No select fire is a violation of our rights... why cant we get them back?

This is a discussion on No select fire is a violation of our rights... why cant we get them back? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by mlr1m The founding fathers had no problem with citizens owning muskets and dueling pistols. These were the very same arms issued to ...

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 121 to 123 of 123

Thread: No select fire is a violation of our rights... why cant we get them back?

  1. #121
    Member Array HerbM's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by mlr1m View Post
    The founding fathers had no problem with citizens owning muskets and dueling pistols. These were the very same arms issued to troops in that day. They did not place restrictions on guns used by civilians that would make them any less lethal than the arms solders of the day were equipped with.
    They knew that the people needed weapons that would be capable if needed to counter any that might be used against them.

    Michael
    No, they did not fail to allow for technology development -- they were amazingly prescient. By adding the militia phrase they made sure the CONTEXT would always be (at least) those weapons needed by (and commonly issued) to the inidividual infantryman and now the police.

    At the time, there was no police as we know them now, but our current para-military style police also set a minimum set of arms and those that are similar that MUST be protected as part of the individual pre-existing right to bear arms.

    Our right to bear arms is important -- necessary -- to a free state (i.e., nation, country) because it ensures that the militia (the body of the people) are available, already trained, and possessing arms to be called to supplement the military (or para-military) forces that protect the Constitution and the nation.

    All this would be true even if the Court had not long since declared that our rights extend to modern technology, such as telephones, computers, television, radio, modern printing presses etc.

    It would be true even if the Heller decision did not explicitly say that the right to keep and bear arms applies to ""all instruments that constitute bearable arms."

    All bearable arms, including automatic firearms.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #122
    Member Array romansten9's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    165
    Quote Originally Posted by BikerRN View Post
    I'm of two opinions about this.

    The first, select fire weapons available to the general populace, I strongly support.

    I believe that if the military has it, we as the controlers and overseers of the military by whom we elect to office, should be allowed to own anything the military has. We are the rulers of our elected represenatives, in theory at least, and should have the same access to the same tools that those they oversee in our stead have.

    The second, and practical application of the idea leads me to believe that while some of us here would be able to handle the responsibility of owning and using fully automatic weapons, the majority of the populace is too stupid to be entrusted with as much as a water pistol.

    There in lies the conundrum of finding a balance between the two extremes. Personally I would favor being able to buy any weapon, fully automatic, select-fire, or single shot without any paperwork, tax stamps or fees beyond the cost of the weapon itself.

    Biker
    I can see what you are saying here. However, I don't think we need to limit certain guns just because some people are stupid with them. (we don't need more gun laws) We already have laws to arrest people that act stupid with their guns! Keep in mind that there are a lot of "dangerous weapons" (so to speak) in this world that are not restricted. Anybody can buy a car or motorcycle capable of going over 200 MPH. (money permitting of course) We have all seen people that can't handle the responsibility of owning these vehicles. However, people that own them can drive them as fast as they want (on a closed course, with safety gear) and avoid getting arrested. In a similar way, people that own weapons can use them at a range and be safe. People that use them unsafely in public will be punished. Cars kill way more people than guns, yet there are no laws restricting the purchase of "certain" cars. Its quite unfair when you think about it. According to the 2nd Amendment, our gun rights should be every bit as free as our right to own cars, if not more!

  4. #123
    Member Array HerbM's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    42
    And in fact, there is NO requirement to have a "license to drive" or to "register an automobile" in most states.

    You only have to take those steps if you wish to operate the automobile on the public roads.

    You can own a car without that.

    And of course that is all without there being an explicit enumeration of the Right to Keep and Bear autos.

    --
    HerbM

Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Dont argue but ... this is why we need 2a fully opened and select fire.
    By tangoseal in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: September 8th, 2010, 02:09 AM
  2. Dont argue but ... this is why we need 2a fully opened and select fire.
    By tangoseal in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: September 6th, 2010, 01:26 PM
  3. Gun Control: The Ultimate Human Rights Violation
    By DaveH in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 3rd, 2010, 07:23 PM
  4. Rules Against City of New York for Violation of Constitutional Rights
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 16th, 2009, 09:28 PM
  5. Lou Dobbs: Rights under fire
    By BlackPR in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: February 23rd, 2009, 04:57 AM

Search tags for this page

bearable arms

,

register select fire weapons

Click on a term to search for related topics.