Interesting Quiz

[Scout26]

I generally can't stand Christian Science Monitor quizzes because of the having to click twice (once to answer and then once again to move on to the next question), but this is only 15 questions.

2 of their answers are wrong.  Which is why I got 13/15.  (You can't say Miller set one precedent and then  in the next question say that the precedent is wrong.    )


Anywho, Enjoy:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/1104/How-much-do-you-know-about-the-Second-Amendment-A-quiz/Topic-of-Second-Amendment?nav%3D675333-csm_blog_post-promoLink

[lee n. field]

Does the Second Amendment guarantee a personal right to own fully automatic military-issued combat rifles, heavy machine guns, and perhaps even shoulder-fired missiles?

Yes, but what answer do they expect?

Ohhhh, the evil Bushmaster.

s because of the having to click twice (once to answer and then once again to move on to the next question), but this is only 15 questions.

Took me 12 excruciatingly slow minutes to oooze through that quiz.

[Perd Hapley]

No, that wasn't patently biased.

You can't say Miller set one precedent and then  in the next question say that the precedent is wrong.   

No, but you can't expect them to think, can you?

[vaskidmark]

That second click is there to alllow for instant gratification at seeing that you selected the response they wanted you to select, or to reveal that your selection was not what they were looking for so when you use the "back" button to redo the question you would know which answer to select.

The only thing better than that system is where selecting anything  but the approved response causes the question to be repeated.  After three attempts you should be able to get the right one on your fourth try.  I hear HR departments like that for their "competency" testing following mandatory training sessions.  Abandoning the test gives no score and no indication you attempted the test.  In order to get to "Finish" you must eventually pick the correct/prreferred/desired response thus guaranteeing a 100% rating for everybody completing the test.

stay safe.

[HankB]

Actually, I remember reading that the NFA '34 passed not so much on account of gangster shootings (like the quiz wants you to pick), but union violence - union goons throught they were safe in attacking unarmed "scabs" during a strike, but were met by company security (Pinkertons?) with SMGs . . . union goons lost that one.

[brimic]

10. Does the Second Amendment guarantee a personal right to own fully automatic military-issued combat rifles, heavy machine guns, and perhaps even shoulder-fired missiles?

I got this one wrong.
Apparantly arms that would be used by a militia are 'probably not' covered by the 2nd.
I got #11 wrong too apparantly...

[Hawkmoon]

I scored 12 out of 15. And I agree -- IMHO my answers to the questions I got "wrong" were correct, and the preferred answers are incorrect.

[RevDisk]

10. Does the Second Amendment guarantee a personal right to own fully automatic military-issued combat rifles, heavy machine guns, and perhaps even shoulder-fired missiles?

You answered:
Yes.
Correct answer:
Probably not.
The majority justices in the 2008 Heller decision said the Second Amendment protects the right of Americans to possess firearms in common use – meaning rifles and handguns commonly used by civilians. The issue may be litigated in a future case, but Justice Antonin Scalia, writing in the Heller decision, suggested that the states and Congress would not violate the Second Amendment by passing and enforcing restrictions on machine guns and specialized military weapons.

At least they said "Probably not", which correlates correctly with the SCOTUS decisions but still not the correct answer. The Second Amendment, per US vs Miller, protects fully automatic military-issued combat rifles, heavy machine guns, and perhaps even shoulder-fired missiles significantly more than engraved duck guns.

11. Does the Second Amendment guarantee a personal right to own semi-automatic rifles that resemble the fully-automatic military versions of the same firearm?

You answered:
Yes.
Correct answer:
Not clear at this point.
This is one of the thorniest unresolved questions in the wake of the Heller decision. In overturning the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns in 2008, the high court said handguns – including semi-automatic handguns – are constitutionally protected because they are in common use by law-abiding citizens. The question now is whether a majority of justices will find that semi-automatic rifles – which are also in common use by law-abiding civilians – enjoy the same constitutional protection.

Again, technically true if referring solely to recent SCOTUS decisions. Semi-automatic copies of full auto military weapons could be argued that they are necessary training or economical alternatives to actual service rifles. Or near identical functionality.

I cannot say the quiz is wrong, per se.  Only that it relies on interpretation of recent SCOTUS decisions.