HR 8 -- Gun Control

[Rigby5]

Bearings arms is a right which is not to be infringed.

Nonsense

Ignoring the fact that the 2A actually refers to a militia...there are all sorts of "infringements" that have been ruled by courts to be legal.

Of course today there are restrictions on the types of arms intended to be covered by the 2nd Amendment. Our founders likely had no intent to protect long range artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such.
These things were unknown to them. Even though these are denied to the average citizen today, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want. I personally know a dealer that owns a fully functional small tank.

The SCOTUS has ruled on several milestone cases involving gun rights for private citizens.

In McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court struck down (in a 5-4 decision) a citywide handgun ban, ruling that the Second Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government.

In the majority ruling in that case, Justice Samuel Alito wrote: “Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”

In the Heller decision, the Court suggested a list of “presumptively lawful” regulations, including bans on possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; bans on carrying arms in schools and government buildings; restrictions on gun sales; bans on the concealed carrying of weapons; and generally bans on weapons “not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”


“Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.” --Justice Samuel Alito

The Second Amendment - Definition, Text & Rights

The Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, is one of 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights. It establishes the right to bear arms and figures prominently in the long-running debate over gun control.

www.history.com

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned, and the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.
What the founders did not like or trust was a standing mercenary military.
They instead wanted volunteer citizens soldiers who already had their own weapons.

 

[Lesh]

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned,

Nonsense. Show us who owned ANY artillery

the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.

Exactly. For use in a militia.

You can NOT do that now. Machine guns? Nope. Missiles? Nope

 

[Rigby5]

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned,

Nonsense. Show us who owned ANY artillery

the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.

Exactly. For use in a militia.

You can NOT do that now. Machine guns? Nope. Missiles? Nope

Sorry, but that is all totally wrong.

The British never defended the colonists well, so they privately defended themselves even before the French and Indian War, and the Revolutionary War army used mostly privately owned cannon.

{...
Going back to 1638, the founding date of what is today The Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts– to this day a privately recruited military unit– local communities took it upon themselves to charter units of cannoneers.

By the 1740s, local artillery units were in Rhode Island, New York, and Pennsylvania with the official history of the latter’s Militia and National Guard noting that in 1747, largely through the efforts of Benjamin Franklin, a plan was undertaken by locals colonists to found companies of “horse, foot and artillery” that the volume stresses “was a purely volunteer organization, and was armed and equipped at its own expense, while its officers were selected by its members.”

Fast forward to the French and Indian War and local volunteer colonists fought alongside the British with one Boston-born engineer, Richard Gridley, helping in the capture of French-held Fortress Louisbourg. Gridley would later show up in June 1775 at Bunker Hill, the first set-piece battle of the Revolutionary War– commanding a motley battery of scrounged up artillery, manned by volunteers, against the British.

THE BRITISH ARE COMING! (FOR THE CANNONS)
As things grew tense between the King and his increasingly unhappy subjects, those Americans yearning to be free exercised their inherent right to keep and bear arms by collecting artillery pieces that were not intended to be used in duck hunting. This included gathering up privately-held cannons, captured French war relics that were brought back as trophies, and, um, borrowing guns directly from the Red Coats.


The British commander in Boston at the time, Lieutenant General Thomas Gage, sent out spies with orders to find where the Patriots were keeping their military stores– most importantly to keep an eye peeled for artillery. They dutifully reported that, at the small town of Concord, they were “informed that they had fourteen pieces of cannon (ten iron and four brass) and two cohorns [light mortars]… their iron cannon they kept in a house in town, their brass they had concealed in some place behind the town, in a wood.”

The Massachusetts Committee of Safety, a Patriot organization of which John Hancock was a member before he placed his famous signature on the Declaration of Independence, came together on the eve of the Britsh move against the stash at Concord and issued orders to shuffle around the assorted cannon and mortars under their control in something of a shell game to stay one step ahead of the King’s men.

Nonetheless, when the British famously marched on Concord on April 19, 1775– pausing along the way at Lexington for a meeting with the Minutemen and a “Shot Heard Round the World”– the Lobsterbacks knocked the trunnions off several iron cannons too large to carry away and cut down the “liberty pole.”

While the newly formed Continental Army soon was able to lay hands on better artillery— such as 58 British pieces seized by Ethan Allen’s Green Mountain Boys at Fort Ticonderoga and moved to Massachusetts by a Boston bookseller by the name of Henry Knox, as well as two dozen guns swiped by a column that included a 20-year-old college dropout named Alexander Hamilton– it should be noted that the Founding Fathers never mentioned that ownership and circulation of artillery be curtailed following the war.

In fact, Hamilton, who went on to become an artillery officer of some renown during the war, wrote in Federalist 29 in 1788 that, “Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped…”

250+ YEARS WITHOUT REGULATION
Although the Militia Act of 1792, which largely governed state militias until the National Guard was established in 1903, outlined the common militia and how it could be called out, military historians can point to hundreds of locally raised private units that existed at the time with a myriad of uniforms, arms and, yes, even artillery, of their choosing and ownership.
...}

Biden Fails Fact Check on Revolutionary War Cannon Ownership :: Guns.com

In a recent interview, Vice President Joe Biden said during the Revolutionary War private citizens couldn't own cannons. That has been ranked as false.

www.guns.com

And you are also entirely wrong about private ownership of machine guns and missiles.
Not only is it illegal for the government to prevent private ownership of any weapon, if not for private ownership, then no one would be able to invent, produce, or sell weapons to the military. The only restriction on the most exotic of weapons is that they have to pay a high tax to cover the investigation to make sure they are stored and used safely.
And there are lots of legitimate civilian uses for these sorts of weapons. One would be as mercenary guards, security, etc., like Blackwater security in Iraq, but cannon, recoiless rifles, etc., are commonly used at private ski slopes in order to induce avalanches before they get too big and dangerous.

{...

One of the first things I was surprised to learn about firearms and firearm ownership in the United States was that I could legally own a machine gun. For clarity’s sake, let’s lay out what exactly a machine gun is. According to the ATF, a “machinegun” (they present it as one word) is:

• Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger
• The frame or receiver of any such weapon
• Any part designed and intended solely and exclusively or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, or
• Any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

That first bullet point describes what is probably the most commonly-encountered form of machine gun in the American gun world. If you’ve got a gun that fires more than one projectile every time you pull the trigger, you’ve got a machine gun (or a malfunctioning semiauto that needs repair ASAP).

To understand American machine gun ownership, there’s a few laws one must familiarize themselves with. Machine guns are regulated under the National Firearms Act (NFA), which was originally passed in 1934. Items that also fall under the jurisdiction of the NFA include short barreled rifles (SBRs), short barreled shotguns (SBSs), suppressors, and “any other weapons” (AOWs—under which things like cane guns and other unique items fall). All of these “NFA items” must be registered with the federal government and are subject to a $200 tax (which was a substantial sum in 1934 dollars).
...
Fully-transferable machine guns
FOPA mandated that machine guns manufactured before May 19, 1986 (the date that President Ronald Reagan signed FOPA into law) could be lawfully owned and transferred between unlicensed “civilians” who are not felons following the completion and approval of an application to the ATF, along with payment of the $200 “tax stamp” fee. Without exaggeration, every single registered machine gun owned by a non-dealer suddenly became much more valuable overnight—no “new” machine guns could be introduced to the “civilian” world after May 19, 1986.

Brown told me that there were an estimated 250,000 registered machine guns at the time of FOPA’s passage. Now, there are roughly 182,000 items on the registry. Wear and tear weigh hard on most select-fire guns.


As there are no new fully-transferable guns being added to the registry, the value of these firearms is ever-increasing. Entry into the “low end” of the transferable machine gun world in the form of something like a MAC-10 submachine gun will cost anywhere from $3,000 to $5,000. Higher ticket items like pristine M16 lowers and Thompson submachine guns can cost around $20,000 and up.

Pre-May dealer samples
Pre-May dealer samples can only be owned by Federal Firearms Licensees who pay a specific Special Occupational Tax (SOT) to take part in the importation, sale, and manufacture of NFA items. Pre-May dealer samples are machine guns that were registered and owned by dealers prior to the May 19, 1986 cutoff, and are only transferable between dealers with the appropriate licenses.

However, if a dealer opts to cease paying their SOT in a given year, a pre-May dealer sample may become part of their private collection. This “feature” of pre-May samples makes them particularly attractive to dealers, and the market for pre-May samples is effectively hyper-limited to dealers alone.

Information is scant and incomplete regarding the number of pre-May dealer samples in circulation, though it is likely very low.

Post-May dealer samples
After May 19, 1986, new machine guns could only be made and imported by appropriately licensed dealers and manufacturers and government agencies. These post-May guns can only be owned by dealers who have paid the applicable SOT, and only after providing to the ATF a letter from a law enforcement or military unit explicitly requesting a demonstration of said guns (a “demo letter”).

...}

A Beginner's Guide to American Machine Gun Ownership | OutdoorHub

What makes a clip a clip, or a magazine a magazine? What the heck is a milsurp, and why are there all these online forums about it? These are a few of the questions I asked myself when I began to get serious about owning, collecting, and shooting firearms several years ago. But the most …

www.outdoorhub.com

 

[asaratis]

The Democrat gun-grabbers are at it again. They tried a similar bill years ago and failed. They're trying again now that they have the Executive and Legislative branches under their control.

The stupidity of the bill has not changed.

Top 9 Reasons Democrats’ Latest Gun Control Bill Is A Terrible Idea

Democrats have dusted-off their last attempt and are making another significant push to enact major gun control legislation.

thefederalist.com

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-117hr8ih/pdf/BILLS-117hr8ih.pdf

Impossible, democrats will never come after our guns ! Remember? They wouldn't lie , or would they ?

As I have said before, if Democrats couldn't lie, they wouldn't speak.

 

[asaratis]

Our founders likely had no intent to protect artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such. Even though these are denied to the average citizen, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want.

That is false.

Our founders themselves, as private citizens, owned cannons, warships, and other word armaments. Thomas Jefferson wanted to implement the Puckle gun (machine gun).

Thanks for the lessons. I found that the Puckle gun is not a fully automatic machine gun but a small bore, flint lock, repeating gun that requires several seconds and several manipulations to advance to the next shot. It was also very expensive. Puckle's 9-rounds/cylinder model was capable of 63 shots in 9 minutes during one demonstration he performed. That required the use of 7 preloaded interchangeable cylinders. Very interesting. Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

The warships were likely also of reach for the average citizen and intended only for use in times of war or as defense against pirate vessels.

The history of the US Naval Forces is also interesting and enlightening:

Continental Congress authorizes first naval force | October 13, 1775 | HISTORY

On October 13, 1775, the Continental Congress authorizes construction and administration of the first American naval force—the precursor to the United States Navy. Since the outbreak of open hostilities with the British in April, little consideration had been given to protection by sea until...

www.history.com

Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

It was when the 2nd was written.

No it wasn't. It was a slow fire revolver with a large barrel and several manual operations required to advance the cylinder between firings. Watch the video.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

It wasn't anything like a Gatling gun....which was invented in 1861.

 

[OKTexas]

Deal with it, most of the men who did the mass shootings shouldn't of never had a gun, and they should have been taken away from them.

Elections have consequences.

When are you stupid commies going to realize, nothing you're proposing will have an effect on any murders. You can't prosecute criminals doing black market sales or their buyers for not doing background checks. Any attempt to do so would violate their 4th and 5th amendment rights. So all you're doing is going after the rights of the law abiding. Of course you know that because this shit has nothing to do about safety, but everything about control. If you keep pushing, the 400+ million guns in private hands may start turning in your direction. That's exactly what the 2nd is for.

.

 

[Auld Phart]

Our founders likely had no intent to protect artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such. Even though these are denied to the average citizen, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want.

That is false.

Our founders themselves, as private citizens, owned cannons, warships, and other word armaments. Thomas Jefferson wanted to implement the Puckle gun (machine gun).

Thanks for the lessons. I found that the Puckle gun is not a fully automatic machine gun but a small bore, flint lock, repeating gun that requires several seconds and several manipulations to advance to the next shot. It was also very expensive. Puckle's 9-rounds/cylinder model was capable of 63 shots in 9 minutes during one demonstration he performed. That required the use of 7 preloaded interchangeable cylinders. Very interesting. Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

The warships were likely also of reach for the average citizen and intended only for use in times of war or as defense against pirate vessels.

The history of the US Naval Forces is also interesting and enlightening:

Continental Congress authorizes first naval force | October 13, 1775 | HISTORY

On October 13, 1775, the Continental Congress authorizes construction and administration of the first American naval force—the precursor to the United States Navy. Since the outbreak of open hostilities with the British in April, little consideration had been given to protection by sea until...

www.history.com

Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

It was when the 2nd was written.

No it wasn't. It was a slow fire revolver with a large barrel and several manual operations required to advance the cylinder between firings. Watch the video.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

It wasn't anything like a Gatling gun....which was invented in 1861.

By 1776 standards, it was a machine gun.

 

[Lesh]

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned,

Nonsense. Show us who owned ANY artillery

the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.

Exactly. For use in a militia.

You can NOT do that now. Machine guns? Nope. Missiles? Nope

Sorry, but that is all totally wrong.

The British never defended the colonists well, so they privately defended themselves even before the French and Indian War, and the Revolutionary War army used mostly privately owned cannon.

{...
Going back to 1638, the founding date of what is today The Ancient and Honorable Artillery Company of Massachusetts– to this day a privately recruited military unit– local communities took it upon themselves to charter units of cannoneers.

By the 1740s, local artillery units were in Rhode Island, New York, and Pennsylvania with the official history of the latter’s Militia and National Guard noting that in 1747, largely through the efforts of Benjamin Franklin, a plan was undertaken by locals colonists to found companies of “horse, foot and artillery” that the volume stresses “was a purely volunteer organization, and was armed and equipped at its own expense, while its officers were selected by its members.”

Fast forward to the French and Indian War and local volunteer colonists fought alongside the British with one Boston-born engineer, Richard Gridley, helping in the capture of French-held Fortress Louisbourg. Gridley would later show up in June 1775 at Bunker Hill, the first set-piece battle of the Revolutionary War– commanding a motley battery of scrounged up artillery, manned by volunteers, against the British.

THE BRITISH ARE COMING! (FOR THE CANNONS)
As things grew tense between the King and his increasingly unhappy subjects, those Americans yearning to be free exercised their inherent right to keep and bear arms by collecting artillery pieces that were not intended to be used in duck hunting. This included gathering up privately-held cannons, captured French war relics that were brought back as trophies, and, um, borrowing guns directly from the Red Coats.


The British commander in Boston at the time, Lieutenant General Thomas Gage, sent out spies with orders to find where the Patriots were keeping their military stores– most importantly to keep an eye peeled for artillery. They dutifully reported that, at the small town of Concord, they were “informed that they had fourteen pieces of cannon (ten iron and four brass) and two cohorns [light mortars]… their iron cannon they kept in a house in town, their brass they had concealed in some place behind the town, in a wood.”

The Massachusetts Committee of Safety, a Patriot organization of which John Hancock was a member before he placed his famous signature on the Declaration of Independence, came together on the eve of the Britsh move against the stash at Concord and issued orders to shuffle around the assorted cannon and mortars under their control in something of a shell game to stay one step ahead of the King’s men.

Nonetheless, when the British famously marched on Concord on April 19, 1775– pausing along the way at Lexington for a meeting with the Minutemen and a “Shot Heard Round the World”– the Lobsterbacks knocked the trunnions off several iron cannons too large to carry away and cut down the “liberty pole.”

While the newly formed Continental Army soon was able to lay hands on better artillery— such as 58 British pieces seized by Ethan Allen’s Green Mountain Boys at Fort Ticonderoga and moved to Massachusetts by a Boston bookseller by the name of Henry Knox, as well as two dozen guns swiped by a column that included a 20-year-old college dropout named Alexander Hamilton– it should be noted that the Founding Fathers never mentioned that ownership and circulation of artillery be curtailed following the war.

In fact, Hamilton, who went on to become an artillery officer of some renown during the war, wrote in Federalist 29 in 1788 that, “Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped…”

250+ YEARS WITHOUT REGULATION
Although the Militia Act of 1792, which largely governed state militias until the National Guard was established in 1903, outlined the common militia and how it could be called out, military historians can point to hundreds of locally raised private units that existed at the time with a myriad of uniforms, arms and, yes, even artillery, of their choosing and ownership.
...}

Biden Fails Fact Check on Revolutionary War Cannon Ownership :: Guns.com

In a recent interview, Vice President Joe Biden said during the Revolutionary War private citizens couldn't own cannons. That has been ranked as false.

www.guns.com

And you are also entirely wrong about private ownership of machine guns and missiles.
Not only is it illegal for the government to prevent private ownership of any weapon, if not for private ownership, then no one would be able to invent, produce, or sell weapons to the military. The only restriction on the most exotic of weapons is that they have to pay a high tax to cover the investigation to make sure they are stored and used safely.
And there are lots of legitimate civilian uses for these sorts of weapons. One would be as mercenary guards, security, etc., like Blackwater security in Iraq, but cannon, recoiless rifles, etc., are commonly used at private ski slopes in order to induce avalanches before they get too big and dangerous.

{...

One of the first things I was surprised to learn about firearms and firearm ownership in the United States was that I could legally own a machine gun. For clarity’s sake, let’s lay out what exactly a machine gun is. According to the ATF, a “machinegun” (they present it as one word) is:

• Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger
• The frame or receiver of any such weapon
• Any part designed and intended solely and exclusively or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, or
• Any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

That first bullet point describes what is probably the most commonly-encountered form of machine gun in the American gun world. If you’ve got a gun that fires more than one projectile every time you pull the trigger, you’ve got a machine gun (or a malfunctioning semiauto that needs repair ASAP).

To understand American machine gun ownership, there’s a few laws one must familiarize themselves with. Machine guns are regulated under the National Firearms Act (NFA), which was originally passed in 1934. Items that also fall under the jurisdiction of the NFA include short barreled rifles (SBRs), short barreled shotguns (SBSs), suppressors, and “any other weapons” (AOWs—under which things like cane guns and other unique items fall). All of these “NFA items” must be registered with the federal government and are subject to a $200 tax (which was a substantial sum in 1934 dollars).
...
Fully-transferable machine guns
FOPA mandated that machine guns manufactured before May 19, 1986 (the date that President Ronald Reagan signed FOPA into law) could be lawfully owned and transferred between unlicensed “civilians” who are not felons following the completion and approval of an application to the ATF, along with payment of the $200 “tax stamp” fee. Without exaggeration, every single registered machine gun owned by a non-dealer suddenly became much more valuable overnight—no “new” machine guns could be introduced to the “civilian” world after May 19, 1986.

Brown told me that there were an estimated 250,000 registered machine guns at the time of FOPA’s passage. Now, there are roughly 182,000 items on the registry. Wear and tear weigh hard on most select-fire guns.


As there are no new fully-transferable guns being added to the registry, the value of these firearms is ever-increasing. Entry into the “low end” of the transferable machine gun world in the form of something like a MAC-10 submachine gun will cost anywhere from $3,000 to $5,000. Higher ticket items like pristine M16 lowers and Thompson submachine guns can cost around $20,000 and up.

Pre-May dealer samples
Pre-May dealer samples can only be owned by Federal Firearms Licensees who pay a specific Special Occupational Tax (SOT) to take part in the importation, sale, and manufacture of NFA items. Pre-May dealer samples are machine guns that were registered and owned by dealers prior to the May 19, 1986 cutoff, and are only transferable between dealers with the appropriate licenses.

However, if a dealer opts to cease paying their SOT in a given year, a pre-May dealer sample may become part of their private collection. This “feature” of pre-May samples makes them particularly attractive to dealers, and the market for pre-May samples is effectively hyper-limited to dealers alone.

Information is scant and incomplete regarding the number of pre-May dealer samples in circulation, though it is likely very low.

Post-May dealer samples
After May 19, 1986, new machine guns could only be made and imported by appropriately licensed dealers and manufacturers and government agencies. These post-May guns can only be owned by dealers who have paid the applicable SOT, and only after providing to the ATF a letter from a law enforcement or military unit explicitly requesting a demonstration of said guns (a “demo letter”).

...}

A Beginner's Guide to American Machine Gun Ownership | OutdoorHub

What makes a clip a clip, or a magazine a magazine? What the heck is a milsurp, and why are there all these online forums about it? These are a few of the questions I asked myself when I began to get serious about owning, collecting, and shooting firearms several years ago. But the most …

www.outdoorhub.com

So you understand that you CAN own a machine gun manufactured PRIOR to 1986 IF you undergo stringent background checks and pay certain fees. You can NOT own one made after that

And gee...no courts are challenging that

The same (background checks and fees) regard cannons. I'm unsure if you can legally own missiles like bazookas or grenades at all.

But clearly actual militia type weapons are heavily regulated and should be. The 2A clearly talks about a "Well Regulated Militia" and yet the weapons that would be required for that are regulated heavily and in some cases banned outright

 

[asaratis]

Bearings arms is a right which is not to be infringed.

Nonsense

Ignoring the fact that the 2A actually refers to a militia...there are all sorts of "infringements" that have been ruled by courts to be legal.

Of course today there are restrictions on the types of arms intended to be covered by the 2nd Amendment. Our founders likely had no intent to protect long range artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such.
These things were unknown to them. Even though these are denied to the average citizen today, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want. I personally know a dealer that owns a fully functional small tank.

The SCOTUS has ruled on several milestone cases involving gun rights for private citizens.

In McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court struck down (in a 5-4 decision) a citywide handgun ban, ruling that the Second Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government.

In the majority ruling in that case, Justice Samuel Alito wrote: “Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”

In the Heller decision, the Court suggested a list of “presumptively lawful” regulations, including bans on possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; bans on carrying arms in schools and government buildings; restrictions on gun sales; bans on the concealed carrying of weapons; and generally bans on weapons “not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”


“Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.” --Justice Samuel Alito

The Second Amendment - Definition, Text & Rights

The Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, is one of 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights. It establishes the right to bear arms and figures prominently in the long-running debate over gun control.

www.history.com

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned, and the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.
What the founders did not like or trust was a standing mercenary military.
They instead wanted volunteer citizens soldiers who already had their own weapons.

I don't recall claiming otherwise. After our War of Independence, our founders wanted our citizens to have the irrevocable right to keep and bear their arms.

Our founders likely had no intent to protect artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such. Even though these are denied to the average citizen, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want.

That is false.

Our founders themselves, as private citizens, owned cannons, warships, and other word armaments. Thomas Jefferson wanted to implement the Puckle gun (machine gun).

Thanks for the lessons. I found that the Puckle gun is not a fully automatic machine gun but a small bore, flint lock, repeating gun that requires several seconds and several manipulations to advance to the next shot. It was also very expensive. Puckle's 9-rounds/cylinder model was capable of 63 shots in 9 minutes during one demonstration he performed. That required the use of 7 preloaded interchangeable cylinders. Very interesting. Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

The warships were likely also of reach for the average citizen and intended only for use in times of war or as defense against pirate vessels.

The history of the US Naval Forces is also interesting and enlightening:

Continental Congress authorizes first naval force | October 13, 1775 | HISTORY

On October 13, 1775, the Continental Congress authorizes construction and administration of the first American naval force—the precursor to the United States Navy. Since the outbreak of open hostilities with the British in April, little consideration had been given to protection by sea until...

www.history.com

Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

It was when the 2nd was written.

No it wasn't. It was a slow fire revolver with a large barrel and several manual operations required to advance the cylinder between firings. Watch the video.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

It wasn't anything like a Gatling gun....which was invented in 1861.

By 1776 standards, it was a machine gun.

Provide a credible link to the 1776 "standards" that characterize the Puckle gun as a machine gun.

I think you're just blowing hot air just to keep from admitting you're wrong.

 

[Auld Phart]

Bearings arms is a right which is not to be infringed.

Nonsense

Ignoring the fact that the 2A actually refers to a militia...there are all sorts of "infringements" that have been ruled by courts to be legal.

Of course today there are restrictions on the types of arms intended to be covered by the 2nd Amendment. Our founders likely had no intent to protect long range artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such.
These things were unknown to them. Even though these are denied to the average citizen today, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want. I personally know a dealer that owns a fully functional small tank.

The SCOTUS has ruled on several milestone cases involving gun rights for private citizens.

In McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court struck down (in a 5-4 decision) a citywide handgun ban, ruling that the Second Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government.

In the majority ruling in that case, Justice Samuel Alito wrote: “Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”

In the Heller decision, the Court suggested a list of “presumptively lawful” regulations, including bans on possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; bans on carrying arms in schools and government buildings; restrictions on gun sales; bans on the concealed carrying of weapons; and generally bans on weapons “not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”


“Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.” --Justice Samuel Alito

The Second Amendment - Definition, Text & Rights

The Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, is one of 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights. It establishes the right to bear arms and figures prominently in the long-running debate over gun control.

www.history.com

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned, and the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.
What the founders did not like or trust was a standing mercenary military.
They instead wanted volunteer citizens soldiers who already had their own weapons.

I don't recall claiming otherwise. After our War of Independence, our founders wanted our citizens to have the irrevocable right to keep and bear their arms.

Our founders likely had no intent to protect artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such. Even though these are denied to the average citizen, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want.

That is false.

Our founders themselves, as private citizens, owned cannons, warships, and other word armaments. Thomas Jefferson wanted to implement the Puckle gun (machine gun).

Thanks for the lessons. I found that the Puckle gun is not a fully automatic machine gun but a small bore, flint lock, repeating gun that requires several seconds and several manipulations to advance to the next shot. It was also very expensive. Puckle's 9-rounds/cylinder model was capable of 63 shots in 9 minutes during one demonstration he performed. That required the use of 7 preloaded interchangeable cylinders. Very interesting. Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

The warships were likely also of reach for the average citizen and intended only for use in times of war or as defense against pirate vessels.

The history of the US Naval Forces is also interesting and enlightening:

Continental Congress authorizes first naval force | October 13, 1775 | HISTORY

On October 13, 1775, the Continental Congress authorizes construction and administration of the first American naval force—the precursor to the United States Navy. Since the outbreak of open hostilities with the British in April, little consideration had been given to protection by sea until...

www.history.com

Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

It was when the 2nd was written.

No it wasn't. It was a slow fire revolver with a large barrel and several manual operations required to advance the cylinder between firings. Watch the video.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

It wasn't anything like a Gatling gun....which was invented in 1861.

By 1776 standards, it was a machine gun.

Provide a credible link to the 1776 "standards" that characterize the Puckle gun as a machine gun.

I think you're just blowing hot air just to keep from admitting you're wrong.

Provide a credible link to the 1776 "standards" that characterize the Puckle gun as a machine gun.

as much a machine gun as the Gatling was.

Which also had to be hand cranked to shoot the next round.

 

[asaratis]

Bearings arms is a right which is not to be infringed.

Nonsense

Ignoring the fact that the 2A actually refers to a militia...there are all sorts of "infringements" that have been ruled by courts to be legal.

Of course today there are restrictions on the types of arms intended to be covered by the 2nd Amendment. Our founders likely had no intent to protect long range artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such.
These things were unknown to them. Even though these are denied to the average citizen today, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want. I personally know a dealer that owns a fully functional small tank.

The SCOTUS has ruled on several milestone cases involving gun rights for private citizens.

In McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court struck down (in a 5-4 decision) a citywide handgun ban, ruling that the Second Amendment applies to the states as well as to the federal government.

In the majority ruling in that case, Justice Samuel Alito wrote: “Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.”

In the Heller decision, the Court suggested a list of “presumptively lawful” regulations, including bans on possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill; bans on carrying arms in schools and government buildings; restrictions on gun sales; bans on the concealed carrying of weapons; and generally bans on weapons “not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.”


“Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day, and in Heller, we held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right.” --Justice Samuel Alito

The Second Amendment - Definition, Text & Rights

The Second Amendment, ratified in 1791, is one of 10 amendments that form the Bill of Rights. It establishes the right to bear arms and figures prominently in the long-running debate over gun control.

www.history.com

Actually most of the artillery used by our side in the American Revolution were privately owned, and the second amendment was specifically intended to include the latest of all military equipment.
What the founders did not like or trust was a standing mercenary military.
They instead wanted volunteer citizens soldiers who already had their own weapons.

I don't recall claiming otherwise. After our War of Independence, our founders wanted our citizens to have the irrevocable right to keep and bear their arms.

Our founders likely had no intent to protect artillery pieces, fully automatic firearms, tanks, bazookas and such. Even though these are denied to the average citizen, licensed arms dealer can own anything they want.

That is false.

Our founders themselves, as private citizens, owned cannons, warships, and other word armaments. Thomas Jefferson wanted to implement the Puckle gun (machine gun).

Thanks for the lessons. I found that the Puckle gun is not a fully automatic machine gun but a small bore, flint lock, repeating gun that requires several seconds and several manipulations to advance to the next shot. It was also very expensive. Puckle's 9-rounds/cylinder model was capable of 63 shots in 9 minutes during one demonstration he performed. That required the use of 7 preloaded interchangeable cylinders. Very interesting. Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

The warships were likely also of reach for the average citizen and intended only for use in times of war or as defense against pirate vessels.

The history of the US Naval Forces is also interesting and enlightening:

Continental Congress authorizes first naval force | October 13, 1775 | HISTORY

On October 13, 1775, the Continental Congress authorizes construction and administration of the first American naval force—the precursor to the United States Navy. Since the outbreak of open hostilities with the British in April, little consideration had been given to protection by sea until...

www.history.com

Still, it wasn't what we refer to today as a machine gun.

It was when the 2nd was written.

No it wasn't. It was a slow fire revolver with a large barrel and several manual operations required to advance the cylinder between firings. Watch the video.

Puckle gun at DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo. Privacy, Simplified.

duckduckgo.com

It wasn't anything like a Gatling gun....which was invented in 1861.

By 1776 standards, it was a machine gun.

Provide a credible link to the 1776 "standards" that characterize the Puckle gun as a machine gun.

I think you're just blowing hot air just to keep from admitting you're wrong.

Provide a credible link to the 1776 "standards" that characterize the Puckle gun as a machine gun.

as much a machine gun as the Gatling was.

Which also had to be hand cranked to shoot the next round.

Watch the damn video.

It shows exactly what has to happen between shots...and it's nothing like the multi-barrel Gatling gun. I would agree that the Gatling gun is a machine gun because the firing rate depends only on how fast the rotation of the barrels can be forced. The gun on an A-10 Warthog is essentially a motorized Gatling gun that can shoot thousands of rounds per minute.

With the Puckle gun, after firing one shot, there are several time consuming steps that have to be manually accomplished before the operator can press the trigger and fire the next shot.

By your way of thinking, all revolvers are machine guns.

Where's your link to the standards of 1776?

 

[Auld Phart]

Microsoft Word - BUCCLEUCH PROJECT Royal Armouries version 2 5 FinalProofEDIT.DOC (hud.ac.uk)
" One of the most famous of these are the Puckle Guns of which this collection boasts two examples, the second on loan at Beaulieu.28 A remarkable invention, these guns were a forerunner of the machine gun and were fed by drum-magazines, firing either square or round shaped projectiles selected depending upon the religion of the foe!. "

"There is no doubt that some of the items purchased relate to the expedition funded by the 2nd Duke to St Lucia and St Vincent, which had been granted to the Duke on 20th June 1722.61 He appointed Nathaniel Uring as Deputy-Governor62 and Uring having equipped a convoy of ships, left Portsmouth on 10th September 1722. On the manifest are listed significant quantities of weaponry, but of particular interest is reference to two easily identifiable artefacts in the Buccleuch Collection today: “2 Machine Guns of Puckles”. 63"

 

[asaratis]

...forerunner of the machine gun...

...and the musket (a smooth bore long gun) was the forerunner of the rifle (rifled bore long gun). That doesn't make a musket a rifle.

Nice try but no cigar!

...and whoever wrote the article apparently doesn't know the difference between a magazine and a revolving cylinder. The Puckle gun uses a revolving cylinder, not a drum magazine.

A firearm cylinder consists of a circular array of separate firing chambers that can be individually loaded and sequentially aligned with the barrel for firing; such as in a revolver (or the Puckle gun)

A firearm drum magazine stores ammunition in a circular or spiral pattern for sequential dispensing into the single firing chamber of a pistol or repeating rifle.

On the manifest are listed significant quantities of weaponry, but of particular interest is reference to two easily identifiable artfacts in the Buccleuch Collection today: “2 Machine Guns of Puckles”.63

For that one I will give you 2 stars.

Before Gatling – Who Was The First To Invent A Rapid-Fire Gun? - MilitaryHistoryNow.com

“While the Gatling gun may be the best-known early-machine gun, the mechanical marvel was by no means the first attempt to fire lethal projectiles in volleys or in rapid succession.” ONE OF THE GREAT ironies of...

militaryhistorynow.com

 

[Auld Phart]

...forerunner of the machine gun...

...and the musket (a smooth bore long gun) was the forerunner of the rifle (rifled bore long gun). That doesn't make a musket a rifle.

Nice try but no cigar!

...and whoever wrote the article apparently doesn't know the difference between a magazine and a revolving cylinder. The Puckle gun uses a revolving cylinder, not a drum magazine.

A firearm cylinder consists of a circular array of separate firing chambers that can be individually loaded and sequentially aligned with the barrel for firing; such as in a revolver (or the Puckle gun)

A firearm drum magazine stores ammunition in a circular or spiral pattern for sequential dispensing into the single firing chamber of a pistol or repeating rifle.

Sorry bud

you lost.

 

[Flash]

 

[Auld Phart]

...forerunner of the machine gun...

...and the musket (a smooth bore long gun) was the forerunner of the rifle (rifled bore long gun). That doesn't make a musket a rifle.

Nice try but no cigar!

...and whoever wrote the article apparently doesn't know the difference between a magazine and a revolving cylinder. The Puckle gun uses a revolving cylinder, not a drum magazine.

A firearm cylinder consists of a circular array of separate firing chambers that can be individually loaded and sequentially aligned with the barrel for firing; such as in a revolver (or the Puckle gun)

A firearm drum magazine stores ammunition in a circular or spiral pattern for sequential dispensing into the single firing chamber of a pistol or repeating rifle.

Sorry bud

you lost.

Bud, I didn't write the manifest in 1722: " There is no doubt that some of the items purchased relate to the expedition funded by the 2nd Duke to St Lucia and St Vincent, which had been granted to the Duke on 20th June 1722.61 He appointed Nathaniel Uring as Deputy-Governor62 and Uring having equipped a convoy of ships, left Portsmouth on 10th September 1722. On the manifest are listed significant quantities of weaponry, but of particular interest is reference to two easily identifiable artefacts in the Buccleuch Collection today: “2 Machine Guns of Puckles” "

THEY referred to them as 'machine guns'.

Like I said before

You lost.

 

[asaratis]

...forerunner of the machine gun...

...and the musket (a smooth bore long gun) was the forerunner of the rifle (rifled bore long gun). That doesn't make a musket a rifle.

Nice try but no cigar!

...and whoever wrote the article apparently doesn't know the difference between a magazine and a revolving cylinder. The Puckle gun uses a revolving cylinder, not a drum magazine.

A firearm cylinder consists of a circular array of separate firing chambers that can be individually loaded and sequentially aligned with the barrel for firing; such as in a revolver (or the Puckle gun)

A firearm drum magazine stores ammunition in a circular or spiral pattern for sequential dispensing into the single firing chamber of a pistol or repeating rifle.

Sorry bud

you lost.

Nope. The Puckle Gun is nothing but a large, clumsy revolver on a tripod.

My question now is, why did you cut the rest of the quote off?

Here. Read this aloud to yourself.

Puckle Gun – 1718

The brainchild of an English inventor and lawyer by the name of James Puckle, the gun that bore his name was essentially an over-sized, hand-cranked revolver – invented more than 120 years before Samuel Colt’s legendary six-shooter. The weapon, also known as a defense gun, had a single barrel, behind which sat a large 11-chamber cylinder, each loaded with a 32 mm ball (about twice the diameter of a musket round) with a powder charge.

It may have been described as a machine gun on the manifest because it is described as The Machine...in the lower right corner of the patent drawing.

 

[Auld Phart]

What we consider a machine gun now, is not what they considered a machine gun then.

I have stated that several times.

It goes over your head.

as I just reposted, they were listed on the manifest as machine guns.

but, for some reason, you can't understand that.

and, somehow, I doubt you ever will.

You may as well drop the subject.

You're wrong, I proved you're wrong, and now you're just whining.

 

[j-mac]

Idiots ignore the Second Amendment as if it isn't the law that our right to keep and bear Arms, that is, to possess and carry firearms, quote, "shall not be infringed."

Does that include assault rifles whose sole purpose is to kill people? They were invented for combat.

No one is trying to take your hunting rifle away from you, or your target pistol. In fact, that is absurd. Only an idiot would believe that.

No such thing as an “Assault rifle”.

Yes there are.

Oh? What are they?

 

[j-mac]

The problem you are ignoring is this law won’t accomplish anything to stop either mass shootings or common gun crime.

Mass shootings? Libs go in for an abortion and then they show up at a Catholic "mass" demanding gun control.

I find you pro life people hypocrites. Time to worry about the people that are already here, just not the fetus anymore.

The people already here need to follow the law.