Slashdot Mirror

How many times do we have to go over this?

The layers of gun nut propaganda and selective reading are quite thick, so many, many times. Unfortunately.

The "militia" in the time of the founders consisted of all able-bodied men.

A well regulated militia. A collective group of people, not every Burt Gummer sitting at home polishing his dick extender.

Also, if you read the history behind it, defense against tyranny was absolutely a consideration.

Absolute delusion. Treason:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Suspension of habeas corpus:

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Calling forth the militia:

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

Tell me again how the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to resist tyranny from the federal government, when exercising that so-called right will see the government legally, constitutionally call forth the militia to suppress your rebellion, throw you in prison without a warrant or a trial, and finally, with two witnesses, see you swinging from a tree for Treason.

You mean the originalists who were clearly intending that the right be reserved to the people?

People, collective via regulated militias. Not an individual right to own dick extenders that will see you labeled a traitor and thrown in prison without a trial if you use the 2nd Amendment the way you think it was meant to be used.

The originalists who clearly stated repeatedly in the Federalist Papers

Fuck the federalist papers. It's one set of opinions from one set of elitist proto-wingnuts, nothing more, nothing less. They aren't words handed down by Alan Rickman from god herself.

You don't know what "well regulated" and "militia" mean in regards to the framer's intent.

Neither do you, obviously.

The framers DID NOT WANT A GOVERNMENT RUN MILITIA.

States, genius, not feds. This is second grade civics here.

You can read the Federalist Papers, which are the notes and thoughts of the framers during the time of the Constitution.

Federalist Papers == toilet paper. It's one set of opinions from one group of people, not word handed down from God.

GUNS ARE PROTECTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

The greatest gun nut delusion of them all. If that were the case, the Constitution wouldn't have defined Treason as making war against the government, or allow Congress to suspend habeas corpus in times of rebellion. You use your dick extender the way you think the 2nd Amendment allows you to do, the government can accuse you of treason and lock your ass up indefinitely, if you survive the initial shootout.

when habeas corpus may be suspended

Have you "read up" on this? With regards to the suspension of habeas corpus, if the government is tyrannical and the people rise up and use their dick extenders to secure a free state then it isn't a "rebellion". Now, tyrannical governments being what they are will call it a rebellion - in which case you have a civil war on your hands. Either side can make whatever arbitrary edicts they like and the "legitimate" edicts are those of the winner.

This is nice article touching on the subject

Ahh. A sophist. "Militia" doesn't mean what you think it means, and a prefatory clause isn't binding.

A projectionist. And if you're going to be pedantic, get retentive over "state", not "militia".

As a self professed liberal, do you also support other laws which would restrict civil liberties? How about the 1st A? It starts with "Congress shall make no law...". So, that means that the States (which definitely aren't "Congress") can make laws establishing religion, restricting speech and press, etc. Right?

Where in the first amendment is there wording on regulation? All you have here is hand waiving and false equivalencies.

Living in a system with the fundamental principles of freedom and liberty means you accept more risk. Fortunately for you, you can move to almost anywhere else and trade that freedom and liberty for less risk and more security. Your choice.

You mean places like other western countries with as much or more freedoms and none of the gun violence? Not helping your case here, slick. Oh, and gun nuts should stop polishing their dick extenders long enough to read up on treason in the Constitution and when habeas corpus may be suspended. Defend your freedum with firearms, and the government is Constitutionally allowed to call you a traitor and throw your ass in prison without a warrant or a trial.

Keeping politicians afraid of an uprising is a perfectly legitimate use. And, yes, scary guns are better at that.

Lulz. Ask the Confederates how well that worked out for them, and they had an army, equivalent weapons, and the best generals. How are you and your fellow Wolverines going to fend off Predator Drones with your dick extenders?

Bullshit.

If you're referring to your butthurt, delusional, irrelevant ammosexual delusions (as if a 1939 court case has Jack or shit to do with what the 2nd had "always" meant), then yes. You were so busy kneejerking that gun cult crap that you didn't bother to actually address the actual point:

Gun cultists, always trying to have it both ways. Modern definition, when it suits you, 18th century definition that you pulled out of your ass, when it suits you.

If you want to change the second amendment, create an amendment and get the states to approve it, until you do so, the second amendment protects everyone's rights to own a firearm, even former felons and the mentally ill.

And you and all of your ammosexual friends can get together to start your own move to amend the Constitution, to take out the words "a well regulated militia". So you cultists can finally stop ignoring the first words in your Bible.

It even covers tanks and fighter jets if you can afford the stamp and the item.

You forgot nuclear weapons! Thanks for confirming the batshit insanity of your chosen cult. Now, why don't you go over to the story on Oklahoma troopers performing asset forfeiture on gift and credit cards, and tell everyone how you're going to singlehandedly stand up to these fascists with your dick extender, and live to tell the tale.

Neato.

I actually wasn't aware of the Model 700 in Titanium ... although I've fired a different ultra-lightweight rifle: a Bushmaster Carbon 15 Type 97S. It uses a steel barrel and bolt assembly (bolt, bolt carrier, etc.), but replaces the upper and lower receiver, plus most of the hardware, with carbon fiber. It's 4.3 lbs unloaded, claimed to be 5.3 with a loaded 30-rd mag. It's an interesting concept, but even with the big AR-15 style recoil buffer system, it's a bit obnoxious to shoot. But rather than go with titanium, they retain the minimum number of steel components necessary, and then use carbon fiber everywhere that doesn't have to withstand tremendous amounts of force.

There is definitely a market for ultra-lightweight firearms, don't get me wrong, but I think it's basically been filled with today's technology. I don't think that it's being hampered much by the price of raw titanium -- I have a feeling that the metal is one of the smaller input costs into the making of a firearm, compared to labor and overhead on the factory / machines / etc., but I could be wrong. It is cool, though, that they can actually make the receiver out of titanium; you can't do that with aluminum (at least not that I'm aware of) or carbon fiber.

The AWB does not ban these - they are covered under an earlier law which does not expire (they can still be owned under certain onerous conditions).

The AWB, despite its name, actually covers semi-automatic rifles which resemble to certain assault rifles. Semis fire only one bullet each time the trigger is pulled, in the same way that a policeman's pistol or a cowboy's revolver does. They are not assault weapons since they cannot be fired in automatic mode. The AWB lists guns resembling certain assault weapons, or which have more than a certain number of specific features, such as a bayonet lug, a pistol grip, a flash hider, or a telescoping stock.

The AWB bans semi-automatic rifles which look scary, ignoring the fact that the average deer rifle is far more powerful and has better range.

I own an AR15 which I use in CMP target matches. While this rifle fires essentially the same round as our soldiers are using in Iraq, in many places I could not even use it to hunt deer legally, since its too feeble a round. Something like this packs a much bigger punch. Of course, there is no talk of banning this rifle, since it does not look scary.

A good analogy to the AWB would be if the legislature decided to attack dangerous driving by banning fuzzy dice and chrome exhausts. It might make some people feel better, but actually attacks the wrong target. (The right target is the criminal, not the gun.)

The (so-called) "Assault Weapons Ban" is a very silly law which did not ban Assault Weapons, or detectably reduce crime. I'm glad its dying. I'm not going out to buy any of the 'scary features' for my rifle - it's fine as it is. But I will like having the ability to do so if I wanted - that's what freedom is all about.

I don't need anything too fancy, just an added layer of protection from the multitude of various people who come in and out of my place of business everyday.

Actually not very.
The Bushmaster Carbon 15 weighs only 4.3 pounds. Throw in a 30 round clip, and you're probably up to 5.

They're also .223, so the recoil is much less that you'd think. Switch it to 3 round burst, and it's not only do-able, but quite comfortable I'd imagine.

The accuracy would most likley go down quite a bit, even with a restraining strap. Likley to the point where it's not worth it, unless you're in a crowded room. :) The game probably only has the accuracy go down by 20-40% though, otherwise no one would even bother using it.

Rumsfeld: "Bush Man", and their masters.

In all seriousness, if the proverbial fecal matter strikes the air circulation apparatus, I plan to hole up at a friend's place out in semi-rural Tennessee. This dude has a gun safe you could fit 3-4 normal-sized adults, 2 average Americans, or 10-12 Ethiopians in. He can't fit all his guns in it.

Among his firearms are:

• AR-50 rifle in .50cal BMG, with a scope that looks like it belongs in an astronomical observatory. It's sighted in for 750 yards, and he can put 5 rounds in a 10" circle at that range.
• Steyr AUG-P rifle in 5.56mm NATO
• Armalite AR-15 rifle in 5.56mm NATO
• Carbon-15 pistol, in 5.56mm NATO
• Isreali FN-FAL variant, heavy-barrel model with bipod, in 7.62mm NATO
• Standard FN-FAL, actually an Austrian STG-58, in 7.62mm NATO.
• Makarov CZ-52 pistol in 7.62mm Tokarev - IIRC, this one's high muzzle velocity plus small-diameter round mean that, with certain brands of ammo, it can penetrate the bullet-resistant vests worn by law enforcement.
• Colt Commander, with 4-14" barrel and laser sight, in .45ACP

And his place is basically a great big hill, easily defensible :)