Couldn't Congress ban Ammo without violating 2nd amendment?

[pendoreilleadventures]

I was just thinking about it today and Couldn't Congress ban Ammo without violating 2nd amendment therefore making owning a gun legal but ammo illegal?

AMENDMENT II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

[runamuk]

I would think that the glitch is in the term "arms" terminology is what courts spend our money arguing over...lol

[Special T]

No because there some stament about it being legal for citizens to own a certain ammount of black powder... Tannerite the expoding targets are considered Back powder... Thas is my understanding anyway.

[Woodchuck]

Don't give em any ideas 

[JimmyHoffa]

BATFE bans certain projectiles from ammo. 

[jackmaster]

it would be pretty damn tough to ban 223 ammo anyways, which is a very common ammo, guns arent going to get banned, they will come up with some crazy idea for a ban so they can please the antis, but i am bettn that it wont have much punch to it, they would be walkn ito a crap storm that they want nothing to do with, of course this still wont stop me from the march on the 19th, i beleive in oly....never hurts to show that no matter what we wont lay down and just take it......

[Zardoz]

Ban ammo? I doubt it.  Tax the heck ot of it? Very possible. 

[ribka]

Tax it severely, declare lead bullets and shot shells to be too toxic for the environment like in California .  New EPA ammo regs, bans  and high tarrifs on importation of ammo,
Etc etc.

[kentrek]

to bear arms..means to use them ? ya ? so we cant use them with out ammo..

thatd be like outlawing firing pins..

but who knows what they "think" they can/will do

[wapiti hunter2]

I was just thinking about it today and Couldn't Congress ban Ammo without violating 2nd amendment therefore making owning a gun legal but ammo illegal?

AMENDMENT II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Maybe???  Actually this article is worth the read.  Long but well written and covers the 2nd  amendment well.

"the Second Amendment specifically speaks of the militia being “well-regulated” and gives to Congress explicit powers relating to that regulation. That makes the right to bear arms less like the more absolute rights to free speech and free exercise of religion (about which “Congress shall make no law”) and more like the right against searches and seizures, which the Fourth Amendment bans only when “unreasonable.” Indeed, Congress used that authority in 1792 to require gun registration and ownership. The obvious conclusion is that, while neither Congress nor the states can properly bar the ownership or possession of any class of guns, one or both may impose reasonable regulations. Again, we can argue about the limits of what kind of regulation is wise or permitted – I personally tend to support background checks, limited waiting periods and even a gun registry – but there’s no particular reason to believe that the Second Amendment is intended to present a meaningful obstacle to such regulations of the right."

http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/26/gun-control-gun-rights-gun-politics-and-newtown-part-i-of-ii/

[Bean Counter]

Tax it severely, declare lead bullets and shot shells to be too toxic for the environment like in California .  New EPA ammo regs, bans  and high tarrifs on importation of ammo,
Etc etc.

Bingo. An all out ban on foreign ammo. Severe postal regulations.

[csaaphill]

not to argue but more speak the truth of what the forefathers said.
A well regulated Militia has nothing to do with Gov regulations it means in their terms a well armed and prepared militia.
however since the supreme court has up held that idea quotes like this Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth. are moot but still holds true to those who know the truth.

[stuckalot]

not to argue but more speak the truth of what the forefathers said.
A well regulated Militia has nothing to do with Gov regulations it means in their terms a well armed and prepared militia.
however since the supreme court has up held that idea quotes like this Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth. are moot but still holds true to those who know the truth.

In the vocabulary of the times "well regulated" referred to well supplied, trained, practiced and ready.  "Therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

[hillbilli]

can they ban ammo without violating the second amendment? No. Do anti-gun politicians actually think the 2nd means anything? No. There are liberal politicians and lobbyists who think they should be able to ban everything, and if they could get the votes they would push the bill through. Same bunch of Aholes who a few years ago introduced a bill in congress to ban any rifle bigger than .22 lr as 'armor piercing' because it will go through a level 2 vest.. If we let them, or they think they can get away with it, they will. Whether it is unconstitutional -only matters when it is challenged in court, and when it finally gets to court.. If They could pass a bill, and, if no one physically stopped them, they would try to confiscate and destroy everything they could, probably while all the time dragging out the court process and delaying a supreme court finding..
     

[csaaphill]

they already are actually blumenthall is on that wagon arleady.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

They could tax the heck out of it and make it impractical for most of us to purchase in any great quantity.

[csaaphill]

he wants us to go through background checks to buy ammo. seen something on this earlier that stores like wal-mart are following suit.

[longrangekiller]

can they ban ammo without violating the second amendment? No. Do anti-gun politicians actually think the 2nd means anything? No. There are liberal politicians and lobbyists who think they should be able to ban everything, and if they could get the votes they would push the bill through. Same bunch of Aholes who a few years ago introduced a bill in congress to ban any rifle bigger than .22 lr as 'armor piercing' because it will go through a level 2 vest.. If we let them, or they think they can get away with it, they will. Whether it is unconstitutional -only matters when it is challenged in court, and when it finally gets to court.. If They could pass a bill, and, if no one physically stopped them, they would try to confiscate and destroy everything they could, probably while all the time dragging out the court process and delaying a supreme court finding..
   

I couldn't imagine hunting elk with a .22 lr lol