Posted on 10/04/2015 2:05:12 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
In an item after the Oregon shootings, I quoted a reader from Florida saying that if you owned more than 10 guns yourself, you might be considered to have an “arsenal.” And just now on TV I heard the British father of the Oregon murderer asking why anyone, including his son, would want or need so many guns.
Yesterday I quoted a reader who said, on the contrary, ten or more guns could be a perfectly reasonable collection for perfectly non-threatening citizens to have.
On the “how much is enough” point, responses from two readers. First, on the similarities and differences between “gun nuts” and other types of nuts, a reader argues that there really is something different in how gun owners relate with the rest of us.
Your correspondent argues that you can own ten guns without being a "gun nut", then proceeds to list an inventory that he feels makes his case.
Let's try to approach on different collections. Suppose I owned ten motorcycles of different types. Perhaps a cafe racer, an enduro bike, a big touring bike, and so on. Would that make me a motorcycle nut? Probably. You're a runner (I think). Maybe you own ten or more pairs of running shoes. [JF note: Over the years, yes. And let’s not get into old computers, or types of beer.] I'm sure you can come up with a better list than I can, but I can imagine shoes for street running, dirt running, trail running, training, racing, and so on.
Does that make you a running shoe nut. Yup....
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
- Article 1 Section 8.:
- The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries . . .
Asmakes plain, the Second Amendment is to be understood only as a floor under our rights. The Framers did not specifically envision all the inventions which lay in the future; no one could. But they trusted progress - they were real progressives - and the default meaning of their system is that it takes a constitutional amendment - in accordance with Article V - to make individual use of an invention extraconstitutional.
- Amendment 9:
- The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Also I don’t think any of the 10 Bill Of Rights can be legally repealed. The states refused to ratify the Constitution without a bill of rights. That means that the entire Constitution would have to be replaced before any of the BOR could be replaced.
I have only 2 guns.
That makes me only 20 % nuts.
Thank goodness, I was really nervous for a moment!
( but I also have 5 guitars, 2 saxophone’s and a piano, and a ukulele....)
Excellent analogy!
Two questions for you:
1. What ship of the line ever sailed as a privateer?
2. What ship of the line ever mounted 300 cannon, or even half that number?
“20 airguns”?
I upgraded from pump airguns to a Benjamin Trial and then to a Vulcan and my wife thinks I’m crazy?
I would make the case that because the 17th Amendment changed the senators from representative of the state governments to representatives of the people of the individual states, it required unanimous consent of the states to enact it. That is, the meaning of "state" was changed by the 17th Amendment.
But of course, the states in fact just went along when it was announced that it had been ratified by "enough" states. So, de facto, the 17th Amendment was assented to by all states.
Reloading equipment and proficiency is good, too, but it is hard to reload in a hot situation when your ready supply is used up.
I don’t keep up with such things but 300 does sound like an awful lot of cannons. Also my impression of “ship of the line” is something like what we called battleships which were in a line such as that required for crossing the T. In other words your most powerful ships. Probably a little expensive for a privateer.
Still his argument is sound. The Constitution provided for the private ownership of war ships.
Using that same logic, “freedom of the press” applies only to newspapers since there was no TV, radio, internet at that time.
You are right about it being difficult to find support for that position but it is absolutely correct.
None of my airguns are really expensive although I do have a few which sell for a hundred or more.
The most costly one I own is a Diana RWS model 48. My first airgun was a .22 Benjamin air pistol which I ordered from Herters around 1960. It was extremely accurate but no where near the claimed 500fps.
It says "...shall not be infringed." That is absolute. I have a right to my MIRVed ICBM. There are practical limits on the enjoyment of this right, however, like expense. That is really the only limit. The only people who can be construed to be denied the RtKaBA Constitutionally are imprisoned convicts under the slave labor provision.
If guns were not barred even to ex cons there would be no difference on the street. The laws are against what some perverse people might do with their 'arms.' Possession is entirely up to the individual whether there are laws against it or not. All that felony possession laws accomplish is to give prosecutors one more charge to lay on an arrestee. Perhaps that is useful but it is unConstitutional.
3 shotguns, 2 for hunting, one for self defense.
2 Semi-auto 30 round "sporting" rifles for self defense.
3 Large caliber bolt action for hunting
2 .22's rifles for plinking and small game.
1 .22 revolver for practice.
1 centerfire revolver.
1 semi-auto pistol.
That's 13. And barely covers the basics.
10 ain't enough!
Oh, the argument is sound, all right, but it would be more effective with factual examples.
If you own more than two cats, does that make you a rancher?
Does having 40-plus million on food stamps make a liberal a welfare nut? Does having 30-plus million illegal immigrants make a liberal a we’ll-take-votes-anyway-we-can-get-them nut?
DoN’t care, need more ammo! Cheaper ammo!!
Warships were privately owned back then.
Cannons included.
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.