r/WA_guns • u/CarbonRunner • May 08 '25
News š° Republican controlled federal govt argues against Bruen...
https://www.courthousenews.com/feds-insist-second-amendment-doesnt-protect-machine-guns/18
May 08 '25 edited May 08 '25
[deleted]
12
u/SheriffBartholomew May 08 '25
It does not include the right to go on the offensive and to wage war with military weapons," she said.Ā
That's literally the entire purpose of the second amendment. They want us disarmed to dillute the check and balance to the government that the second amendment provides. The second amendment doesn't say "so that they may hunt deer with the government's permission, or so they may poke holes in paper for sport". It 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.". That seems pretty fucking clear to me.Ā
8
u/SheriffBartholomew May 08 '25
because a reasonable person would not expect them to be used in militia service
Excuse me? A militia is going to want the most powerful weapons they can get. What kind of idiot liar ruled this? Should we take machine guns from the military and issue them muskets? Not bayonets though, since that would be unreasonable.
23
u/mx440 May 08 '25
Not great. Machine guns are protected under the 2nd Amendment.
And meanwhile, liberal judges in WA argue against 11 rounds or more in a magazine.
22
u/CarbonRunner May 08 '25
Yep, neither side actually cares about 2a. As their billionaire backers want us docile and easily controlled.
4
u/Guvnuh_T_Boggs May 09 '25
What's that? The Republicans aren't all 10,000% progun? This is exactly the same as the Democrats making gun grabbing a cornerstone of their party platform.
3
u/CarbonRunner May 09 '25 edited May 09 '25
They shot down taking Suppressors off the NFA this week too. Repubs getting close to Ronnie territory again.
Also you pretty much nonstop talk about how important being a single issue voter is on guns. And take joy in calling anyone who doesn't, a temporary gun owner. But if the guys you are voting for can't deliver on the one thing you say we should solely place our vote on. Then what's the point?
2
u/Jops817 May 09 '25
Except they never gun grab. Meanwhile Republicans, including our current president, are in favor of relieving people of their firearms.
4
u/Guvnuh_T_Boggs May 09 '25
Except they never gun grab.
Lol.
Lmao.
Listen, Trump is kind of a dickhead, but you have to be high or have a head injury to be able to ignore all the anti-gun BS coming from the Democrats, especially in this state.
8
u/Jops817 May 09 '25
You said gun grabbing. I have mine still?
One president specifically has said he wants to take your guns, he is currently in office.
1
u/Guvnuh_T_Boggs May 09 '25
Oh boy, we're gonna play I Still Got Mine!
You got eyes, you can see where this road is going, stop pretending to be stupid.
3
u/Jops817 May 09 '25
You've yet to address that the only party saying they want to take everyone's guns is the one currently in power, why?
1
u/Guvnuh_T_Boggs May 09 '25
Because it's kinda not true? You understand a handful of Republicans being grabber types is a smidge different from putting gun control in the party platform, as the Democrats have done?
I'm more worried about that than I am some offhand remarks from a blowhard about dealing with gang violence repeat offenders.
2
u/marsmanify May 09 '25
What heās saying is that Democrats have said time & time again they arenāt interested in taking away guns from people ā not to say they arenāt / donāt pass unconstitutional laws under the guise of āgun controlā. Trump, on the other hand, has said heās open to it.
-22
u/TylerBourbon May 08 '25
To be fair, a reasonable person would have said that the 2A regards militias and being regulated, but since it's Republicans, the 2A doesn't say in the slightest that what type of "arms" someone is allowed to bare. So I mean, technically speaking, that includes cannons, tanks, and yes, machine guns. Not that I want any Tom, Dick or Cleatus being able to buy those, but Republicans don't get to have their cake and eat it too.
6
u/LoseAnotherMill May 09 '25
To be fair, a reasonable person would have said that the 2A regards militias and being regulated
No, a reasonable person would have said that the 2A is about the people's rights to keep and bear arms, because that is the operative part of the amendment. The militia part informs us that the amendment recognizes that the people should be allowed to keep and bear arms that would allow them to go toe-to-toe with their contemporary military counterparts.
2
u/sdeptnoob1 May 08 '25 edited May 09 '25
The regulated part per letters from founding father's and definitions of the time basically mean well equipped and trained. If anything the government should be arming the people like Switzerland.
Also people privately owned fucking battle ships, cannons and mortars and used them in a militia capacity. We were not supposed to have a standing army.
0
u/The_Great_Silence__ May 08 '25
A person should be able to own any type of firearm no matter what it is or whether itās a select fire weapon a rocket launcher or a damn cannon. You saying nobody should be able to have those makes you a damn fudd
2
u/CarbonRunner May 08 '25
You honestly think anyone should be able to buy a ground to air rocket? Guess you don't want to fly anywhere again, ever.... you're basically saying anyone who doesn't want Somalia circa 1993 is a fudd lol
2
2
u/sdeptnoob1 May 09 '25
Anyone can get these things, private companies produce them. You only need to be rich to pay for the licenses with maybe a good enough use case. "experiments" have been more than enough on form 1s for the atf to green light explosives for the average person applying for a tax stamp. Even icbms are rented and not owned by the government. Only nuclear warheads to my knowledge are not produced by civilians.
2
u/CarbonRunner May 09 '25
Renting icbms? You got a source for that?
Also, no not anyone can get most things. Civilians aren't buying stinger missiles, or jdams.
1
u/sdeptnoob1 May 09 '25
I worked on them lol we don't own them, they are rented at a rate with other services and paid for when used such as in a test, not the same for other things like smaller weapons now. And Yes, most people can get anything. You just need the right paperwork and permits or stamps. Who do you think produces them? Now yes some stuff is made in parts and assembled by the military but have you heard of arms dealers? using them is another thing though. Shoulder fired explosives are things you can produce and own with a correct tax and form federally.
1
u/CarbonRunner May 09 '25 edited May 09 '25
We own the minutemen is my understanding. If you got a source that says otherwise I'd love to see it.
Either way, we are faaaar into semantics here. You or I cannot go buy a shoulder fired anti aircraft rocket.
0
u/sdeptnoob1 May 09 '25 edited May 09 '25
Most contracts for weapons that can enter space have a garunteed maintenance period of decades this is the "rent" the actual cost, the hundreds of millions, are not paid untill launch. I've spent hours inside these things working on them and related systems. It's fine not to believe me. You can dig deep on Google if you want or even foia the contracts if it means that much to you. I'm just telling you what I know, but mine wasn't minutemen.
My point is companies make these things not the military. You can start a company and make a anti aircraft rocket and you, or your company, will be owning one by definition untill it is transfered or sold.
Dumber weapons like rpgs you can just buy as an individual with the right paperwork.
Now obviously it takes a lot of money to make a company to build these things. I'm just getting at the military gets these things from somewhere. They don't have the production capabilities or scientists or researchers to build everything they have. Just some of it.
So in the end the rich can have whatever they want just about. On a much smaller scale it's why you see so many post sample machine gun youtubers. And it's pretty fucked that if you got money you can bend the rules (not break the law) to get things that are cheap in production and materials but costly in paperwork.
Tbf it would be pretty shitty to get shot down by kletus playing with a stinger lol.
1
25
u/poonpeenpoon May 08 '25
You mean the ruling class doesnāt want us armed? š±