Well put Dr. Buker.
I was in Billings last weekend, and it occurred to me... I could definitely live there! :)
We The People, are much more law abiding than our government.
Along the way to making a case for wholesale review of U.S. nuclear-weapons control policy, Scarry usefully reviewed the militia laws since 1792, including the relevant acts governing the National Guard whose constitutional problems she illuminates as a side issue to her main thesis.
She shows that the Framers fully intended that the People be armed, and that they intended that the nation, for the sake of the People's liberty, rely primarily on the Militia for its security.
Here’s a frivolous aside: In the distant past, when wearing swords in public was common among gentlemen, if not the bourgeoisie and laborers, as much as not, swords were a symbol of class and rank. A gentleman just wore a sword, to identify himself as a gentleman, and that was that.
It was somewhat different in the old West, as guns were most frequently worn by the laboring class, and less common among the middle class and wealthy in most situations. And far from being fashionable, guns were seen as a useful and practical tools. If you were working out in the wilderness, you just had to have a gun for all sorts of reasons.
But in either case (and I’m sure that someone could point out great flaws in either of these examples), weapons had a dual purpose which made them almost a uniform need among the people who carried them.
So my aside is, today, carried openly or concealed, what other social reason can you imagine that would make guns “the thing to have” for the typical man on the street? Just like men all used to wear hats, what do you think might be the trendy reason to sport a gun today, besides its purpose as a weapon?
In past, I’ve thought that a business could encourage its employees to be armed, not for any great reason, except to both improve morale and esprit. Of course, if the business was either in a bad neighborhood or its employees were at some risk, it would be a good idea as well, and would demonstrate that the business cared for its employees.
But what would make a gun “the thing to have” for the typical man on the street, beyond its use as a weapon?
Perhaps as a tool, perhaps as a fashion statement, perhaps as a symbol of affiliation or adulthood. And not just for men, but women as well. I wonder.
Times may have changed, and rules may, may I said, need to have been changed. But they haven't been. The Rules for government in the United States are set out in the Constitution, the Second Amendment still reads the same as the day it was passed. It still still means the same thing too. So until the rules *are* changed, any talk of "gun control" better mean hitting what you aim at.
But I like the doc's notion of getting more fully automatic intermediate power rifles out into homes. If nothing else it would make burglars think about 10 times and then decide they had other things to do.
Then I stopped reading.
Possession or use of a machine gun in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of a crime of violence is punishable by not less than 20 years in prison. Possession or use of a machine gun for an aggressive or offensive purpose is prohibited. A presumption of possession for an aggressive or offensive purpose is raised by possession or use by a person who has been convicted of a crime of violence.
This law does not prohibit or interfere with the possession of a machine gun for scientific purposes, or the possession of a machine gun that is not usable as a weapon and possessed as a curiosity, ornament or keepsake, or the possession of a machine gun for a purpose manifestly not aggressive or offensive
“loose” an election. That ended it for me. It’s petty, I know.
ping in my crosshairs
Squeeeeeeeeze the trigger. Don’t jerk it.