APP - Ending the moratorium on the machin gun registry

Status
Not open for further replies.
/MSG/

/MSG/

Uwaa OmO
For those of you unaware, since 1986 there has been a moratorium on privately registered machine guns in the United states. Specifically, United States Codes chapter 18, section 922(o):
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.
(2) This subsection does not apply with respect to— (A) a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
(B) any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect.
Click to expand...
This law is in direct opposition to several SCOTUS decisions, most prominently US v Miller 1939.

US v MILLER
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. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158.
Click to expand...
In essence the court stated that a firearm with military applications is protected for private ownership (Miller had died awaiting his day in the USSC and was not present to counter the state, hence the lack of evidence on his behalf).

Since such ownership is protected, we should move on to practical applications of opening the registry;

Modern small arms development in our country has always stemmed from private commercial interests. The semi automatic rifle, the repeating pistol, the self contained cartridge, high caliber rifles, modern sniper rifles, and various rifles accessories (rails, sights, etc), have all been born by civilian shooters. But our current automatic firearms technology lags behind, requiring us to rely on other nations technological advances. By once again allowing private citizens their due freedom to possess machine guns, similar advances can occur.

EDIT: A full transcript of the Miller decision can be found here; http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0307_0174_ZO.html
 
Uppem!!!! .30cal!!!

Yea, thats what you need, a machine gun and a tower overlooking town. yea right.
 
the 'sheeple' need to again become the 'people' and understand that their freedom is guaranteed by them alone and not the 'military' or police. standing armies were and are banes to freedom.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
the 'sheeple' need to again become the 'people' and understand that their freedom is guaranteed by them alone and not the 'military' or police. standing armies were and are banes to freedom.
Click to expand...

And yet, our standing army seems to have kept America free!!

Interesting, HUH!!
 
Bender Bending Rodriguez said:
No, the duties of a standing army have nothing to do with opening the machine gun registry to private citizens again.
Click to expand...

Then you contradictate yourself, with the following comment:

"In essence the court stated that a firearm with military applications is protected for private ownership"

for without a standing army (military) to reference, your presentation has no bearing.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Then you contradictate yourself, with the following comment:

"In essence the court stated that a firearm with military applications is protected for private ownership"

for without a standing army (military) to reference, your presentation has no bearing.
Click to expand...
So you're not going to discuss the issue. Fine, go somewhere else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top