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.
“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.
What?
So the state doesn't have a right to prohibit to say,
prohibit felons from voting while they are on parole?
Well perhaps with S. Dakota passing a ban on abortion, States Rights will be revisited again real soon
Well, perhaps with Californias passing a ban on 'assault weapons', States Rights will be revisited again real soon?
Don't hold your breath.
A state exercising its 'right to prohibit' is a problem in a free republic, not a solution.
What? So the state doesn't have a right to prohibit to say, prohibit felons from voting while they are on parole?
It becomes a problem, -- especially for instance when they prohibit ex-felons from owning guns, along with losing the vote.
States are delegated the power to reasonably regulate most aspects of our life, liberty or property, using due process of law. -- But fiat prohibitions are not due process.
Deprivation of Rights due to criminal prosecution is a far cry from a priori restraint of a law abiding citizens Rights.
Wait a minute here, the legalization of abortion came about because the judicial system over stepped its Constitutional bounds, it made law instead of interrupting law. Federalizing its decision.
What about the rights of a "law abiding" baby in the womb?
Does this "citizen" have no rights?
Please show me where, by the doctrine of intent, does the Constitution speak of an enumerated right to an abortion?
You should should be far more fearful of an activists court that basically eliminates a constitutional branch of the government then a state trying to protects its future citizen's by "prohibiting" its death
WTF are you blathering about? This is about the Second Amendment. "Shall not be infringed". Where does abortion come in?
I grew up in a small town in North Dakota. No one ever thought anything about a kid walking around with a firearm of any kind. No problems with leaving them in a car while you were at school. Used to hunt ducks or pheasant nearly every evening after school let out.
Sorry I posted this earlier in the thread and I thought you were replying to the subject of abortion
LOL
Well It wouldn't the first time that more than one issue developed on a thread would it?!
P.S. I don't "blather" :>)
Well perhaps with S. Dakota passing a ban on abortion, States Rights will be revisited again real soon.
Well, perhaps with Californias passing a ban on 'assault weapons', States Rights will be revisited again real soon?
Don't hold your breath.
A state exercising its 'right to prohibit' is a problem in a free republic, not a solution.
What? So the state doesn't have a right to prohibit to say, prohibit felons from voting while they are on parole?
It becomes a problem, -- especially for instance when they prohibit ex-felons from owning guns, along with losing the vote.
States are delegated the power to reasonably regulate most aspects of our life, liberty or property, using due process of law. -- But fiat prohibitions are not due process.
Please show me where, by the doctrine of intent, does the Constitution speak of an enumerated right to an abortion?
Neither our US Constitution, nor any state constitutions mention abortion or the power to prohibit it. --- We have murder laws that apply to the issue. They should be enforced.
You should should be far more fearful of an activists court that basically eliminates a constitutional branch of the government then a state trying to protects its future citizen's by "prohibiting" its death.
If you see a murder, demand that your local prosecutor indict and hold a trial..
But fiat prohibitions on items like guns or on sins like abortion are not Constitutional under our due process of law.
That's the way I read it too.
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.