PDA

View Full Version : Can all ammo be banned in California because its not written in the 2nd amendment?


vincnet11
01-28-2011, 9:40 PM
Well they are going after handgun ammo that "shoots through metal" and are saying this cannot be challenged because ammo is not part of the 2nd amendment.

FourTenJaeger
01-28-2011, 9:45 PM
The supreme court disagrees. The Second amendment gurantees right to FUNCTIONAL Firearms..

Lone_Gunman
01-28-2011, 9:46 PM
How exactly can you effectively bear weapons with no ammo? Wasn't it Heller that said bear=functional firearm?

FourTenJaeger
01-28-2011, 9:51 PM
As much as the anti's want, The Supreme Courts have been beginning to rule in our favor, And ammo bans, same as firearm bans, Are unconstitutional. As much as they want to turn back time and change the constitution, it wont happen.

jtmkinsd
01-28-2011, 10:02 PM
Outright bans on all ammo are never going to go anywhere...regulation is going to be the tool used by the antis...in other words, "how hard can we make it to get the stuff they want" is going to be the mantra. In the interest of public safety, could they ban armor-piercing rounds? You betcha, just like they banned a host of other ammunition dubbed too dangerous to be in the hands of the public.

Blackhawk556
01-28-2011, 10:28 PM
Reload anyone?

rojocorsa
01-28-2011, 10:35 PM
Reload anyone?

That would be the biggest nightmare ever! {As if an outright ammo ban wasn't bad enough!}

Think about the cost of a single 9x19 casing or something like that! And then all the brass vultures would really come out of the woodwork. And smart people would use revolvers and bolt actions and anything that didn't eject brass/shotshells automatically so they could keep their spent cartridges to themselves.


Plain and simple it would be utter madness!

CalBear
01-28-2011, 10:42 PM
I think in these cases the Constitutional test needs to be, and hopefully will be, relation of the item to a functional firearm used in self defense. The intent of the 2A is clearly to protect the fundamental American right to preservation of self, preservation of one's State, and preservation of the free state (United States). Attempts to ban all ammunition would render these basic protections null and void.

Kid Stanislaus
01-28-2011, 10:43 PM
Reload anyone?

BINGO!! We have a winner!:D

Don29palms
01-28-2011, 10:45 PM
Wouldn't ammunition be considered arms?

jtmkinsd
01-28-2011, 11:02 PM
Wouldn't ammunition be considered arms?

They are a component to arms...and as was stated, SCOTUS recognizes ammunition as part of "functional arms", which is why an outright ban would never fly. BUT, there's the possibility with regulation, the dark powers could push the cost/burden of getting ammunition higher and higher and force more litigation on us (what's "reasonable" regulation) to gobble up money that would be better spent fighting the regulations on firearms themselves.

RickD427
01-28-2011, 11:02 PM
Just for the sake of discussion, the Second Amendment make no specific reference to "firearms" either.

I have to think the founding fathers used the much more encompassing term "arms" for a reason.

sawchain
01-28-2011, 11:03 PM
Trick question. Munitions are arms are munitions.

The sure hate the Constitution, don't they?

CalBear
01-28-2011, 11:14 PM
Trick question. Munitions are arms are munitions.

The sure hate the Constitution, don't they?
Yes, and they like urinating on the founders' graves. I'm serious. People's lack of historical understanding (or their willingness to ignore it) is disgusting.

This case is particularly comical, as General Gage and the Brits knew damn well that restricting the flow of gun powder and other resources necessary to operate a functional firearm was one of the best ways, along with direct confiscation, to disarm the public.

The colonists were absolutely livid over this, and started procuring and producing necessary materials in the colonies or from other countries to combat the British prohibition on importation power and guns.

"Been there done that" can be used to describe many gun control measures. Registration was known and disdained, confiscation happened and sparked the war, importation prohibitions were used, as well as carry restrictions, and arbitrary search and seizure... all used. The founders experienced all of those in one form or another. The 2A was intended to protect against any such abuses in the future.

Not even 250 years later, Kevin de Leon wants to ban handgun ammo.

Speechless.