A Brief Inquiry into the Nature and Value of the Second Amendment(FL)

naplesnews.com ^ | 26 October, 2011 | J. Patrick Buckley

[ctdonath2]

Today, that IS basic armament.

[ctdonath2]

What you see as “permitted up to”, the founding fathers saw as “minimum required” - read the Militia Act of 1792. Anything beyond that was more than common folk could afford - but if you could, you were more than welcome to bring to a fight.

This notion of RKBA being limited to one-man ordnance is absurd.

[wastedyears]

This notion of RKBA being limited to one-man ordnance is absurd.

Yes, I absolutely agree with you on that.

[archy]

The general rule of thumb that I have seen, and which is sensible, is that private individuals should by law be permitted arms up to the same basic armament as an army infantry soldier. This was the standard in the time of Washington and Jefferson; we don't quite meet it today

Not so. The Constitution authorizes Letters of Marque and Reprisal, allowing the use of privately armed shipping- and other forces; it is not limited to naval warfare- as private military contractors to engage hostile forces wherever they might be found. That means that the crew-served weaponry necessary for outfitting such foces must, of necessity, also be available for the use of the American citizenry and employees engaged in such actions.

Too, remember that Henry Knox, Washington's first General of artillery and said to be both "the father of the Army Artillery branch" and "the father of the U.S. Navy," was a self-taught amateur artillerist, whose personally owned cannon and experience developed fromm their use, was essential to the founding of this country. He was of such importance that he became our first Secretary of War, and at least four military installations have been named in his honor, the most recent being the one in Kentucky where the nation's gold is kept. Also named for him are several cities and counties, including the one in Indiana from which this response was sent.

[archy]

If that were the case, how would someone execute a Letter of Marque and Reprisal?

They wouldn’t.

They would need the equivalent of what in today’s world would be a battleship.

Not necessarily.

[archy]

Why only basic armament? I want an M4A1 with ACOG and M203 launcher.

Avoid the M4A1. The Continental R975 radial gasoline aircraft is a fuel hog and is air-cooled, overheating easily. And genuine 100-octaine AvGas is getting hard to find these days.

Consider a Lend-lease M4A2- hard to find- with a Diesel powerpack instead, or possibly one of the Israeli M51 rebuilds, which were both upgunned and refitted with a Cummins 460hp Diesel engine.

[DuncanWaring]

Possibly.

But “Club K” is still well in excess of what a typical infantryman can carry, which is the standard of what some say the Second Amendment protects.

[archy]

But “Club K” is still well in excess of what a typical infantryman can carry, which is the standard of what some say the Second Amendment protects.

They say wrong. Those who would limit the effectiveness of ANY American military response give aid and comfort to the nations enemies, and adhere to them.

[DuncanWaring]

You’ll note that line of thought hasn’t gotten a whole lot of support around here.

[Lurker]

Nothing, could it be converted for low-level bombing or ground-support?

Why don't you Google up some pictures of the planes used in WWI for that purpose. It wouldn't be difficult at all to hang a couple of perfectly legal Class III weapons on a Cessna.