CDZ Let's talk about bump-stocks, banana clips and other gun accessories

[TNHarley]

why do you think it doesnt protect the right to own machine guns?

Well, the actual wording is "may not be infringed." The right to own a machine gun is clearly infringed by ATF regulations.

Thats better.

 

[jwoodie]

Who are the militia? The people who wish to preserve liberty and are capable of bearing arms.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

It is true that standardized firearms were uncommon in the U.S. at that time. However, the model for militias was Switzerland, which issued military weapons to every adult male. That is why the Second Amendment refers to "a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State."

 

[jwoodie]

During Infantry AIT and OCS, I was trained in firing every weapon in the Army inventory from a 5.56 mm M16 to a 106 mm Recoilless Rifle, so i am dismayed by the hysterical responses and faux expertise posted in this CDZ thread. As far as automatic weapons are concerned, their principal advantage is not their rate of fire, but their ammunition capacity. That is why the M16(AR15) came with an expanded 20 round magazine. This was designed as an offensive military weapons, not for self defense. (The M1911 Colt .50 caliber pistol was designed for the latter.)

Being a gun aficionado, I have also fired Uzi, Schmeisser, Ithaca and Thompson submachine guns at firing ranges, but their private ownership is strictly regulated by the AFT. SUMMARY OF STATE AND FEDERAL MACHINE GUN LAWS From what I have observed, the desire to own military-derived weapons stems more from their macho image than from legitimate hunting or self defense purposes. If it takes you 20 shots to bring down a deer, you shouldn't be hunting. (My bolt-action 30.06 worked just fine.)

Do any of you favor any restrictions on the private ownership of these weapons? Please be civil in your responses.

"This was designed as an offensive military weapons, not for self defense. (The M1911 Colt .50 caliber pistol was designed for the latter.)"

Well...on the bright side, you have now convinced me you were once a 2nd Lt. On the not-so-bright side it's a real shame that while you were in OCS training to be expert with all weapons they didn't inform you what ammunition the 1911 actually fires.

Sorry for the typo. Should be .45 caliber. (I was thinking about the short .50 caliber spotting round on the 106 RR.)

 

[jwoodie]

So if our founding fathers were alive today and you asked them what kind of arms should the people possess to serve as a check against a standing army. I suspect they would say that they should be armed with the technology of the day that any light infantry ought to possess. And today that would be semi-automatic rifles and pistols with high capacity magazines.

A "well regulated militia" would be issued a standard military weapon, to be kept at home or, more likely, at a local armory.

 

[jwoodie]

You would think you would focus your time and energy trying to keep actual gun criminals in jail

I also believe that possession of a gun during the commission of a felony should result in an additional 10 year jail sentence.

 

[2aguy]

So if our founding fathers were alive today and you asked them what kind of arms should the people possess to serve as a check against a standing army. I suspect they would say that they should be armed with the technology of the day that any light infantry ought to possess. And today that would be semi-automatic rifles and pistols with high capacity magazines.

A "well regulated militia" would be issued a standard military weapon, to be kept at home or, more likely, at a local armory.

No....the civilian would bring his privately owned weapon to militia duty....but that has no bearing on our discussion since the Right to bear arms is an individual Right, not connected to military service.

 

[jwoodie]

As many experts on firearms will testify.....the AR-15 and all the other semi auto rifles are great self defense rifles.....for many reasons.

Cite? What is so great about a small caliber high velocity round that can go through walls and endanger innocents?

 

[miketx]

As many experts on firearms will testify.....the AR-15 and all the other semi auto rifles are great self defense rifles.....for many reasons.

Cite? What is so great about a small caliber high velocity round that can go through walls and endanger innocents?

You want him to tell you so you'll know, you him to tell you so can can make more innuendo.

 

[2aguy]

As many experts on firearms will testify.....the AR-15 and all the other semi auto rifles are great self defense rifles.....for many reasons.

Cite? What is so great about a small caliber high velocity round that can go through walls and endanger innocents?

Any bullet is going to go through walls.....youtube is full of videos demonstrating this from .38 caliber to larger rounds......a .357 round is going through your home.........the AR-15 can be adapted to fit any body size, it can hold both lights, and lasers in addition to other optics....it shoots without much if any recoil which is another great feature for female shooters and people who don't want sore shoulders, and the semi auto firing mechanism means you can engage more than one attacker without having to manually reload the gun with a bolt, lever or pump.....there are lots of reasons the AR-15 is a great self defense gun...

And here is the key....if you don't like it, don't buy it.....but don't tell other people who think it will help them defend their family that they can't own one...

 

[2aguy]

As many experts on firearms will testify.....the AR-15 and all the other semi auto rifles are great self defense rifles.....for many reasons.

Cite? What is so great about a small caliber high velocity round that can go through walls and endanger innocents?

This.....


GOOD MAN WITH A GUN: Man With AR-15 Saves Neighbor From Stabbing Attack


I poked my head out the door. There was a pool of blood, blood was everywhere in the hall. There was still a confrontation going on, there were about three or four people involved at this point. So I ran back into my house and grabbed my AR-15. I grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun — bigger gun, I think a little bit more of an intimidation factor. Definitely played a part in him actually stopping.

The assailant was only free for a short time before he was apprehended; the stabbing victim was taken to the hospital. According to police, Thomas has a valid firearm owner's identification card and a concealed carry permit.

Thomas added, "The AR-15 is my weapon of choice for home protection. It's light, it's maneuverable. If you train and know how to use it properly, it's not dangerous. And this is just a perfect example of good guy with an AR-15 stopped a bad guy with a knife. And there were no lives taken, so all in all it was a good day.”

 

[jwoodie]

No....the civilian would bring his privately owned weapon to militia duty....but that has no bearing on our discussion since the Right to bear arms is an individual Right, not connected to military service.

So "militia" duty has no bearing on the Second Amendment?

P.S. Are you happy to accept whatever "interpretation" SCOTUS comes up with?

 

[2aguy]

No....the civilian would bring his privately owned weapon to militia duty....but that has no bearing on our discussion since the Right to bear arms is an individual Right, not connected to military service.

So "militia" duty has no bearing on the Second Amendment?

P.S. Are you happy to accept whatever "interpretation" SCOTUS comes up with?

Nope.....but we have Heller......and Caetano, and Miller.....our 2nd Amendment Rights do not depend on 5, unelected, politically appointed lawyers........but even their decisions support owning AR-15s....

 

[jwoodie]

GOOD MAN WITH A GUN: Man With AR-15 Saves Neighbor From Stabbing Attack


I poked my head out the door. There was a pool of blood, blood was everywhere in the hall. There was still a confrontation going on, there were about three or four people involved at this point. So I ran back into my house and grabbed my AR-15. I grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun — bigger gun, I think a little bit more of an intimidation factor. Definitely played a part in him actually stopping.

The assailant was only free for a short time before he was apprehended; the stabbing victim was taken to the hospital. According to police, Thomas has a valid firearm owner's identification card and a concealed carry permit.

Thomas added, "The AR-15 is my weapon of choice for home protection. It's light, it's maneuverable. If you train and know how to use it properly, it's not dangerous. And this is just a perfect example of good guy with an AR-15 stopped a bad guy with a knife. And there were no lives taken, so all in all it was a good day.”

Thank God he didn't actually fire his AR-15.

 

[jwoodie]

our 2nd Amendment Rights do not depend on 5, unelected, politically appointed lawyers

Wishful thinking.

 

[2aguy]

GOOD MAN WITH A GUN: Man With AR-15 Saves Neighbor From Stabbing Attack


I poked my head out the door. There was a pool of blood, blood was everywhere in the hall. There was still a confrontation going on, there were about three or four people involved at this point. So I ran back into my house and grabbed my AR-15. I grabbed the AR-15 over my handgun — bigger gun, I think a little bit more of an intimidation factor. Definitely played a part in him actually stopping.

The assailant was only free for a short time before he was apprehended; the stabbing victim was taken to the hospital. According to police, Thomas has a valid firearm owner's identification card and a concealed carry permit.

Thomas added, "The AR-15 is my weapon of choice for home protection. It's light, it's maneuverable. If you train and know how to use it properly, it's not dangerous. And this is just a perfect example of good guy with an AR-15 stopped a bad guy with a knife. And there were no lives taken, so all in all it was a good day.”

Thank God he didn't actually fire his AR-15.

Yep......dittos for all self defense shootings where there is no need to ventilate the thug........and it is good that in the 1,500,000 times a year that Americans use their legal pistols and rifles to stop criminals...they only have to kill about 230 morons each year....who just don't get the message when you tell them to stop...

 

[jwoodie]

Yep......dittos for all self defense shootings where there is no need to ventilate the thug........and it is good that in the 1,500,000 times a year that Americans use their legal pistols and rifles to stop criminals...they only have to kill about 230 morons each year....who just don't get the message when you tell them to stop...

You forgot to mention pump action shotguns...

 

[ding]

Because it is more effective than a five or a ten round magazine.

More effective at doing what?

Being a deterrent against a standing army of a tyrannical government.

 

[2aguy]

Yep......dittos for all self defense shootings where there is no need to ventilate the thug........and it is good that in the 1,500,000 times a year that Americans use their legal pistols and rifles to stop criminals...they only have to kill about 230 morons each year....who just don't get the message when you tell them to stop...

You forgot to mention pump action shotguns...

And you forgot semi auto shotguns...

 

[ding]

The Right to Bear Arms (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) was seen by our Founding Fathers as the last check against tyranny. They knew that the best line of defense against a standing army was an armed populace.

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

A little history lesson: The Federalist Papers were arguments in favor of a U.S. Constitution that did not include ANY Amendments, which were later added by the States as a condition of their ratification. Furthermore, these Amendments only applied to the Federal Government, not to the States (who reserved the right to maintain militias against federal or foreign invasion).

But we do have a Bill of Rights and the states did ratify them and as such are bound by them.

They are effectively restrictions placed upon government; state and federal. The only exception I am aware of is the establishment clause of the 1st amendment which only prevented the federal government from establishing a state religion.

 

[ding]

So if our founding fathers were alive today and you asked them what kind of arms should the people possess to serve as a check against a standing army. I suspect they would say that they should be armed with the technology of the day that any light infantry ought to possess. And today that would be semi-automatic rifles and pistols with high capacity magazines.

A "well regulated militia" would be issued a standard military weapon, to be kept at home or, more likely, at a local armory.

Not according to the framers.

Who are the militia? The people who wish to preserve liberty and are capable of bearing arms.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788