Latest activity
Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1
- By ColbyLang
- The Bear Pit
- 305265 Replies
Modern times require modern solutions. Laser hair removal for the winChick's don't need a bikini wax, but......
PortaJohn
- By Longshot231
- The Bear Pit
- 152440 Replies
Some people think that Trump is too much with his insults...
Suppressors 300 blackout sub/super ar suppressor
- By Hoser
- The Armory
- 26 Replies
I threw my TBAC Magnus on my Desert Tech 300 Whisper/Blackout boltgun.
Hollywood quiet baby. Now it stays on that rifle.
Hollywood quiet baby. Now it stays on that rifle.
Intellectual Warfare
- By Maser
- The Bear Pit
- 20 Replies
Here's a novel idea to try. How about when hanging out with your Leftist friends, you only focus on the things you have in common and avoid the things you don't? If you constantly go around looking for the bad in people, you're gonna realize fast that EVERYONE has shitty qualities to them. My Leftist friends and I will never agree on politics, but you get us talking about retro video games or 80s slasher movies, and you'll never get us to shut up. 
Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1
- The Bear Pit
- 305265 Replies
Chick's don't need a bikini wax, but......
Intellectual Warfare
- By Alphatreedog
- The Bear Pit
- 20 Replies
Thanks . I wonder if , since this is a gun forum if someone could make a sticky . I would submit that a sticky if exerps and decisions clarifying 2A would be beneficial in both education , respectful debate and dialogue.If you read Miller v. US, you will find the same.
The Supreme Court announced the Second Amendment test, with respect to a weapon and whether it was intended to be included, was "whether this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense."
United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)
United States v. Miller: Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation.supreme.justia.com
This is the case from which Scalia got the "common use" test and bastardized everything to make the Second Amendment about a "core right" of self defense.
Read the case (at the link). You will see that common use is not a test at all, but just a historical observation about how early Americans were expected to show up with their privately owned arms of the type in common use at the time.
It would be like saying now militia should show up with privately owned M4 rifles because that is the type of weapon in common use as the infantry rifle.
You always see Miller discussed as a federal case that held that a short barreled shotgun is not protected by the Second Amendment. Nothing of the sort was held in Miller. Read it and see for yourself. The Arkansas judge threw out the indictment on Second Amendment grounds with no evidence - simply dismissed it (the "demurrer" mentioned in the beginning history of the case). The Supreme Court merely held that "in the absence of any evidence" (because not had been submitted below) "It is not within judicial notice" meaning the court is not simply going to recognize this without evidence (that is what judicial notice means). They then set forth the test:
Now read it and see if I am right or Scalia and all these commentators are right. Link is above. You now have the power to know about this case firsthand instead of being in the dark and relying on others telling you what you should think about it.
