Author Topic: The right of the people to keep and bear arms... (Read 4271 times)

bulletstuffer · « **Reply #30 on:** February 19, 2013, 09:27:59 AM »

SharonAnne,

You are a great American. It is a very sad state of affairs when a person can not even understand a simple statement like

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

God Bless America!

Bulletstuffer

DDZ · « **Reply #31 on:** February 19, 2013, 11:47:09 AM »

Quote from: Mike in Virginia on February 18, 2013, 08:36:21 AM

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

That doesn't say or even imply you have a right to full auto weaopns. Neither does it say we can have tanks or handgrenades. Or rocket launchers. Or nukes. "Necessary to the security of a free state," reflects back to the immedately preceding phrase, "A well regulated militia."

You ain't the militia. You have a right to keep and bear arms, but you don't have a right to any arm you want.

As others have stated Mike, we are the militia. Do some reading and research on our history and founding documents, don't just believe what you heard on the news or what you think to be true. Go find out the truth.

We do have a right to any firearm we want, and that should include automatic firearms. What difference does it make if a law abiding citizen owns a single shot or a fully auto rifle? From your way of thinking we should only be allowed to own a front loading firearm.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #32 on:** February 19, 2013, 01:51:48 PM »

You are talking to the wrong person. Go ahead and get it. Just go ahead and buy yourself a vehicle mounted machine gun. Get a flame thrower. It's okay with me. I'm on your side. I only tried to tell you you are not going to get what you want. No banker or real estate agent or brick layer or any other regular citizen has ever had such weaponry and they never will. If you are to cheap to invest in an automatic rifle, it ain't my fault. It ain't my fault that the gov't requires special fees. If you want to berate me for what you don't and can't get, do it because I'm glad you can't have it. If YOU can have it, so can all the other weirdos who think they need it. The average person cannot be trusted with such stuff. That's why the fees are applied to those who want a fully automatic rifle. The gov't can't look closely into your background for free. If you think they should NOT look into your background to allow you to have fully automatic weapons and explosives, then you are not responsible enough to have them. This ain't 1776. This is NOW. Each of us is a spec in the totality human population. You as an individual cannot have an aircraft carrier. Again, it's not my fault. If you want a fully auto .50 caliber rifle that's belt fed with unlimited rounds, IT AIN'T MY FAULT that you don't have it. Go ahead and get it. Good luck.

tom548 · « **Reply #33 on:** February 19, 2013, 01:54:38 PM »

If you read some of the papers written at the time of the Constitution by the founding fathers, they did mean for us the people to be armed and as well as the standing army and with sufficient ammo to protect our freedom. In those days it was a single shot ML. But today that would be a minimum of a semi auto and even a full auto and much bigger if you follow their thoughts on the subject. If we loose any more 2ND Amendment rights I feel it could be the beginning of the end of freedom as we know it. They don't like the 2ND because it takes much of their power away to do as they want.

Oldshooter · « **Reply #34 on:** February 19, 2013, 02:35:27 PM »

Sorry mike, but we all know of the things of which you speak, no one here but you think we want nukes and flame throwers . You are coming off like a Barney fife that has his bull it in his pocket and wants no else to have one. It's us against them right, us being all the self righteous Leo's who think like the gooberment that we need them and you to look out for us. Who's gonna protect us against YOU.

I have no problem with a background check but oppressive fees that prohibit ownership is just prohibition ?

m-g Willy · « **Reply #35 on:** February 19, 2013, 04:10:07 PM »

Quote from: yellowtail3 on February 16, 2013, 07:11:16 AM

Quote from: Mike in Virginia on February 14, 2013, 01:17:30 PM
If you are non-police and non-military, your semi-auto will serve you just fine. No one is going to take you out because you don't have a full auto.

Police should definitely have 'em. Who knws what they'll come up against.
My semi-auto probably will be sufficient. I'd agree. On the subject of okay for cops, not for me? Well... I'm so comforted by police hosing down innocent citizens driving pickups, with impunity. I'm not qualified to have a full-auto AR, but they are?

nuts.

WHAT!!!
I didn't think I'd ever say this.
But I agree with you 100% on this one!

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #36 on:** February 20, 2013, 07:11:44 AM »

I see what you're talking about now. You're saying the 2nd is only about small arms--the right of the people to keep and bear small arms shall not be infringed. You're saying the amendment has a cut off point concerning the size and complexity of the arms we have a right to carry.

jhm · « **Reply #37 on:** February 20, 2013, 10:18:11 AM »

Mike in Va. so now we are WEIRDOS instead of THEM, and you know our financial position in life also, well my friend I am not going to tell you what I am worth, but there are a few on this site that know me personally and they have a pretty good idea where I stand, you might take heed of some of your thoughts as on several occasions you have slandered several people on this site and we still have allowed you to stay on. I am beginning to see why you are NO LONGER in law enforcement if you ever were. Jim

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #38 on:** February 20, 2013, 11:01:59 AM »

What are you talking about? I've expressed no interest in how much money you have or don't have. And no you don't see why I'm retired. Don't say things like that.

jhm · « **Reply #39 on:** February 21, 2013, 07:28:04 AM »

MIV just go back to your post reguarding banker bricklayers etc. etc. and I am sure you will see your AROGANCE in bold print. Jim

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #40 on:** February 21, 2013, 08:17:15 AM »

Say something nice sometime. BTW, arrogance has two r's.

jhm · « **Reply #41 on:** February 21, 2013, 09:41:54 AM »

The NICE part was I see why you are no longer in law enforcement! If you ever were? Jim

JPShelton · « **Reply #42 on:** February 21, 2013, 02:47:20 PM »

Quote from: Mike in Virginia on February 19, 2013, 01:51:48 PM

The average person cannot be trusted with such stuff.

Sure they can, and they should be in a free society that values liberty and the power of the individual over the primacy of the State.

Quote

If you think they should NOT look into your background to allow you to have fully automatic weapons and explosives, then you are not responsible enough to have them.

Color me "irresponsible" then, because I don't think a citizen in a fee society should have to have their background explored by government to exercise a right, and I think private ownership of fully automatic small arms falls within the orginal scope and intent of the Second Ammendment.

Quote

This ain't 1776. This is NOW.

True, but tyrany never goes out of style. As long as there are people who think they know more about what another person should own, do, think, say, or believe in than that other person does, the threat of tyrany will always be with us. And in the here and now, tyrany is as close at hand as a fellow citizen who has chosen not to exercise their Second Ammendment right, yet absent of any practical knowledge of small arms, has no restraint in telling me how I should go about exercising it and what small arms I "need" or "don't need" or "can be trusted with" or "can't be trusted with."

Quote

Each of us is a spec in the totality human population.

Not true. Virtually everyone born with normal faculties has the capacity to achieve great things on the basis of their own individual drive, ambitions, talents, and abilities. In a free society, you can be a blazing meteor if you want to be, or you can succumb to the notion that you're an irrelevant speck if you chose to, but that's your choice and it is flawed to assume that your chosen destiny is everyone else's designed purpose.
JP

SharonAnne · « **Reply #43 on:** February 22, 2013, 01:19:07 PM »

I am not a speck. I am a free, thinking American citizen. Just as I have no need to explain my First, Third, Fourth etc. Rights I do not need to explain my Second Amendment Rights. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights does anyone have to express a NEED for expressing those Rights.
Some people need to READ the Bill of Rights. Nowhere is a need ever written into my God Given Rights.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #44 on:** February 22, 2013, 01:48:46 PM »

God given? God gave us the 2nd Amendentment? Might you provide some scripture to back that up?
And Jim, I'm going to have to ask you to stop talking ugly. You might have to consider banning yourself.

Deadeye63 · « **Reply #45 on:** February 22, 2013, 01:49:02 PM »

Every one of my weapons were purchased legally. Semi auto, Bolt, and lever action LEGAL each and everyone. I abide by the US Constitution, I live by it, And BY GOD I`ll die by it! Be it known here and now I will not give up any of my guns! I will NOT for any purpose of retaining affore mentioned ownership of said weapons submit for inspection or thereby "register" any of same. The many background checks I have been "approved to proceed" should in itself speak volumes for my good character. The content of my locked and secured gun safe is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS! I will resentfully allow any Law Enforcement Officer to visually verify (externally only) that I indeed have a suitable gun safe upon receipt of a valid WARRANT duly signed by a sworn judge in good standing. That should pretty much outline my views and understanding of my Constitutional rights. I`m sure I have been less than thorough, But if there are any legitimate legal minds reading this please feel free to suggest addendums.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #46 on:** February 22, 2013, 02:16:27 PM »

Deadeye, you are correct. Admit no "official" into your home. Even if you must because he has a warrant, do not answer his questions.
The only problem is, if any particular weapon we have becomes illegal to possess, we can't use them except in an emergency. But still, don't give then up. I see the time coming when we will need them, a time when the nation has degraded itself into a place where only those with firepower will stay alive.
Recent lies by Obama have proven we are headed for serious conflict. I'm convinced he is a Muslim on the side of terrorists.

JonnyReb · « **Reply #47 on:** February 22, 2013, 02:53:27 PM »

Quote from: Mike in Virginia on February 14, 2013, 01:17:30 PM

I'd like to have a full auto, but I ain't about to pay the fees. Besides, neither myself nor you need one. The day will never, I mean NEVER, that you will need it. If you are non-police and non-military, your semi-auto will serve you just fine. No one is going to take you out because you don't have a full auto.

Police should definitely have 'em. Who knws what they'll come up against.

Odd that 10 posts earlier you said this Mike, are they coming to get us or not?

Oldshooter · « **Reply #48 on:** February 22, 2013, 02:55:53 PM »

JonnyReb · « **Reply #49 on:** February 22, 2013, 03:07:53 PM »

Quote from: Androclese on February 16, 2013, 06:02:30 PM

Quote from: JonnyReb on February 13, 2013, 05:33:27 PM
Not that I don't agree with your point of full auto accessability for the common man, but I believe that with the right permits, fees and background checks, your welcome to own full auto assault weapons. I did a construction job for a local ATF agent a decade or so ago, who told me he'd gladly run my paperwork through to allow me to purchase a full auto. I think it was 200 bucks and some paperwork. He'd background check me and i'd get the permit. I went so far as to look for a suitable weapon, driving to a shop in kings mt. N.C that specialized in class 3 weapons. The prices astounded me and I left. Never thought about it much since but unless the law has changed I think its just a matter of some hassle and some money. Jeff

The Form 4 transfer is not a permit, or a license, its just a transfer of ownership much the same as for an automobile. Before anyone can process your paperwork at a Federal level it must be first signed off by local law enforcement, Police chief, city/District attorney, county Sheriff or Attorney, Commander of the State Police, or State's attorney General They will perform a records check of the applicant, and if there is nothing disqualifying in that report, they will sign the papers saying so. Then it has to go to BATFE along with the finger print cards, and Mugshots and $200 transfer tax (Postal Money Order) Then the FBI does an investigation, clasifies your prints, and pictures, and if all is well the transfer will be approved. All of these things must happen before approval can be made, so all a friendly agent might do is speed things up a bit (3 months instead of as much as 9)
Prices are the problem, but you might find a private owner wishing to sell for a more reasonable price, and the form 4 process is the same for private transfers, as for dealer transfers. Local police will usually provide finger print cards (2) and print you, for a fee. Walgreens Passport pictures will serve for the mugshots. further, there are regulations for moving Class III or destructive device firearms across State lines, application for permission to do so must be made, and received before such weapons can be transported to another State. Some States have their own additional regulations, so you'll want to check that out before you start doing the lumber work.

Hey thanks so much for the great explanation and for taking the time to put it all down. Personally, there's NO WAY I'll be affording one, not anymore, but it was fun to at least go shopping for one. J

JonnyReb · « **Reply #50 on:** February 22, 2013, 03:09:52 PM »

Quote from: Oldshooter on February 22, 2013, 02:55:53 PM

yellowtail3 · « **Reply #51 on:** February 23, 2013, 03:02:29 AM »

Quote from: JPShelton on February 21, 2013, 02:47:20 PM

Quote from: Mike in Virginia on February 19, 2013, 01:51:48 PM
The average person cannot be trusted with such stuff.
Sure they can, and they should be in a free society that values liberty and the power of the individual over the primacy of the State.
Quote
If you think they should NOT look into your background to allow you to have fully automatic weapons and explosives, then you are not responsible enough to have them.
Color me "irresponsible" then, because I don't think a citizen in a fee society should have to have their background explored by government to exercise a right, and I think private ownership of fully automatic small arms falls within the orginal scope and intent of the Second Ammendment..... .... .... ...

fine poast

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #52 on:** February 23, 2013, 05:06:50 AM »

I know Johnny. A conrtradiction. His lies over the sequester has turned my direction. He is a stupid stupid person to tell such blatant lies and to think even the liberals will not see it. His goal is to get ALL guns. If he will so clearly lie, we can't trust anything he says. When he says we can keep our single shot shotgunss for hunting, he will eventually go for those also. He is allied closely with the nations that hate us, and he is staffing his office with those of his ilk. I no longer doubt that he wants us completely unarmed. When he leaves office, his evil notions will be so entrenched we'll never be shed of them.

JonnyReb · « **Reply #53 on:** February 23, 2013, 06:05:04 AM »

Quote from: Mike in Virginia on February 23, 2013, 05:06:50 AM

I know Johnny. A conrtradiction. His lies over the sequester has turned my direction. He is a stupid stupid person to tell such blatant lies and to think even the liberals will not see it. His goal is to get ALL guns. If he will so clearly lie, we can't trust anything he says. When he says we can keep our single shot shotgunss for hunting, he will eventually go for those also. He is allied closely with the nations that hate us, and he is staffing his office with those of his ilk. I no longer doubt that he wants us completely unarmed. When he leaves office, his evil notions will be so entrenched we'll never be shed of them.

Well only 4 to go

, I look forward to less diversion on future threads

Now how bout them full autos?

SharonAnne · « **Reply #54 on:** February 23, 2013, 08:05:51 AM »

the Bill of Rights guarantees to "keep and bear arms". When obama and John Lott Jr. were professors at the University of Chicago the first time they met, obama told Lott straight out that he believed Americans had no right to own a gun. Now the liar-in-chief says otherwise. he got where he wanted, the White House, no he lies his way to his goal, total disarmament. a skunk cannot change its stripes.

SharonAnne · « **Reply #55 on:** February 23, 2013, 08:31:54 AM »

miv has been quoted so many times I went back and read what he had posted. He asks where in Scripture we can find our God Given Rights. Perhaps he needs to read a bit more. "and Jesus said he who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one". Sure seems like a God given right to self defense. To quote the Declaration of Independence "they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights". The Bill of Rights enumerated Some of those Rights but obviously not all. To claim God has not given us rights if they cannot be found in Scripture is to ignore history. God did not stop talking to us 2,000 years ago. Some just do not know how to listen.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #56 on:** February 23, 2013, 11:24:41 AM »

I'm sorry Sharon, but that single verses is not proof that God gave us gun rights. We have gun rights from the 2nd. Maybe you know the scriptures better than I and maybe you can find something else. ". . . certain inalienable rights" is from a gov't document. I'll stand with anyone to keep those gov't given rights set forth in the Constitution, but I don't fool myself into believing it's God inspired. The Constitution is the basis of what America was meant to be, but it was drafted by politicians of the day. I believe in it, I live by its truths, and I'm glad I'm not in a country without a Constitution.
If you can find another scripture, I'll be glad to consider it, but as far as I know, political rights and rights granted by God are not always the same. I'm going to do a search on the verse you quoted and see if you have used it out of context.

Mike in Virginia · « **Reply #57 on:** February 23, 2013, 12:00:06 PM »

Okay, 'tis as I thought. You used the verse out of context. You quoted part of Luke 22:36. This is the last supper chapter, when Jesus knew Judas was about to betray him, that He was taking his last food and drink before entering the Kingdom. He was about to leave his disciples, and they were to enter into a new phase of service to Him. They would now have to face hunger and poverty and danger, and it would be necessary for them to make provision. They should now take a money bag, a knapsack or lunch box, and the absence of a sword they should sell their clothes and buy one. What did our Savior mean when He told them to buy a sword? It is clear he did not intend for them to use the sword as an offensive weapon against other people. That would be in violation of His teachings, such as:
"My Kingdom is not of this world. If My Kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight."
"All who take the sword will perish by the sword."
"Love your enemies."
"Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also."

I don't mean to say I know what He meant. Some say he referred to the protection of an ordered gov't, concerning that in Romans 13:4 about the power of a magistrate.
Matthew 5:39 seems to rule out the use of the sword event or defensive purposes.
The next verse, Luke 22:37, explains it further: Soon he would be departing from them according to propehecy. The things concerning Him had "an end." That is, His earthly ministry would come to a close by his being numbered with the transgressors.
22:38 - The disciples completely misunderstood Him. They brought forth two swords, implying that these would be sufficient for any problems ahead. They apparently thought they could foil the attempt by His enemies to slay Him, by using the swords. THATWAS THE FARTHEREST THING FROM HIS MIND, as he certainly knew what was coming.
You cannot use that verse in defense of your rights--rights that were given to you by the 2nd Amendment. As I said, I belive in the Amendment, but I don't give it more credence than it has on its own. It is what it is and that's all it is.

Deadeye63 · « **Reply #58 on:** February 23, 2013, 12:56:30 PM »

MinV, I`m somewhat confused by your query. You`ve indicated you believe in the Constitution without reservation yet you seek validation of someones belief that our rights are "God given". Do you believe there to be some ambiguity either by fault or design of our founding fathers? I`ve read the "Declaration", "Constitution", and "Bill of Rights" I saw absolutely no reason to think there was anything but righteous intent when the documents were drafted. Perhaps the premise that our rights are God given is based on and ONLY on faith. To me, dismissal of that faith is to imply that the ideals we hold dearest are`nt actually worth the paper they are printed on.

jhm · « **Reply #59 on:** February 24, 2013, 06:47:47 AM »

MIV from what I have been reading here the Majority of the posts are against YOUR kinda thinking, again I say I see now why YOU are no longer in law enforcement If you were ever a LEO, you have some of their mindset however little or no common sence to go with it. Jim