Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
would you say the first machine gun .. ? granted it only had limited rounds .. but it was rapid fire ..
I can see SBR’s and SBS’s being unrestricted along with maybe suppressors. I am unsure about machine guns as even before the NFA they were not that common simply due to cost. Guns like the Thompsons were extremely expensive brand new for what the average person then could afford.
I really really want a suppressed SBR
I think a honey badger is my dream gun.
I only need 1 kidney
Just let me LARP dudeLmao imagine actually wanting anything made and sold by Q
Just let me LARP dude.
We all have our fantasy
I really really want a suppressed SBR
I think a honey badger is my dream gun.
I only need 1 kidney
This was spelled out, in spades, in Caetano vs Mass.It's a nice try but someone didn't read Bruen:
. . . the Second Amendment protects only the carrying of weapons that are those 'in common use at the time,' as opposed to those that 'are highly unusual in society at large.'
The discussion in Heller on page 54 of that decision is pretty informative on this subject as well.
It's a nice try but someone didn't read Bruen:
. . . the Second Amendment protects only the carrying of weapons that are those 'in common use at the time,' as opposed to those that 'are highly unusual in society at large.'
The discussion in Heller on page 54 of that decision is pretty informative on this subject as well.
Just let me LARP dude
We all have our fantasy, regardless of how practical it is
Way to cherry pick lmfao...
"Cherry pick"? Did you read the part of Heller on page 55 that effectively says M16 rifles can indeed be banned?
No In heller they said they were not considering if a ban on other guns like rifles was Constitutional.. they said it could be but that was not the scope of the case at the time..
Get back to your cherry tree
Also fyi.. fuck heller.. Bruen supersedes heller
There are a little over half a million machineguns registered with the NFA. Seems pretty common to me.
I'll make a last attempt to help you out with the most relevant paragraphs from Heller on page 55:
. . . We also recognize another important limitation on theright to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have
explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those
“in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We think
that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradi-
tion of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual
weapons.” [Citations omitted]It may be objected that if weapons that are most usefulin military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be
banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said,
the conception of the militia at the time of the Second
Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens
capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of
lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia
duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as
effective as militias in the 18th century, would require
sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at
large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small
arms could be useful against modern-day bombers andtanks. But the fact that modern developments have lim
ited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the
protected right cannot change our interpretation of the
right.
And Bruen most definitely does *not* supersede Heller, they are to be read together.
Unfortunately for us, probably not. The number of registered machineguns has always been somewhat apocryphal but 500,000 is a good estimate. The issue with that is twofold: 1. as a percentage of the guns floating around the US, estimated at 300,000,000, it's 0.167%, so not a lot, and more importantly 2. estimates vary but about 1/3 - 1/2 of that 500,000 number are in the hands of LE agencies and not the civilian population (i.e., the "militia" as Heller describes it).
500,000 is probably in the same neighborhood as the number of current model corvettes on the road.Unfortunately for us, probably not. The number of registered machineguns has always been somewhat apocryphal but 500,000 is a good estimate. The issue with that is twofold: 1. as a percentage of the guns floating around the US, estimated at 300,000,000, it's 0.167%, so not a lot, and more importantly 2. estimates vary but about 1/3 - 1/2 of that 500,000 number are in the hands of LE agencies and not the civilian population (i.e., the "militia" as Heller describes it).
Also fuck Kevin. He's a garbage person
Wasn't that similar to the actual cost of the tax stamp at its inception ( meaning adjusted for inflation)?If rescinded they would could increase the tax stamp amount. $20K instead of $200.
"Common use" as of 1934.
How many machine guns were there between civilian owned, military owned, and police owned?
If it was common enough for the .gov to want to ban them, then it is common enough to be covered under the 2nd.
There is no historical evidence that "machine guns" or full auto was restricted at the time the 2nd was ratified.
I just realized, this also means we can build and possess cannon!
I'll make a last attempt to help you out with the most relevant paragraphs from Heller on page 55:
. . . We also recognize another important limitation on theright to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we haveexplained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those“in common use at the time.” 307 U. S., at 179. We thinkthat limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradi-tion of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusualweapons.” [Citations omitted]It may be objected that if weapons that are most usefulin military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may bebanned, then the Second Amendment right is completelydetached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said,the conception of the militia at the time of the SecondAmendment’s ratification was the body of all citizenscapable of military service, who would bring the sorts oflawful weapons that they possessed at home to militiaduty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be aseffective as militias in the 18th century, would requiresophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society atlarge. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of smallarms could be useful against modern-day bombers andtanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and theprotected right cannot change our interpretation of theright.
And Bruen most definitely does *not* supersede Heller, they are to be read together.
Wasn't that similar to the actual cost of the tax stamp at its inception ( meaning adjusted for inflation)?
I just loved the Al Capone and the untouchables story when I was a kid and I’d love a Tommy gun. I’d even be happy with a semi auto one and a 50 round drum mag and a few sticks for it. Add in the WWII story of using them and that’s my dream gun.I can see SBR’s and SBS’s being unrestricted along with maybe suppressors. I am unsure about machine guns as even before the NFA they were not that common simply due to cost. Guns like the Thompsons were extremely expensive brand new for what the average person then could afford.
And they are much louder than what the movie portrays they don’t make the pew, pew nose. It is sad and I’ve often said the same because stupid people on social media say the same with assassins using them. I always said to myself show me where one was used in a crime??Forget the "machine guns" or "full auto". I'd rather have it for the suppressors, SBS, and SBRs.
I find it absolutely insane that suppressors which is probably one of the most basic pieces of equipment that prevents hearing damage and reduces noise is so highly regulated.
It's sad that politicians use Hollywood movies as the medium of what suppressors do/are; the tools of hitmen and assassins.
I mean for God's sake as liberal as most European countries are, they are more easily obtained and often encouraged.
Every large or medium sized, and many small police forces have selective fire M4’s. My towns police force does. They have single and three shot burst ones as far as I understand it. I have that from a good source for my police force. They also have 30 round mags. I’d say that’s common enough then add in the civilian use ones and the ones at ranges and I’d say there are plenty.Unfortunately for us, probably not. The number of registered machineguns has always been somewhat apocryphal but 500,000 is a good estimate. The issue with that is twofold: 1. as a percentage of the guns floating around the US, estimated at 300,000,000, it's 0.167%, so not a lot, and more importantly 2. estimates vary but about 1/3 - 1/2 of that 500,000 number are in the hands of LE agencies and not the civilian population (i.e., the "militia" as Heller describes it).
Okay lmfao cope and seethe