Posted on 02/19/2018 9:26:27 AM PST by Simon Green
I'll keep things simple for the purposes of this poll. If it were up to you, what sorts of weapons would a law-abiding American be able to purchase with little or no paperwork?
1. Absolutely anything.
2. Anything short of WMDs (nuclear, chemical, biological).
3. Anything capable of being wielded by a single person (up to and including grenades, rocket launchers, MANPADs, etc), but none of the above.
4. Any firearm including full auto, SBRs, silenced weapons, but none of the above.
5. The current status quo at the federal level, but none of the above.
6. The current status quo, but ban "assault" weapons and "high capacity" magazines.
7. Even more restrictive (please explain).
#3
“The fighting ships during the Revolutionary War were private ships (”Privateers”). With cannon and a fighting crew. No different than a B-52 today in many regards. ...”
The Continental navy was not strictly privateers.
They were armed vessels outfitted and manned at the expense of private individuals to pursue and capture cargo vessels (”merchantmen” in the parlance of the 1770s), with the goal of hampering enemy transport and commerce, officially authorized in writing (those “Letters of Marque and Reprisal” mentioned by Carlucci and Simon Green).
Promising booty and riches, privateering captains had better success in recruiting crews than captains of warships. But their vessels were less heavily armed and they avoided engagements with warships. Historical opinion is divided on their effectiveness: some considered them little better than pirates.
The fledgling United States did build and launch real men-of-war during the American War of Independence, but the expense of equipping and manning limited their numbers. Notable exploits did happen, and John Paul Jones (later turned into a celebrity figure by the US Navy) did not do all of it.
see _John Barry: an American Hero in the age of Sail_ by Tim McGrath. Also _George Washington’s Secret Navy_, __Benedict Arnold’s Navy_, and _George Washington’s Great Gamble_, all by James L. Nelson. All are highly readable recent accounts of the many roles sea power played in the nation’s war for independence.
John Barry has been eclipsed by the dash and daring of John
Paul Jones, but was in reality no less a hero of those times. A merchant captain before the war, he became “the fastest man of the 18th century” for a record-breaking run of over 200 nautical miles in 24 hours, during one voyage. And he commanded the first US ship to force an enemy to strike its colors in action.
If you don’t like the wording, change it. Legally.
Yes - I meant to say that MOST of the ships were private.
http://www.usmm.org/revolution.html
Along with the rewards of being a privateer - one also had the risks. Estimated 11,000 private sailors died on the prison ships in New York harbor.
From the link - Private ships: 1,600+, Navy: 64
Private cannon: 14,800, Navy: 1,240.
(Disclaimer, I’ve read similar things, but I have no idea how accurate this particular website noted is.)
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held, in a 5–4 decision, that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.
AR-15’s are the most common firearm now sold with over 8 million in civilian hands. AR-15’s are protected by the Constitution. Period! Further discussion is pointless and self-defeating.
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held, in a 5–4 decision, that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.
AR-15’s are the most common firearm now sold with over 8 million in civilian hands. AR-15’s are protected by the Constitution. Period! Further discussion is pointless and self-defeating.
#1. Anything less means household cleaning products such as bleach and ammonia would need to be banned.
What is a gently used Iowa-class BS going for nowadays? Is 1,000,000 miles considered high? I see a few on CL but they both have a lot of rust.
Not sure it would pass inspection in New Hampshire? :)
#4.
#4. Basically, anything a soldier is issued and can be carried. No biohazards or WMD. In my understanding of the 2nd Amendment.
#3.
4. Any firearm including full auto, SBRs, silenced weapons, but none of the above.
Strange case, that one.
As you may know, the Judge ruled in favor of Mr. Miller, the perp, knowing he wouldn't be sticking around for the appeal which was sure to follow.
All the Supreme Court heard was the gummint's side of the case since nobody wanted to pay his legal fees (where was the NRA in 1939?) so it was kinda like a FISA court passing judgement on the meaning of the Second Amendment, except this was a precedent which lower courts would be held to.
Since there was no counsel for the defense, the court didn't know (or the justices disregarded it if they did know) that sawed-off shotguns were also military weapons. They were issued to soldiers in WWI--then known as The World War--and should have been permitted for civilians under the "militia" clause of the Second Amendment.
Except the court ruled otherwise, and now we're ever so s-l-o-w-l-y getting back to the original intent of Amendment 2, but it won't happen overnight.
“The Tiffany family (owners of NYC’s Tiffany’s) bought a Colt Machine Gun a donated it to the Rough Riders.”
Not the case. Many writers and historians have assumed it, though.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2013/2/27/the-rough-riders-potato-digger/
William Tiffany - a trooper in the 1st US Volunteer Cavalry regiment - was the son of George & Isabella Tiffany of Newport, Rhode Island. Not the NY City Tiffany in the jewelry & adornment trade.
William Tiffany’s parents gifted one of the two Colt-Browning M1895 Automatic Guns used by the Rough Riders in Cuba. The other was a gift from Louisa Kane and Sybil Kane, sisters of Woodbury Kane, another member of the upper crust who served in the regiment.
Both guns chambered 7x57mm Mauser. They became the first full-auto arms to be used in action by any unit of the US Army.
Well my knowledge of it originally came from TV movie ‘ROUGH RIDERS’. Needless to say it was privately bought, which was my point.
I’ll go with #4. If push comes to manpads everybody knows where the armories are. :-)
#2.
1
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.