This is a discussion on The Second Amendment in 2013 (David B. Kopel) within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; ...
Thanks for the link.
The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.
Watched this yesterday, excellent video!
"Don't start none, won't be none!"
Yes, this is definitely worth watching.
NRA Life Member
"I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady
“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.” --George Washington
It is good to see that not everybody in the news is screaming for the banning of our weapons..
Watched it yesterday and enjoyed it thoroughly. I had never heard of the Cato Institute before.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
They make some very good arguments about why an ban on AR15's (with 30 rnd magazines) and handgun magazines under 20 rounds would almost certainly be found unconstitutional. The fact that they are in common use by law enforcement, come as standard factory equipment, and (in the case of the AR) are the most popular rifle sold in the country are all testaments to their 'common' use standard. Perhaps this wasn't the case 20 years ago when the 2004 ban was being bandied about, but it certainly is now.
Good video - I wonder what impact it will have.
It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!
"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson
You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.
Yes, that was very well stated. Of course, rational and intelligent debate is often lost of emotional people (as any of you who have ever argued with my wife know... thank you! I'll be here all week!).
I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
Interesting watch. I thought it telling that the former DNC chair wants mass confiscation. Good way to pull the cork on a genie bottle if you ask me.
I watched this again and I think Kopel really hit the nail on the head.
If an AW/>10 round mag ban makes it into law, the Supreme Court will not touch an argument that the purpose of the 2A is to arm the citizenry to fight tyrants (either foreign or domestic). They will not do this for the simple reason that they do not need to. All they need to find is an AW/>10 round mag ban barred by the Heller holding. As Kopel notes, both semi pistols with 13-19 round mags and AR's with 30 round mags are in common use by citizens and police to defend themselves and others in homes and businesses. As we all know, over the past 20 years, these two weapons have largely replaced revolvers and shotguns in virtually all police forces and in many civillian households.
Now I understand (and I am sure all of you understand) that the primary purpose of the 2A, as described by its drafters, was to arm citizens to fight tyrants, including - if need be - the state's standing army, but there is no way you will ever get 5 votes on the SC for that holding. The easiest way for the SC to overturn an AW/>10 round mag ban is to find that they are in common use for self defense and thus cannot be banned following the rationale in Heller for overturning the DC ban on handguns. A smart lawyer always makes the argument that is easiest for the court to accept. And, since the object here is to win the argument against the bans, perhaps it is time for us all to put away our copies of the Federalist Papers and the Constitution ratification debates and recognize that making the argument about being armed to fight tyrants simply antagonizes those who are on the fence and that the argument we should all be making is the Heller/customary for defense by civillians and police argument. I also know that we all make this argument as well as the fighting tyrants argument, but I am beginning to think that our cause might be better served if just stuck to the latter argument.
why isnt this guy on cnn!!!!!!!! FINALLY a person who thinks RATIONALLY about the gun debate and what will and will not have any affect! I vote him for President!!!!.....lol