Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: 2A and "Infringement" [View all]1. Limiting magazine capacity to, say, 10 or 20 rounds
2. Banning a particular sub-type of weapon such as AR-15 or AK-47 rifles (I don't mean simply saying "no semi-automatic rifles allowed" - that is an infringement)
3. Requiring a paperwork trail of sales
4. Limiting purchases of more than one weapon at a time
1) infringement
2) infringement unless the government decided the official arms of the militia... they define militia in us code... don't see why they can't designate the official arms (police should be limited to same list)
3) There already is in the form of dealer books. Since registrations have only been misused (NY paper publishing names, Roanoke Times too) can't support registration at this time.
4) not an infringement because you technically are only getting delayed gratification... and waiver should be available, but involve paperwork.
Most proposed gun control requires a change at the amendment level
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
53 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I think we're about to find out just what is and isn't considered infringement
bubbayugga
Jan 2013
#1
Well-regulated doesn't mean controlled by government regulations in this clause...
tortoise1956
Jan 2013
#4
Not really. That is what musters were for...training under the authority of the state,
jmg257
Jan 2013
#23
I'm talking about the well regulated Militia - the reason for the 2nd amendment.
jmg257
Jan 2013
#51
Not really. The debates from those assembled when coming up with the 2nd had VERY
jmg257
Jan 2013
#30
Well, I'm no Constitutional scholar, and setting aside whether I like any of those things
petronius
Jan 2013
#18
When considering the original intent of the 2A and what actions may or my not run afoul...
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jan 2013
#37
Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I said the phrase "bearing arms" was vauge I was referring to
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jan 2013
#44
No need to even buy the gun. People of military fighting age are ALREADY ascribed to the militia.
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jan 2013
#45