Quote Originally Posted by mcjo tech View Post
Also from the Supreem Court:

(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons

So it is not unconstitutional for the government to limit the purchase of semi automatic rifles if it can be passed thru congress and signed by the president.

Therefore your contention that their rights to bear arms are being infringed upon is moot.

I do however think that you have some valid points regarding why these massacres are occurring and they should also be addressed.

You point out perhaps why but offer no solutions.


read the syllabus and nothing more.

The syllabus was likely written by a law clerk.

I also maintain that an ban on semi-automatic rifles is counter productive and serves no good purpose.

In other words, it will not accomplish the stated end of removing these rifles from circulation. In fact, I bought my first "assault weapon" DURING the first AWB in about 1997.