Biden’s attempt to regulate pistol braces dealt blow after appeals court casts doubt on constitution

Yep, commerce with foreign nations.

 

And I still don't know whether you agree or disagree that congress has zero legislative power over the use and possession of firearms by private individuals.

 

The federal government has the legislative power to require a private individual to own a firearm and train with it, so... disagree.

 

Hm, that was not actually what I asked about agreement. I asked whether we agree that congress has no legislative power to limit or prohibit the use and ownership of firearms by private individuals.

 

a private person-or someone who is already serving in a state militia. obviously those ineligible to serve in their own state's militia is beyond this power by congress

 

You said:
....that congress has zero legislative power over the use and possession of firearms by private individuals.
Yes. It does.

 

I think the issue is this-chickpea differentiates between congress being able to require those in militia service to own a certain type of weapon as opposed to telling private citizens that they cannot own other weapons.

 

Yes, you've pointed out that I made an error in my statement. Congress can use the militia power.

But this current question I have is unrelated to the militia power. Does congress have the power to limit or prohibit private individuals from owning or using firearms?

 

10 USC S246
The constitution gives Congress the power to add:
(c)
All members of the militia of the United States, regardless of class as defined in (b), shall obtain and maintain a rifle or carbine suitable for service in same.

 

If it does, it is a very narrow window.
And the Bruen ruling narrows it further.

 

yep, but that doesn't give congress any power to LIMIT or prohibit what said citizens choose to own and it does not give congress any power over those not members of the militia

 

what sort of limits are proper constitutionally?

 

Narrow window? Can you explain?

 

Yes.
If the power exists, it is very limited.

 

But it doesn't exist.

 

The proposition in question:
...that congress has zero legislative power over the use and possession of firearms by private individuals....

The militia clauses gives Congress legislative power to that effect.
Thus, the proposition is false.

 

As I have several time posted, you have proven that the proposition as I originally stated it is false. You pointed out commerce and the militia clauses.

The current point of discussion is whether congress has any legislative powers to limit or prohibit the use and ownership of firearms by individual citizens.

 

Congress has the power to:
-To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States
-To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
As a result of a conviction under the proceedings related to above (thusly meeting due process), Congress could define punishment, in whole or in part, as the abrogation of the right to bear arms.

 

I know. I made a clarification for TD.

 

Great!

Does congress have the power to limit or prohibit private individuals from owning or using firearms?

 

See post # 68

 

The word "yes" has three letters. The word "no" has only two. You typed much more than necessary.

And post #68 doesn't answer my question.

 

Then post #68 answers your question with much more detail than you require..
But it -does- answer your question.

 

Hm, so post #68 says:

So you're talking about how congress would have the power abrogate the right to bear arms of convicted counterfeiters and pirates.

Okay, I'll agree that they can punish those crimes.

So are those the only legislative powers congress has regarding the use and ownership of firearms?

 

similar to religion, but the government does ban people from practicing the peyote religion in their own homes