Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
Again that goes back to the US Government versus Miller
the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”
That's easy to prove with a nuke which is a strategic and offensive weapon, oh and also falls on their list of weapons of mass destructions and nationstate weapons.
So no it wouldn't come in to effect.
But try proving that with hand guns and assault rifles which could be reasonably argued are required for the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia or the protection of the individual.
I get the point that you're making, but its not relatable.
|
Is it not relatable insofar as to the "regulated militia" and it's needs to protect citizens from the government when the government has thousands of them? If that truly is the goal of the 2nd amendment, then citizens should have access to all weapons that the government does, including tanks, jets, and nukes.