Mike Sullivan on Heller

[LaEscopeta]

Just because the Supreme Court finds a particular type of firearm is not protected by the 2cd Amendment does not means it is automatically banned. The court found in Miller and reaffirmed in Heller that short barreled shotguns are not protected by the 2cd, and yet they are not banned by the Federal Law (registered, taxed and restricted to only certain owners yes but not banned outright.) I think the wording in Heller is going to make it hard to overturn existing anti-machine gun laws on the basis of the 2cd alone. It is going to be hard to argue for machine guns kept in the home for the lawful uses listed in Heller (hunting, target shooting and self defense.) I’m sure many members of this board will argue machine guns are useful for these 3 purposes but I don’t think these argument will sway anyone who does not want to own a machine gun themselves. And those are the people we are going to have to convice to get any legal movement our way.

I think we need additional arguments if we want improved rights to own machines guns, etc. Like arguing lawfully owned machine guns have been used in basically ZERO crimes nationwide in the 30+ years since the DC gun ban was passed.

 

[ilbob]

In addition, the court appropriately recognized that the 'carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons,' such as machineguns, is not protected by the amendment. The bureau is studying the decision, but expects that it will not affect its continued enforcement of all existing federal firearms laws.

The decision did say something about "carrying dangerous and unusual weapons", and that prohibition goes back long ago in English common law. I don't recall that the decision stated that MGs qualified as "dangerous and unusual". That was an editorial comment added by Sullivan. Note the court did not say anything about keeping such weapons.

 

[El Tejon]

:banghead:

Again and always with NFA and Heller?:banghead:

Heller is a base. It did not limit the right to the listed categories. The issue presented in Heller was a pistol for self-defense, not machine guns.

You guys are doing this to make me crawl under my desk and assume the fetal position, right?

 

[ilbob]

El Tejon vs. BATFE will be the case where the SC decides we can have MGs subject to reasonable restrictions such as a $200 tax, fingerprinting, and a background check. One other minor issue, only MGs made before 1986 are covered. Its in the 2A somewhere, something about where the comma is means 1986. And the MG decision is not incorporated against the states, even though all the other decisions are. It will be decided 10 years after El Tejon dies of old age at 135.