Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
Even if I wanted to do this, I doubt I have the money to fire off that many rounds.
|
ONLY because of current prohibition laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
This argument is the sole reason I'm opposed to people owning assault weapons. Attitudes like this are insane. Sure, you have a machine gun. Great. One tank and your day is over. The only logical conclusion is either 1) we engage in a government / citizen arms race (government obviously wins since they can buy a lot more missiles than you can) or 2) we stop being ridiculous about insisting on gun ownership.
|
And this is where we let a cowardly group of people screw us. Posse Comitatus is SUPPOSED to ensure that the military would NEVER be used against the citizenry, but now all the gov has to do is make a claim of drugs being involved and BOOM, instant armored vehicles abound. I won't bother going over the people vs. military issue again since that would be beating the dead horse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
No one's trying to take your hunting rifles away, but really, do you really think that overall we'd be safer if everyone, including the idiots, had machine guns? That's just crazy.
|
How many of those 'idiots' would walk out in public and start firing, KNOWING that everybody else has a machine gun and WILL be firing back? I don't think a whole lot will, in fact, do you know how many LEGALLY owned machine guns have been used in a crime? ONE, and that one was owned by a police officer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
And that worked great when the best weapon the government could obtain was a flintlock rifle. The citizens had a chance because their weapons were as good as the government's. Now, there's absolutely no chance for the ammendment to work as you say it's intended. I buy a machine gun, Bush buys a B-52. He wins. So since there's no way the citizenry is going to overcome the power of the government, that argument is null and void.
|
dead horse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
But if the citizenry really does want to exercise their 2nd amendment rights, they should certainly buy a gun and join a well-regulated militia. Unless you're in a WELL REGULATED militia, the 2nd simply does not apply to you. Period.
|
Again, ALL of us are the well regulated militia, or at least we should be had the democrats not infringed on our rights to keep and bear arms. Well regulated does NOT mean government regulated. It also does not mean that you HAVE to be in the militia to keep and bear arms, since the militia act qualifies members of organized and unorganized militia as american citizens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
Let's boil this down. A well regulated militia. We all know what a militia is, right? It's a civilian force that answeres to the government in a time of trouble. It's not a potential insurgent force, as an insurgent force does not answer to the government. The well regulated militia is ...*drumroll*... the National Guard! Te right of the civilians (read: people) to bear arms is protected. I'm not in the militia, so I don't have the constitutional right to bear arms.
I guess we're back to kicking that dead horse again.
|
We are all the militia. one district court ruled that the militia was the national guard. This is incorrect insofar as it is only one part of the militia, the organized militia. Also, since the constitution prevents states from maintaining a standing army, the PEOPLE naturally make up the security of a free STATE by keeping and bearing arms equal to that of the standing federal army.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
Is it a problem for gun rights advocates that Bush just secretly signed into law the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007, which gives him right for to call up the National Guard of any state (with or without the approval of that state's governor) for purposes of "suppressing public disorder"?
If I were a gun advocate who was concerned about the public being able to overthrow the government if needed (versus just really liking noisy dangerous toys), I'd have a real problem with that.
|
especially since the national guard, being federalized, is no longer a state militia, therefore, the people make up the actual militia and hence the individual right shall not be infringed.
For a better look at how congress has usurped power from the people, read my signature.