|
|
The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is called, in The City of New York v. Miln, 11 Pet. 139, the "powers which relate to merely municipal legislation, or what was, perhaps, more properly called internal police," "not surrendered or restrained" by the Constitution of the United States.
- U.S. v. Cruikshank
现在大家还愿意听大爷大娘唠叨，说明还没想翻桌子。如果哪一天真的不想在宪法法律框架内妥协了，半自动 AR 改全自动在技术上太容易。而且凭美国民间机械加工的技术水平和能力，禁任何枪的想法，略可爱。
另外，不要扯天朝了吧，在拥枪这个问题上，天朝跟美国不光是技术门槛，连观念上的差别也是巨大。
|
|
[复制链接]
发表于 2014-1-22 14:22
