Reply #16: Four things...

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

1) Well regulated had a different meaning than the word "regulation" does today. The unorganized "Militia" is codified in the Constitution. And the prerequisite statement is not an exhaustive condition on the actual meaning of the second - the right of The People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The use of "The People" is consistent throughout the Bill of Rights and other state constitutions from the time period... there is no evidence to show that the usage is any different in the 2nd amendment. This is SCOTUS's official standing. Even the liberal dissent opinions in Heller v. DC don't dispute the 2nd amendment as recognizing the individual right - they only disputed that DC's restrictions violated rights.

2) The fifth amendment is bigger than that. I was actually referring to the latter part of the 5th amendment, "... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. What this means is that to ban 30 round magazines, or any other arms in the interest of public safety would require the US government to justly compensate (pay for) the items which they are taking from the public. There are literally billions of "hi-cap" magazines in the US.

3) The 14th amendment incorporates protections of civil liberties to the states. This is what the Heller and McDonald cases go a long way toward establishing. Even state laws have to recognize civil liberties which are federally protected. Because of Heller & McDonald, the gun lobby will go state to state, starting with the most oppressive, and strike down laws.

4) In a free society, the argument which IMPOSES restrictions is required to give persuasive argument for why only limited round magazines are needed. Furthermore, it's required to show us how those restrictions supply the desired effect using the least amount of restriction possible (ie - why not 15 rounds or 17 rounds... why TEN?). This is simple due process and strict scrutiny. In the end, your explanation of why I only require 10 rounds is every bit as much much conjecture as my desire to have 30 rounds. Prove otherwise... because in America the onus is ON YOU.


This is not hyperbole... this is how the courts interpret the law.
I'm sorry you choose to live in a country with more freedom than you desire.