National What arms are "common"?

[Diamondback]

The

To define "common use" IMO...

is it available on the open market?

Does it meet Miller criteria? (Suitable for militia/military use)


If the answer is yes to both.......

On the other hand... if they decide that again, only arms that are issued in the military are "common use"; then Miller requires a repeal in part or ideally whole of the NFA1934 act and the FOPA86 Hughes Amendment

This would be a painful pill for the politicians to swallow because of precedent of Miller, AND the simple fact they used Miller as a citation against DC's handgun ban...if the Judges find that Miller decision protects arms in common use, and suitable for military use; then the Hughes Amendment itself is unconstitutional due to the existence of M4s and M16A4s

As is NFA itself since virtually every weapon in the Infantry TO&E is an SBR, SBS, MG, Large-Bore Destructive Device or Explosive Destructive Device... granted, Willie Petes on the streets for EDC could be problematic but I know if I'm lost in the woods I wouldn't mind an M203 with flares and star-shell to signal SAR.

 

[CamoDeafie]

The

As is NFA itself since virtually every weapon in the Infantry TO&E is an SBR, SBS, MG, Large-Bore Destructive Device or Explosive Destructive Device...

But crew served weapons are "not common" if the definition is "every infantryman has one issued"

granted, Willie Petes on the streets for EDC could be problematic but I know if I'm lost in the woods I wouldn't mind an M203 with flares and star-shell to signal SAR.

Believe theres the 37mm flares/smoke/pyrotechnic rounds that can be launched from a M203 37mm version? At least what I could find online... of course theres bound to be some restrictions on usage in the woods due to fire hazards and so forth

 

[ma96782]

I must have missed it somewhere. Because the 2nd A never mentioned "common usage." The USSC made that up. Just like how the liberals like to make up that the 2nd A actually says.....

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, unless I say it's reasonable.

Mind you that (I don't like it) but......the 2nd A is currently being interpreted as such. And, it appears that the USSC will also go along with this interpretation.

Rrrright..... you're not allowed to join this "line of defense". Because you've brought a firearm in the "wrong" caliber or an obsolete firearm.

Aloha, Mark

 

[CamoDeafie]

I must have missed it somewhere. Because the 2nd A never mentioned "common usage." The USSC made that up.

Its all to do with Miller and Heller SCOTUS decisions

1. Miller decision claimed that arms suitable for Militia/military use are protected by 2A (never mind that M4s and M16s are taxed as MGs under NFA1934 )


2. Heller decision made the novel claim of "common use" to reject D.C.'s handgun ban.

 

[ma96782]

As I said, "The USSC made that up."

Let the nose of the camel under the tent and.....

Aloha, Mark

 

[RicInOR]

AN AMICUS BRIEF FROM DAVE KOPEL: What Arms Are "Common" for Purposes of the Second Amendment?
via Glenn Reynolds

 

[bfo]

Common use should also extend to any arms that an infantry unit would use. One of the reasons the militias were formed prior to the revolutionary war was to push back against British seizures of arms and black powder. The intent was to stop the red coats from further confiscations, which then led to the war. I understand why Kopel quotes from Heller and Staples, and why the language that distinguishes M-16s/full autos as common but still be not protected on the 2A are in Heller. Just don't like it very much. This likely means any court case brought against Hughes or NFA regarding full autos will have to depend on something other than the 2A.

 

[Diamondback]

Common use should also extend to any arms that an infantry unit would use. One of the reasons the militias were formed prior to the revolutionary war was to push back against British seizures of arms and black powder. The intent was to stop the red coats from further confiscations, which then led to the war. I understand why Kopel quotes from Heller and Staples, and why the language that distinguishes M-16s/full autos as common but still be not protected on the 2A are in Heller. Just don't like it very much. This likely means any court case brought against Hughes or NFA regarding full autos will have to depend on something other than the 2A.

Probably have to stress the "militia use" language in Miller, "FA and suppressors weren't common infantry use then but they're almost universal now."

 

[CamoDeafie]

Recall it was Miller that interpreted arms protected by the 2A as belonging to the class of rifles suitable for militia/military use, in 1939. The presence of M16s, M4s, original AK47s, AKM, AK74, Uzi, practically every infantry rifle in service since Vietnam all have features and stuff that falls under NFA1934 and if the metric is common use and suitable for military/militia use;
Then Hughes Amendment and parts or whole of NFA1934 must be repealed

Miller decision stated that arms suitable for militia/military use have the protection of 2A...

While Heller decision states that arms in common use are protected;

The argument that M16s/M4s are "dangerous and unusual" falls flat when set against Miller decision; because the US Govt have found that the M16s/M4s are suitable for military use; and thus, they are in common use with the military

A case can be brought up to finalize the seemingly contradictionary decisions of Miller and Heller; by virtue that Miller states militia/military arms are protected by 2A
But Heller states that arms commonly available are protected...
Whereas M16s and M4s are not commonly available due to NFA1934 and Hughes Amendment;

Yet in the argument of Heller; prohibition itself is not justification for uncommon availability


Edited

 

[coloradojim]

Please excuse my grey hair brain, but did not Justice Thomas and the Supreme Court rule (may have been in Heller) that the AR15 was in common use?