What Changed That Made 2A "Invalid"? - Page 2

What Changed That Made 2A "Invalid"?

This is a discussion on What Changed That Made 2A "Invalid"? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Dateline NEW YORK 1911: The Sullivan Act: Some History about Gun Control By Patrick Sperry The history of gun control is riddled with racism and ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 16 to 19 of 19

Thread: What Changed That Made 2A "Invalid"?

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array boscobeans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    upstate new york
    Dateline NEW YORK 1911:

    The Sullivan Act: Some History about Gun Control
    By Patrick Sperry
    The history of gun control is riddled with racism and corruption as well as outright deception. Based in elitism of one sort or another it is a subject worthy of soap opera drama that stirs the imagination.

    One of the earliest examples is New York’s Sullivan Act. Often pointed to by various advocates of the destruction of unalienable rights as some sort of morbid example of what those that know better than you do what you and your loved ones so desperately need it too is founded in corruption. One has to believe that Chuck Schumer and Frank Lautenberg both wish that they had written this law, and that their constant never ending attacks on liberty reflect that desire.

    Some years or decades ago I researched and reported on the Sullivan Act, one of America’s first gun control laws.

    New York state senator Timothy Sullivan, a corrupt Tammany Hall politician, represented New York’s Red Hook district. Commercial travelers passing through the district would be relieved of their valuables by armed robbers. In order to protect themselves and their property, travelers armed themselves. This raised the risk of, and reduced the profit from, robbery. Sullivan’s outlaw constituents demanded that Sullivan introduce a law that would prohibit concealed carry of pistols, blackjacks, and daggers, thus reducing the risk to robbers from armed victims.

    Poloiticians are no different today.


  2. #17
    Member Array MIKEV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    The Sullivan Act not withstanding (local/state? not federal?)

    It seems that the most damage or nearly all damage has been done by the following 4 government actions.

    1. NFA 1934 signed into law by FDR.
    2. GCA 1968 signed into law by LBJ.
    3. Lewis v. United States SCOTUS 1980
    Which held that 2A WAS NOT a fundemental right.
    4. FOPA 1986 signed into law by RWR.
    This banned all new production of Automatic Weapons other than
    those made for Govt/Leo use.

    what I find strange is that Miller decided that if a firearm doesn't have 'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.' it isn't protected. Yet the above listed 4 government actions excluding the lewis decision effectively took "effective" military/militia weapons out of reach of the citezenry.

    I would think that the repeal of the 3 above stated Federal laws in concert with the recent Heller decision would effect the re-instatement of 2A to the position it was intended to be.

    Or am I way off base?


    p.s. Did Reagan know what he was signing. My opinion of him has tarnished just abit.

  3. #18
    Senior Member Array Phillep Harding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    We have the lesser weapons because the technology improved and the government was able to pass laws keeping the improved weapons tech out of our hands. The voters did not think it through, some people in power did. The news and entertainment industry (singular) was complicit with this, terrifying the granny voters of all ages and genders with gratuitous violence on TV and in the news papers.

    There's a saying in the Drama classes, that if a gun is shown in the first act, someone has to get shot in the third.

  4. Remove Advertisements

  5. #19
    Distinguished Member Array Guardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Wichita Falls, Texas
    Quote Originally Posted by Faitmaker View Post
    Because at some point, someone decided that the police force was more than capable of protecting us before criminals most evil deeds became common place. Then they decided that YOU didn't need those guns anymore.

    Saw a post on the Reader website about the OC in San Diego. Para-phrasing.. "San Diego has such a large and capable police force, why would you think you need to carry a gun?" That's how we got to this point. So many people giving power over to the government to take care of them and it's not just with the guns.
    I guess San Diego never heard the SC ruling that the Police do not have to individually protect anyone.
    "I dislike death, however, there are some things I dislike more than death. Therefore, there are times when I will not avoid danger" Mencius"

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Sponsored 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. TN: "Guns haven’t changed state parks"
    By paramedic70002 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 15th, 2010, 04:36 PM
  2. Questions " Changed Address"
    By FireAir7215 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: September 15th, 2009, 12:20 PM
  3. I got "made" wearing my body armor, sort of
    By jiggz01 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: July 5th, 2006, 06:27 AM