Vaughner
Posts: 381
Joined: 5/30/2008
Status: offline
|
The big thing I would like to comment on here is one of the most common arguments I hear. "The forefathers couldn't have forseen X"
Yes they could have.
Why you ask? Sure a Barret M82A1 chambered in .50BMG is a far cry from anything that was used in the time of the founding fathers. However its not like they were not aware that technology advances over time. They were well aware of the fact that the musket had supplanted the capabilities of the bow and arrow. They were aware of the developments of rifled longarms and their greater abilities over previous generation muskets.
Also I knew someone would throw out the assault weapons ban. Let's take a look at that, by that law what determined if something was an assault weapon?
For Rifles it was any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable box-magazine and any two of the following.
Conspicuous Pistol Grip
Folding or Telescopic Stock
Bayonet Mount
Threaded Barrel
Grenade Launcher Mount
Now tell me how many drive-by bayonetings or drive-by grenadierings are there in the streets of LA or New York?
For Pistols it was the presence of a detachable magazine and any of the following
Detachable Magazine and 2 of the following
Magazine that extends outside of the handle (extended magazine, or designs placing the magazine ahead of the trigger)
Threaded Barrel
Barrel Shroud that could be used as a hand-hold
Unloaded weight of 50 oz or more (that is one heavy ass pistol)
Or being a semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm.
I am pretty sure it was Tim Wilson that said it best. If you get hit by 2 bullets, it doesn't really matter if 28 come after it. You're mind is pretty focused on those first 2.
For shotguns
Semi-automatic with any 2 of the following
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol Grip
Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
Detachable Magazine
The first of those is the one that most raised my eyebrow considering shotguns are already restricted on their total length as it is. While a shotgun can be legally made below this limit one cannot give any modification to an exisiting shotgun that would bring it below this limit.
Notice in every case it counts semi-automatic firearms. For those who do not know the difference semi-automatic means you fire one shot each time you pull the trigger. While automatic means it fires until you let go. In the end the ban was meant to remove those things which cosmetically resembled military assault rifles. Military assault rifles are always either full automatic or burst fire (3-5 shots per trigger pull) they are not semi-automatic like those covered in that ban were. A civilian can't just go in and buy a fully automatic firearm, you have to go through a complicated and time consuming process through the BATF to obtain a Tax Stamp on that firearm. This means you have to be approved, scrutinized, and they are going to know you have it. Can they be acquired illegally? Sure but if someone is already going to go through the trouble of acquiring an illegal firearm, addiotnal laws on that subject are not going to have any effect.
This officer explains it extremely well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9cDbA8O9-c&feature=related
Also the National Guard is not a Militia
The militia in the time of the Constitution's writing was every able-bodied male between the ages of 17 and 45. The National Guard is a military reserve operated by the States, for the purpose of law enforcement, emergency and home defense. Now there is some overlap but what differentiates the two? The National Guard is at the disposal of the President to be regularized into military service and deployed out of the country. A militia is a home gaurd force of local citizens.
It also annoys me all of the coversations about .50 caliber firearms. The most common ones out there are the .50BMG, .50AE, and .500 S&W Magnum. The most well known of these would likely be the .50AE as its principle firearm the Desert Eagle is commonly used it hollywood. Why? Because it looks mean and sounds loud. The problem is a Desert Eagle is about a foot long, is very heavy, and has recoil that nothing short of an experienced shooter can handle. These firearms are not used in crime because of their weight, their impossibility to conceal, and their difficulty to control. There is a lot of talk and fear about the .50BMG being able to be used to take down aircraft. Pardon my French but that is Bullshit. If a .50BMG was sufficient to take out an aircraft, all modern military aircraft like the F-15 Eagle, F-16 Falcon, F/A-18 Eagle, F-22 Raptor, F-35 Lightning-II, AV-8B Harrier, EuroFighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, Su-27, Su-30, Su-33, Su-34, and Su-35 would carry a .50BMG machine gun. But they don't all of them carry guns in the size of 20-30mm. A 50 caliber bullet simply doesn't have the energy to disable an aircraft even if it hits hydrolics as modern aircraft have multiple redundency in these systems. What about the fact a .50BMG can hit a target a mile away? Yeah it can do that, so can a .300 Winchester Magnum a very common hunting round. If a marksman has the skill to do it with one he can likely do it with another and the WinMag has the advantages of cost, weight, and portability.
To often people forget that what they see in the media is not bound by the contraints of reality. Anyone ever seen Terminator-2? Remember the scene when Arnold is firing the large minigun down on the cops? Why has this never happened in real life? Because a minigun is heavy, the one used in T2 is the exact same one used by Jessie Ventura in Predator. It takes men of that size to heft such a firearm to begin with. Second when firing actual rounds instead of blanks, the recoil is so intense a person trying to shoot it would literally be spun in circles by it. And three the gun is electrically operated. Arnold doesn't move during this scene because he has a powercable running down his leg out of his pants and back to a pile of car batteries. Why do I bring this up? Media is not bound by reality, and this is a perfect example. And to many of those who speak on this subject have too little knowledge of what they are actually talking about.
And for someone who wanted justification on the rational I quote Thomas Jefferson
"We must train and classify the whole of our male citizens, and make military instruction a regular part of collegiate education. We can never be safe till this is done."
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
"The Beauty of the 2nd Amendment is that it will be most needed when an attempt is made to take it."
To quote George Mason
"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
The final problem I wan't to address is the idea of gun registration. Its not a bad idea on its face but the problem is every time it has been brought forth it has lead to eventual confiscation of firearms.
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!" -Adolph Hitler; 1938 (not 1935 as if often quoted)
Every tyrannical government that has ever set has first diarmed the populace. Hitler, Stalin/Lennin/Hussein. But it goes much further back. Anyone ever seen Braveheart? "The English won't let us train with weapons, so we train with stones." This is an accurate quote.
The problem with registration is that any time it has been practiced it preceeds confiscation.
I'll digress now that everyone reading this probably thinks I'm a NRA Gun Nut (not a member, and just well educated). America was always meant to be a self-reliant nation. Ensuring that the common man was armed was a tennent of this goal. Sadly somewhere along the way much of America has forgotten how to be self-reliant. So no matter how many good points are made this is an issue that won't go away for some time.
Now I'm not saying that we have an immediate threat of the US Government becoming corrupt, but it doesn't hurt to be prepaired.
I'm not saying I lay awake worrying if someone will break into my home. But I know the Police Station is 10 minutes away, my pistol is about 8 seconds away.
The 2nd amendment protects the right of indivual citizens, even its location in the document is evidence of this. The amendments outline the rights of the populace, those things which outline on the powers of the government at federal and state level are spelled out in other portions of the Constitution.
I'm rambling now so I'll close for the time being.
< Message edited by Vaughner -- 6/24/2008 5:28:25 PM >
|
RE: The 2nd Amendment - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread