Hey people.

The constitution states that all men between certain ages are in the United States Militia and the 86 ban states that only military and LEO can purchase certain goods.  Doesn't our membership in the Unioted States Militia (as per) the US Constitution give us the ability to purchase restricted items?

Just fleshing out an idea here people, tell me where I am going wrong.

You're digging way too deep into this. You only have to go as far as the second amendment to the Constitution. The phrase, "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", is enough to show that all of these laws are unconstitutional.

Michael

Actually it is the US Code that defines the "militia" as all men between the ages of 17 and 40.

I think Hielo was referring to the fact that "shall not be infringed" or RKBA is largely ignored.  He has come up with an interesting way to argue the issue in court.  Leave it to the Anti's to pressure congress to redefine "militia".

I wonder if the definition of "militia" is expanded to exclude folks not on active duty.

Edited for spelling

Now bear with me here I am doing this from memory. There is a case in Florida (I wish I could find the link) where a guy took a hacksaw to a 12 guage and walked into the local LEO shop stated he was a member of the unorganized militia and to arrest him (guy has a larger pair than me) they did so far he has won reversing miller and the NFA. It is a little known case. it is either in the state appeals court or the FL Supremes.

I think hielo has a very interesting angle, how does this spin ya. Persons upon reaching the age of 18 are compelled to register for the draft therefore considered to be the militia waiting to be called to active duty. If is, is not sex then registration "is" joining the militia. Wonder what the Wizard of Is would make of this?

i have been thinking about that. i guess if they redefine "milita" to exclude americian citizens that will mean they dont want my help next time war breaks out.

*Blam* *Blam*  It wouldn't fly, because (as you all know) the f*cking libs make up their GD rules as they go.

Looks good to me, but this is not exactly an official constitutional position with years of case law to back it up.  It seems to be merely an executive oversight in need of clarification.  Bill?  Hillary?  BATF?  I'm sure that this loose end could be tied up fairly handily by adding a word or two.

BTW - What were the Founding Fathers thinking when they added the words " A well regulated Militia"?  They were only asking for confusion down the road.  
It would have been better if they had just wrote, "The People of the United States can shoot, carry, own, purchase and transfer guns as much as they want.  No restrictions shall be placed on these activities whatsoever!  Kiss my Ass King George!"
[uzi][+]:D]