So, Lets say the Second amendment gets reinterpreted by SCOTUS

[BogWalker]

I get that everyone would protect their rights if Hitler jr. took over.

But my question is more of a legal "what if"

In the state of Indiana would a general ban even apply in the case of a redefinition of the federal second amendment? With all citizens of the state being defacto members of the state militia wouldn't such a maneuver actually have the unintended consequences of expanding the selection of firearms for hoosiers to own (auto, explosive, ect?)

99.999% chance that our militia statutes are wholesale ignored if it came to it.

 

[miguel]

If being in the militia gave the recognized, legal right to own full military-grade weapons.....why don't we have that right now?

Has a case like this ever gone to court?

edit: By that I mean, has anyone ever said, "I'm part of the militia by law and where's my right to buy X, Y, Z?"

 

[HoughMade]

Has a case like this ever gone to court?

edit: By that I mean, has anyone ever said, "I'm part of the militia by law and where's my right to buy X, Y, Z?"

Don't know, but I'm sure the NFA has been challenged about every way it can be challenged. I'm sure active duty military personnel have been convicted of NFA violations, so why people in state militias would be any different, I don't know.

 

[The Meach]

Has a case like this ever gone to court?

edit: By that I mean, has anyone ever said, "I'm part of the militia by law and where's my right to buy X, Y, Z?"

Seems like a risky and expensive gambit. Either way you are in it for millions on the Supreme Court case. If you win, YAY! But if you lose you are going to jail for a LONG time

 

[BugI02]

If Nazi Germany could confiscate all the weapons (they included bludgeoning and stabbing weapons on the list) from their political enemies with the aid of basically the first generation IBM punch card system then there's plenty of data out there to do the same here.

Getting the political support to do so would be their problem, obviously they'd need a crisis. Certainly one could be manufactured but the believability, therefor effectiveness would dictate that it be on a grand scale. And in that scale of a crisis it would be hard to make the argument that it wouldn't be better for us all to have guns.

If attempted though the question then becomes is it April 19th 1775 or November 9th 1938. The answer to that question will tell us what country our children will live in.

We take a page from someone else's playbook and have a Million (Armed) Man March on DC

 

[HoughMade]

The way these cases make it into court is in 2 ways. In one instance the person attempts to buy, is denied because of the NFA and then sues for a civil rights violation.

The second is much more common and even though I can't cite a case, I'm sure it happened. A guy gets picked up in possession of a fully automatic weapon, gets convicted, and one aspect of the appeal is about whether the law he was convicted under was Constitutional.

Kirk would know about that than me, though.

 

[T.Lex]

Wasn't this somewhat raised in Miller? Or maybe reserved for a later case; that is, specifically not answered?

I feel like it was dodged in Heller or mooted by the determination that the 2A was an individual right.

Oh, that's right, this thread is where we can play make believe and pretend precedent doesn't exist.

 

[Expat]

Someone posted an article here many years ago that discussed an outright ban on guns and how the government could carry it out without door to door confiscations. Increased penalties if and when discovered to be in possession. You would be made to account for guns purchased in the past or no SS or Medicare. It had several other thoughts that I simply no longer recall.

 

[Expat]

Oh, that's right, this thread is where we can play make believe and pretend precedent doesn't exist.

Like the binding precedent of anti-sodomy laws being constitutional, marriage laws being states rights issues, etc.

 

[HoughMade]

Like the binding precedent of anti-sodomy laws being constitutional, marriage laws being states rights issues, etc.

State's rights....pffft. Why would we want more local bodies who have a better idea of what their constituents want and who have to answer to them more directly making decisions about what is NOT spelled out in the Constitution?

 

[indykid]

A little thing about NAZI Germany confiscating weapons. Most Europeans can't fathom the size of the United States. I have had more than a few friends visit from across the pond ask me about making a day trip to Disney World.

When I remind them that you could take all of Germany and fit it into Texas, and have enough room left to lose Germany, people suddenly realize how big the USA is.

Imagine a military the size that the NAZIs had stuffed into an area half the size of Texas, and then it makes it a little easier to understand how they were able to go door to door.

As for we forming a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, using the Army of the United States own advertising, I am a militia of one.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It may be different in other states, but: here in Indiana, who would the State get to carry out enforcement of such laws?

I'm afraid you'd be surprised.

I will.

One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them; the antis will soon be here. And I for one welcome our new anti overlords. I’d like to remind them that as a trusted internet personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.

Told ya...

 

[T.Lex]

Like the binding precedent of anti-sodomy laws being constitutional, marriage laws being states rights issues, etc.

The timelines for all of which can be measured in decades. There is no clear and present danger.

Those issues also involved changing societal norms. As gun owners, we must accept that the greater risk if complacency by our fellow citizens. That will be the death knell for the 2A. When society reaches a point where gun ownership is unacceptable, then gun owners will be, too.

That's basically what happened in the UK and Australia, as I understand it. The majority of people decided what to do with all the guns. Welcome to a democratic republic. That can happen here.

I just hope I'm not around to see it.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The timelines for all of which can be measured in decades. There is no clear and present danger.

Those issues also involved changing societal norms. As gun owners, we must accept that the greater risk if complacency by our fellow citizens. That will be the death knell for the 2A. When society reaches a point where gun ownership is unacceptable, then gun owners will be, too.

That's basically what happened in the UK and Australia, as I understand it. The majority of people decided what to do with all the guns. Welcome to a democratic republic. That can happen here.

I just hope I'm not around to see it.

So, what you are saying, is that culture is downstream of politics and we should work to expand guns to more and more of the culture. Maybe join some large civil rights organization which works promote guns in the culture. Maybe the . . . NRA perchance?

But, but, I WANT MY PONY NOW! NOW!

 

[T.Lex]

So, what you are saying, is that culture is downstream of politics and we should work to expand guns to more and more of the culture. Maybe join some large civil rights organization which works promote guns in the culture....

haha

Yes. We should do our best to inculcate future generations with the glory and responsibility that is firearms ownership.

I have a personal distaste for the specific organization you mentioned, but acknowledge that they are prominent in that market.

 

[HoughMade]

Well, there is more than one national organization that can help us "inculcate future generations with the glory and responsibility that is firearms ownership."

Of course, the one I have some experience with gets some considerable funding from the organization which shall not be named.

...and yes, my son's graduation open house invitation has a real, live firearm on it. I don't see any of the recipients getting their panties in a bunch, though.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

nd yes, my son's graduation open house invitation has a real, live firearm on it. I don't see any of the recipients getting their panties in a bunch, though.

Your son's real, live firearm is the wrong caliber. This. Is. INGO.

I have a personal distaste for the specific organization you mentioned,

Sure, I understand. They are yyyuuugggeee, and they are winners.

T. Lex and Larry Pratt, sitting in a tree, defintely NOT k-i-s-s, i-n-g!

 

[BugI02]

...

Sure, I understand. They are yyyuuugggeee, and they are winners.

Oh, very well played, sir!

 

[HoughMade]

Your son's real, live firearm is the wrong caliber. This. Is. INGO...

...but there's 3 to choose from: .22 short, long and long rifle.

 

[actaeon277]

The biggest threat to us is we let the schools teach Big Government.