The AR Alternative

Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding of the 2nd amendment (without an exact quote) is for the citizens to poses/own arms to protect themselves from government soldiers/arms. It was meant for the people to be able to protect themselves with the same firearms that the military used then and now. It only makes sense that if our forefathers were to write the constitution today their intent would be the same as it was then, to protect ourselves from the government. So if the military has ARs, M1As or what ever doesn't it seem only right that citizens have the same fire arms. Surely no fair minded individual would believe that our founding fathers would expect us to use single shot ML to defend ourselves against present day rifles.
But that's just my understanding
 
Last edited by a moderator:
vinny said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding of the 2nd amendment (without an exact quote) is for the citizens to poses/own arms to protect themselves from government........................................... Surely no fair minded individual would believe that our founding fathers would expect us to use single shot ML to defend ourselves against present day rifles.
But that's just my understanding
Click to expand...

That is the exact intention of the 2nd Amendment, Vinny. Read the history behind why our founders insisted on that right as part of the Constitution. You write "fair minded", we are not up against fair mindeness.

A recent FOX News guest tried to make the point that we didn't need a 223 to hunt squirrels. That vital part of the US Constitution isn't about hunting squirrel and duck.
 
The Challenge

Constitutional Law is a very complex field. Its confusing,even to the trained professionals(Lawyers),and they don't post on this forum. The 2nd amendment right to "keep and bear arms" has been challenged many times in the past. It should be comforting to know that,with the exception of a few design restrictions,the people's right to keep and bear arms remain intact. it took the Brady Bill ten years to work its way to adoption. It had little if any impact on crime prevention. I'm curious to know how this challenge will be any different from any other.



Glenn
 
Chism G said:
I'm curious to know how this challenge will be any different from any other.
Click to expand...
Most likely, it won't. However, as in everything else in life, the real possibility exists to exploit high emotion to persuade people to make bad decisions. This is a time of very high emotions and would-be gun-banners will strike while the iron is hot. They probably won't succeed to any great degree but they're certainly trying.

Instances of mass shootings leading to confiscatory statutes have been cited. After each of those, I'm sure gun owners felt that total bans wouldn't happen, that no rational legislator would buy into the idea that an individual incident is a sufficient guide for general policy, and that cooler heads would soon prevail. Yet, that didn't happen. Riding a wave of emotion and acting quickly, some nations simply lost their legislative reason en masse and did not regain it soon enough to avoid the temptation of enacting gun bans as a feel-good solution. Many U.S. gun owners fear that the same might happen here. As I said, it's unlikely but it's not out of the question.
 
And money..... Don't forget money. I'm going to send a couple hundred to the NRA. I do this whenever the gun banners get particularly worked up over something. I wish everyone did. I don't always like the NRA's fund raising tactics, treating me like a senile old guy, but they're the most effective advocate we have. If only 1/4 of gun owners were members, we wouldn't have a political problem at all. We should always encourage other gun owners to join. I personally think most estimates of gun ownership in the U.S. are way low. All those silent owners need to step up and help. I was once on a real-estate "Caravan" with six female agents. They all started talking about their guns. I was the only one in that vehicle that wasn't armed.
 
The majority today wants everybody to get along and for everyone in Congress to vote yes on every bill and give them a raise. They want everyone to Love eachother and for everyone to be able to live forever. They are all for knee jerk fixes for every issue that comes up and for everyone to agree on those fixes without questioning any of them. We can seen the enemy and some of us created them.

I didn't truly understand the why until I watched a young professor talking about his students, how they think and react to us ( Older Folks). It was most enlightening. We have lost the battle. They consider us to be irrelevent and won't engage in discussion with us. They will call the tune, going forward.
 
Last edited:
Got the following letter via E-mail. Can't vouch for it's authenticity. Allegedly written by a US Marine Corporal.




Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime.

You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.

I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.

I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.

I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.

We, the people, deserve better than you.

Respectfully Submitted,

Joshua Boston

Cpl, United States Marine Corps

2004-2012
 
This story popped up on my Yahoo news feed in the form of an article. Warmed my cockles mightily.

You can google it, it's current news
al
 
Oddly enough I was considering buying my first Black Rifle, even went to the store to check em out the Monday before Newtown.
Decided against it seeing as the future laws are up in the air. Confiscation?
So I did pretty much just what you suggested. Stocked up on 45ACP and a case of 12G 00 buck.
My thoughts are that should suffice for home defense (hopefully)
If the Zombies ever attack and I use up all that ammo plus the rifles I should have an AR at the end of it. If not it won't really matter;)
 
I've seen and heard various people give the advice about not attempting to resist or defend oneself, evade or give in. Well, boys and girls I'm gonna be 72 in 3 months, and my evasive skills have rapidly declined over the past 15 or 20 years I'm afraid. If someone breaks into my house I'm afraid I'll just have to take my chances with shooting the sucker, and although I may well miss a few times I likely won't do much worse than Mikey Bloomberg's NYC cops who wounded 9 (or more) civilians trying to shoot a criminal not too long ago.

That's the absolutely stupidest advice I've ever heard and likely given by someone who's afraid of guns, hurting someone, or is just afraid of everything.
 
Larry Elliott said:
Mikey Bloomberg's NYC cops who wounded 9 (or more) ......everything.
Click to expand...

Larry, read the Jan 2013 column Wayne laPierre wrote in the American rifleman. He calls Michael Bloomberg "the soda-pop banning little dictator of Manhattan". More dictators to come if they get their way!!
 
I always get a kick out of the guys with the bumper stickers that read "Come and get them!"....or..... "From my Cold Dead Fingers" LOL. There's a gunshop around the corner from me that has that "Come and get them!" slogan painted accross the length of the owner's car! Sadly.......that's EXACTLY what Obama and the Democrats will do.... and I don't see these macho and defiant types all accross the nation doing much about it either!!!

And if burying your gun in your backyard is your answer, that's a pretty sad answer.....as that makes it impossible to keep it handy for home security or civil unrest (ie; Catrina, Rodney King riots, etc), or to just be able to enjoy it for hunting or at the firing range.

What's my point? Very simply; I wish somebody out of all the macho loudmouths with the defiant tones would organize a meanigful protest. I'll let you determine what "meaningful" can imply, but it seems to me that not too long ago in the history of this nation, some very vocal minorities had been sucessful in winning their cause and making their point very clear. Essentially their point was "Don't mess with us!" It has worked very well for them so that we would even appease some folks by declaring a National Holiday in the name of their leader. The number of gunowners in this nation is larger then that of any minority group, but yet we continue to be lead down this path.
 
"Them" means anyone that is trying to enter your home take away your life, belongings, or rights....."Zombies" to me means democratic voters, of which many are criminals and a large majority only crawl out of their closet on election day or when "FREE" checks are handed out!! Vanib, I agree with you wholeheartedly...where were all of these people on election day!! I spent a large amount of money, time, and phone calls to help elect candidates that lost!! So many of these northern union members seem to vote democrat without realizing that you cannot trust them once they get in office.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If they get a semi-auto ban, it won't help and as history shows, it is only a matter of time before they extend it to pumps, etc.
 
George Wallace had the whole state of Alabama behind him when he stood in the school house door. The feds showed up and he moved outta the way. Same deal here...
 
Wilbur, I think there might be a little difference here....for one thing the 2nd Amendment is part of the constitution and the other thing might be that almost all states are against a gun ban. I'm sure Obama and Holder would love to take our gun rights away, but if every state screams loud enough I don't even think those communist would force the issue, but as was stated before the "WIMPS" on our side would be the breaking point.
 
VaniB said:
...it seems to me that not too long ago in the history of this nation, some very vocal minorities had been sucessful in winning their cause and making their point very clear. Essentially their point was "Don't mess with us!" It has worked very well for them so that we would even appease some folks by declaring a National Holiday in the name of their leader. The number of gunowners in this nation is larger then that of any minority group, but yet we continue to be lead down this path.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. History can be an excellent teacher.

In the mid 1960s, real progress was made against racist oppression by corrupt governments and law enforcement agencies in California due to the actions of the Black Panthers. They knew what the 2nd Amendment was for. They started open-carrying rifles at protests, while shadowing the police, while telling arrestees not to talk to anyone until they got a lawyer, etc.

The power-structure did NOT appreciate being forced to obey the law, so they made a new law. Governor Ronald Reagan responded by signing the Mulford Act that made it essentially impossible for anyone except the rich, powerful, well-connected and their minions to carry firearms. At the time he said "No one needs to carry a firearm in public." That was 1967.

Arguably, that major state cracking down on gun owners provided major momentum to the national gun control debate...on the wrong side. We wound up with the Gun Control Act of 1968.

All freedoms are interconnected. The ACLU has never stood up for the 2nd. The NRA certainly doesn't even give a nod to the 1st. That's just wrong. Fail to fight for them all and they'll simply be taken away singly. If one of your personally-admired heroic freedom fighters is Harlon Carter, then you should feel just as strongly and positively about Larry Flynt.

Yet we don't. Most of the Bill of Rights has already been damaged beyond repair and the only one left that has actually gotten stronger in recent years is the 2nd.

So now "they" are trying to split up the defenders of the 2nd into "legitimate hunters and target shooters" vs "Rambo wannabes with military-style weapons." 100+ years ago, the wide civilian adoption of bolt-action rifles brought wailing from some yellow journalists asking why civilians needed to own "weapons of war." The good guys won that battle mainly just because most legislators at the time knew enough about the technicalities of the issue, including the long availability of lever-action rifles with even greater firepower. Most legislators are more ignorant these days.

This time, unfortunately, it seems that far too many bolt and pump hunters and target shooters are willing to throw their embarrassing distant cousins, the bang-bang-bang-black-gun crowd, under the bus.

Next time you're at the range and you hear some old geezer (not a pejorative in this usage, since I've attained old geezer status) say "they just want those stupid plastic guns", try to talk some sense into 'em, OK? The gun-banners want all guns. It's just that the "sniper rifles" that hunters and target shooters use are a bit further down the list and they haven't gotten to them, yet.

We don't need an AR alternative; we need to keep our ARs. Even if very few who read this site personally care about ARs very much, we all need to fight for them. We stand together or we fall separately and, separately, we will eventually *ALL* fall.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top