The thesis of their argument is that AR15's cause so much damage. OK, let's take that at face value. A 500% tax on their salaries for every law that fails to achieve the purposes they state in their speeches and interviews.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers
This is what our nation has become! A pool of stupid!
Miller vs US. Original defendant died before he could appeal
might be worth revisiting." ... Desert Shield/Storm, Somalia and OIF veteran "This is what our nation has become! A pool of stupid!
That"s why I'll never get any NFA items.
Last time someone proposed a tax like that, we dumped their schit in the harbor and told em to phuck off.
Agreed in principle. Black Robes on SCOTUS have ruled it "constitutional"
Same basis could have been used against NFA and FOPA's Hughes Amendment. Also, wasn't there a State or Fed law/order that banned "Saturday Night Specials" or something like that?
Absolutely. I didn't even know about "Saturday night specials" until now. Interesting!
Miller vs US. Original defendant died before he could appeal
Edit. Both sides claim it as victory.
Heller expanded on it to overturn DC handgun ban
Interestingly, one of the interpretations is that "arms suitable for militia usage are protected by 2A; but can be subjected to registration & tax". Heller went with "arms in common use at the time are protected".
It should have been "arms in common use, and issued to general troops are protected and not subject to NFA" (M16s, M2, m1928 thompson, Winchester combat shotguns, etc)
The problem is "arms in common use" may not apply to arms exclusively made for the Military, due to the fact of Hughes Amendment which prohibits non-FFL people from owning post-1986 "machine guns" (automatics made since then, including M4 and MP5 models). Yes it could be argued that the use by military makes it "common use" but they are not commonly available legally to us peons
This is exactly what I'm saying. This is why I suggest "or" rather than "and". Consider this example:
