Luchtaine
What kind of militia is restricted to legitimate sporting weapons.
The irony is that the 1939
U.S. v. Miller decision
http://www.rkba.org/research/miller/Miller.html that the antis so love to cite as precedent for limiting firearms in the hands of the public, had Miller losing because the gun in question (a saw-off shotgun) had no legitimate use in the militia (because there was no judicial notice of such use, because Miller had no lawyer arguing for him before the Court). Putting aside the fact that the Army made extensive use of sawed-off shotguns as "trenchbrooms" in WW1 (only 21 years before), the exact opposite result should occur with any semi-auto version of a military weapon (and, for that matter,
especially with the full-auto versions, since they are
ideally suited for militia use). The .50 BMG cartridge was invented (along with a machine gun to shoot it) by John Moses Browning after the lessons of WW1 showed that our boys needed more firepower to handle lightly armored vehicles, and to snipe at longer ranges.
The answer to your question is that a militia composed of the body of the people cannot be restricted as to the weapons it uses. The government, in fact, derives all of its power and authority from We The People, so we cannot be legally restricted by the government from doing something that the government can do. Of course, we are restricted - but that is in the nature of tyrannical governments. Another part of the answer is that Feinstein, Schumer, Kennedy, et al (including a bunch of R's) don't want to even think about one of the primary purposes of the militia (let alone to ever admit it in public), which is to prevent a domestic tyranny from arising via deterrence and, if necessary, by the use of force by millions of citizens against the likes of Feinstein, Schumer, Kennedy, et al and the goons they hire with our tax dollars. And don't believe me...look at the quote from a Federal Appeals Court Judge in my signature below.
