Georgiapacking.org banner

21 - 40 of 86 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,068 Posts
Since you ask me my opinion, then, yes, I believe the right to keep and bear arms encompasses military small arms of the kind in common use at the time. Today, this would include the M4, Ak-47, and other fully automatic rifles.

Cannon, too.

Oh, I own full auto, and my neighbors have never been in any danger. This is reality, not fantasy land. Your neighbors may own these, too. :wink:

Is Switzerland a dangerous place?

Does this mean my neighbor can endanger me by firing wildy in my direction? Why are you lumping that in to your discussion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum, I have no doubt you are a responsible gun owner and keep your fully automatic weapons safe according to prescribed regulations. I also have no problem with individual citizens owning automatic weapons. I have shot many different automatic weapons, count myself as proficient with the M-60 and M-16 and given the money wouldn't mind owning fully automatic weapons myself (although I don't think I would like the ATF's authority to inspect my storage of them at any time they so desired).

All of that being said, I thought we were talking about the rights of citizens to own weapons for self-protection. I don't agree with gunsmoker's stance limiting the capacity or type of firearm allowed to be carried. I think that any small arm should be allowable to a citizen for carry purpose. I do not think that a citizen should be allowed to walk around carrying a fully automatic firearm though.

Do we disagree on that point, or are we just not understanding one another's position? And would you honestly choose a fully automatic firearm for home protection purposes in the case of a home invader knowing the potential for stray shots injuring an innocent? That is my point. I don't believe it to be an appropriate choice of firearm in that situation.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,068 Posts
Thorsen said:
(although I don't think I would like the ATF's authority to inspect my storage of them at any time they so desired).
Please do not think I am being harsh, but where do you get that idea?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,068 Posts
Thorsen said:
I do not think that a citizen should be allowed to walk around carrying a fully automatic firearm though.
I do. See why I can't ever run for office? :D
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,068 Posts
Thorsen said:
And would you honestly choose a fully automatic firearm for home protection purposes . . .
14 inch barreled shotgun. :wink: (yes, I am serious).

BUT, a full auto might be my first choice in an unlikely "angry mob" situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,798 Posts
Thorsen said:
I do not think that a citizen should be allowed to walk around carrying a fully automatic firearm though.
What's the difference?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
Thorsen said:
(although I don't think I would like the ATF's authority to inspect my storage of them at any time they so desired).
Please do not think I am being harsh, but where do you get that idea?
Am I wrong on this? I was always under the understanding that if you owned a class III firearm in addition to the $200 stamp, you had to follow specific storage criteria in order to keep the weapon secured. I also thought that ownership of a class III firearm was sufficient to allow the BATF to perform a compliance check without a warrant.

Am I off-base on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
Thorsen said:
And would you honestly choose a fully automatic firearm for home protection purposes . . .
14 inch barreled shotgun. :wink: (yes, I am serious).

BUT, a full auto might be my first choice in an unlikely "angry mob" situation.
We agree on the shotgun. In a home defense scenario my weapon of choice would be my 12 gauge loaded with #1 buckshot (3" shell). It has 24 .30 caliber pellets per round which means maximum tissue damage, a significant chance of inducing shock on the first hit and little chance of overpenetration occuring endangering others.

I always wanted to own the much maligned streetsweeper shotgun.

As to the unlikely "angry mob" scenario, in that situation I can agree with the choice of a fully automatic firearm. You simply would have little choice in the matter. If I owned a fully auto weapon you can guarantee it would be my choice in such a situation.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,068 Posts
Thorsen said:
As to canons and such, the military hardware of the day, I would invite you to point out to me in any of the founders' writings where the second amendment was intended to include such military hardware. As far as I know it isn't there. The only thing referenced is the ownership of small arms of the day.
Private ownership of such items was more common than you have supposed. As today, cost was a factor, but even so, they were privately owned and called up for militia duty.

This link is hostile to the idea that the right to keep arms protects the right to own cannon (or any weapon, so far as I can tell), but the militia returns clearly show:

What begins on this page as "Arms, Ammunition, and Accoutrements" is the artillery of the day, Three to Twelve Pounders. Some of these were, in fact privately owned, but, nevertheless, subject to militia call up and inventory detailing without mention of a constitutional right of protection . . .
Why would an inventory return of available arms for call up mention a constitutional right? :roll: Logic and reason evade some people. Do they not find it odd that these were owned?

The book I recommended tells of General Gage's anger at the Americans sneaking of so much in the way of private artillery (not just cannon, but mortar as well) out of Boston in direct contravention of his orders and martial law. Read the book! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Rammstein said:
Thorsen said:
I do not think that a citizen should be allowed to walk around carrying a fully automatic firearm though.
What's the difference?
The chance of collateral damage is too great, in my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
Thorsen said:
Am I wrong on this? . . .
Am I off-base on this?
Yes. :D
Wow! I don't know where I got it in my head, but I always thought that class III ownership entitled the government to make unannounced compliance checks on your storage and continued ownership of any class III weapons that are registered to you.

Learn something new every day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
Thorsen said:
As to canons and such, the military hardware of the day, I would invite you to point out to me in any of the founders' writings where the second amendment was intended to include such military hardware. As far as I know it isn't there. The only thing referenced is the ownership of small arms of the day.
Private ownership of such items was more common than you have supposed. As today, cost was a factor, but even so, they were privately owned and called up for militia duty.
Hmmm ... did not know this. While I was aware that wealthy private individuals bought cannon and such for the military, I did not think that the private ownership of such was so widespread. I was basing my original statements on the writings of the founders that I have read that specifically mention militia members (also known as the male populace) arming themselves with smallarms and powder.

I will definitely check out that book that you have linked to, but I have to say in advance that even with ample evidence of largescale ownership of what amounted to colonial ownership of crew-served weaponry, I would never advocate automatic weaponry being carried for the purposes of self-defense.

Ownership of automatic weaponry? Sure. But for use as a personal defense firearm? No, sorry, I can't buy into that at all. Automatic weapons are simply not discriminatory enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum, I have attempted to find some statute or such that covers class III weaponry beyond having to pay the $200 fee and I can not. I even phoned up the BATF and asked them for information and was told to call another office in the BATF, which ended up being a disconnected phone line.

Can you point me in the right direction? There has to be something online I can read up on and I would like to educate myself on class III ownership.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,226 Posts
Malum Prohibitum said:
They have selector switches. :wink:
I know that :roll:

Heh, you know what I am talking about, using the weapon in full auto mode.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
68,068 Posts
Thorsen said:
Malum, I have attempted to find some statute or such that covers class III weaponry beyond having to pay the $200 fee and I can not. I even phoned up the BATF and asked them for information and was told to call another office in the BATF, which ended up being a disconnected phone line.

Can you point me in the right direction? There has to be something online I can read up on and I would like to educate myself on class III ownership.
www.subguns.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,306 Posts
If a firearm carries one bullet or 30, semi-auto or full-auto - what's the difference?

The inherent danger is only derived from that of the user. I wouldn't have a problem at all if I saw Ramm coming down the street with an MP-5 slung across his back.

The argument to ban some but not all just doesn't make sense to me. If a person can be trusted with one, then they should be trusted with all. Seung Hui Cho could have had an MP-5 and used 2 clips, or as he did with a Glock and reloaded several times. Limiting Class III weapons doesn't mitigate human loss.

Just my $.02
 
21 - 40 of 86 Posts
Top