"Don't be silky. No one is coming for your guns!"

Why do you believe this?

 

You said machineguns are banned.
This means they are not "in common use".

 

my point was same as who decided if a drug is "drugs with no currently accepted medical use"

as no scheduled one drug can have an accepted medical use, yet marijuana is a scheduled one drug

https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling

"
Schedule I

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.
"

 

and the next conclusion is adding seats

 

Yes, we might as well finish off the trip to official banana republic.

 

so why are machine guns easier to get?

 

cause someone would have fought it by now

 

so if ar-15's are banned, they won't be in common use either

 

Irrelevant.
"In common use" for "traditionally lawful purposes" is the standard at hand.
The AR15 falls under this

 

You don't understand your question.

 

They are in common use for traditionally lawful purposes NOW.
This makes them a "bearable arm" and thus protected by the constitution:
...the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

 

We have about eight retail marijuana retail stores within a 20 minute drive from my house.

 

Republican can not keep the SC they stole - just the way it works

 

exactly, it's got a medical use, yet, the fed STILL has it as a scheduled one substance, which is against their own rules

https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling

"
Schedule I

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.
"

 

What's the point of focusing on one subset of murder that makes up a negligible share of even gun murders, let alone murders as a whole.

It is an emotional appeal. Like policies culling sharks.

 

Except that an AR15 is not an assault rifle. Assault rifles have a very specific feature that modern sporting rifles don't. An AR15 also in not an assault weapon. That is an ambiguous made up ploitical term of dubious origins from the 80's. The morons who use that term simply prove that they actually know d!ck about guns or how they function.

 

Then he should know the government has admitted under oath AR-15's are not assault rifles.

Wilson and SAF fought the suit on First Amendment grounds and secured a settlement with the State Department and the Department of Justice, the latter of which finalizes the settlement.

The amended regulations proposed in the settlement show the government will no longer look at semi-automatic firearms below .50 caliber as “military equipment” or weapons of war.

In offering a definition of “military equipment” the settlement says:

The phrase “Military Equipment” means (1) Drums and other magazines for firearms to 50 caliber (12.7 mm) inclusive with a capacity greater than 50 rounds, regardless of the jurisdiction of the firearm, and specially designed parts and components therefor; (2) Parts and components specifically designed for conversion of a semi-automatic firearm to a fully automatic firearm; (3) Accessories or attachments specifically designed to automatically stabilize aim (other than gun rests) or for automatic targeting, and specifically designed parts and components therefor.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/07/23/government-admits-ar-15s-not-weapons-war/

 

Totally false.

Per United States District Judge Roger T. Benitez ruling.

“Analyzing the list of 161 national events, Allen finds that 78% of mass shooting events did not involve an assault weapon. Put differently, across the U.S. only 22% did involve an assault weapon. Her opinion comports with other evidence in the record. Professor Mark Gius reports even less frequent use of assault rifles in mass shooting events. Gius says, ‘contrary to popular belief, however, assault rifles were not the predominant type of weapon used in these types of crimes. In fact, according to a recent study, handguns were the most used type of firearm in mass shootings (32.99% of mass shootings); rifles were used in only 8.25% of mass shootings.’ That may come as a surprise to the public that is constantly told that assault weapons are often used in mass shootings.”

 

And you can’t ignore federal laws by making state laws that make say what you banned federally is still legal in your state.

Yet blue states do that with weed. Red states shall do that with guns. Monkey see, monkey do.

 

and the federal government can't ignore their own rules, marijuana can not be a schedule one drug as it has valid medical uses


https://www.dea.gov/drug-information/drug-scheduling

"
Schedule I

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.
"

 

And that exact reasoning can be made into a legal argument as to why you can’t ban machine guns, as they would have been in common use if not for the ban. Being that the ban engineered them not being in common use, that means they can’t be banned.

The pro gun side has some good lawyers; I guarantee they have had round table discussions over all of this.

 

Well, an AR-15 lower receiver doesn’t fit the ATF/US code definition of a firearm receiver either. But the ATF pretends that it does and illegally regulates it as such.

 

The Obama administration decided to NOT prosecute a felony gun charge because of this.

 

Yep. If they push it to the SC, the result would be that AR-15 lowers could be purchased any time anywhere with no background check etc. The ATF and gun grabbers are in a big pickle.

 

It's more likely that the ATF will just rewrite the law, unconstitutionally.