Posted on 07/30/2004 8:17:31 AM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
I am filling out a survey about gun ownership and have been asked about a .50 cal BMG rifle.
Could you please explain to me what this is and what it's used for?
Thank you
Do you just make this stuff up? Answer my question above about the Minutemen. Where they part of a state or a federal militia?
It's up to the state to decide -- as I stated before, the state may authorize their keeping them at home, in an armory, whatever. The federal government may not deprive them of these arms if they are for use as part of a well regulated state militia.
I was at a range in Bradford County today, shooting the genteel little Lady Smith, when somebody set up one of these .50 things. We were 30 feet away and we could feel the wave of air hit our faces; the gases shot out and blew stuff into the air and just about scorched somebody who was unwise enough to have moved up close to see it.
Pretty impressive. It certainly got a good crowd at the range, at least!
Tell me something, robertpaulsen. Is there any detail whatever regarding the right to keep and bear arms for which your understanding differs from Diane Feinstein's?
How is it that you prefer the rulings of the Ninth Circuit over those of the Fifth Circuit?
Is there now or has their ever been a state which has dictated that privately owned arms must be kept in an armory or any other place not of the choosing of the owner?
Really? I seem to recall you stating that the Second Amendment had never been "incorporated" and therefor only applied to the federal government. Was that not you who said that? How then could it not apply to a federal militia?
William Tell wrote:
Do you just make this stuff up?
______________________________________
He lays awake nights dreaming up this crap.
It's become obvious that paulsen is addicted to being FR's gun goat.
That happens everytime I take mine out.
All the shooting stops, and someone will say, "What in the hell was that?"
Then everyone wants to shoot it!
Some advice:
Stand behind, never to the side.
Wear ear plugs and muffs if you're close. The .50 produces a dangerous noise level.
You might as well stop shooting because you're going to be waiting for that blast every time you try to hold and squeeze.
William Tell wrote:
Do you just make this stuff up?
______________________________________
He lays awake nights dreaming up this crap.
It's become obvious that paulsen is addicted to being FR's gun goat.
And he gets very upset if he isn't pinged and mentioned by name, - his name is robertpaulsen, his name is robertpaulsen, his name is robertpaulsen, robertpaulsen, robertpaulsen,robertpaulsen,robertpaulsen.
I don't know.
The second amendment authorizes nothing. It grants no right or priviledge. When the federal government was created, it stated that the RKBA was not to be infringed by that institution.
There was no US Constitution at the time, was there? Does that mean that the Minutemen were a Massachusett's militia? But that would mean that they were created and authorized by Massachusetts, wouldn't it?
But they weren't, were they? If they had been, then the military governor of Massachusetts would not have sent the Regular Army to disarm them, would he?
Tell me, do you think it was important what happened on April 18, 1775? Is it relevant to how our nation was created? Is there any relevance to the limitations on government power written into the US Constitution?
You have stated that the right to keep and bear arms pre-dated the Second Amendment and was not created by it? Do you think that the Minutemen were exercising their right to keep and bear arms?
When the federal government was created, it stated that the RKBA was not to be infringed by that institution.
Wrong robbie strikes again.
When the federal government was created, the Constitution stated that the RKBA was not to be infringed by any level of government, as is evident by Art. VI.
Both the supremacy clause, and oaths of office bind all officials to support our Consitution as the "Law of the Land".
"In a concurring opinion, Judge Parker wrote that the majority's detailed exposition of the Second Amendment individual right, while not necessarily wrong, was irrelevant "dicta." In other words, because the statute (as applied to Emerson) didn't violate the Second Amendment anyway, it didn't matter if there was an individual Second Amendment right, and therefore the Court should not have discussed the Second Amendment so extensively. In Parker's view, the majority's Second Amendment analysis is not even binding law on future courts within the Fifth Circuit (Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi)."
"The majority opinion, however, specifically refuted Parker on this point, and said that the Second Amendment ruling was very much part of Emerson holding. Indeed, the Brady Center acknowledged that courts in the Fifth Circuit would now adhere to individual Second Amendment rights, although it also pointed out, quite correctly, that courts in other Circuits do not have to."
Well, future cases will decide who's correct.
Do you think that Nordyke is a good second amendment case? Denying a gun show on county fairgrounds is a second amendment violation?
The second amendment only applies to the federal government -- it hasn't been incorporated (yet). This was pointed out by the 9th Circuit (in a footnote) in Nordyke v King.
The USSC won't hear this.
We didn't yet have a federal government on April 18,1775. What are you talking about?
The States were delegated the authority to appoint officers and train according to Congress' directives. That's the extent of State authority in Militia matters.
Congress shall have Power;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
The Militia is under the control of the Federal government.
Make your point, or STFU.
"How is it that you prefer the rulings of the Ninth Circuit over those of the Fifth Circuit?"
Prefer? Liar. Show me where I said that or retract it.
"Is there now or has their ever been a state which has dictated that privately owned arms must be kept in an armory or any other place not of the choosing of the owner?"
The arms of a well regulated militia? I don't know. I mentioned it as a possibility. Why? Are you saying that the state could not do this? Better be able to back that up, lightweight.
Your question make no sense.
My point is that I can find no difference between your stand on the Second Amendment and that of Diane Feinstein. Evidently, you can't either.
They were a subset of the Massachusetts' militia.
"But that would mean that they were created and authorized by Massachusetts, wouldn't it?"
The militia was created, authorized and supplied by Massachusetts.
"If they had been, then the military governor of Massachusetts would not have sent the Regular Army to disarm them, would he?"
The majority of the colony's militia supported the rebel cause, Luke Skywalker. That's why.
"You have stated that the right to keep and bear arms pre-dated the Second Amendment and was not created by it?"
I have stated that the second amendment does not confer a RKBA. It protects the RKBA from federal infringement only.
No. If it's important to you, I suggest that you demonstrate otherwise. When you mention the Ninth, you quote elements of the decision as fact. When you quote Emerson from the Fifth, you focus on the claim that it is only "dicta".
If you are unwilling to have others on this forum judge the correctness of my statements without your comments, then feel free to add your comments.
They could be called into federal service by a vote of Congress to "execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions", yes. That was the plan.
As the War of 1812 demonstrated, it was a bad plan. Subsequent to that war, the state militias gradually disappeared as the federal government created a standing army.
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.