[Atlas Sneezed]

Bang

[Atlas Sneezed]

"And yes, those who own automatic weapons should register them."

Never mind that these are precisely the type of arms (those carried by the current well-equipped foot-soldier) that the founders wanted to make sure that the citzens had in quantities that vastly outnumberd any standing army, whether USMC or NYPD SWAT.

And in 1986, the tyrants in Congress (and a duped President and NRA) enacted a law that stopped FOREVER the production of these militarily-essential arms for civilian, so that there is one per 1000 citizens, and that number is actually much smaller accounting for the many concentrated in a few private collectors hands (many obsolete) and the fact that population will grow, while the guns will wear out.

In 100 years, the citizens will have at best 100-year-obsolete weapons to fight tyranny. In 500 years (if this tyranny lasts), we will be limited to 500-year obsolete arms.

Miller says I have the right to a machine gun, and that has since been misinterpreted and distorted.

[Centurion2000]

The issue isn’t so much the amount of regulation. Hardly anyone, including the vast majority of those who say the Second Amendment protects an individual right, suggests that the amendment is an absolute prohibition on all government regulation of the use and ownership of firearms.

YES IT DOES. "shall not be infringed" is pretty clear cut

Yes, they say, the amendment doesn’t prohibit the government from making it illegal for the average citizen to own, say, a grenade launcher or an anti-tank missile.

Those weapons are deployed at the platoon level in an infantry unit. Yes, they are exactly what the Founders of our country wanted in the hands of the militia.

And yes, those who own automatic weapons should register them.

STRIKE 3 ..... Miller is totally unconstitutional.

[cruiserman]

Yes, they say, the amendment doesn’t prohibit the government from making it illegal for the average citizen to own, say, a grenade launcher or an anti-tank missile. And yes, those who own automatic weapons should register them.

I have a problem with those statements. I can get a grenade-launching, Yugoslavian SKS for $160 here in town. I don't see the point of registering any firearms, including automatic weapons.

Repeal the ban on automatic weapon importation/manufacture.

[Wurlitzer]

"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.”

I guess I can understand those who got learnt in goberment skools not understanding this sentence structure but where on earth does the first part of the sentence in anyway modify the last part?

Frequently a very smart Freeper (sorry I don't recall who dat person be) :-),posts a test sentence (an I am doing this from a limited memory) like the following.

An educated electorate, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed" or words to that effect.

In the test sentence to follow the gun grabbers logic, I guess that only educated people should be allowed books.

[The Raven]

Yep...always err on the side of freedom....

[Gritty]

The author's right, of course.

But don't expect "right" to have much sway with the anti-Constitutionalists either on the 9th Circuit or anywhere else!

[William Tell]

From the article: "The issue isn’t so much the amount of regulation. Hardly anyone, including the vast majority of those who say the Second Amendment protects an individual right, suggests that the amendment is an absolute prohibition on all government regulation of the use and ownership of firearms. Yes, they say, the amendment doesn’t prohibit the government from making it illegal for the average citizen to own, say, a grenade launcher or an anti-tank missile. And yes, those who own automatic weapons should register them."
-----------------------------------------

What hogwash.

The Second Amendment says "arms". Not "firearms". Not "guns". But "arms". "Every terrible instrument of war" as described by a commentator of the time.

If the Founders had wished to protect only muskets and rifles, they had the words available to do so.

The fact that they did not anticipate nuclear weapons or anthrax is justification for use of the amendment process. It is not justification to see a power of infringement which our Founders sought to prohibit.

[mountaineer]

Check out this thread on how England's draconian gun control laws have failed.

[vannrox]

.



Yao Zhongyu, 1974
Always keep the gun firmly in hand


.