Firearms

Started by Peter, Dec 24, 2012, 12:20 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Peter


High-powered, militarily useful weapons are the point of the Second Amendment.


by
Bob Owens




The brutal murders of 20 schoolchildren and six adults in Newtown, CT, stunned the world last week. A mentally ill young man apparently discovered that his long-suffering mother was going to attempt to have him committed to a psychiatric facility; he took out his rage upon her and then his former elementary school's faculty, staff, and students.

It was senseless. It was barbaric. As parents, it is difficult for us to cope with the thought of having our youngest beloved ripped from us by any method, much less something as abhorrent as intentional, callous murder. No decent person could feel anything but anguish for their loss.

As Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel warned us, however, there is a mentality among the opportunistic political class that demands they "never let a serious crisis go to waste."

While America recoiled, media vultures first pounced upon the survivors while they were still in shock. Since then, they have attacked America's lawful gun owners, of which there are roughly 100 million.

We've heard calls for "gun control" in recent days, including specific demands for a ban on so-called "assault weapons." Detractors question the need for weapons "designed for war" whose "only purpose is to kill"; they insist that you "don't need an assault rifle" for hunting deer.

This is ignorance, and further, completely misses the point. To cite something I wrote earlier in the week:

    The Second Amendment was not written to protect firearms designed for the taking of game, nor firearms designed for sport or individual personal defense, except that such a purpose proves to be militarily useful.

    The explicit purpose that the Second Amendment was written was so that civilians that comprised the militia and alarm list would be armed with military-capable arms to depose would-be tyrants.

I'd amend that slightly to more accurately reflect that the intention was to arm citizens with contemporary arms of military utility. To assert that the right applied merely to flintlock muskets suggests that human rights are superseded by advances in technology, which is on its face a preposterous statement. Could anyone rationally argue that freedom of speech does not apply to modern forms of communication?

The Second Amendment was written to ensure citizens had contemporary rifles of military utility, and no single rifle more accurately fits that description today than AR-15 rifles patterned after the M-16 rifle and M-4 carbine that have been the U.S. military standard for half a century.

If Americans are interested in adhering to the Founders' intentions for a "well-regulated militia" as envisioned, it is our duty not to just own firearms (with exceptions made for religious, mental, and physical limitations), but to own AR-15 rifles and accessories and to train with them to an agreed upon standard of competency. This competency (and proficiency) is what the Founders meant by the term "well-regulated," which in the English of the day meant "smoothly functioning."

An unorganized militia's military efficiency can be measured a number of ways, but the most easy and logical to measure is to require a certain minimal level of equipment and to judge proficiency with military-capable firearms.

As previous militias were required to maintain a minimal level of stores, a modern contemporary militia would want to be equipped with the following:

    an AR-15 rifle or carbine, with iron sights or optics
    at least four but preferably seven or more 30-round magazines
    a chest rig or bandolier for carrying loaded magazines
    a constantly maintained reserve of 1,000 rounds of full-metal jacket (FMJ) ammunition for training and service use if called upon
    appropriate seasonal clothing
    a first aid kit (preferably an individual first aid kid, or IFAK)
    food, water, and temporary shelter for three days

The traditional way to measure weapons proficiency is a marksmanship test such as the Army Rifle Qualification Test or the Marine Rifle Qualification Test. A variant of this test commonly used today is the 25-meter Army Qualification Test (AQT) as administered during Project Appleseed events, which itself is based upon World War I riflemanship standards (disclosure -- the author is an Appleseed instructor) but adapted and scaled to fit a 25-meter range.

Ideally, citizens should be able to use AR-15s or comparable arms to demonstrate proficiency at 100 yards, 200 yards, 300 yards, and 400 yards either on the scaled 25-meter range or, where available, an actual known distance (KD) range. Such training does not constitute violations of the law in regards to the establishment of private militias, yet still ensures a level of firearms proficiency among the general population that serves the deterrent effect the Founders intended: to dissuade the undermining of the republic by enemies "foreign and domestic." The thought of engaging a nation with tens of millions of self-equipped riflemen capable of decimating government forces from nearly a quarter-mile away is chilling to any would-be tyrant.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is the last line of defense against tyranny and, far from being a colonial relic, was most recently used in 1946 in several areas as returning GIs took on tyrannical local government machines. The most significant of these, the "McMinn County War," saw young veterans home from World War II depose a corrupt and tyrannical government using military arms.

Eleanor Roosevelt wrote at the time of this morally required insurrection:

    We in the U.S.A., who have long boasted that, in our political life, freedom in the use of the secret ballot made it possible for us to register the will of the people without the use of force, have had a rude awakening as we read of conditions in McMinn County, Tennessee, which brought about the use of force in the recent primary. If a political machine does not allow the people free expression, then freedom-loving people lose their faith in the machinery under which their government functions.

    In this particular case, a group of young veterans organized to oust the local machine and elect their own slate in the primary. We may deplore the use of force but we must also recognize the lesson which this incident points for us all. When the majority of the people know what they want, they will obtain it.

    Any local, state or national government, or any political machine, in order to live, must give the people assurance that they can express their will freely and that their votes will be counted. The most powerful machine cannot exist without the support of the people. Political bosses and political machinery can be good, but the minute they cease to express the will of the people, their days are numbered.

    This is a lesson which wise political leaders learn young, and you can be pretty sure that, when a boss stays in power, he gives the majority of the people what they think they want. If he is bad and indulges in practices which are dishonest, or if he acts for his own interests alone, the people are unwilling to condone these practices.

    When the people decide that conditions in their town, county, state or country must change, they will change them. If the leadership has been wise, they will be able to do it peacefully through a secret ballot which is honestly counted, but if the leader has become inflated and too sure of his own importance, he may bring about the kind of action which was taken in Tennessee.

A former first lady of the United States condoned insurrection to restore constitutional law, and against corrupt local representatives of her own Democratic Party. She knew a history uncorrupted by modern-day revisionism.

In the days after April 19, 1775, Founding Father Samuel Adams trod the road between Lexington and Concord at the carnage wrought when British General Thomas Gage triggered the American Revolutionary War while attempting to impose gun control on the Colonials. Surveying the burned-out buildings, bloody lanes, shot-pocked walls, and bodies awaiting burial, he remarked:

    If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Now is not a time for those whom Thomas Paine labeled "sunshine patriots." The republic will stand or fall based upon whether its citizens choose to defend the Constitution. Let us pray that all Americans realize the stakes in play, and act with calm restraint.

BM-NByw7VE2PwjfTtsVdeE5ipuqx1AqkEv1

Peter

... so still time to send a message to Old Nick and propose some suitable weaponry.

If you do not trust his taste of firearms, there is still some time do do your own Christmas shopping.

BM-NByw7VE2PwjfTtsVdeE5ipuqx1AqkEv1

PaulGuelph

#2
Dec 25, 2012, 02:55 PM Last Edit: Dec 25, 2012, 09:25 PM by PaulGuelph
Well ... really its your business. Get as many guns as you like.

I am really just interested in MRA stuff, so there's no point getting everybody riled up for nothing.

(edited)
Men's Movie Guide:  http://www.mensmovieguide.com   The Healing Tomb: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B081N1X145

User 0

The nuke arguement is ridiculous.  Governments HAVE nukes, they don't USE nukes.  The only difference between a nation of citizens and a vast slave plantation whose residents enjoy any liberties entirely and solely at the leisure of the government that owns them is the ability of the populace to defend itself against the government. 

I truly cannot fathom the mindset of people who are so eager to give up the most basic right that every animal on the planet has.  I also pity those people.  The savage truth about the right to defend one's self (whether against the government or criminals whom don't obey the law) is that no one can ever take it away from you.  You can give it up, or you may die in the practice of it, but no one can EVER take it away from you.

I really wish there was somewhere left in the world that wasn't a socialist or religious shithole. 

Let's just blame the guns, though, eh Paul? 

Virtue

Quote
I am really just interested in MRA stuff, so there's no point getting everybody riled up for nothing.


Gun Control is a feminist cause.
Imagine waking up tomorrow to find
that unbelievably rape is now legal.

You would be freaking out, telling everyone you ran into this is crazy- something needs to be done... now!!! And then every man you told this to just very smugly and condescendingly says...

"Hey... not all men are 'like that.'"

dr e

Gun control reminds me of the rest of the feminist/left's agenda.  Go into the home and control every aspect you want.  Family courts enters the home to control who gets barred from their children.  That is such a bizarre concept I can't believe it is so common place.  VAWA goes into the home to control any arguments that might take place withthe explicit intention of protecting only women.  Gun control goes into the home to take the guns out of one's household. Go into the home and decide who will go to college.  Go into the home and disdain fathers and sons while you celebrate the wonder of women and girls.  Affirmative action, all manner of laws that favor women and screw males.  Gun control is the same thing only different.  If obama and biden want it you know it as got to go against the desires and needs of men. 
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

outdoors

All gun laws in Canada are a distinct attack on an identifiable group of people-men.

BRIAN


Well ... really its your business. Get as many guns as you like.

I am really just interested in MRA stuff, so there's no point getting everybody riled up for nothing.

(edited)


A man must be able to to be free from tyrany and secure his rights. The right to bear arms in defense of ones self is an MRA issue.
You may sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence upon those who seek to harm you.

Virtue

Imagine waking up tomorrow to find
that unbelievably rape is now legal.

You would be freaking out, telling everyone you ran into this is crazy- something needs to be done... now!!! And then every man you told this to just very smugly and condescendingly says...

"Hey... not all men are 'like that.'"

Peter

#9
Dec 31, 2012, 06:43 AM Last Edit: Dec 31, 2012, 06:53 AM by Peter
I saw this shit first time a few years ago and it was immediately obvious that using square patterns in camouflage is an imbecile idea, whatever yout "theory" (blending of colours in the eye of the viewer) says. Ha, did they think that it would fool a computer vision system because it uses "pixels"? Idiots.

I would be rich, if someone would have asked me and if they would have taken my answer seriously and if they had paid me 1/1000 th of the money saved when my answer had stopped the project.

Zero probability for any if passing.


No study, no research needed, just common sense.

$5B CAMO SNAFU

:bawl:
BM-NByw7VE2PwjfTtsVdeE5ipuqx1AqkEv1

PaulGuelph

Oh well, much bigger mistakes have been made.

- Bank deregulation
- Iraq invasion
- Space Shuttle launch when engineers said 'no!'

The problem with the uniforms was that they ignored science, but followed some marketing idea.
Men's Movie Guide:  http://www.mensmovieguide.com   The Healing Tomb: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B081N1X145

Libertariandadd

'It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.' George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Libertariandadd

Why does the cast of characters get more & more bizzare?
Sandy Hook Hoax "Medical Examiner" Wayne Carver
'It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.' George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Libertariandadd

'It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy.' George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four


Go Up