Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: William Tell
Thank you for the explanation. It seems Miller's send-off was even wormier than I had read.

I still interpret this as the Roosevelt Administration playing rough with an indigent defendant to get the outcome the President wanted for political reasons.

And yes, the NFA would appear to be ripe for revisitation, especially as regards suppressed and short-barreled weapons. Under Heller, SCOTUS might agree -- if we could see a case there before Obama assassinates CJ Roberts and elevates Diesel Kagan to be his Vanguard CJ and Sister in the Righteous Struggle of the Narodny Proletariat -- that fully-automatic weapons are armory weapons and ought to be kept there, but any man of reasonable military age ought to be found to be a member of the Unorganized Militia and able to obtain them without onerous and confiscation-minded federal legal or processual attachments.

19 posted on 01/13/2013 1:00:19 PM PST by lentulusgracchus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: lentulusgracchus
lentulusgracchus said: "... that fully-automatic weapons are armory weapons and ought to be kept there, ..."

The nice thing about "select-fire" rifles is that one need not trust to an "armory" to store one's arms. One's machinegun is just a selector switch click away. If one needs only semi-auto fire, then select THAT.

Storing community owned weapons in a common location is just exactly what motivated the government to move on Lexington and Concord. We should learn from history and not repeat its mistakes.

Whoever has the keys to the armory is fully armed. Whoever doesn't have the keys, is, at least partially, disarmed.

21 posted on 01/13/2013 10:07:14 PM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson