Posted on 03/23/2015 8:08:45 AM PDT by pabianice
A Navy veteran and his wife are challenging a ban on handguns in Saipan, arguing in federal court that the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands is bound by the U.S. Constitutions Second Amendment.
Ive always been a firm believer in our constitutional rights, whether thats freedom of speech, religion or the right to keep and bear arms or right to privacy, and Im pretty sure that what Im doing in this case is in defense of those convictions, said David J. Radich, 44, a former petty officer third class.
His wife, Li-Rong Radich, was severely beaten by an intruder in 2010, a trauma that her husband says might have been prevented if she had a handgun.
While the islands citizens can receive permits for a select few long guns, the law prevents them from possessing those for self-defense, even at home. Regulation of handguns varies in the four other inhabited U.S. territories. With differing degrees of regulation, they are allowed in Americas only other commonwealth territory, Puerto Rico, as well as in Guam and the Virgin Islands, but handguns are banned in American Samoa.
(Excerpt) Read more at stripes.com ...
I wasn’t talking about the American invasion in 1944, but the Japanese militarization of the island in 1941. The League of Nations Class C mandate was not supposed to include militarization, thus it was technically an invasion.
“I wasnt talking about the American invasion in 1944, but the Japanese militarization of the island in 1941. The League of Nations Class C mandate was not supposed to include militarization, thus it was technically an invasion.”
Japan pulled out of the League in 1933. It is widely regarded that the militarization of Saipan began then.
Even then, the state department blocked requests by the defense department to beef up the defense capability of Guam, believe it or not. They said it would be provocative. Yeah, sort of like buying a home defense shotgun would provoke a home invader.
It is amazing that Guam held out as long as they did given that their defense was hamstrung so much by our own government.
“In theory, true. In practice, not until the decision was made to go to war with the United States in the summer of 1941.”
In practice yes. They allowed no foreign ships into the ports and there is ample evidence of the building of airfields and other infrastructure.
Bump!
“It is amazing that Guam held out as long as they did”
One hour from initial engagement to surrender.
Tell that to the men who died there.
Ditto for Guam. Yes, December 8, 1941 was a very one-sided and quick contest thanks to the flunkies in the State Department who vetoed any defense of Guam lest it provoke the Japanese. How did that work out?
The indigenous population of Guam resisted bravely until the American military returned in 1944. By most estimates, said resistance and the reprisals which resulted cost them 10% of their population. That's nothing to dismiss lightly.
“How many people died in Saipan in 1941 resisting the Japanese?”
Since the Japanese were the occupiers in 1941 and we didn’t attack till 1944, I doubt that many people died in Saipan in 1941.
“The indigenous population of Guam resisted bravely until the American military returned in 1944. By most estimates, said resistance and the reprisals which resulted cost them 10% of their population. That’s nothing to dismiss lightly. “
Where the Japanese went, people died. But I can find no indications of any overt resistance. If you can enlighten me, please do.
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.