Check out DNR seeks input on deer hunting (But You Know The New York Slimes)
Posted on 02/26/2006 1:44:39 PM PST by wagglebee
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia fondly remembers carrying a rifle around New York City as a boy and says outdoorsmen should attack the idea that guns are only used for crimes.
An avid outdoorsmen who's hunted with Vice President Dick Cheney, Scalia spoke Saturday at the National Wild Turkey Federation's annual convention.
"The attitude of people associating guns with nothing but crime, that is what has to be changed," Scalia told the audience of about 2,000.
"I grew up at a time when people were not afraid of people with firearms," said Scalia, noting that as a youth in New York City he was part of a rifle team at the military school he attended.
"I used to travel on the subway from Queens to Manhattan with a rifle," he said. "Could you imagine doing that today in New York City?"
Scalia was criticized in 2004 for hunting ducks with Cheney while the Supreme Court was considering a case involving Cheney's energy task force. This month, a lawyer hunting with Cheney in Texas was wounded when he stepped in the way as Cheney fired at a bird.
The nonprofit turkey federation is dedicated to conserving wild turkeys and preserving hunting traditions.
Absolutely right!
The media would go bonkers if he shot Scalia. Dont they wish.
People do it with concealed pistols all the time...
If Cheney had accidentally shot Scailia, the media would be complaining that Scalia got "preferential treatment" from Cheney's medical staff.
Good man!
Scalia was giving a speech to a group promoting hunter's rights. Nothing that Scalia has ever said or written (that I am aware of) gives any indication that he does not fully support the second amendment.
and politicians try to say guns are only for hunting...that is why they believe in the 2nd amendment...so the VP can shoot republican lawyers!!!
No one else but police(and their body guards) need guns..not even the military.
Only responsible people.
Drop off a trailer of loaded shotguns in the Bronx or South Central and see what happens.
We always carried around bb and pellet guns when we were kids. Never got a second look. Maybe we should all start openly carrying again so that people will be less likely to freak when they get used to them again...
When I was 12, I actually had a scabbard on my bike, to carry my .22. I could ride through town, to Western Auto, park the bike, walk into the store, with the rifle, buy my weekly needs of ammo, get back on the bike, and go hunting.
Does anyone else remember buying 10 .22 long rifle loads, or 5 shotgun shells, because it was all you could afford?
When I was 18, I crewed on a commercial snapper boat, I would walk a couple of miles to the city dock, with a Lee Enfield slung over my shoulder, at 2 AM. One morning, a cop stopped me on the bridge, asked me where I was going, I told him "fishing", and he gave me a lift to the dock, and shared his thermos of coffee with me. He never even asked if the rifle was loaded! Imagine that, a "cop" assuming that a "civilian" kid, had sense enough to carry a gun, without calling in the SWAT bunch.
I am amazed, in retrospect, at just how quickly my life has gone by, and by just how much our freedoms have suffered, in such a short time.
Re your #8 -
It seems that Scalia was using his rifle in NY for cometitive shooting in a military school.
As far as I know, the military hasn't had a lot to do with "hunting" either lately.
But then again, the 2nd A. really isn't about the standing military, either. Although I think it was presumed during the founding that the National Military (which was supposed to be kept at a minimum) and the local Militias were supposed to be working cooperatively.
Of course, after the Civil War, the Federal Gov't. seems to have reconsidered the idea of relative local / State military autonomy, and that was pretty much the end of the "Militia" system as a serious tactical element in America.
By the mid 1890s the "Militia" became "National Guard", subject to federalization.
So much for "State's Rights", as Roe V. Wade has pretty much demonstrated.
Well perhaps with S. Dakota passing a ban on abortion,
States Rights will be revisited again real soon
"People do it with concealed pistols all the time..."
My friend tells a funny story about a guy dropping his gun on her foot in the subway. She said "Um, excuse me, your gun is on my foot." He was an undercover cop, or so he claimed, she believed him anyway.
Security guards go, "Nice gun..!"
WEIRDEST FEELING...!
Hell I mused to walk out of my house in the Germantown section of Phila at 17 with my 15 year old brother carrying a shotgun and walk two blocks to the trolley get on ride for 1/2 hour get off take a bus into Ambler PA and walk 1 mile to go hunting and NOBODY even gave a damn
That was back in 1953
People wouldn't believe that when I tell them that today
And the police didn't ear vests as a daily part of their uniform
Quite right! The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with hunting.
Well, we don't know whether he supports the incorporation of the Second Amendment to the states, but then again this issue wasn't (yet) considered by the SCOTUS (which is strange, BTW).
It's actually not strange. Both sides are scared to death of a 'final' USSC decision on guns. The court is often unpredictable, and may try to find some 'middle ground' that both sides can't stand.
Now if we can get them to over turn the NFA of '34, the GCA of '68, that FOPA of '86, and the '89 Import ban. Maybe we could get back to the 50 State Alaska style carry laws that the Founders originally envisioned.
After the natural weeding out [aka "survival of the fittest"] period only the more responsible ones would likely remain.
When I was in high school back in the mid-1960s, a friend of mine got an "A" for a project he worked on in metal shop. He built a .50 cal muzzle loading pistol!
QUOTED FOR POSTERITY--and a REALITY CHECK!!!
"Well, it's not just for crime it's also for hunting."
Not much help there, Judge.
My memories of childhood include Dad using his rifle to protect us.
He once shot a rattlesnake coiled up and ready to strike some of the kids, including my sister, playing near it.
He and the men of the neighborhood would go down to the canal and shoot moccasins to make the area safer for the kids.
He told us about going out with his Dad to get rabbits for dinner during the Depression.
Now my brother uses his rifle to get the turtles and coyotes that come around for the geese and the cats.
And not long ago my sister-in-law grabbed a shotgun and scared off a meth-head that had smashed through the front window to rob their home while she was there alone.
It's not for crime, it's for protection and in bad times for feeding your family.
But then again, the 2nd A. really isn't about the standing military, either. Although I think it was presumed during the founding that the National Military (which was supposed to be kept at a minimum) and the local Militias were supposed to be working cooperatively.
Of course, after the Civil War, the Federal Gov't. seems to have reconsidered the idea of relative local / State military autonomy, and that was pretty much the end of the "Militia" system as a serious tactical element in America.
By the mid 1890s the "Militia" became "National Guard", subject to federalization.
yeah guns are to protect us from tyranny first and foremost.
Police wear vests because it is known that they are an armed threat to any criminal they actually happen upon.
If the Police were unarmed, they wouldn't need vests.
I don't remember that, but I remember when a box of 50 .22 long rifle cartridges was only $0.50. I also remember all the back to school sales at the local stores would always feature reduced prices on shotgun shells (9, 8, or 7 shot) because it coincided with the opening of dove season. For a long time you could always look forward to buying your shells at $2.97 for a box of 25 shells each fall.
God, please give us more justices like Scalia. It's so nice to have someone with a brain on the court.
And which NYC was safer to live in? Draw any obvious conclusions, libs? (not you, wagglebee)
I bet the nonprofit turkey federation has preserved its target species better than the endangered species act.
“Of course, after the Civil War, the Federal Gov't. seems to have reconsidered the idea of relative local / State military autonomy, and that was pretty much the end of the "Militia" system as a serious tactical element in America. By the mid 1890s the "Militia" became "National Guard", subject to federalization.”
Historically and legally inaccurate. Too many errors to cover in detail so here are the bullets
1.The courts have recognized the existence of the Militia without exception, since the civil war. From Presser v Illinois – 1879
“It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing
arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the States, and in view of this prerogative of the general government, as well as of its general powers, the States cannot, even laying the constitutional provision in question out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and earing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful
resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government.”
2. The reserve militia of the United States is a concept and legal construct completely separate from the National Guard. The idea the one morphed into the other is a liberal construct not backed by legislation or legal decision.
Re your #15 -
"... States Rights will be revisited again real soon"
Looks like it, for sure.
Let's just hope that it turns out a lot better than it did from 1861-5!
Make no mistake about it; Abortion is every bit as divisive an issue in America today as slavery was in 1860.
Isn't it interesting that both institutions essentially "dehumanize" people?
One by the color of a person's skin; the other by their state of prenatal development.
The Negro slave was considered "property", and the featus only a mass of "tissue".
Those are not the only forms of dehumanization, of course, but may represent two of the most significant in recent History.
That part of American History between 1861 - 5 might be fun to "reenact" (which I occasionally still do) as long as only blanks are being fired at one another - but we'd best learn from it, as we sure as Hades don't want to go repeating it!
As a high school kid in N.C. in the 60's we would bring our hunting rifles to school (and leave them in the car --- skool parking lot) for after skool hunting.
Not today --- would be a Federal Krime!
No society ever really learns from history. If anything, they use history to try and justify making the same mistakes over and over again.
Thinking back, your probably right that that's what started it. Up to that time it was no big deal to buy mail order, that came to a screeching halt.
"I used to travel on the subway from Queens to Manhattan with a rifle," he said. "Could you imagine doing that today in New York City?"
Scalia will be 70 in about 2 weeks. One of my uncles, who is 15 years younger, has told me virtually the same exact story. He walked to school, rifle on his shoulder, and put it into his locker - as did his teammates. No one looked at him cross-eyed or called the cops, and none of the members of the team shot the other students or any of the teachers, even if they got a bad grade (which was, not so coincidentally, rather rare for them). This was in the mid- to late-1960's.
The fact that mere possession of a gun has become so demonized is almost unbelieveable. The antis vest powers of mind control and self-volition in guns, which to my way of thinking is worship of an inanimate object. I guess that this is no surprise, given the utter irrationality of their utterances over the years, but it is a fact nonetheless.
Scalia is right - the attitude must be changed. All gun owners should teach their kids about guns, and also go out of their way to take non-shooters to the range. Only by getting more, and especially younger, people involved with gun ownership and usage can we ensure the future of guns in this country. Without them, I fear for the liberties of future generations.
It started well before that with the National Firearms Act, which played on the public's fear of Mob violence in the twenties and thirties.
Thanks for the update, Jim.
I am pretty much aware of the legal "technical" case for the existance of "Militia" per se, and there seems to actually be a few of them organized and active here and there.
Perhaps I should have predicated my remarks with "for all intents and purposes".
Local Militias used to be logisticaly supported by the War Department (now the DOD) - for one thing, with "obsolete" military weapons and ammunition.
I have perused Adjutant General's records in the State House Archives documenting the issue of Springfield .45-70 "Trapdoor" Cadet rifles including bayonets to several Maine community Militias, including the "Yarmouth Rifles" from my home town. At the time, the single-shot breech loading rifle had been replaced in the Regular Military with the M-1893 KRAG .30-40 magazine fed bolt-action repeater.
Apparently tents, accouterments and such were also available as needed by requisition from the State Arsenal.
Every summer several Militias would gather for a County or state muster - at least one place was Deering Oaks Park in Portland, where they drilled and had "Sham Battles" with one another (sort of like reenacting).
Yarmouth usually took on the "Portland Blues".
Shooting competition was popular as well, and at least one "Turkey shoot" is documented.
Unfortunately, the custom seems to have died out in the mid 1890s, and many - including the Yarmouth Rifles - disbanded.
At about the last State Muster held in Augusta on the hill where the airport is now located, most of the Militiamen used the occasion to get roaring drunk, and as one of the frustrated Officers complained to the AG, "completely unmanageable".
Needless to say, Citizens were not fond of the idea of men running around armed to the teeth while jovially plastered, so the whole system essentially folded, leaving the NG to fill whatever practical, tactical void the Militia had left.
Which by that time, wasn't much.
Apparently this was essentially the case Nationwide, and I get the impression that Great White Father (and all his bureaucrat Cousins and Uncles) in Washington was not the least bit heartbroken over it.
If anybody is aware of the Federal or any State Government encouraging, equipping, or otherwise supporting a local Militia, I would be interested in knowing about it.
According to the 1870s standard, "organized" Militia units should currently be ISSUED at least M-14 select fire rifles, M-60 machine guns and mortars (one each per Squad) and a battery of 155mm howitzers per State.
Heck; throw in a tank or two!
Got any spare HU-1D choppers, BTW?
Suffient ammo, fuel, spare parts, rations and such to allow for regular training and to have on hand for emergencies.
I don't see that happening around here much, do you?
So yes; Militias may be "allowed" or given "permission" (albeit somewhat reluctantly, it seems) by law - but those that do actually try to revive the system get a lot more suspicious scrutiny from de gub'mint than support, I opine.
And it's a pretty far jump from "permission" to "support".
It sure ain't like it useta be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.