@spendius,
Quote:“The right of the whole people,
old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only,
to keep and bear arms of every description,
and not such merely as are used by the militia,
shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon,
in the smallest degree;
and all this for the important end to be attained:
the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia,
so vitally necessary to the security of a free State.
Our opinion is, that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant
to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right,
originally belonging to our forefathers
spendius wrote:That means that all requirements to apply for any sort of licence
to " bear arms of every description" are unconstitutional.
YES.
I have taken u
off Ignore; for now, anyway.
I 'd be less than candid if I failed to recognize that your post
is
thoughtful, your prose is
UNDERSTANDABLE and it is
clean of obscenity.
spendius wrote:But as I understand it the President is constitutionally empowered to legislate
and execute anything he thinks fit to promote the public weal.
And if its no good the electorate are to blame.
Your understanding is in error.
Your source was not worthy of your credence, if it said that.
spendius wrote:As a matter of interest what was the cost to the individual of bearing arms. Compared to now.
It was
worth your life; then, as now.
I have not calculated the finances.
(As an aside: years ago, while buying guns in a gunstore,
I chanced to see, for the first time, a .44 Bulldog revolver -- the model
used by David Berkowitz, "the .44 caliber killer, Son of Sam". What a piece of
garbage it was;
gross.
I coud not get it out of my hand fast enuf. Berkowitz was a
cheapskate. )
U bet your
LIFE on your guns. That is no place to
scrimp.
spendius wrote:How many could afford a gun, or procure one, in those old days?
Is it possible that only those of the same class as the founders could afford
a gun and maybe those who used it as a working tool.
Guns were (and many remain)
very simple devices, originally hand-made,
consisting of a pipe laid into a carved wooden stock,
with a simple spring-loaded lock released by a trigger.
The parts n labor shud not be expensive.
The kids in my naborhood in Arizona were making them all the time,
regardless of their having plenty of factory-made guns. It was a passtime.
spendius wrote:Would a sod-buster with a wife and 5 kids be able to get the family tooled up?
Where there is a will, there is a way.
In the middle of the 1930s Depression, radios proliferated and movies
FLOURISHED.
spendius wrote:I imagine that a weapon that could be relied upon in emergencies
would be an item on a shopping list of gentlemen.
Guns r
health insurance; then and now.
Few citizens wanna be torn apart by the local fauna & eaten while we live.
Addressing the temper of the times, the biographies of James Butler Hickok
and of Annie Oakley are very co-incidentally similar, in one aspect:
Hickok said that when he was 9, his father put a rifle in his hands
and told him not to come back without lunch. Annie said that when she was 8,
her mom put a rifle in her hands and said what amounted to the same thing.
In time, their accuracy grew precise, because thay liked to eat every
day n had no refrigeration. (No gun locks around)
spendius wrote:Now there are supermarkets full of them,
and the ammo, at prices everybody can afford.
Yeah; like vitamins. People wanna
remain healthy.
spendius wrote:And another thing Dave--granted you might need to defend yourself with lethal force at some point.
It happened to
ME.
spendius wrote:But not twice. Not six times.
I hope that u r right; once was enuf.
spendius wrote:What's all this ammo for?
Cars need gas n guns need ammo to function at their best.
spendius wrote:Ruth Ellis shot her unfaithful lover and she had never fired a gun before. But okay--100 rounds for practice.
After that what's all the ammo for?
To be used at one's discretion.
I
don 't have
TOO MANY books in my library, tho there r a lot of them.
spendius wrote:The sheer sensuality of handling them is a fair enough reason.
I
HAVE been accosted by the police at gunnery ranges,
who commented upon the
BEAUTY of my ordnance,
e.g. a blued snubby .38 revolver with rosewood grips,
GOLD trigger, hammer & cylinder release latch.
As an artifact of Americana, I have my .44 magnum Ruger SuperBlackhawk with squared trigger guard.
The
architecture of some of my guns is rather striking.
I took some pride in showing some of my guns to a troop of Boy Scouts
at a gunnery range, including my 9mm 1940 German Luger P-'08,
with its dramaticly sleek 55 degree angled handle n short 4 inch barrel.
It must have an interesting provenance. I also showed them my 3 and 5/8 inch
silver colored .45 caliber Ruger Vaquero and it made me happy to begift
their Scout Master with a few hundred
$$ for ammunition & ice cream.
spendius wrote:Why go to all this trouble [WHAT "trouble"??] because you won't admit that.
It shows through your contributions anyway.
I admit that I enjoy the beauty of my gun collection.
Is
that what u mean ??
I purchase with an eye toward
esthetics; my security needs have long been fulfilled.
spendius wrote:A man, usually a young one, fair struts when he gets a Sten gun
slung casually over his shoulder.
Submachineguns r tons of fun.
I love them, but it has never occurred to me to strut.
I just think about hitting the targets.
I 've seen a lot of guys holding fully automatic weapons,
but I don 't remember seeing any struting.
Maybe its different in England or in Europe.
I hope that u will not get mad at me for saying this,
but it seems to me that English guns are of rather
ungainly appearance,
such as the Sten gun and
more so the Webley revolver. Thay
work, tho.
spendius wrote:What does the Constitution say about concealment?
It says that government has
no jurisdiction
to
interfere with citizen's possession of guns.
spendius wrote:You should be able to wear your gun on your hip to get a real buzz.
In many jurisdictions in America,
u
MUST expose the weapon (e.g., on your hip) unless u have a license for concealment.
New Hampshire is such a State.
On the other hand, in NY, u
MUST keep handguns concealed (on pain of loss of licensure)
unless u r wearing a uniform. That will probably change with future litigation.
spendius wrote:Like they all did in Libya recently.
All this slinking around with it hidden underneath your clothes
We don 't do much slinking. I 'm concerned of how much longer
I can continue to support the weight of a gun.
We usually just
forget that we r wearing them,
like we forget about our watches, until we need to know the time of day.
spendius wrote: and having to go to a government approved range to go bang-bang must be pretty tiresome.
I have some gunnery ranges within only a short drive from my abode; not tiresome,
but many of us use open land with a
competent backstop
(like the side of a ravine --
not a government approved ravine) to pop away!
spendius wrote:When the amendment was passed they could pot pop bottles
in their back yard all day long if they could afford it.(Dec 15, 1791).
That is not suitable for urban purposes,
but in many American rural areas u can still do that. U have privacy.
David
