Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

PCB66

(210 posts)

17. This was addressed in the Heller decision

Reply to pansypoo53219 (Reply #5)

Wed Jul 1, 2026, 12:09 PM

7 hrs ago

In the vernacular of the time when the Bill of Rights was drafted "well regulated" meant well supplied. Not what we would call regulated by the government nowadays.

I suspect that since they took up the case they have intentions of overturning the bans in the states that have them. otherwise they wouldn't have taken the case.

Probably one last big "fuck you" by Thomas.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

19 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court will consider whether laws called assault weapons bans violate the Second Amendment [View all] BumRushDaShow Yesterday OP

Since the 6 fascist court majority are so afraid of their security, a problem they themselves created, I would be ImNotGod Yesterday #1

Or their fears could cause them to vote against the bans PatSeg Yesterday #2

If they do, well, then, it's machine guns for everyone ashredux Yesterday #3

Who said "small artillery"? And one boy's small is anothers ginormous. erronis Yesterday #7

If they do, well, then, it's machine guns for everyone ashredux Yesterday #4

how come they ignore the well-regulated part of the 2nd? pansypoo53219 Yesterday #5

You know, one of these years .. not in my lifetime ... the Court will finally take "well-regulated' into account. ificandream Yesterday #12

If you had participated in DU's long-ago Gungeon debates, you'd know maxsolomon Yesterday #14

language does change. pansypoo53219 21 hrs ago #15

Tell that to the "Originalists" maxsolomon 8 hrs ago #16

This was addressed in the Heller decision PCB66 7 hrs ago #17

It would seem to me Mr.Bee Yesterday #6

Ballistic missile? Bullets made with spent uranium? (Or not spent yet.) erronis Yesterday #8

It was written for muskets Bayard Yesterday #9

With so many Americans living in fear of someone lost knocking on their door, Torchlight Yesterday #10

"Supreme Court will consider" J_William_Ryan Yesterday #11

The only possible way and i mean only possible way THIS supreme court would ban assault weapons is bluestarone Yesterday #13

If they're so original purr-rat beauty 7 hrs ago #18

That's already been decided in Caetano v Massachusetts in 2016 which said the 2A is not limited to the tech at the time DetroitLegalBeagle 4 hrs ago #19