25 February 2017

How Far We've Come

We've gone from the Supreme Court ruling that a particular weapon wasn't protected by the 2nd amendment because it had no military utility...

...to the 4th circuit ruling a particular weapon wasn't protected by the 2nd amendment because it has too much military utility.



  1. Whatever it takes to justify what they want.

  2. So what weapon doesn't have military utility? They still use bolt action guns and pump action shotguns. Are these A-holes saying we need to go back to only using black powder?

    It's beyond me how they can say the most popular rifle in America isn't in common use.

    1. In 1934 shotguns with barrels shorter than 18" apparently had no military utility.

      Since no defense was presented to the Supreme Court, nobody mentioned the combat use of sawed off shotguns in WW1.

  3. I was noticing that myself. "The second amendment is only for the MILITIA, which is police and military because I don't know anything about what the militia actually means" "The second amendment doesn't cover anything useful to the militia, because it'd be too useful!"

    With a nice side of "SEE, EVERYONE TURN THEM IN NOW THEY AREN'T PROTECTED" along with "nobody wants to take your guns, you stupid ignorant gunhumper!"


Try to remember you are a guest here when you comment. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.