Everybody seems to have one.
Posted on 04/04/2013 10:31:15 AM PDT by neverdem
The answers are far from simple, and lie in American constitutional and military history.
A key narrative in the push to ban assault weapons is that they are exceptionally powerful, firing rounds with a special capacity to pierce body armor and pulverize human bodies. The AR-15 infamously used in the Sandy Hook massacre fires the same 5.56x45mm NATO ammunition as its cousin the M16. The “NATO” designation seems to validate Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and company’s fear that these are military weapons which do not belong in the hands of civilians. The language of the Second Amendment and historical context in which it was conceived fundamentally undermine this logic:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The Bill of Rights was adopted as a precaution against tyrannical government, with the Second Amendment democratizing military force. The Framers believed that citizens should have access to the military hardware they themselves would use to defend the homeland against tyranny, foreign or domestic, as members of militias. Whether this standard applies to artillery (reasonable persons may differ), it surely includes firearms. If anything, an originalist interpretation of the Constitution privileges the right to keep and bear arms suitable for militia service.
Progressives counter that the homeland has long been protected by a standing army. In their view, the right to keep and bear arms was confirmed strictly in the interest of military preparedness. No less than the Father of the Constitution expressly warned against a standing army. James Madison spent many months before the Constitutional Convention studying the history of governments. As he said to that body:
A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions...
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
There are reasons the ComDems want to eliminate ARs and AKs.
They can be made in modest machine shops from a few castings and the parts are available in many places. Standard design.
These are a version of the weapons that the military train with. They are light, accurate, large enough to kill a man and are pretty reliable.
There are a lot of civilian style weapons that have a lot more knock down, range and accuracy. So this is about something other than being powerful.
I don’t own one, but would love to own an old M1. That heavy beast is a military weapon. Long range, accurate, reliable and powerful.
Considering the DHS is buying Ars and calling them defensive weapons, one wonders why the government says that and then turns around to go apestuffincrazy over civilians owning the same DEFENSIVE weapons?
*************************
Not so. The answer is quite simple; it becomes difficult only when intentionally misinterpreted, due to the mental contortions one must perform to distort the intended meaning.
crimials and police don’t think so.
Last time I checked, if you have the money you can buy a Barrett 50BMG with no legal issues here in TX.
Don’t have the money to spend on one, but would love to.
I am, for the time being, a long time resident of Massachusetts so my knowledge of what is and is not allowable or easily available are clearly somewhat skewed.
And then there’s the Mosin Nagants...
If someone has the knowledge and time, maybe they could list most, if not all, of the calibers that have their origins in warfare and have been used as military calibers?
“The answers are far from simple, and lie in American constitutional and military history.”
Perhaps, but the answer is still irrelevant, as far as the 2nd amendment is concerned. Arms means weapons of war, so we have a right to bear them.
Back in the 1870s you would find a trail drive’s drovers better armed than a cavalry platoon. And on rivers from the Ohio to the Missouri flatboats would routinely have swivel cannon as defense against river pirates. And more importantly we are approaching the 238th anniversary of Lexinton and Concord. Do people remember why the British Light infantry andRoyal Marines were marching toward Concord that April Morning? To confiscate the arms of the provisional militia which were stored at Concord and which included wheeled cannon.
.308 = 7.62x51
Don't give the gun-grabbers any new ideas like that!
Sorry, I was confusing logic with their version of reality. A BB gun has more magazine capacity that the bolt action rifle too...
I should not have said NATO 7.62, only 7.62.
Thanks. I forgot. I think 50 BMG is 12.7 x 98MM
Everybody seems to have one.
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.