Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2nd Amendment and "Ray" guns

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by leadcounsel, Jun 25, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. leadcounsel

    leadcounsel member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    So when humans ultimately develop practical energy weapons such as lasers, plastma rifles, compressed air weapons, etc. will the 2nd Amendment cover only conventional firearms, or do you think it would extend to energy weapons?
     
  2. Justin

    Justin Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,285
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    The day such arms come online, I would hope that there would be an Alan Gura type willing to step up to the plate and defend the ownership of such items.
     
  3. Mags

    Mags Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    3,235
    Location:
    Belgium
    I think it would be the same as the past. When the 2nd Amendment was written we had flint lock muzzle loaders. I see the same jump in technology from a flint lock to an automatic as an automatic to an energy weapon.

    I s that you LeadCounsel or has someone hacked your account? Maybe a few too many Friday night drinks? It is unusual of you to type such a far fetched post.
     
  4. Echo9

    Echo9 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    305
    I think historically the Second Amendment has extended to protect the more and more advanced weapons that are invented over time.

    Compare a musket to an ar-15.
     
  5. Dnaltrop

    Dnaltrop Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
    It's just a different method of transferring energy.

    And it's probably environmentally friendly, charges by USB, and accesses the Internet to register every shot you make, GPS location, and a HD video of the 5 seconds before and after you took the shot.

    I'd still take one.
     
  6. FourteenMiles

    FourteenMiles Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2010
    Messages:
    192
    Location:
    USA
    I don't see any specification or limitation of or to Firearms.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2010
  7. Zack

    Zack member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    USA
    They had cannon's so I see no problem with .50cals :D :evil:
     
  8. Carter

    Carter Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,434
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Well...if you want to get technical...they have them, they just take up an entire warehouse. I think a magnetic accelerated cannon would be more likely to come first, as far as practical use. Either way, I'm sure it will get listed as a destructive device or something else equally prohibited to the masses.

    But who knows...maybe one day you can own a "noisy cricket" hehe.
     
  9. GEM

    GEM Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,419
    Location:
    TX
    Somebody should search - I think there are state laws that mention energy weapons.

    Here's a fly in the ointment for you phaser fans. Hand held blinding lasers have been developed and then banned by international agreements.

    Thus, if you argue for militia utility, the ban could be used to say that such weapons aren't used by the military.

    However, practical laser weapons for ships and planes are coming in real time, so the guys who argue that we can have cannons might stew about this.

    Another fly - if reliable stun phasers weapons are developed, would that negate the need for lethal weapons for civilian self-defense? The defense against tyranny argument might be used but would that fly?
     
  10. leadcounsel

    leadcounsel member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    @The Real Mags
    Ha - I think you know me better than most!
     
  11. leadcounsel

    leadcounsel member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    For true scholars, I agree that it should include portable energy weapons. However, remember, in Heller the language permitted weapons in common use at the time. Remember the treatment of the M16/AR15. Because they had effectively been banned for a long time, they were not in common use. And because they weren't in common use, they weren't specifically included. If energy weapons are NEVER in common use, then they may be excluded. A real catch 22.
     
  12. armoredman

    armoredman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    16,765
    Location:
    proud to be in AZ
    Wasn't there just a demonstration of a practical directed energy weapon for naval use? I would also like to see more research into rail gun technology.
     
  13. CPerdue

    CPerdue Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2007
    Messages:
    65
    Location:
    Salem, Va.
    The 2ndA only uses the term 'arms'. The knife-rights folks rightly point out this includes them.

    I wonder about software. We see nations engaged in cyberwarfare (Russia vs. Georgia), so the software (and probably hardware too) must be 'arms' right?
     
  14. Snowdog

    Snowdog Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    3,950
    There's always the possibility they will be classified as a destructive device and though ordinary citizens might still be able to obtain and possess such a device, the government might apply such a taxation to make it costly to own. However, I also imagine a portable plasma cannon will be expensive to begin with, so those few who can afford them might have no issues with any such tax.
     
  15. Sunray

    Sunray Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Messages:
    11,353
    Location:
    London, Ont.
    Your Second Amendment is about your Constitutional right to bear arms. It really has nothing to do with firearms alone.
     
  16. bigalexe

    bigalexe Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    SE Michigan
    The OP's questions is valid as a hypothetical in the times we live in and presents an interesting quandary.

    At this time there are probably 3 main ways to kill people; first is melee weapons from kitchen knives to 2x4's and also bayonets (Weapons that kill by bludgeoning or bleeding), secondly is firearms and projectile weapons of various sorts including bombs and missiles can be lumped here IMO (weapons that kill by bludgeoning or bleeding remotely), third we have chemical and biological weapons including radiation.

    Right now the small arms race has plateaued at a point where we throw projectiles at each other and they are propelled by an explosive charge or rocket technology. However we are on the verge of new small arms race including energy weapons and non-firearm projectiles.

    Non-Firearm Projectiles are guns that throw things without fire; Coil Guns and Gauss Rifles. These are real and right now are limited by power requirements but they have potential. Energy weapons are an entirely new class of horror we can inflict on each other. The energy weapon that I see us most likely using is the laser and this has more potential than the coil gun.

    What is interesting is how will our government overlords (elected, self-appointed, or otherwise empowered) interpret these new weapons and as such how will they by interpreted by the legal system. It is interesting because right now most guns are noticeably guns before they are completed but these new weapons are not guns by their nature. Lasers have many uses and the same laser employed in surgery could also kill someone, alternately Gauss Rifles are a combination of electronics available in most old radios and even more so in 12vdc-->120vac inverters in cars.

    These new weapons of war will not be recognizable as weapons until you are staring them down in combat. How will the laws deal with these new guns, and is the regulation of them even enforceable?
     
  17. Cosmoline

    Cosmoline Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    23,648
    Location:
    Los Anchorage
    I think it's a bunch of nonsense. I've been hearing about how we're going to have these things for ages now. Just like how we were going to have colonies on the Moon and flying cars all over. That future was nothing but the boyhood fantasy of men who are quite old now. It's not going to happen.

    We've had these since the 18th century. Captain Lewis carried one on his expedition. For the most part they're not even regulated.

    We've also got lasers--attached to our firearms. The DOD has been trying to turn them into working weapons for decades now with failure after failure.

    And I've got a couple of particle guns that will throw one mother of a particle.
     
  18. leadcounsel

    leadcounsel member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,365
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    Arms also include relatively benigh clubs and 4" knives, but these are illegal to carry in most places in the US. Arms would also arguably include fully automatic rifles, short barreled shotguns and rifles, and silencers; yet these are so heavily regulated as to nearly be illegal.

    So it's certainly no 'given' that if a viable energy weapon were available that it would be lawful to own/possess by commonfolk...
     
  19. Owen Sparks

    Owen Sparks member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2007
    Messages:
    4,524
    Posession of modern firearms like our nations service rifle, the M16 are now criminalized (except for the government of course.) Using the same logic it's wonder that the First Amendmant still applies to radio, TV and the internet rather than just ink and paper.
     
  20. 19&41

    19&41 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2010
    Messages:
    294
    Location:
    Georgia
    While not deadly, there are handheld laser units being sold now that use the laser from Blu-ray players. And these cause permanent damage to ones' retina. Something to think about.
     
  21. bigalexe

    bigalexe Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    931
    Location:
    SE Michigan
  22. fastbolt

    fastbolt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,712
    Location:
    Within the lightning
    The Weapon Shops of Isher. ;)
     
  23. The Lone Haranguer

    The Lone Haranguer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,717
    Location:
    Johnson City, TN
    The 2nd Amendment still applies to multi-shot, self-contained cartridge firearms, despite their not having been invented in the 18th century. Why would it not extend to ray guns in the 21st? The 1st Amendment is still valid despite the fact that we no longer use hand-cranked printing presses, quill pens and town criers. ;)
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2010
  24. M-Cameron

    M-Cameron member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    2,865
    im actually fairly confident that we will see "coil guns" that rival traditional small arms within the next 10-20 years....

    hell, just last year i built a coil gun out of nothing more than a half dozen surplus camera circuit boards, some second hand swap meet capacitors, and a trip to radio shack that has enough power to drive a nail into plywood.....heck, ive seen some that can drive a rail road spike through a 1" piece of plywood....

    its really just a matter of getting batteries small enough and powerful enough and getting those pesky capacitors down to a more reasonable size.
     
  25. Dnaltrop

    Dnaltrop Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page