New respect for crossbows

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad

apsuman said:


United States v. Miller, 307 US 174

I read nothing in the opinion that excludes the second amendment from defining an individual right.

Exactly. And you see nothing incorporating it either. For a right to be an individual right rather than a ‘collective’ right, one of the people (i.e. states) it must be incorporated through the 14th amd. I actually don't have the case on me; only this months ABA journal which discuses it… The holding is cryptic and doesn't address the issue out right but holds (according to the article) that certain weapons are not ‘suitable’ for Militias and therefore are not protected by the 2nd.

Hey, it’s a 64 year old case; feel free to argue about it at will.
 

I'm pretty sure that (in Michigan at least) you can only use a crossbow for hunting if you're disabled. I'm not sure what, if any, restrictions there are on owning one, but it's still sad that the Aussie perception of America is a place where roving bands of crossbow-armed vigilantes injure small schoolchildren.

Of course, our perception of Australia is a place where wild packs of dingoes roam around eating babies, so I guess I shouldn't talk. :)
 

blackshirt5 said:
Angcuru, out of curiousity, what is it legal to carry in our home state?

no clue. do a search on New Jersey Weapons Charter or something similar. Doesn't matter that much to me, since I don't plan on staying in NJ for too long.
 

I thought our perception of the Aussies was that they're all Convicts? At least, thats what I gathered from The Simpsons yesterday.
 


Fenes 2 said:
In Switzerland, swords are not covered by the weapon laws, since they are too long to be concealed. But this is in a country where sixteen year olds get a military-issue assault rifle to keep at home over summer ("Just don't switch the plate covering the burst-fire and autofire modes like this, ok?") for shooting tarining and every soldier (military service is mandatory for all able-bodied males) keeps his military sidearm (pistol or assault rifle) with ammunition also at home, so it does not matter much...
But, of course, this is in a country where, if i remember correctly, any lawbreaking with a firearm involved grants an automatic life sentance, no questions asked, speedy trial, no parole.
 

I just have to say, Kesh: GREAT avatar/sig combo!:D

hmm.. that covered guns, but not blades, clubs, etc.
 

8XXX{0}====> said:
But, of course, this is in a country where, if i remember correctly, any lawbreaking with a firearm involved grants an automatic life sentance, no questions asked, speedy trial, no parole.

I think that explains why the murder/assault/theft rates are so much lower in Sweden. Perhaps they are onto something there...
 

Also, as to answer a question previous. It is illegal (anyone correct me if I am wrong here) for an individual to own a machine gun in the United States. It is also illegal to own or manufacture bombs.

My father had a friend who got to keep a machine gun from Korea or Vietnam (I forget). It had to be mounted in a cement block, in addition to being chained, locked up, and otherwise secured (wasn't mounted in the ground), and had to call the police whenever he transported it to the firing range. I think there were some other details too, but this was a long time ago (late 80's) when I found out.

Not sure how much of a difference that is, it was certainly taken seriously.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top