Ducimus:
When the 2A was written was such a weapon like AR15 available to general public? Not being a smart arse here, just what kind of weapon was discussed if any at all when the 2A was written? The powers that be look to have a broad definition at their disposal.

As far as the military, government contracts for improved weapons are lucrative. I do not believe our troops would be using Viet Nam era weapons in the latest wars we have had in Iraq, etc. I could be wrong. If so, let me know. It is in my experience the military is unaffected by civilian laws.

The anti crowd brings up that argument. By that logic, we should all be limited to black powder, muzzle loading muskets.

If your interested. I suggest watching this.
The Second Amendment in 2013 (David B. Kopel) - Cato Institute.

If your into reading about law, you might consider this:
District of Columbia v. Heller
In particular, I would call your attention to the phrase "in common use at the time" within that link. An AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America today. Because of that, I think it would fall under "common use" under the Heller decision.

I sure will read your links. There is always more to study on the subject.

Just read a bit of it and thought the Heller case might be used in CT today as they attempt to approve a very sweeping new law on arms. :hmmm: But yes, DC was way over their boundries for the 1975 banning what they did. The 2A was basically ignored. I will read more. Very interesting.

As an aside, I really don't think a ban of any kind is going to work, nor is a real solution. Based on production data from firearm manufacturers, there are roughly 300 million firearms owned by civilians in the United States as of 2010. Of these, about 100 million are handguns.

I don't know what the current statistics are but it is much higher now. I've heard reports from California, to Oklamhoma, that the majority of people that have been in doing the run on the gun shops buying up firearms, isn't your old crotchity redneck types. 80% of the customers were new to firearms. That made me ask around my local shops and the range I frequent. Sure enough, the majority of the people that have been buying up the firearms, are new shooters, and that's saying something.

I have discussed this with you before. My wife expressed interest in having a firearm because, the crazies as she put it, have one. But yeah, in your and my lifetime, the amount of guns out there already kind of makes the control part moot. I think thought that some of the 80% are buying guns out of fear of the country and the idea that we will be going into a collapse, etc. Just a theory.

I'm still of mind that the only real law that would help is making the registered gun owner responsible for that weapon no matter who is pulling he trigger. The irresponsible might become responsible when a few go down for not being responsible. :timeout:

Well I agree with you on the the fear of the country and economic collapse. I don't think that fear is an irrational one.

As to gun owner responsiblity, I can't say I'm a big fan of registration, but I agree wholeheartedly on responsibility. If it's your gun, and your kid, and he does something really stupid or really heinous, I don't see how it couldn't be your fault by virtue of not properly securing said firearm, and not properly raising said kid.

Right now I have a gun safe on order. Should get it this month. Paid the extra money for an electronic lock where I can change the combo whenever I feel the need to. I know for my own childhood, keys, or unchangeable combos, do not work. Hell, even my wife knew where my father in law kept the key to his gun cabinent. When your away, they will eventually snoop around. I did, my wife did, and kids continue to do so today im sure.

Agreed, the fear is not unfounded. My wife is fearful of the crazies! She basically said they have one and I want one because of that. I had firearms. I felt them not necessary and sold them off. Truth be told, never thought of buying one in over 20 years. At any rate, my original post, no update on where Jr got the weapon. I did catch wind this was his second week at the HS. He was probably feeling insecure and or someone was hard timing him. I wish kids would see administrators before taking action like a handgun. Bullying is something my kids school talks about all the time. So, the wife is wanting to take the kids out of the school. Are we to live in a bubble the rest of our lives? My 15 year old said she did not care about what happened. Then proceeded to talk about graduating early and joining Jumpstart that allows students in 11-12th grades start taking college courses at the community college. Little kid is getting a tough skin and has no time for the soon to be truant classmates of hers.

Where does the 2A say "just not a particular type of firearm"? It says the right cannot be infringed period. Gun bans if nothing else are huge infringements upon that right.

Not all guns are banned. You may have a firearm. Just not a particular type of firearm. The only thing infringed up is not being able to purchase a particular type of firearm and or type of clip. Is that really an infringement or a limitation? So go right on and purchase a firearm. Your right then has been exercised. No infringement. It seems to me your more upset because particular types of weapons are not available for purchase. Get to the meat of the matter. No right is infringed. Good thing there is no Plasma Rifle in the 40 watt range for sale. But you can get 100's of other types of weapons. Where is the huge infringement?

Where does the 2A say "except for a particular type of firearm"? It doesn't.

Where does it say AR15? :hmmm:

It doesn't. Your point? Are you trying to claim that an AR15 wouldn't classify as a militia weapon?

Again what does this have to do with shotguns?

August, you really make my head hurt. What the 2A says or does not say, in your part of the country....what CT passes today....your state is next. Good luck. :up:

Yeah we'll see. We'll also see if Cts laws stand up in court.