In common use
NSSF: AR-15 Used in Oklahoma Home Defense; Same Rifle 4th Circuit Court Says Americans Should Not Have
3 Responses to “In common use”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
April 4th, 2017 at 7:52 pm
Ergo; Americans should not engage in home defense. Ergo; the 4th Circuit is anti-constitutional. Ergo; they should be removed post haste.
April 4th, 2017 at 10:32 pm
The ‘in common use’ standard drives me crazy. By definition, it means that anything new isn’t covered by the 2nd. I can’t believe this hasn’t been argued successfully.
April 5th, 2017 at 9:53 am
The Heller decision should have been about three lines long. The dicta therein has been misappropriated and taken to mean the exact opposite of its literal wording.
Worse even than “in common use” is the narrow nature of Heller, which posed to the Court ONLY the question of the constitutionality of a ban on handgun ownership within the home in a federal enclave (District of Columbia). The lawsuit was tailored to eliminate any other questions than this simple, clean statement of the 2nd Amendment in regard to federal law.
That the case had nothing to do with any existing gun laws other than the handgun ban in DC should have been clear. It is clear, reading the text of the decision. But the tautological dicta that the case did not address the constitutionality of any gun laws other than the one gun law before the Court has been taken by the 4th Circuit to mean that all other gun laws are constitutional, the exact opposite of the literal text of the Heller decision.