• Quick Shot Challenge: What’s the dumbest shooting myth you’ve heard?

    Drop it in the replies for the chance to win a free shirt!

    Join the contest

Well, that's just like, your opinion, man...

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage, according to NBC.

“It’s unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment,” Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who spearheaded the movement, said.


ummmmmm.....like......that is literally exactly what its for.......

thats why the put the bit about "a well regulated militia" in the 2A...........we dont need militia to hunt pheasant.......we need a militia to go to war.
 
According to US v Miller, M14's, M16's and M4's are what we should have.

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

And they were wrong to say short barrel shotguns were not weapons used by army's for national defense. But the courts are so corrupted that the meaning of amendment II is lost until it's, hopefully, used for its intended purpose. I really wish they'd just go ahead and outlaw possession of all firearms, stones over 2 oz and pointy sticks.