3 ms·

I don't think that's right. There are many exceptions to the 2A, such as the classic example of a sawed off shotgun. [1] https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/

by radlad 4y ago

I don't think that's right. There are many exceptions to the 2A, such as the classic example of a sawed off shotgun. [1] https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-ut/legacy/2013/06/03/guncard.pdf https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-ut/legacy/2... [2] https://books.google.com/books?id=CmPKNI2z5-AC&q=heller+%22not+unlimited%22&pg=PA396#v=snippet&q=heller%20%22not%20unlimited%22&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=CmPKNI2z5-AC&q=heller+%22n... edit to add - per [1] above, 18 USC § 922(k), (o) & (v); 26 USC § 5861 specifically prohibits "KNOWINGLY POSSESS OR MANUFACTURE [...] E. Destructive device" which is defined as: > A “destructive device” includes any explosive, incendiary or poison gas --- (i)bomb; (ii) grenade or (iii) similar device, or any combination of parts designed or intended to be converted into a destructive device, or from which a destructive device may be readily assembled. Does not include black powder or antique type firearms. 18 USC §921(3).

notch898a 4y ago
The highlight sentences text of [2] talked about WHO was banned from owning arms, not what. [1] Is just so bad I'm pretty sure it was written by a drunk child (admittedly the intelligence level of most government employees), I would not trust this document AT ALL. It's egregiously wrong. You can own sawed off shotguns with a tax stamp (in fact it was written in law as a tax because they thought they had no constitutional right to ban them). It also says idiotic things like you can't own a gun without a serial number (WTF, a ton of early 20th century guns don't even have these). Now I know some of you will say "but notch, if you have to get a stamp it's a privilege not a right." And I'll explain to you why that's wrong. If you're allowed to have it, they have to give you the stamp. If you're not? Oh you're gonna love this -- if you're not THEN THEY CAN'T PROSECUTE YOU FOR NOT HAVING THE STAMP. Self incrimination. That's right, if you're a criminal you don't legally need the stamp! Only law abiding people have to get it, and hey if you don't theyll just make you a felon so you don't have to get it the next time! It also uses "transported across strate line" to establish federal jurisdiction which is just straight up 100% wrong, it doesn't need to do that as feds will happily prosecute an item even DIY made in the same state (see conviction of kettler). I actually lost track because it seemed like almost everything I read there was wrong. I hope whoever wrote that has a nice job collecting quarters from the parking meters or something now, because I wouldn't trust them with much else. Note: this is entertainment and not legal advice. Seek a lawyer before acting in your own individual circumstance.

by radlad 4y ago

notch898a 4y ago

The highlight sentences text of [2] talked about WHO was banned from owning arms, not what. [1] Is just so bad I'm pretty sure it was written by a drunk child (admittedly the intelligence level of most government employees), I would not trust this document AT ALL. It's egregiously wrong. You can own sawed off shotguns with a tax stamp (in fact it was written in law as a tax because they thought they had no constitutional right to ban them). It also says idiotic things like you can't own a gun without a serial number (WTF, a ton of early 20th century guns don't even have these). Now I know some of you will say "but notch, if you have to get a stamp it's a privilege not a right." And I'll explain to you why that's wrong. If you're allowed to have it, they have to give you the stamp. If you're not? Oh you're gonna love this -- if you're not THEN THEY CAN'T PROSECUTE YOU FOR NOT HAVING THE STAMP. Self incrimination. That's right, if you're a criminal you don't legally need the stamp! Only law abiding people have to get it, and hey if you don't theyll just make you a felon so you don't have to get it the next time! It also uses "transported across strate line" to establish federal jurisdiction which is just straight up 100% wrong, it doesn't need to do that as feds will happily prosecute an item even DIY made in the same state (see conviction of kettler). I actually lost track because it seemed like almost everything I read there was wrong. I hope whoever wrote that has a nice job collecting quarters from the parking meters or something now, because I wouldn't trust them with much else. Note: this is entertainment and not legal advice. Seek a lawyer before acting in your own individual circumstance.