Apparently the Constitution allows the federal government to disarm state militias down to the level of hunting rifles and pistols.

__________________
"We have a lot of work to do and I'm afraid it's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border,” -- John McCain, in an ABC News interview

"Short-barreled shotguns", if I were to venture a guess, refers to "sawed-off" shotguns.

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. Are you saying that Joe-Six-Pack should be allowed to own fully automatic weapons?

note this "lawful purposes"

yeah, this will prohibit sawed off shotguns, street sweepers and such. but if you read the thing it is simply revisiting already decided limits. nothing is new.

full auto are valid as lawful purpose for target alone which is why they are a bit more controlled but NOT illegal.

Yes, why not?

"Shall not be infringed"

That says it all...

__________________
"Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves." ~ Lord Byron

Well, it appears that Antonin Scalia disagrees with you on that, and the main difference between your opinion and his is that his counts.

So when's the militia meeting start?

The "militia" has absolutely nothing to do with the individual right to own firearms.

As Obama might put it, you shouldn't be bitterly clinging to your gods (Bubba and AlGore) and your antiquated interpretation of the second amendment.

Matt

__________________

Bubba signed that automatic-weapons ban though with Republican approval, not least of which that guy who took a bullet with Reagan. That was in place, what was it, the Bradey Bill, for a decade, and Bush let it go without passing. Bubba also added some 80 to 100,000 cops out there, but Bush pulled funding for hiring grants a few years ago, and violent crime and violent crime against police officers rose in 2005 and then in 2006, immediately after the Bradey Bill wasn't re-signed along with the pulled funds.

Apparently only 1-2% of violent gun crimes are committed with semi-automatic weapons, but making them legal to be in the country just doesn't sound right. How can we say we support our cops when we turn around and say we support semi or fully automatic weapons? My personal opinion is that crazy people in America are a special kind of crazy, since no other nation enjoys shooting each other up more frequently.



Violent Crime in America

Police deaths up sharply - Crime & courts - MSNBC.com

The Bubba thing was a joke, as signified by the

It appears you do not understand what the AWB banned, nor the difference between a semi-automatic and a fully-automatic firearm.

I'd suggest doing some research, or asking some questions, before making definitive statements like those above.

Matt

__________________

It's definitive that in America, more than any other free nation, the crazies like to shoot each other.

I'm not an expert on guns, but the AWB banned guns that are classified in both of those categories. Matt, you left out the fact that I said that although violent crimes spiked upwards against cops, there is no data that suggests that more semi or fully automatic weapons were used in those crimes.

But for the purposes of supporting law enforcement, both here and in Canada, I support the ban since an influx of guns coming into the US and then coming into Canada has been evident in the last 5 years. I don't even know how the ban was enforced exactly, and guns coming in from the US have always been a problem for the Canadians, but that the trend has spiked upwards since the ban wasn't resigned makes alarm bells go off inside me head.

So you blame America because Canadians cross the border and buy guns?????

__________________
"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chardonnay in one hand, chocolate in the other, body
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming 'WOO HOO, what a ride!'"

The AWB emphatically did not ban guns in "both of those categories". The AWB has absolutely nothing at all to do with fully-automatic firearms.

It also did not ban semi-automatic firearms, but rather placed certain cosmetic restrictions on otherwise similarly functioning firearms.

And as you noted, there is no data suggesting that these guns you advocate banning are being used in the crimes you are talking about.

You don't know what the ban covered, or how it was enforced, but because there is more crime (apparently with different firearms, according to your post) after the ban expired, "alarm bells" are going off in your head?

Are you, perhaps, familiar with post hoc, ergo propter hoc?

Pray, for the "purposes of supporting law enforcement", are you willing to give up your car (it can be used for crimes, and it can exceed the speed limit). What about free speech? Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure?

Maybe the right to remain silent? That would be a huge "support" for law enforcement.....

The bottom line is that by your own admission, you don't know what was banned, or how the ban was enforced, but you support it based on an ill-informed, knee-jerk reaction.

Matt

__________________

That quote was clearly intended for and toward traditional bans that have by and large been in place; silencers, saw off shotguns, shotguns with the plugs removed allowing more rd.s beyond design specifications to be loaded etc...

I see this re-affirmation of such a good thing affirming that homegrown modifications beyond approved manuf. licensed builds is illegal.

__________________
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile....

Silencers aren't banned - they just require an additional ATF tax stamp and certain extra hoops.

Same thing for short barreled shotguns and rifles.

Matt

__________________

Nevertheless, Sparkhammer is right -- bans on certain categories of firearms ARE consistent with the 2nd Amendment, per the SCOTUS. (I happen to disagree with them as a matter of law, but my opinion counts for no more than DammitBoy's.)

There's been a good bit of premature celebrating in the gun culture over this ruling. What the ruling actually did, was to void types of gun control that were politically impossible anyway in most of the country (outright bans on all firearms, or on the most common firearms for home defense and sport use), while removing all ambiguity about the legality of other types of gun control that are a more realistic concern (bans on "unusual and dangerous" weapons such as assault rifles, registration, waiting periods and background checks, bans on concealed carry, restrictions on open carry).

Per the court's decision, we now know that all of those could be constitutional. Expect increased political pressure to put them into effect soon.