Posted on 03/12/2018 10:27:53 PM PDT by FrankLea
The reason for the 2nd Amendment was written was to give the citizen Military grade weapons to protect themselves from the Government. In 1776 the Military grade weapons was a Mussel loader now it is a fully automatic weapon. Thomas Jefferson said, "an Armed man is a Citizen, an unarmed man is a subject." This country was founded on the premise that all citizens are Sovereign.
I agree full auto has no place in the civilian world. They are designed to be used on fast moving vehicles or aircraft to shoot the enemy. They are also good for laying down cover fire so your soldiers can get into a better position to assault the enemy. It will also kill large numbers of people in a crowd. For civilians is waste too much ammo and you have no idea where most of the bullets are going. Semi-auto is good. Select fire puts the bullets where you want them. I used to own a Ruger 10-22 rifle; it was a semi-automatic weapon with a variety of clips. Anywhere from 10 to 50 rounds. Given this; the Ruger 10-22 carbine is considered an Assault weapon in the state of New Jersey. I am certain it has a similar classification in other states. I agree it is a lethal weapon.
My question is; What designates a weapon as an assault weapon? All firearms: Pistols, Rifles, Carbines, Shotguns are designed to Kill. Pistols are designed to kill people. Many states outlaw pistols for hunting. It does not matter if it is mussel loader, Breach loader single shot, semi or full auto all firearms are all designed to kill. By that reckoning, all firearms are assault weapons.
The mussel loaders of the Revolution were the military weapons of the day. In my opinion from reading the Federalist Papers; the argument that the 2nd amendment only pertains to those type of weapons is flawed as those were the high tech military weapons of that time. In the civil war, breech loader riffles were developed. Repeating Lever and bolt action rifles came soon after. Black powder cap and ball pistols were refitted to use cartridges. The carbine and semi-auto and full auto weapons came a short time later. The founding fathers were adamant in the Federalist Papers that an armed society will keep the government in fear of the people; not the people in fear of the government. I believe if we were able to ask the founding fathers do you think it is a good idea that the people of today to have military grade weapons to defend themselves from the government they would to a man say “Yes.”
As for banning all firearms; this will never work. Anyone who wants to can make a zip gun in the privacy of their home with hand tools and supplies from a hardware store. It will take a while and may not be the best weapon. Then again, firearms started out as handcrafted weapons of exceptional quality. A person in a basic machine shop can manufacturer a pistol, rifle or shotgun in a short amount of time. 3D printers can print a firearm in a few hours. A man in Bulgaria created a key fob gun for personal protection. It is a very small weapon that shoots 22 or 38 caliber bullets. It has a short range of a few feet and fits between 2 fingers. It can be made in a machine shop in less than an hour.
Whatever laws the government passes someone will find a way around it. If the government bans smokeless powder used in the cartridges; someone with a high school level chemistry class education can make a suitable substitute. If all firearms are banned and confiscated then murderous people will find different ways to cause mayhem. Timothy McVeigh the Oklahoma City bomber used a truck, fertilizer, and diesel fuel for domestic terrorism.
Guns are not the problem. There is no simple panacea cure for the violence in this country. I will be the first to say I do not have all of the answers on how to fix this huge problem in our country. Any of the simple answers have been put forth and tried. Many have failed. I do believe we need to get back to a Nuclear family for the majority of the people in the country. This will help stabilize many communities. A strong family was the basis of our country for most of its history. But this is a topic for another day.
As always I look forward to the discussion on my views. These are my views and I believe they are for the most part correct. If you have an opposing view I desire a spirited conversation.
Mussel loader?
Do bears...?
The invading armies had muskets. We needed muskets. This isn’t brain surgery.
One would have to put on the ‘history-hat’ and put yourself into the situation where British authority arrived in your village or town, and right away....they wanted your guns confiscated to ensure ‘respect’ for authority. This didn’t go over well. Had this not happened, then there would have been no cause to write the brief text into the Constitution.
Yes they did intend for citizens to be armed with military weaonry. How would letters of marque work otherwise?
Look at the armaments on the Lucy. She was a private warship armed to the teeth. (As I recall, 14 plus cannons.)
That tired argument is so full of c749 I can’t believe it is still tried by the left/commies.
Freaking moron
the Founders were well aware of, and were fine with, private citizens owning CANNONS
CANNONS.
Cannons that would blow a hole thru modern day houses.
And the Founders were ABSOLUTELY FINE with them being owned by private citizens.
I’ve read that 70 Percent of the Cannons used in the Revolutionary War by the Patriots came from Private hands.
Most came from Armed Galleons owned by Private Merchants.
Feral government servants have no business interfering with our natural right to arm ourselves with the latest in state-of-the-art personal weaponry at least equal to that possessed by feral government thugs. (Actually, with few exceptions, such as border control and perhaps the FBI, no feral bureaucrats should be issued guns. When they need law enforcement, let them go to the local sheriff.)
Gun ownership is not a right granted by any law or even the Constitution. It is a natural right of man merely recognized by the Constitution. And yes, it is a bit frightening for our so called elected servants when We the People, the sovereign citizens they supposedly serve, are as well armed as the military, but that is the whole point, isn't it?
Of course, self defense, defense of family and hunting -- in that order -- are natural rights, too, but the primary purpose of a well armed citizenry is to strike an ongoing undercurrent of well placed fear into the hearts of our feral government servants, lest they forget who are the servants and who are the sovereigns.
Mussel loader? Yup! Those little clams had those assault rifles! The dumbass that wrote this had the brain of a clam!
For shooting clams.
The entire point of the Second Amendment is to instill in our public servants a healthy respect (if not downright fear) of their sovereign masters (i.e., We the People). The Second Amendment does not grant, but merely recognizes our natural right to arm ourselves with state-of-the-art weaponry to a level that the fools in the feral government should fear for their lives such that they never be tempted to overstep their limited and temporary powers.
The phrase "well-regulated" was long in common use at the time of writing of the Second Amendment (and remained so for a century thereafter). It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was well maintained, calibrated correctly and functioning as expected.
It is quite clear that the Founders used the phrase "well-regulated" to denote that militia forces should be skilled with arms of contemporary military utility and relevant military tactics, so that they can serve in the defense of Republic against both foreign invaders and the threat of domestic tyrants commanding a national army against the liberty of the citizenry.
What we normal people are saying (and useful idiot leftists don't really understand) is that it is vitally important that our public servants (especially the bloated drones that inhabit the District of Corruption) never forget that We The People are the true sovereigns in this nation and that they are our mere temporary servants. That they might fear the citizenry is a good thing. That they should fear that any attempt at tyranny should lead to their deaths is a very good thing, for that is what keeps such an outcome safely in the hypothetical.
“Did the Founding Fathers Want Citizens to Have Military Weapons?”
Yes they did.
Mussel loaders? Clam launchers? Oyster roisterers? Snail mailers? Take your pick. If enemies came at us with rubber bands, would the left ban rubbers? We need to be armed, to protect life, liberty, and property. And a fighting chance is defined as “not being outgunned.” Simple as that.
Of course not. While setting up the most radical idea of freedom and self-governance in the history of man, the founding fathers realized they needed to protect the sport of target shooting and hunting.
After intense debate, amendments to protect the right to play cards and fly kites were rejected. An the founders never could have anticipated bowling.
Mussel loader?
Yea it’s muzzle loader!
"While I cannot presume to know what the current slate of elected officials are thinking on the issue of gun confiscation at this moment, their collective past words, actions, and positions lead me to believe if they thought they could get away with it, yes, they would confiscate every gun in American not in the hands of their own designated people and groups.
"I think that starts with our recent ex putative-president and resonates throughout the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party, a position advocated with zeal among the left's most zealous supporters. But due to the Second Amendment and active opposition by groups such as the NRA, that likely is not possible today, but we must remain ever vigilant so it is not possible tomorrow.
"Now is the time to disarm our out-of-control federal government, that is one key advantage our system allows, just shut down all these expensive bureaucratic agency police, I would rather trust our National Guard units and those who serve in our military, the others should be fired. Our federal government can't protect our information, much less our borders and lives."
And laugh if you want, but a freshwater mussel at 1300 FPS would mess you up! And it has to be pretty terrifying for the mussel also.
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.