View Single Post
Old 12-29-2012, 09:18 PM   #303
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NYC/NJ
Posts: 962
My Ride: S2000+Wrangler
Originally Posted by Rhumb View Post
Perhaps to turn the question a bit then, should we then also be allowed to possess F-22s, M1 tanks, ballistic missiles and nuclear arms to provide a more or less equal counter to what our own government possesses? Isn't stopping at allowing assault rifles an essentially meaninglessly minute step beyond allowing only single-shot weapons in creating some armed parity with what our government fields?

Should the Federal Gubment roll up to your front door in an M1 to take your freedoms, a Bushmaster is as useless as grand daddy's single shot squirrel gun, presuming the JDAM dropped by aforementioned F-22 didn't already turn your home into a smoking crater.

Or is the whole concept propounded by some that the basic purpose/function of the Second Amendment is to create an armed parity with our own government -- as opposed to external threats -- problematical?

And why then is that “well-regulated militia” phrase even in the Second Amendment if it basically carries no import in understanding the Amendment in full?

Just like an AR15 is a "detuned" military weapon, you can also legally own "detuned" military hardware, including choppers, tanks, and planes. Now, if you are skilled and psycho enough to re-arm them (breaking the law) they so be it, but you can own military hardware. Hell, even in england, you can buy any toy you want from their military surplus yards.
NFRs2000nyc is offline   Reply With Quote