A Second Amendment scholar “schools” us all.

Now for it to go out nationally.....

Good luck with that huh?
Click to expand...
PBS Newshour is a national broadcast. It would be great if more media outlets did this kind of interview, but most want emotion and controversy, not calm, reasoned discussion. PBS is unusual in making space for that... which is partly why their ratings are so low. :cool:
 
Is she correct in thinking that large capacity magazines are in "common usage" and therefore these bans are unconstitutional?
Click to expand...
I agree with that view, so she must be correct. :)

Seriously, what two firearms are arguably the most common in common use today? Let's begin with where most of the legislatures (other than NY State) are going, by defining "large capacity" as capable of holding more than ten rounds. What handgun is perhaps the most popular/most ubiquitous in the U.S. today (considering both police and private citizen ownership and use)? Probably some model of Glock. What are the magazine capacities of the various Glock models?

For rifles, I think the most popular rifle without question is going to be an AR-15 with a 30-round magazine. There is probably one of those, with multiple 30-round magazines, in the trunk of nearly every police patrol vehicle in the U.S. Almost any private citizen who owns an AR owns multiple 30-round mags. They're the "sweet spot." 10-rounders and 20-rounders are too small, 40-rounders and larger are unreliable.

So it's absolutely a valid argument, and based on Mr. Justice Scalia's language in Heller the argument should be persuasive. Whether or not it will be remains to be seen.
 
Why on Fox - choir? Never mind.

It was very thoughtful and she is known as a scholar. PBS and NPR are fairer in general than MSM - esp. those horrors on MSNBC or Piers.

There are national outlets that have stepped up with reasonable pieces. NY Magazine and the Atlantic did so.
 
Why fox

Why fox?

Because this argument for RTKBA beats everything that I have seen them run recently. I believe they are the closest network to being on our collective side but they are playing into the extremes of things.
 
I think the biggest thing people are not thinking about in a modern setting, is the implications of defining how far your RKBA goes.

For instance, in the next supreme court ruling they were to say that a 30 round magazine and semi-automatic platform was in common usage and legal. However, the states and federal government can ban everything that isn't SA and below (bolt, pump, muzzle-loader, etc) and doesn't have 30 rounds or less.

That essentially means that NO NEW TECHNOLOGY will ever be made available to the public, and this is why the NFA was so smart. It made the next evolution of firearms illegal, and with a long-standing law that is easily protected by precedent, the Semi-autos of today could look like the muzzle loaders of tomorrow.

Its stops anything else from being exposed and marketed to the public that isn't already in common usage. The 2nd Amendment ended with the NFA, and our supply of freedom has already run dry. We are stuck with out-dated technology forever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top