My view on guns and gun control in the U.S. (Vanity)

[StormPrepper]

I finished watching this exchange between a Navy Seal and Piers Morgan

And I'm getting irritated at all the dodging around I keep seeing everyone doing about the 2nd amendment.

The 2nd amendment is not there to protect hunting or sport shooting. That's the argument that people use to avoid the truth.

The 2nd amendment is in the Constitution for the express purpose of protecting the Constitution. As long as the people are sufficiently armed, the power will always ultimately reside with the people and not the government.

That was the intent of the founding fathers. It had nothing to do with hunting.

It's time people started standing up and stop being afraid to defend this truth.

Increased gun crime is the result of not teaching morality to the children. It's about generation after generation growing up without a reason to treat each other with dignity and kindness. Being a good citizen for a reason. Thank you public school system. (I home school thank you very much)

So yes Piers, an AR15 has a use in civilian hands. It's to protect our country from itself. It is the last line of defense for the rest of the Constitution.

If we're not armed then we are no better than off than the citizens of North Korea, China, Cuba, etc...

-Stourme

[backwoods-engineer]

I too tire of the "Elmer Fudd" arguments.

We have militia weapons for the defense of ourselves, our neighbors, our state, and the country. And if necessary, against tyrants.

And by the way, the NFA '34 and GCA '68 (as amended) are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. End of story.

[Balding_Eagle]

It's time people started standing up and stop being afraid to defend this truth.

If I knew how to post the US map which depicts how much the gun laws have changed in the last 20 years to our favor, it might improve your moral a bit.

So would turning off MSNBC.

[umgud]

Gun control is kind of like trying to solve drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to own cars.

[StormPrepper]

I don't watch MSNBC... I saw it on youtube. I came across it while I was watching some of Ann Coulter's discussions on race relations (how the left screwed it up).

I live in Colorado where they passed a ban on magazines over 10 rounds. We successfully recalled 2 of the democrats that pushed that crap..and a 3rd resigned.

We talk about this subject around here all the time. Most of the people I know (anecdotal, but it's my perception), don't believe it's about reducing gun violence at all... it's about disarming the people for more sinister designs. That also happens to be my opinion.

I could go on, but I'll keep it at that. Let's just say I think everyone should be armed. Personally... I think gun control laws are for evil purposes.

uggg... I'll stop typing now... I get so worked up and emotional about this subject.

[noprogs]

Please read the Second Amendment. Plainly, even in the modern sense of the word, it is about the militia being “regulated”, NOT THE PEOPLE! Commas have meaning!

I’m willing to compromise, however. If the projectile exceeds three pounds in mass and can explode on impact, the firearm should be registered with local law enforcement. Of course me agreeing with this restriction means anyone can carry anything they feel like in any manner they see fit anywhere they wish, except upon private property if the property owner chooses to restrict this freedom. Should a property owner choose to restrict the free bearing of arms on their property, they are responsible for ensuring the security of all people on their property at any time, and are liable for any loss if life, injury and personal property of their “guests”.

See! I can compromise.

[Antihero101607]

Next time someone uses the “The founding fathers could never have envisioned what we have today” argument or saying that civilians shouldn’t have military grade weapons, do remind them that the average gun owner does not have easy/ready access to the following:

Select fire weapons, MRAPs, NVG’s, Body Armor, encrypted radios, satellite surveillance, extensive training, pyrotechnics/incendiary weaponry, teargas, drones, helicopters, tasers...

You get the idea.

[nathanbedford]

Hence the essential paradox of the gun grabbers: the more they succeed in their campaign to deprive law-abiding citizens of the power of self-defense, the more they leave them vulnerable to the lawless element who will continue to possess an employee firearms and the more reaction generated among the law-abiding against gun laws.

The left's fundamental public-relations problem is that they believe that they will achieve a safer society when all guns are removed and that is their ultimate if publicly denied goal. Anything less than total confiscation means they will have achieved only making the law-abiding vulnerable. But there is simply no political consensus across the country to confiscate all guns so the left is reduced to nibbling at the edges. Every time they take a bite out of the right to own and bear arms, they make us more vulnerable and increase resistance to acceptance of their ultimate goal which is, of course, the elimination of all gun ownership.

To address the author's argument, the more the government expands and intrudes into our lives, the more it approaches tyranny and commensurately the more it generates resistance and support for gun ownership. The very act of grabbing guns is itself a tyranny which generates resistance and increases the general desire to keep and bear arms.

The essential tyranny of the left is to govern unmoored from the United States Constitution. Running roughshod over the Second Amendment is itself justification for the people to keep and bear arms as a reaction to the very tyranny it was intended to prevent.

[CrazyIvan]

It has only been recently that the military had arms on par with civilians. The civil war was fought mostly with muzzle loaders when repeaters were available.

As far as the founding fathers envisioning modern firearms Franklin and Jefferson were avid inventors.

[Voice of Reason1]

The purpose of the Constitution is as a constraint on governmental power - the 2nd amendment being the constraint of last resort.

Why is that difficult for people to understand?

[ClearCase_guy]

And note that in 1776, the British redcoats were arguably the most capable army on earth. They had state of the art muskets.

And the colonists had exactly the same things.

The RKBA is not frozen in the 18th century. Citizens today should have the firearms that our soldiers carry in Afghanistan. I also have no problem with citizens having weapons more advanced than just a really slick carbine.

[FAA]

“Please read the Second Amendment. Plainly, even in the modern sense of the word, it is about the militia being “regulated”, NOT THE PEOPLE! Commas have meaning!”

As I read the Constitution and the 2nd in particular, the “militia” was the people. A “militia” was what was created once the common folk were called and organized and regimented for defense of the particular territory. The country at the time did not believe in a standing Army which they saw as an evil which served to deprive the regular folk of life and property. Basically, the people had the freedom to own arms as they saw fit since they could be summoned at any time to act in defense of the country. Casters and towns owned cannon that they had made themselves. The federal government never paid for them, owned them, or, controlled them. They belonged to the locals who paid for them.

In my mind the 2nd says that I need to be able to own anything I think is necessary to defend myself, my property, or my country from an aggressor. Who that “aggressor” is is not defined. It’s my judgement as a free person. It could be a neighbor on the rampage, a murderous tribe, a foreign nation, or, agents from a government I don’t recognize. I, as a free man, make that determination in my judgement.

To me, that is what the 2nd Amendment is.

[rockinqsranch]

“Why is that difficult for people to understand?”

They (Meaning the Left) don’t want to.

[Daffynition]

On the op-ed page of Sunday's Hartford Courant....the normally very LIEberal Colin McEnroe offered a very unusual observation about the Sandy Hook circus I have no idea what caused his abberation, but, finally a progressive sees the light.

In part:

**And, given that, there probably isn't anything in the area of gun policy or mental health that could have been done to save us from them or them from each other.** **

[Yosemitest]

You're right on target.

The United States Citizens KNOW that they're going to have to fight TYRANTS in their own government.
You cannot protect life, without the ability to take life.

While you are WAITING for the police to respond, someone could be losing their life.
All people of a responsible age should be armed.

As EternalVigilance reminded us:

The Second Amendment IS Pro-Life.

"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these:
First, a right to life;
Secondly, to liberty;
Thirdly, to property;
together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can.
These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation,
commonly called the first law of nature...
In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society,
to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights;
when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution,
is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights;
the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property.
If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right,
the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation.
The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty,
it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift
and voluntarily become a slave."




-- Samuel Adams, The Rights of the Colonists

Click here to read the 12 page pamphlet.

Let us NEVER FORGET THAT !

Let's subjugate them to OUR end game, DUST!
"COMPROMISE" is a DIRTY word!
People who study the Bible know that COMPROMISE almost always leads to destruction.


It's time to mock the "Gun Control" Zombies!
"Gun Control" is a firm grip, steady breathing, accurate aim (developed by lots of practice), and a slow trigger pull.


The Swiss have got it CORRECT !
We need to learn from the Swiss and implement their "gun control measures" here in the United States right now, today!
These laws are the ones we should shove into the "2nd Amendment Haters" faces.

" Today, military service for Swiss males is universal. At about age 20, every Swiss male goes through 118 consecutive days of recruit training in the Rekrutenschule. ...

Even before required training begins, young men and women may take optional courses with the Swiss army's M57 assault rifle.
They keep that gun at home for three months and receive six half-day training sessions.

From age 21 to 32, a Swiss man serves as a "frontline" troop in the Auszug, and devotes three weeks a year (in eight of the 12 years) to continued training.
From age 33 to 42, he serves in the Landwehr (like America's National Guard); every few years, he reports for two-week training periods.
Finally, from ages 43, to 50, he serves in the Landsturm; in this period, he only spends 13 days total in "home guard courses."

Over a soldier's career he also spends scattered days on mandatory equipment inspections and required target practice.
Thus, in a 30-year mandatory military career, a Swiss man only spends about one year in direct military service.
Following discharge from the regular army, men serve on reserve status until age 50 (55 for officers).

By the Federal Constitution of 1874, military servicemen are given their first equipment, clothing and arms.
After the first training period, conscripts must keep gun, ammunition and equipment an ihrem Wohnort ("in their homes") until the end of their term of service.

Today, enlisted men are issued M57 AUTOMATIC assault rifles and officers are given pistol.
Each reservist is issued 24 rounds of ammunition in sealed packs for emergency use.
(Contrary to Handgun Control's claim that "all ammunition must be accounted for," the emergency ammunition is the only ammo that requires accounting.)

After discharge from service, the man is given a bolt rifle free from registration or obligation.
Starting in the 1994, the government will GIVE ex-reservists assault rifles. Officers carry pistols rather than rifles and are given their pistols the end of their service.

When the government adopts a new infantry rifle, it sells the old ones to the public.

Reservists are encouraged to buy MILITARY ammunition
(7.5 and 5.6mm-5.56 mm in other countries-for rifles and 9 and 7.65 mm Luger for pistols)
which is sold AT COST by the government, for target practice .
Non-military ammunition for long-gun hunting and .22 Long Rifle (LR) ammo are not subsidised, but are subiect to NO sales controls.
Non-military non-hunting ammunition more powerful than .22 LR (such as .38 Spl.) is registered at the time of sale.

Swiss military ammo must be registered IF bought at a private store, BUT NEED NOT BE REGISTERED IF bought at a range.
The nation's 3,000 shooting ranges sell the overwhelming majority of ammunition.
Technically, ammunition bought at the range must be used at the range, but the rule is barely known and almost never obeyed.

The army SELLS a variety of machine guns, submachine guns, anti-tank weapons, anti-aircraft guns, howitzers and cannons.
Purchasers of these weapons require an EASILY OBTAINED cantonal license, and the weapons are registered.
In a nation of six million people, there are at least two million guns, including 600,000 FULLY AUTOMATIC assault rifles, half a million pistols, and numerous machine guns.
Virtually every home has a gun.

Besides SUBSIDIZED military surplus, the Swiss can buy other firearms easily too.
While long guns require NO special purchase procedures, handguns are sold only to those with a Waffenerwerbsschien (purchase certificate) issued by a cantonal authority.
A certificate is issued to every applicant over 18 who is not a criminal or mentally infirm.

There are NO restrictions on the carrying of long guns.
About half the cantons have strict permit procedures for carrying handguns, and the other half have NO rules at all.
There is NO discernible difference in the crime rate between the cantons as a result of the different policies.

Thanks to a lawsuit brought by the Swiss gun lobby, semi-automatic rifles require NO PURCHASE PERMIT and are NOT registered by the government.
Thus, the ONLY long guns registered by the government are FULL AUTOMATICS."

The Swiss have got it CORRECT !
Let's adopt THEIR LAWS !

Remember:

The beauty of the Second Amendment is
that it will not be needed
until they TRY to take it.

Read Second Amendment: It’s Not About Hunting, IT'S ABOUT TYRANNY .

[jrd]

maybe people should start pointing out that the second protects the constitution from Democrats

[FAA]

All right, Yosemitest, when do we unleash Hell. I’m just saying.

[Yosemitest]

We should have already ~ several months ago!



Let us remember ...

"You Americans are so gullible.
No, you won’t accept Communism outright.
But we will keep feeding you small doses of socialism
until you finally wake up and realize you already have communism.
We won’t have to fight you;
we’ll so weaken your economy
that you will fall like over ripe fruit into our hands. "


Nikita Khruschev, Former Soviet Premier

[TigersEye]

I don't have the map you're talking about but I did work this up a while back...

The Dem/libs have been engaging in a steady push to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms for decades. And this is how it has been working out for them in the last two decades...

• The percentage of Americans who own guns has increased.
• The percentage of Americans who believe we have a right to own guns has increased.
• The number of guns owned per gun owner has increased.
• The amount of ammunition possessed per gun owner has increased.
• Concealed carry laws have spread from state to state like wildfire.
• Castle Doctrine laws have been passed in numerous states that didn't have them.
• Stand Your Ground laws have been passed in more states than had them before.
• Gun rights lobbying groups have become a cottage industry unto themselves sprouting up like mushrooms after a rainstorm.
• In the worst economy since the Great Depression the firearms industry can't keep up with orders or expand fast enough.
• 65.4 Million Guns Bought Since Obama Took Office, 91% More Than Bush's First-Term Total
• 46,455 Background Checks For Gun Purchases Each Day Under Obama

And in the last two months... (Nov. 2012 and Dec. 2012)

• Americans Buy Enough Guns in Last Two Months to Outfit the Entire Chinese and Indian Armies
• NRA membership has increased by 250,000. (Jan. 2013)

And it continues...

• NRA Surges to Record 5 Million Members (May 4, 2013)

MOLON LAVE! WE'LL BUY MILLIONS MORE. ;-)

[Stanwood_Dave]

The Constitution authorizes Congress to "grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water". That means they expected individuals to have enough firepower to take on foreign ships and armies (as shown by the "captures on land and water"). You aren't going to do that with a single musket, so at least some people had to own the 18th century weapon(s) of mass destruction, the cannon (and probably more than one). Letters of Marque and Reprisal. Article I, Section 8, paragraph 11 of the U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to "grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water." A "reprisal" means an action taken in return for some injury. A reprisal could be a seizing of property or guilty persons in retaliation for an attack and injury. It could include forced used against the perpetrators for the redress of grievances. A reprisal could even involve killing a terrorist who is threatening further harm and cannot be captured. "Marque" is related to "marching" and means crossing or marching across a border in order to do a reprisal. So a Letter of Marque and Reprisal would authorize a private person, not in the U.S. armed forces, to conduct reprisal operations outside the borders of the U.S.A. Such Letters are grantable not just by the U.S. Constitution, but also by international law, which is why it was able to be included in the Constitution. The Letters are grantable whenever the citizens or subjects of one country are injured by those in another country and justice is denied by the government of that country.

Applying for, and legal effect of, letter of marque

The procedure for issuing Letters of Marque and the issuing authority varied by time and circumstance. In colonial America, for instance, colonial governors issued them in the name of the king. During the American Revolution, first the state legislatures, then both the states and the Continental Congress, then, after ratification of the Constitution, Congress authorized and the President to sign Letters of Marque. A shipowner would send in an application stating the name, description, tonnage, and force (armaments) of the vessel, the name and residence of the owner, and the intended number of crew, and tendered a bond promising strict observance of the country's laws and treaties and of international laws and customs. The commission was granted to the vessel, not to its captain, often for a limited time or specified area, and stated the enemy upon whom attacks were permitted. For instance, during the Second Barbary War President James Madison authorized the Salem, Mass., brig Grand Turk to cruise against "Algerine vessels, public or private, goods and effects, of or belonging to the Dey of Algiers".[17] (Interestingly, this particular commission was never put to use, as it was issued the same day the treaty was signed ending the U.S. involvement in the war—July 3, 1815.)

During Colonial times, the 'battle ax' was replaced with the tomahawk, a device with utility as a tool and a weapon--and it was a fearsome weapon in the right hands. (Remember the scene's in The Patriot, a 2000 American historical war film directed by Roland Emmerich, written by Robert Rodat, and starring Mel Gibson)

Yet private ship owners had cannon, and even as late as Teddy Roosevelt's Roughriders, the {William Tiffany}Tiffany Family gave them a couple of machine guns (Private interests gave the regiment superior firepower). See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodbury_Kane or below:

http://www.americanrifleman.org/Webcontent/images/2013-2/20132279156-roughridersgun_m.jpg

From Paragraph 7

But this was not a Gatling; it was a potato digger and, as TR wrote in The Rough Riders (1899): “Our regiment had accumulated two rapid-fire Colt automatic guns, (pre John Browning's design 50 caliber M2 machine gun, see also Note-1) the gift of Stevens, Kane, {William Tiffany}Tiffany {as in Jewelry Family}, and one or two others of the New York men … .”

Note-1: Prior, to the July 1, 1898, assault on San Juan Hill.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodbury_Kane

Spanish-American war service

When the Spanish-American War broke out, Kane, with other leaders of society, enlisted in the First United States Volunteer Cavalry, better known as the "Rough Riders." Kane and several of his East Coast friends including William Tiffany donated two Colt Machine Guns that cost $7,500 each. When the Rough Riders will Sic{were} allowed to expand from their original number of 778 to 1000, Kane was commissioned a lieutenant. Roosevelt mention him {Kane} in his account The Rough Riders: