Talk about the Second amendment!

[LaRocha]

Read the law shit for brains.

Lollypop, the law was re-written, what militia meant for a hundred years plus prior to 1903, to suit the arbitrary power aims of the federal government.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Thanks. That's really interesting.

Whats more, inactive militia can organize itself in an emergency. It generally happened during the Indian Wars.

 

[oggbashan]

The right to bear arms is part of the inalienable rights of man. Of course this also means that man has the right to be wrong. too.

Only in the US.

Many other countries do not see it as inalienable at all and have passed strict legislation to control arms.

Og

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Don't think you have to re-write it. With the original punctuation, it's actually a list, isn't it?

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State,

(as well as)

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms

(are two things that)

shall not be infringed.

Meaning they are just two stuffs that shall not, for one reason or the other, or for separate reasons, be infringed. The correlation of the two does not mean there's nessecarily a connection. Maintining that having a well regulated militia may not be the reason why people have the right to bear arms.



Why yes, I'm a syntax geek.

You're right but most people think that list is all about the militia and not about the people's rights. Of course most of them are those left wing nuts that want to dis-arm the people so only...I really don't know why anyone that thinks guns are evil would only want those in power to have them? Sounds like a dumbass idea to me.

 

[LaRocha]

Whats more, inactive militia can organize itself in an emergency. It generally happened during the Indian Wars.

Second Militia Act of 1792

The second Act, passed May 8, 1792, provided for the organization of the state militias. It conscripted every "free able-bodied white male citizen" between the ages of 18 and 45 into a local militia company overseen by the state. Militia members were required to arm themselves at their own expense with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack. Men owning rifles were required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch, and a knapsack.[3] Some occupations were exempt, such as congressmen, stagecoach drivers, and ferryboatmen. Otherwise, men were required to report for training twice a year, usually in the Spring and Fall.

So who on this board's reporting for training twice a year? It's not about muskets and ferryboatmen. The militias still exist, and you're hunting rifle and 9mm aren't part of the program.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I would like to point out that while the US does have quite a number of armed citizens...it's death rate per 1000 is still lower than those of England, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, France, Luxembourg and many others.

USA 8.27 / 1000
UK 10.05 / 1000
Sweden 10.24 / 1000
Germany 10.80 /1000
France 8.43 / 1000

Now I'm not saying that the ownership of guns have anything to do with this but a correlation could be construed.

These are the end of year 2008 numbers, if anyone has complete data any more recent...post it.

 

[driphoney]

Tanks are only good against other tanks...while they may decimate infantry, they are really no threat to guerrilla units that hit and run. Tanks are only good in a stand up, lines delineated battle. In an urban environment they will be ignored by the guerrilla units who will attack points of command and control.

I just wasn't going to go into it. The current US military has more firepower than any organized, or ragtag, group of extra-military guerilla units could dream of. Your point about tanks was made in Vietnam, I believe, though they seem to be the usual weapon a government trucks out to show force during coupe attempts.

I'm not saying it would neat or pretty, but the chances of any Minutemen (a la Revolutionary, not current bands roaming the border) successfully helping to overthrow the US government--the possible point of allowing an armed citizenry--is pretty remote today.

Okay ... heading back to the social threads before I get spanked.

 

[stephen55]

I would like to point out that while the US does have quite a number of armed citizens...it's death rate per 1000 is still lower than those of England, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, France, Luxembourg and many others.

USA 8.27 / 1000
UK 10.05 / 1000
Sweden 10.24 / 1000
Germany 10.80 /1000
France 8.43 / 1000

Now I'm not saying that the ownership of guns have anything to do with this but a correlation could be construed.

These are the end of year 2008 numbers, if anyone has complete data any more recent...post it.

No, a correlation cannot be construed.

DEFINITION: The average annual number of deaths during a year per 1,000 population at midyear; also known as crude death rate.

The death rates of all of these countries is taken from the total of all deaths from all causes. It has nothing to do with gun ownership, lack of gun ownership, murder rates, by firearms or otherwise.

It is a crude statistic in that it doesn't consider any factor other than total deaths.

A more refined type of statistic might be the total death rate due to firearm homicides (non military that is). My guess would be that the US would be right up there with Mexico and Brazil.

Found a list!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

Guess who is right up there?

The data is dated but I don't think it has changed much.

What I found surprising is that of all firearm related deaths in the US, there were twice the number of firearm suicides as there were firearm homicides.

I wasn't aware of that.

 

[JackLuis]

Only in the US.

Many other countries do not see it as inalienable at all and have passed strict legislation to control arms.

Og

Isn't America great?

I fear our English Common wealth neighbors are unprotected by their legal structure from a repressive Government.

I see that in NZ and Oz, that many enjoy hunting and shooting, despite the restrictions that have been imposed on their right to keep and bear arms.

It is implicit in our founding fathers philosophy ( broad and unsubstantiated, IMHO) that an individual has the right to make up his own mind about what is right on any issue, carry a gun? Draw on the scruffy asshole with the knife? Double tap the car jacker?

It is also true that the individual bears responsibility for his acts and should be subject to the full application of the law to the results of his actions.

So in Florida Grannies carry guns in fear of the lawless. How's that working out JBJ? In Australia home invasion is up.

 

[oggbashan]

...

What I found surprising is that of all firearm related deaths in the US, there were twice the number of firearm suicides as there were firearm homicides.

I wasn't aware of that.

I don't think that the firearm suicide rate is that significant as an indicator. I would expect firearms to be a choice for potential suicides.

People intending to commit suicide use what means are easily available. In the US, guns are much more freely available to people wanting to commit suicide than in many other countries that have a higher suicide rate.

If firearms were severely restricted in the US, the suicides would still happen, but using other means.

Og

 

[oggbashan]

I would like to point out that while the US does have quite a number of armed citizens...it's death rate per 1000 is still lower than those of England, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, France, Luxembourg and many others.

USA 8.27 / 1000
UK 10.05 / 1000
Sweden 10.24 / 1000
Germany 10.80 /1000
France 8.43 / 1000

Now I'm not saying that the ownership of guns have anything to do with this but a correlation could be construed.

These are the end of year 2008 numbers, if anyone has complete data any more recent...post it.

The only correlation likely is one of age profile of the population.

Og

 

[LaRocha]

‘Christian Warriors’: Who Are The Hutaree Militia And Where Did They Come From?

If you think that owning a gun is going to protect you and your family from federal power you should talk to these guys, then the couple Branch Davidians that the ATF didn't get a chance to blow up, then the folks at Ruby Ridge, and then there's Leonard Peltier who was only defending his nation's right to bear arms against US imperialist aggression... Your little weapons are a joke, they're more likely to harm a family member than some marauding rapist cat burglar.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Fully automatic weapons are a pain to control. That's why soldiers are trained to fire in three shot bursts. It keeps the weapon from climbing out of your hands.

As to the Girls With Guns, not on my firing range they won't!


The SCOTUS has stated that the National Guard and the Army Reserve are not the militia. An armed citizenry is the militia. Better regulation, i.e. training would be a good idea, though.

 

[stephen55]

‘Christian Warriors’: Who Are The Hutaree Militia And Where Did They Come From?

If you think that owning a gun is going to protect you and your family from federal power you should talk to these guys, then the couple Branch Davidians that the ATF didn't get a chance to blow up, then the folks at Ruby Ridge, and then there's Leonard Peltier who was only defending his nation's right to bear arms against US imperialist aggression... Your little weapons are a joke, they're more likely to harm a family member than some marauding rapist cat burglar.

What's so little about this baby?

http://render64.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/tac50-package.jpg

You feed it the big guy on the left....

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Rifle_cartridge_comparison_w_scale.png

The McMillan TAC-50 long range sniper rifle is rather pricey but fully legal in my neck of the woods. I don't have one but that's only because I can't think of a reason to have one. I don't fear my provincial of federal government.

I do fear the recoil this baby must have.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I would prefer this one...

http://images.military.com/pics/SoldierTech_AS50-4.jpg

http://www.defensereview.com/1_31_2004/Accuracy%20International%20AS50%20.50%20BMG%20Semi-Auto%20Rifle_5.jpg

 

[Zeb_Carter]

But if I want accuracy over pure brute power, I'll take one of these...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/M24_SWS.jpg

All available through you local retailer.

 

[JackLuis]

But if I want accuracy over pure brute power, I'll take one of these...


All available through you local retailer.

I'd rather have a pair of the caliber on that blond and see if I could rock those boobies like an MP-5!

A man should have his priorities, after all.

I know Tom Jefferson and Ben Franklin would agree.

 

[Bobby_3111]

Fully automatic weapons are a pain to control. That's why soldiers are trained to fire in three shot bursts. It keeps the weapon from climbing out of your hands.

As to the Girls With Guns, not on my firing range they won't!


The SCOTUS has stated that the National Guard and the Army Reserve are not the militia. An armed citizenry is the militia. Better regulation, i.e. training would be a good idea, though.

Small bursts also keep the barrel from over-heating and cooking off rounds when chambered. If you use a belt-fed light machine gun like the 240B and squeeze and hold the trigger for a 200 round belt that barrel will glow red hot. In basic some idiot shot a 100 round belt without stopping when the drill sergeant stepped away for a moment. For some strange reason they didnt change the barrel on the weapon and let the next guy use it. When it jammed on him he opened it up and tried to get the round out. The round blew up and took his finger off.

 

[JackLuis]

Girls with Guns!

I just had the image of the blond pumping her MP-5 change to an image of Golda Mayier with an Uzi.

Brr, that takes all the fun out of it.

 

[stephen55]

The McMillan TAC-50 Is the rifle used by Canadian sniper Corporal Rob Furlong, formerly of the PPCLI (Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry) during Operation Anaconda, Afghanistan. He holds the record for the longest ever recorded and confirmed sniper kill at 2,430 m (2,657 yd).

Of note, he used US military ammo as the stuff he was issued wasn't hot enough to reach out that far.

The reason (my guess) that the TAC-50 was used, instead of an AI rifle or some other auto loader is that auto loaders simply can't match the minute of angle accuracy of the TAC-50 with it's bolt action. The AI rifle, in the ad you posted, delivers 1.5 moa.

At 2,657 yards, 1.5 moa is about 40 inches. That's impressive but to hit someone's chest, call it 18 inches thick, (Furlong's target was walking perpendicular to the shot) at 2,657 yards calls for 0.7 moa or better.

The AI rifle can certainly put more fire down range being an auto loader but when the chips are down and you have to reach way, way out and touch someone, nothing beats a bolt action IMHO.

Except perhaps an F-22, but those things are a bugger to carry around.

What I find amazing about the previous record by Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock (Vietnam war), 2,460 yd, is that he used a scoped M2 Browning machine gun. This was apparently also done in Korea. A scope was somehow bolted on to the M2, the tripod of the gun was dialed in for the shot and a single round was fired. Amazing....and so much for my theory about the superiority of the bolt action....

 

[Zeb_Carter]

The McMillan TAC-50 Is the rifle used by Canadian sniper Corporal Rob Furlong, formerly of the PPCLI (Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry) during Operation Anaconda, Afghanistan. He holds the record for the longest ever recorded and confirmed sniper kill at 2,430 m (2,657 yd).

Of note, he used US military ammo as the stuff he was issued wasn't hot enough to reach out that far.

The reason (my guess) that the TAC-50 was used, instead of an AI rifle or some other auto loader is that auto loaders simply can't match the minute of angle accuracy of the TAC-50 with it's bolt action. The AI rifle, in the ad you posted, delivers 1.5 moa.

At 2,657 yards, 1.5 moa is about 40 inches. That's impressive but to hit someone's chest, call it 18 inches thick, (Furlong's target was walking perpendicular to the shot) at 2,657 yards calls for 0.7 moa or better.

The AI rifle can certainly put more fire down range being an auto loader but when the chips are down and you have to reach way, way out and touch someone, nothing beats a bolt action IMHO.

Except perhaps an F-22, but those things are a bugger to carry around.

What I find amazing about the previous record by Gunnery Sergeant Carlos Hathcock (Vietnam war), 2,460 yd, is that he used a scoped M2 Browning machine gun. This was apparently also done in Korea. A scope was somehow bolted on to the M2, the tripod of the gun was dialed in for the shot and a single round was fired. Amazing....and so much for my theory about the superiority of the bolt action....

The AS50 can fire other than ball ammo. Put a clip of HE down range into a vehicle or into group of targets you will take some out of action. It will also fire Incendiary rounds so I can be a mile away and burn down that wooden building everyone is hiding in. And as they run out I switch to HE or ball and take a few out as they roll on the ground to put out the flames.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I'd rather have a pair of the caliber on that blond and see if I could rock those boobies like an MP-5!

A man should have his priorities, after all.

I know Tom Jefferson and Ben Franklin would agree.

I've rocked a pair of boobies like that, now though I'd rather have the gun.

Getting old is a bitch! They (the boobies) were sweet and a long time ago, damn.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Small bursts also keep the barrel from over-heating and cooking off rounds when chambered. If you use a belt-fed light machine gun like the 240B and squeeze and hold the trigger for a 200 round belt that barrel will glow red hot. In basic some idiot shot a 100 round belt without stopping when the drill sergeant stepped away for a moment. For some strange reason they didnt change the barrel on the weapon and let the next guy use it. When it jammed on him he opened it up and tried to get the round out. The round blew up and took his finger off.

I saw a demonstration of a light machine gun on the discovery channel or the history channel were the fired a 200 round belt without stopping and the guy picked the gun up by the barrel without burning himself.

They say they only have to change barrels due to wear every 15,000 rounds I believe. And it was as accurate after that 200 round belt as the first shot. Can't remember it designation.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Fully automatic weapons are a pain to control. That's why soldiers are trained to fire in three shot bursts. It keeps the weapon from climbing out of your hands.

As to the Girls With Guns, not on my firing range they won't!


The SCOTUS has stated that the National Guard and the Army Reserve are not the militia. An armed citizenry is the militia. Better regulation, i.e. training would be a good idea, though.

VM there are new autofire weapons in the works where muzzle rise is almost non-existent.

As for the citizenry being trained as the militia...

1. too lazy.
2. most are afraid of guns.
3. those that would willing be trained are too old, like you and me.

Although I would willing be a trainer in marksmanship. At least my recruits would be able to hit that bullet with the side of a barn.

and give me an M-24 with suppressor and the other side will dwindle slowly.

 

[kromen]

"AK-47. The very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in room....accept no substitutes." - Ordell Robbie