Shotgun Forum banner
  • Whether you're a greenhorn or a seasoned veteran, your collection's next piece is at Bass Pro Shops. Shop Now.

    Advertisement
Status
Not open for further replies.
21 - 40 of 186 Posts
The current bill to regulate Armalite rifles (which won't pass until 10 Republicans vote to end the filibuster) doesn't follow the Canadian plan.

I own one AR-15. If I pay $200 my Amish renter can still borrow it, and I can use it until I die, and then my heirs can pay a $200 tax if they want to keep it. It's regulated exactly as a pre 86 M16.

Or Uncle Joe will pay me on the order of thousand bucks for it.

Now.

I think my Amish renter and me might have more fu shooting a 45-70 High Wall at those bottles and cans and steel targets.

He could own, the 45-70, but he'd probably prefer the .270 Savage Axis II I sold him for the $250 I paid for it.

I think eventually something like that, will pass.

I just hope it's Republicans that shoulder the political cost.

The people that hate the public schools the most, adore their Armalite rifles.

Yet they didn't raise a peep when their bump stocks to them were flat out banned, with no compensation.

The biggest problem with public schools is nearly every one is a life support system for a ball team.

And to preserve the public schools, it's better to support the local Tigers and never breath a word about gun control, because gun control is unpopular with small town ball fans.
 
Save
dannyd93140 said:
If the 2nd amendment was treated as it should be: You would be able to own an M-16 Without any restrictions.
If you read the words of the Founding Fathers, the current military service weapon is exactly the sort of arms they intended to be outside the scope of federal law. The patriots of the day used the same Brown Bess and Charleville muskets that the armies of the two major world powers used at the time. They also used highly accurate Kentucky rifles that were on the cutting edge of sniping technology 80 years before rifles became standard military issue.
 
Save
dannyd93140 said:
If the 2nd amendment was treated as it should be: You would be able to own an M-16 Without any restrictions.
You can own an M-16 issued to you as part of a well regulated militia. The Second Amendment, which originally was a compact between the states and the federal government guarantees that right to the states.

Thanks to Justice Anton Scalia me and you and every qualified citizen in the United States can own common firearms in common use among the people, but not M16s and the like, as Scalia phrased it.

Military weapons are reserved for the federal government and state militias.

If it's not a military grade weapon, then the government cannot unreasonably infringe our right to own and use it.

It's important that we DO NOT have to show the weapon has a militia purpose.

It's enough that it's useful for self defense or sport.

That's not a perfect solution.

But how else would you prevent machine guns sold mail order to people held in prisons?

Or a rich man buying his own nuclear weapon?
 
Save
Obviously lawyers aren't experts on the constitution.
 
Save
The Constitution is like the Bible: everyone has their own opinion of what it says
 
Save
Read and understand what the author's were thinking about freedom from oppression, and individual rights and the meaning is clear.
 
Save
I agree, but yet someone out there is going to get a different take on it. Remember? "It depends on what the meaning of the word IS,.....IS".
 
Save
casonet said:
I agree, but yet someone out there is going to get a different take on it. Remember? "It depends on what the meaning of the word IS,.....IS".
{hs#
 
Save
casonet said:
I agree, but yet someone out there is going to get a different take on it. Remember? "It depends on what the meaning of the word IS,.....IS".
But that was a criminal trying to weasel-word his way out of a tight spot.
 
Save
Word parsing. How people can disagree on what a word means; even when something is pretty clear to you and me and they WANT a word to have a different meaning
 
Save
47MolineRTU said:
Disappointing to see gun owners that support gun bans. Guns are not the problem, people are the problem.
It's always easier to blame in adamant objects than people. That's how we got Thousands of new warning labels. Warning the Coffee is Hot. ;)
 
EricB said:
Obviously lawyers aren't experts on the constitution.
The Supreme Court has the final say on what the Constitution means.

Heller was a close 5-4 decision. It could become as unpopular as Roe vs Wade in another fifty years. It could be overturned.

What makes Heller so very valuable is Justice Scalia's holding that our right to own the common arms commonly used by the people dates back centuries before the constitution was written. The Second Amendment secures, but not create the ancient right to be armed.

So, even if the Second Amendment was repealed, by another amendment we'd still have the same rights to own and use arms as we do to travel, engage in the common occupations, and get married to who we choose, as inalienable rights not written into the constitution but essential to a free society.

But if Heller and McDonald are ever overturned, entirely, we will only have the right to own and use military weapons as part of a well regulated militia.

The ancient right for free people to be armed, that dates back to the Roman Empire, doesn't fit well on a bumper sticker.

But every single lawyer without any exception will respect Heller and McDonald as long as they are good law like they are forced to accept Roe vs Wade, whether they agee or not.

That's priceless.

It means the most liberal judge in the most liberal state must obey Heller the same way as the most conservative judge in the most conservative state must obey Roe vs Wade.

Neither the right to be armed or the right to have a legal early term abortion is anywhere to be found in the express wording of the original constitution.

But the use and possession of common arms and the privacy to have an early term abortion are both ancient rights at common law.

Abortions were not outlawed until about the same time as the first gun control laws.

At common law life began after a child was born alive, and made it's first cry.

And at common law the government had the right to call up the militia, and regulate their arms.

But freemen have enjoyed the right to common arms in use among the people since the days of the Roman Emperors, although they had to join the military to have the really dangerous stuff like Roman short swords and later on Brown Bess muskets.

And if you can find a better way than Justice Scalia's Heller decision to secure the arms we realty love, I sure can't.

We will never buy hand grenades, rocket launchers and machine guns at the local gun shop, not in million years.

But the local gun shop will have common firearms for sale, unless Heller is ever overturned.
 
Save
SuperXOne said:
EricB said:
Obviously lawyers aren't experts on the constitution.
The Supreme Court has the final say on what the Constitution means.

Heller was a close 5-4 decision. It could become as unpopular as Roe vs Wade in another fifty years. It could be overturned.

What makes Heller so very valuable is Justice Scalia's holding that our right to own the common arms commonly used by the people dates back centuries before the constitution was written. The Second Amendment secures, but not create the ancient right to be armed.

So, even if the Second Amendment was repealed, by another amendment we'd still have the same rights to own and use arms as we do to travel, engage in the common occupations, and get married to who we choose, as inalienable rights not written into the constitution but essential to a free society.

But if Heller and McDonald are ever overturned, entirely, we will only have the right to own and use military weapons as part of a well regulated militia.

The ancient right for free people to be armed, that dates back to the Roman Empire, doesn't fit well on a bumper sticker.

But every single lawyer without any exception will respect Heller and McDonald as long as they are good law like they are forced to accept Roe vs Wade, whether they agee or not.

That's priceless.

It means the most liberal judge in the most liberal state must obey Heller the same way as the most conservative judge in the most conservative state must obey Roe vs Wade.

Neither the right to be armed or the right to have a legal early term abortion is anywhere to be found in the express wording of the original constitution.

But the use and possession of common arms and the privacy to have an early term abortion are both ancient rights at common law.

Abortions were not outlawed until about the same time as the first gun control laws.

At common law life began after a child was born alive, and made it's first cry.

And at common law the government had the right to call up the militia, and regulate their arms.

But freemen have enjoyed the right to common arms in use among the people since the days of the Roman Emperors.
I don't understand what Abortion has to do with the Second Amendment: If you keep your pants up or skirt down and control yourself; abortions aren't needed.
 
dannyd93140 said:
SuperXOne said:
EricB said:
Obviously lawyers aren't experts on the constitution.
The Supreme Court has the final say on what the Constitution means.

Heller was a close 5-4 decision. It could become as unpopular as Roe vs Wade in another fifty years. It could be overturned.

What makes Heller so very valuable is Justice Scalia's holding that our right to own the common arms commonly used by the people dates back centuries before the constitution was written. The Second Amendment secures, but not create the ancient right to be armed.

So, even if the Second Amendment was repealed, by another amendment we'd still have the same rights to own and use arms as we do to travel, engage in the common occupations, and get married to who we choose, as inalienable rights not written into the constitution but essential to a free society.

But if Heller and McDonald are ever overturned, entirely, we will only have the right to own and use military weapons as part of a well regulated militia.

The ancient right for free people to be armed, that dates back to the Roman Empire, doesn't fit well on a bumper sticker.

But every single lawyer without any exception will respect Heller and McDonald as long as they are good law like they are forced to accept Roe vs Wade, whether they agee or not.

That's priceless.

It means the most liberal judge in the most liberal state must obey Heller the same way as the most conservative judge in the most conservative state must obey Roe vs Wade.

Neither the right to be armed or the right to have a legal early term abortion is anywhere to be found in the express wording of the original constitution.

But the use and possession of common arms and the privacy to have an early term abortion are both ancient rights at common law.

Abortions were not outlawed until about the same time as the first gun control laws.

At common law life began after a child was born alive, and made it's first cry.

And at common law the government had the right to call up the militia, and regulate their arms.

But freemen have enjoyed the right to common arms in use among the people since the days of the Roman Emperors.
I don't understand what Abortion has to do with the Second Amendment: If you keep your pants up or skirt down and control yourself; abortions aren't needed.
It's well known that most people who love guns hate abortion, and vise versa.

Justice Scalia, a conservative Saint and liberal troglodyte, joined in the opinion that made it legal to burn the American flag.

We don't need a constitutional right, to enjoy a mother's love, hot dogs, apple pie and baseball.

We need a right to make the local little government officials madder than all hell at us for burning flags, owning a common gun, or having a safe legal abortion, or marrying a dude if we like other dudes.

If you found, and there is one, the most liberal county commission in America, with three women that hate all guns, they don't have the right to ban your handgun.

That's the law of Heller, and other decisions like it.

The same three right wing old white men sitting on the most conservative county commission in America, also can't outlaw an abortion clinic, or a mosque, or make your kids pray before lunch at school.

That's Roe vs Wade, and other decisions like it.

Ideology must give way, to the ancient rights of free people everywhere.

According to Heller, you can live anywhere in the USA including the North Marina Islands, and sleep secure your local county commission can't outlaw you handgun.

You just have no right to "M16s and the like" which are reserved for the government.

The same county commission can't close down a licensed abortion clinic.

No matter how much, either wants to.
 
Save
All lawyers should be made to learn the background of our founding fathers so that they don't misinterpret the Constitution. There is no need for the federal government to concern itself with abortion, except to recognize that the individual rights of the child are being denied and a fitting sentence should be applied to the oppressor.
Back to guns: There is nowhere in the constitution that allows restrictions on bearing arms.
 
Save
If our Subdivision militia was called up today in a real 2nd Amendment world: We would all have M-16's, the guys down the street would be the mortar crew: guys around the block would be cranking up the trucks to tow the 105mm and the guys on the other street would be the M-60 crew. :)
 
SuperXOne said:
dannyd93140 said:
SuperXOne said:
EricB said:
Obviously lawyers aren't experts on the constitution.
The Supreme Court has the final say on what the Constitution means.

Heller was a close 5-4 decision. It could become as unpopular as Roe vs Wade in another fifty years. It could be overturned.

What makes Heller so very valuable is Justice Scalia's holding that our right to own the common arms commonly used by the people dates back centuries before the constitution was written. The Second Amendment secures, but not create the ancient right to be armed.

So, even if the Second Amendment was repealed, by another amendment we'd still have the same rights to own and use arms as we do to travel, engage in the common occupations, and get married to who we choose, as inalienable rights not written into the constitution but essential to a free society.

But if Heller and McDonald are ever overturned, entirely, we will only have the right to own and use military weapons as part of a well regulated militia.

The ancient right for free people to be armed, that dates back to the Roman Empire, doesn't fit well on a bumper sticker.

But every single lawyer without any exception will respect Heller and McDonald as long as they are good law like they are forced to accept Roe vs Wade, whether they agee or not.

That's priceless.

It means the most liberal judge in the most liberal state must obey Heller the same way as the most conservative judge in the most conservative state must obey Roe vs Wade.

Neither the right to be armed or the right to have a legal early term abortion is anywhere to be found in the express wording of the original constitution.

But the use and possession of common arms and the privacy to have an early term abortion are both ancient rights at common law.

Abortions were not outlawed until about the same time as the first gun control laws.

At common law life began after a child was born alive, and made it's first cry.

And at common law the government had the right to call up the militia, and regulate their arms.

But freemen have enjoyed the right to common arms in use among the people since the days of the Roman Emperors.
I don't understand what Abortion has to do with the Second Amendment: If you keep your pants up or skirt down and control yourself; abortions aren't needed.
It's well known that most people who love guns hate abortion, and vise versa.

Justice Scalia, a conservative Saint and liberal troglodyte, joined in the opinion that made it legal to burn the American flag.

We don't need a constitutional right, to enjoy a mother's love, hot dogs, apple pie and baseball.

We need a right to make the local little government officials madder than all hell at us for burning flags, owning a common gun, or having a safe legal abortion, or marrying a dude if we like other dudes.

If you found, and there is one, the most liberal county commission in America, with three women that hate all guns, they don't have the right to ban your handgun.

That's the law of Heller, and other decisions like it.

The same three right wing old white men sitting on the most conservative county commission in America, also can't outlaw an abortion clinic, or a mosque, or make your kids pray before lunch at school.

That's Roe vs Wade, and other decisions like it.

Ideology must give way, to the ancient rights of free people everywhere.

According to Heller, you can live anywhere in the USA including the North Marina Islands, and sleep secure your local county commission can't outlaw you handgun.

You just have no right to "M16s and the like" which are reserved for the government.

The same county commission can't close down a licensed abortion clinic.

No matter how much, either wants to.
Abortion comes from two people that made bad choices. Has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment. Can we move on now.
 
21 - 40 of 186 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.