The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 14, 2012, 11:45 PM   #1
JoshM75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 28, 2000
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 231
Heller and the definition of "dangerous and unusual"

A query - in reading the comments of the Heller decision I was initially under the impression that the historical prohibition on “dangerous and unusual weapons” related to actual weapons. For example "dangerous" as in area-effect weaponary such as man-portable flamethrowers or rocket launchers, and "unusual" such as pen guns, walking stick guns, or cell phone guns.

However, the comments of Alan Gura at a NJ2AS meeting refers to this prohibtion as not being about actual weapons, but rather to dangerous and unusual behaviour or conduct by those whom are carrying arms.

IIRC Gura sets out his view of the historical prohibition is based on the offence of "going armed to the terror of the Public".

So my query is does the historical prohibition on “dangerous and unusual weapons” a matter of weaponary or of conduct?

I'd be interested to read others views on this or be pointed to any links.

Much thanks .. Josh

Gura discusses it here (22.20)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE3kX...e_gdata_player
JoshM75 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05936 seconds with 9 queries