Originally Posted by
Yaya
Can you cite that? I thought I read that as well...
Part two:
Aymette at page 158 states:
"The object, then, for which the right of keeping, and bearing arms is secured is of the public. The [citizens] may keep arms to protect the public liberty, to keep in awe those who are in power, and to maintain the supremacy of the laws and the constitution. The words "bear arms," too, have reference to their military use, and were not employed to mean wearing them about the person as part of the dress.
As the object for which the right to keep and bear arms is secured is of general and public nature, to be exercised by the people in a body, for their common defence, so the arms the right to keep which is secured are such as are usually employed in civilized warfare, and that constitute the ordinary military equipment. If the citizens have these arms in their hands, they are prepared in the best possible manner to repel any encroachments upon their rights by those in authority.
They need not, for such a purpose, the use of those weapons which are usually employed in private broils, and which are efficient only in the hands of the robber and the assassin. These weapons would be useless in war. They could not be employed advantageously in the common defence of the citizens. The right to keep and bear them is not,therefore, secured by the constitution."
Refering to the previously quoted Miller paragraph, the SCOTUS established the 2nd Amendment protection criteria as, . . . If the arm is of a type that constitutes the ordinary military equipment and/or it is of a type that could be employed advantageously in the common defence of the citizens, and (later in the opinion) is of a type in common use by the citizens at the time, then the right to keep and bear that weapon must be preserved and any authority claimed by government to restrict its possession and use must be repelled or invalidated.
It is abundatly clear that arms "like" the AR-15, semi-auto, detachable magazine rifle, meet ALL the protection criteria -- probably better than any other type of arm in the public domain currently.
Let's be perfectly clear, 2nd Amendment protection criteria is based primarily on how the arm fits into a battle scheme -- IOW, how effective it is in killing people and how common it is in the hands of the citizenry. If the arm in question meets any of those criteria it cannot be considered "dangerous and unusual" no matter how hyperbolic liberals get.
.
Bookmarks