When I was a kid I thought it would be so cool to have BEAR ARMS… now I know better!
Here we have Eugene Volokh and he’s taking on a not-so-common aspect of the Second Amendment; Are blade weapons covered by the Constitution?
As Written By Jazz Shaw for Hot Air:
Eugene Volokh is tackling a less common Second Amendment argument this week. It stems from a recent decision made by the New Jersey state supreme court involving a resident who was convicted of Unlawful Possession of a Weapon. The “crime” in question was the fact that there was a dispute going on with a neighbor in his apartment complex and when he came pounding on the door, the defendant answered the door with a machete in his hand. He may or may not have pointed it at the unruly neighbor (stories conflict on that point) but he definitely didn’t injure or even attack the person. The state supreme court overturned the conviction and sent the case back for a new trial with different instructions from the judge because the defendant’s rights had been violated.
This leads Volokh to answer another question which he apparently gets fairly often from people who don’t follow the subject closely. Are swords, knifes, machetes and other blade weapons covered by the Second Amendment? We spend so much of our time talking about guns that this area of hardware doesn’t come up very often. His conclusions: (The Volokh Conspiracy, Washington Post)
This should be obvious, I think: The Second Amendment protects “arms,” and the D.C. v. Heller opinion discusses bows and knives as examples of such arms; opinions in the 1800s and 1900s dealing with state constitutional rights to bear arms also mention bladed weapons; and post-Heller opinions, such as from courts in Connecticut, Michigan, and Wisconsin agree. But some have disagreed — the Massachusetts government in the Caetano stun gun case before …….
KEEP READING HERE: