Happy 4th of July! In this special episode, we dive into the debate surrounding the AR-15 and the Second Amendment. Discover the historical context of firearm ownership in America, from the Revolutionary War to modern times, and understand why the AR-15 should be protected under the Second Amendment. We’ll also explore recent Supreme Court rulings and the logical conflicts in current arguments. Plus, enjoy a fun and patriotic celebration at the end of the video with an over-the-top 4th of July scene! Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more insights into firearm legislation and your Second Amendment rights.
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, social media, internet forums. etc.
Man talk about a rage bait title
Furthermore: When are we going to see a soul brave enough to challenge the Supreme Court about that albatross FDR has fastened to our necks 90 years straight, namely the NFA?
This guy is full of crap
Not only should AR-15s not be banned, but M4's should be issued to every able bodied man. Whatever is issued to military personnel. Period.
What it boils down to is the Second Amendment and interpretations by Judges who are often activists that ignore and attack the 1st and 2nd amendment as they push for an aristocracy based government. Only the elitists would enjoy these freedoms and the rest left to the whims of the aristocracy. The founders clearly understood that the Constitution was a treaty between the government and the governed. Without an armed population the Constitution is just a piece of paper.
Dang the Kentucky long rifle is older than Kentucky
This doesn't make any sense at all. This is the exact same thing as saying you can change your gender. The AR-15 is a firearm. Arms. "The right to keep and bear arms" it doesn't say "not the AR-15". I swear people just makes it up just to make s*** up. The second amendment also doesn't say anything about "sporting" arms. Back in the day the majority of militia members didn't have military issued weapons. They had their civilian rifles/muskets. It seems to me like wording it this way is just another way to appeal to the fascist tyrannical government.
This doesn't make any sense at all. This is the exact same thing as saying you can change your gender. The AR-15 is a firearm. Arms. "The right to keep and bear arms" it doesn't say "not the AR-15". I swear people just makes it up just to make s*** up. The second amendment also doesn't say anything about "sporting" arms. Back in the day the majority of militia members didn't have military issued weapons. They had their civilian rifles/muskets. It seems to me like wording it this way is just another way to appeal to the fascist tyrannical government.
This doesn't make any sense at all. This is the exact same thing as saying you can change your gender. The AR-15 is a firearm. Arms. "The right to keep and bear arms" it doesn't say "not the AR-15". I swear people just makes it up just to make s*** up. The second amendment also doesn't say anything about "sporting" arms. Back in the day the majority of militia members didn't have military issued weapons. They had their civilian rifles/muskets. It seems to me like wording it this way is just another way to appeal to the fascist tyrannical government.
More like a $130 fine today.
The way you say “Illinois” makes me want to unsubscribe
Arms are arms. Doesn’t matter if it’s a spear, a pistol, an AR, a SAW, or a damn grenade launcher.
2A uses the term “ARMS”, not “certain guns for certain purposes”
Gun folk are better off in court representing themselves. Law only knows lies.
20million and one after this video when I buy another one 😎
We can’t have them, but you bet your buttery sweet ass all of the judge’s security details have them.
They SCOTUS sent the issues back to the lower courts, with Clarence Thomas sending along with it the sharply worded instructions noting:
To the State of Illinois: The AR-15 is the most popular semi-automatic rifle in America and there-fore undeniably "in common use today". Heller V. District of Columbia
He further goes on to state:
"The Seventh Circuit's decision illustrates why this court must provide more guidance on which weapons the Second Amendment covers. The Second Amendment's protection extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitutes bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
"But this minimal guidance is far from a comprehensive framework for evaluating restrictions on types of weapons, and it leaves open essential questions such as what makes a weapon "bearable", "dangerous", or "unusual".
"The AR-15 is a civilian, not military, weapon. No army in the world uses a service rifle that is only semi-automatic. In my view Illinois ban is highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semi-automatic firearms used for lawful purposes."
This court is rightly weary of taking cases in an interlocutory posture. (before other cases are settled/final judgement in lower courts).
He then went on to warn:
"The Court must not permit "the Seventh Circuit to relegate the Second Amendment to a second-class right"
I assume when the cases are settled, the SCOTUS will step in if necessary, because the AR-15 is the epitome of what is protected under the 2nd amendment. The lesson to be learned here is stay diligent and do not let the smallest of cases slip by the wayside. For the right or rather government restriction upon interfering with the right to bear arms must be protected at all costs.
"
What most people don't know is that Remington produced a semi automatic rifle, the Model 8 in 1906, for the civilian market thirty years before the US military adopted a semi automatic rifle the M-1 Garande in 1936.
Its like all branches of government are trying to start a revolution at this point. I don't think its going to be over tax or the things that started the civil war like slavery. Its probably going to be over 1st and 2nd amendments. For my generation at least, those were literally ingrained into us that they are the most important overall and to be proud of them. Now they are trying to tell us they are not that important and should be removed. I have people I am responsible for now and the thought of it that happening and them going through it really does keep me up at night, and I really don't want it to happen.
I hope your wife's boyfriend buys you that musket you want now cause of this 😂😂
Forgotten Weapons just featured the Belton repeating flintlock, an equivalent "semi-auto" flintlock from 1785 that Congress actually had a contract with. This proves that the knowledge and technology at the time, including the Puckle Gun, featured repeating weapons. Not once were any of them regulated until much later in US history.
How much do I wish I had an AR-15? No freedom at all in the UK.
Bs, the musket was a modern firearm when the constitution was written!@" No military in the world uses semi auto rifles!! So technically our firearms should be exactly the same as the military ! Are ya all a bunch of bozos?? We already lost a major part of our constitution to the authoritarian rulers! Thus this coversation is moot!! Look out of your paper bags folks! Say safe, ..
Underneath that logic, then we should ban alcohol and cars that go past 90 miles an hour because what kills more people drinking and driving how come the government is not doing shit about that
But why does the government sell the fully automatic A.R. fifteens and other military weapons? Without the military themselves being behind that to make better judgment. If they do not want us to have it, they should not be able by law to sell it to other countries to bomb or to harm school, kids and people in hospitals. You can’t tell us we can’t protect herself the semi automatic version, then turn right around and sell the fully automatic version plus other deadly weapons to other countries that’s hypocrisy at the finest you’re not putting the military person behind these weapons that you’re selling and I mean US military with US weapons, then breaking their laws
Confirmed, James Reeves is a dirty Feddie. SIEG ZEON!
I agree with you, great points. But by that logic, the 2nd A should then also provide civilians the right to own nuclear bombs and fighter jets. Right? And perhaps that’s the root issue here that the Supreme Court is struggling with, and perhaps why they are kicking the can down the road on this – because the way it’s written + the historical context presents a few problems. Perhaps the founding fathers did anticipate semi-auto rifles, but they sure as hell didn’t anticipate Apache helicopters and hydrogen bombs.
He is wrong.my father in-law fed his family hunting with a 22 ruger. Place shot write and you get food on the table.
Great topic James! 💪🇺🇸
Love This Great Nation!
-Nate (Ohio) 🇺🇸💪✝️☝️
It’s all protected. The fact someone is trying to take them should tell you everything you need to know
What I hate that the government plays it both ways NFA? Well MGs, Suppressors, SBRs, SBSs aren't in use by militaries. Fast foward and now they are and it's why they don't want us to have them.