Quote:
|
Originally Posted by divemedic
I reject the "common use" argument as the equivalent of the "Second Amendment only covers muskets" meme.
|
Apparently the SCOTUS disagrees. However, I think it is a useful way to draw the bright line. Seems pretty clear to me that "in common use" means in common use for civilian purposes of self defense, sport and hunting. FA is not in that mix and never really was. The fact that there were only 118,000 legally registered out of hundreds of millions of other guns in 1986 when the tax and cost to own were not prohibitive shows that to be true. So, SCOTUS rules that the Second Amendment protects firearms in common use by civilians. The circular argument was handled by Gura in that clip and the NFA still stands.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Crosshair
that back in the early 80's before the registry closed,select fire M-16's tended to cost only a couple hundred dollars more than an AR-15. You could get an AR-15 for $700 and an M-16 for $900-1,000.
|
And look how few people legally owned them. More proof they were never in common use.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by maestro pistolero
Even in warfare, automatic fire has limited but specific uses such as area denial.
|
Fire suppression is the other (anti-aircraft perhaps) and that is why I believe they (FA) are unsuitable for civilian self defense.