PDA

View Full Version : 8th Circuit bans machine gun ownership... because they are "not in common usage"!!



Little-Acorn
08-14-2008, 11:35 AM
I knew this one was coming. It was inevitable, after the DC v. Heller decision.

In Heller, the Supremes said that the 2nd amendment's protection of our right to own and carry guns, did not extend to "dangerous or unusual weapons", or weapons not "in common usage". Leaving aside the question of how something that wasn't dangerous could be called a weapon at all, the "not in common usage" part left us ripe for a continuation of all the unconstitutional laws the anti-gun-rights people have been building up over the years.

In 1934 the government made a law saying that anyone buyig a machine gun had to pay a $200 tax (more than many such guns were worth back then) and go through and incredible amount of paperwork, waiting periods, etc. And this during a massive depression where people were earning $5/day if they were lucky enough to have a job at all. Later the govt banned the manufacture of machine guns, and banned any importation of them. As a result of all this, the supply of such items dwindled and prices skyrocketed.

And surprise, surprise! Today machine guns are "not in common usage" at all! Gee, who would have ever guessed THAT would be the result, eh?

And now we have the 8th Circuit deciding that since they are "not in common usage", due mostly to unconstitutional Federal laws over the years, its' OK to remove the 2nd amendment's protection of people who want to own them now - an even worse violation of the 2nd.

Only in America......!! :D

As I've said, the efforts of the anti-gun-rights people will remain unceasing. Every bit of this battle will have to be fought, as we wrest our rights back from them. This just openes another of the many fronts on which we have to fight.

--------------------------------------------

http://www.abajournal.com/news/appeals_court_rejects_militia_organizers_second_am endment_claim/

Appeals Court Rejects Militia Organizer’s Second Amendment Claim

Posted 5 hours, 28 minutes ago
By Debra Cassens Weiss

A federal appeals court has ruled a man who organized his own militia did not have a Second Amendment right to possess a machine gun.

Hollis Wayne Fincher had argued that his Washington County Militia was a well-regulated militia that was protected by the amendment. A federal judge rejected his claim and the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in an Aug. 13 opinion (PDF).

The 8th Circuit said in a footnote that Fincher loses under both his militia argument and under an argument he didn’t make: that he has an individual right to own a machine gun under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. The June 26 Heller decision said the Second Amendment protects an individual right to own a handgun for self-defense in the home, but said the right “is not unlimited.”

The 8th Circuit cited language in Heller that the Second Amendment does not protect “dangerous and unusual weapons” and said a machine gun falls into that unprotected category. “Machine guns are not in common use by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes and therefore fall within the category of dangerous and unusual weapons that the government can prohibit for individual use,” the appeals court said.

The 8th Circuit opinion also said Fincher’s militia was not affiliated with the state and not subject to protection as a well-regulated militia.

manu1959
08-14-2008, 12:27 PM
next up....

they will define "common usage" as greater ownership than 50% of those eligble to own guns....which historically polls have "seemed" to prove is not the case.....

as for "dangerous"...they will argue all weapons are dangerous......

so.....there you have it....all weapons are dangerous and all weapons do no't meet the definition of common usage therefore all weapons should be banned....

unfortunately, criminals, the police and the military will all still have weapons.....

but damnit we will still have our freedom...............

Immanuel
08-14-2008, 12:29 PM
next up....

they will define "common usage" as greater ownership than 50% of those eligble to own guns....which historically polls have "seemed" to prove is not the case.....

as for "dangerous"...they will argue all weapons are dangerous......

so.....there you have it....all weapons are dangerous and all weapons do no't meet the definition of common usage therefore all weapons should be banned....

unfortunately, criminals, the police and the military will all still have weapons.....

but damnit we will still have our freedom...............

You are starting to think like a politician. Might I recommend a therapist to help snap you out of it before it is too late?

:laugh2:

Immie

manu1959
08-14-2008, 12:43 PM
You are starting to think like a politician. Might I recommend a therapist to help snap you out of it before it is too late?

:laugh2:

Immie

remember........All warfare is based on deception.

Little-Acorn
08-14-2008, 12:53 PM
remember........All warfare is based on deception.

Especially when one side cannot reasonably defend its agenda, but wants to keep pushing it anyway.