Marlin Firearms Forum banner
61 - 80 of 86 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
The Party that paid rioters to burn, loot, murder, and ruin peoples' livelihoods want 'common sense' gun control. They flew the organizers and ringleaders from targeted city to targeted city. biden and harris contributed to rioters' bail funds. Their partners in Media, Police, and City Administration gave them carte blanche to destroy with no consequences.
Now, they don't want you and I having access to ammunition. I wonder why that is?
Exactly. Gun control laws have never had anything to do with anybodies safety,...gun control laws are only meant to make it easier and safer for governments to rule over people, destroy people, or both, depending on the current government.
Make no mistake about what is going on now, this current government, and the people who control it want over half of this population, along with its culture destroyed...meaning dead and gone.
There is NO other reason to open our borders, destroy the economy, ignore the laws of our country, attack religion, and try to take away ammo and weapons from the citizenry,.. except to kill our way of life, our families, and our culture.
If you believe nothing else, believe this, because it's right in front of our faces now and we are watching it happen HERE and now.
We have both seen and read about this in countless other cultures and countries. It's nothing new and has been going on since the beginning of civilization.
I believe If we want to save our way of life for future generations, two things are crucial:
Knowing who the enemy is...
Recognize what is really happening right here and now...
I pray that Americans wake up, save, and reclaim what we were given by those who came before us. God bless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Exactly. Gun control laws have never had anything to do with anybodies safety,...gun control laws are only meant to make it easier and safer for governments to rule over people, destroy people, or both, depending on the current government.
Make no mistake about what is going on now, this current government, and the people who control it want over half of this population, along with its culture destroyed...meaning dead and gone.
There is NO other reason to open our borders, destroy the economy, ignore the laws of our country, attack religion, and try to take away ammo and weapons from the citizenry,.. except to kill our way of life, our families, and our culture.
If you believe nothing else, believe this, because it's right in front of our faces now and we are watching it happen HERE and now.
We have both seen and read about this in countless other cultures and countries. It's nothing new and has been going on since the beginning of civilization.
I believe If we want to save our way of life for future generations, two things are crucial:
Knowing who the enemy is...
Recognize what is really happening right here and now...
I pray that Americans wake up, save, and reclaim what we were given by those who came before us. God bless.
you are correct its about control crimminals dont obey the laws and most of the shootings involved stolen firearms so that being said gun control is just another way to get closer to take away our rights to own firearms its a very serious move to get to goverment conferscation and to go against our second amendment
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
For more than 10 years CA has been talking about ammo bans on the basis ammo isnt specified in 2A. (See? We're not trying to take your guns! Stop the crazy conspiracy theories and spreading of lies!!)

You might be thinking the next thing i'll say refers to the assumption that most of our laws are founded in that idea, that 2A didnt mention thumbhole stocks, bumpstocks, scopes, pistol grips, bullet buttons, etc. either, but no. The problem, where I think the founders were remiss, is not defining militia, gun ownership by who and when, what is a firearm, etc and because of the cloudy questions, it becomes up to the govt to decide who gets to the operate the gun, meaning in this case who gets ammo and for what specific purpose. Ammo would be held by the govt until war or other problem for which a militia would have to be formed and then issue the ammo as needed. Your musket stays over your fireplace, empty, until youre called. And mind you, that was all before we had a standing army which assumed all of the roles, making 2A moot.

I didnt get this from my opinion, its the debate that gone on for 200 years that most have heard. So, if you get to have any gun you want and the govt holds the ammo in warehouses until needed, there IS a legal argument that would support it. But the govt has a humongously giant problem that has allowed expanded 2A rights to survive, thats the common use of ammo, guns and accessories all along and there is a legal basis that supports that too. We're in a tug of war, the classic definition of 2A against how the govt allowed it to be used which became part of the fabric. Thats the basis of all the weird laws like sudden talk of ammo bans, etc, its the govt trying to roll back fabric-ed permissions which it now regards as mistakes. Its critical the SC rule on the myriad 2A cases before it and settle it before the govt chips away all rights.

That assumes good times but today woke mobs run DC and they dont care about legal arguments and neither do the citizens they represent. That poses a new problem for everyone else. How does 2A fit into to a govt thats run amok, if it has run amok? If a sound and stable govt isnt what we have, what should be the posture then be? My whole life I never had to think about such a question. We had good, lousy, so-so but never this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
189 Posts
The problem, where I think the founders were remiss, is not defining militia, gun ownership by who and when, what is a firearm, etc.
If I remember correctly, the 2nd Amendment says that the right to bear ARMS shall not be infringed. Nothing about them being firearms. Therefore, restricting the ownership and carrying of swords, daggers, clubs, bows, arrows etc. is also unconstitutional....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,849 Posts
Remember now--The Gubberment forgets that if it were not for all of us buying any outdoor fishing, camping and shooting sports equipment they would not even have the money they waste on trying to suppress our rights. All of the manufacturers should immediately work on legal work-arounds to paying that tax on the sporting equipment that they make and sell. See how that will starve the Gubberment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,284 Posts
Discussion Starter · #68 ·
"The problem, where I think the founders were remiss, is not defining militia,"'

But they they did. They did it on several occasions but dissolved them illegally when they created the national Guard. The following is a little something I wrote a few years back in rebuttal to a similar comment.

OK, lets discuss the 2nd Amendment. Good idea. It is my carefully considered opinion that the KEY WORD is MILITIA.

1. The Militia Act of 1792. One year after the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, Congress passed a law defining the militia. The Militia Act of 1792 declared that all free male citizens between the ages of 18 and 44 were to be members of the militia. Furthermore, every citizen was to be armed. The act stated:
"Every citizen...[shall] provide himself with a good musket, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints...."

The Militia Act of 1792 made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.

U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982) "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated BY LAW (emphasis mine) to possess a [military style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipmemnt....There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the national Guard."

Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311. "The militia of the Untied States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and...under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States.....

Supreme Court: U.S. v. Miller 1939 In this case, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised of all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense...[and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves AND OF THE KIND IN COMMON USE AT THE TIME. (emphasis mine)
(BTW, Miller lost in court because he did not show up. It was never taken into account that his no show was because he had passed away.)

More on Title 10 of the U.S. Code

UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 302, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -

(1) the organized militia which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or of the Naval Militia.

Now it took me all of about ten minutes to find all that information. Just go to the Gun Owners of America's website and look for their firearms fact sheet. There's 24 pages of good information there.

I plan on making copies of the above and sending each of my representatives their own personal copy. Feel free to do the same. Maybe, if they get flooded with as many letters with the above as Zumbo's sponsers did on his major foot in mouth problem, the idiots just might get a message. Leave our guns alone.
Paul B.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
30,586 Posts
Remember now--The Gubberment forgets that if it were not for all of us buying any outdoor fishing, camping and shooting sports equipment they would not even have the money they waste on trying to suppress our rights. All of the manufacturers should immediately work on legal work-arounds to paying that tax on the sporting equipment that they make and sell. See how that will starve the Gubberment.

Ah yes, the FET tax being 10% of your goods sales price. Had to pay that damn tax my entire manufacturing career. I hated paying it as the DC gangsters often raided those funds for whatever their whim might be. Certainly not spending it on what they're supposed to be spending on. Of course, that is par for the course.

Jack
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,849 Posts
Ah yes, the FET tax being 10% of your goods sales price. Had to pay that damn tax my entire manufacturing career. I hated paying it as the DC gangsters often raided those funds for whatever their whim might be. Certainly not spending it on what they're supposed to be spending on. Of course, that is par for the course.

Jack
They were supposed to be using it to support and maintain hunting lands and the shooting sports. They lied and divert much of the funds to anti 2nd A agendas.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
30,586 Posts
They were supposed to be using it to support and maintain hunting lands and the shooting sports. They lied and divert much of the funds to anti 2nd A agendas.

Preaching to the choir, owned my own manufacturing businesses since 1974, I know.

Jack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts
For more than 10 years CA has been talking about ammo bans on the basis ammo isnt specified in 2A. (See? We're not trying to take your guns! Stop the crazy conspiracy theories and spreading of lies!!)

You might be thinking the next thing i'll say refers to the assumption that most of our laws are founded in that idea, that 2A didnt mention thumbhole stocks, bumpstocks, scopes, pistol grips, bullet buttons, etc. either, but no. The problem, where I think the founders were remiss, is not defining militia, gun ownership by who and when, what is a firearm, etc and because of the cloudy questions, it becomes up to the govt to decide who gets to the operate the gun, meaning in this case who gets ammo and for what specific purpose. Ammo would be held by the govt until war or other problem for which a militia would have to be formed and then issue the ammo as needed. Your musket stays over your fireplace, empty, until youre called. And mind you, that was all before we had a standing army which assumed all of the roles, making 2A moot.

I didnt get this from my opinion, its the debate that gone on for 200 years that most have heard. So, if you get to have any gun you want and the govt holds the ammo in warehouses until needed, there IS a legal argument that would support it. But the govt has a humongously giant problem that has allowed expanded 2A rights to survive, thats the common use of ammo, guns and accessories all along and there is a legal basis that supports that too. We're in a tug of war, the classic definition of 2A against how the govt allowed it to be used which became part of the fabric. Thats the basis of all the weird laws like sudden talk of ammo bans, etc, its the govt trying to roll back fabric-ed permissions which it now regards as mistakes. Its critical the SC rule on the myriad 2A cases before it and settle it before the govt chips away all rights.

That assumes good times but today woke mobs run DC and they dont care about legal arguments and neither do the citizens they represent. That poses a new problem for everyone else. How does 2A fit into to a govt thats run amok, if it has run amok? If a sound and stable govt isnt what we have, what should be the posture then be? My whole life I never had to think about such a question. We had good, lousy, so-so but never this.
The founders were quite clear on defining a militia, and the reason for an armed citizenry. You can find the definition of militia ,both organized and unorganized in the Federalists papers, the US Code, probably your state constitution, and many of the writings of the founders.
The main reason for an armed citizenry was to overthrow the government should it fail in its duty to protect and defend the rights and freedoms of the people. Other than the specific powers enumerated in the Constitution, the federal governments job is to protect the borders, the freedoms of the people, and the Constitution of the US. All powers not specifically listed in the Constitution are reserved for the states, or to the people. The Constitution was meant to LIMIT the power of the federal government.
There is no legal argument for the federal government to "hold" any private property belonging to free people, and if the government or its courts thinks there IS a legal argument to take our property,...THAT is why we have an armed citizenry. It is our duty to preserve our rights and freedoms for the next generation. The government does not "allow" people to have weapons...people allow them to have weapons. JMO
JMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
642 Posts
Hey Oletimer, could not have said it better myself. Too bad that the Government don’t agree. There needs to be change alright. Our “government” has become waaaaaay too powerful over the people. There will come a time when the people will take back their government.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
"The problem, where I think the founders were remiss, is not defining militia,"'

But they they did. They did it on several occasions but dissolved them illegally when they created the national Guard. The following is a little something I wrote a few years back in rebuttal to a similar comment.

OK, lets discuss the 2nd Amendment. Good idea. It is my carefully considered opinion that the KEY WORD is MILITIA.

1. The Militia Act of 1792. One year after the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, Congress passed a law defining the militia. The Militia Act of 1792 declared that all free male citizens between the ages of 18 and 44 were to be members of the militia. Furthermore, every citizen was to be armed. The act stated:
"Every citizen...[shall] provide himself with a good musket, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints...."

The Militia Act of 1792 made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.

U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982) "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated BY LAW (emphasis mine) to possess a [military style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipmemnt....There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the national Guard."

Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311. "The militia of the Untied States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and...under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States.....

Supreme Court: U.S. v. Miller 1939 In this case, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised of all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense...[and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves AND OF THE KIND IN COMMON USE AT THE TIME. (emphasis mine)
(BTW, Miller lost in court because he did not show up. It was never taken into account that his no show was because he had passed away.)

More on Title 10 of the U.S. Code

UNITED STATES CODE
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA

Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes

(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 302, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are -

(1) the organized militia which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia;
and

(2) The unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or of the Naval Militia.

Now it took me all of about ten minutes to find all that information. Just go to the Gun Owners of America's website and look for their firearms fact sheet. There's 24 pages of good information there.

I plan on making copies of the above and sending each of my representatives their own personal copy. Feel free to do the same. Maybe, if they get flooded with as many letters with the above as Zumbo's sponsers did on his major foot in mouth problem, the idiots just might get a message. Leave our guns alone.
Paul B.
Well researched and presented ! I'd like to add that one of the major points argued about the Type of guns with which the Militia (we the people) were supposed to equip ourselves :

Many 2A detractors say "well regulated Militia" means a formally organized and controlled Militia, despite the broader use of the term as defined above in the various Acts.

In reviewing the writings of the founders regarding the constitution and Bill of Rights, the common term for professional Army was "Regulars". Regular Army would have the appropriate weapons and ammunition and "kit" of the day to muster to war.

A "well regulated" Militia does not mean "well controlled", it means well EQUIPPED with the proper arms. Militias of the day frequently had Cannon and other supplies equal to Army regulars.

And throughout much of American history, PRIVATE citizen (militia) had SUPERIOR weapons to Regular Army. IE Rifled barrels vs smooth bore muskets, lever action repeating rifles vs muzzle loaders or trapdoors, revolvers of large caliber (45 colt or 44-40) vs 38 colt Army revolvers. Heck, the Rough Riders were equipped with the latest machine guns (colt-browning 1895) purchased by a wealthy benefactor as well as the colt 1895 gattling gun from the military.

Private citizens have been able to buy semi automatic weapons since the early 1900s (winchester 351 SL) well before Regular Army adopted the Garand.

All this to say : Constitution, historical writings, AND 200 years of American history all support the Broad definition of 2A, not the narrow box they are trying to push us into at this point in time !!

thanks !
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,429 Posts
Biden and the Kamela are doing everything they can to destroy our Republic. When will the insanity end ?! As much as he was obnoxious Trump was the best president in my 67 years!

AC
it will end when "we the people" exercise our God given rights spelled out in our constitution! ain't nobody coming to save us! the founders knew it! that is why they spelled it out for us! now it is up to us. what will we do,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 

·
Premium Member
All kinds. Enamored of their mechanisms! Worked as an engineering
Joined
·
12,535 Posts
Bullets save lives. Maybe he would ban food so no crimes could be committed. Ya, I know it's stupid but I was thinking stupid like Biden.

AC
Winchester could simply setup another line at it's Oxford, MS plant.

I'm getting an uncomfortable feeling with the maneuvering the government pursuing.

Can't ban the guns so we will ban ammo? Or at least choking the output to civilians.

"we ain't seen nuthin' yet". AC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
For more than 10 years CA has been talking about ammo bans on the basis ammo isnt specified in 2A. (See? We're not trying to take your guns! Stop the crazy conspiracy theories and spreading of lies!!)

You might be thinking the next thing i'll say refers to the assumption that most of our laws are founded in that idea, that 2A didnt mention thumbhole stocks, bumpstocks, scopes, pistol grips, bullet buttons, etc. either, but no. The problem, where I think the founders were remiss, is not defining militia, gun ownership by who and when, what is a firearm, etc and because of the cloudy questions, it becomes up to the govt to decide who gets to the operate the gun, meaning in this case who gets ammo and for what specific purpose. Ammo would be held by the govt until war or other problem for which a militia would have to be formed and then issue the ammo as needed. Your musket stays over your fireplace, empty, until youre called. And mind you, that was all before we had a standing army which assumed all of the roles, making 2A moot.

I didnt get this from my opinion, its the debate that gone on for 200 years that most have heard. So, if you get to have any gun you want and the govt holds the ammo in warehouses until needed, there IS a legal argument that would support it. But the govt has a humongously giant problem that has allowed expanded 2A rights to survive, thats the common use of ammo, guns and accessories all along and there is a legal basis that supports that too. We're in a tug of war, the classic definition of 2A against how the govt allowed it to be used which became part of the fabric. Thats the basis of all the weird laws like sudden talk of ammo bans, etc, its the govt trying to roll back fabric-ed permissions which it now regards as mistakes. Its critical the SC rule on the myriad 2A cases before it and settle it before the govt chips away all rights.

That assumes good times but today woke mobs run DC and they dont care about legal arguments and neither do the citizens they represent. That poses a new problem for everyone else. How does 2A fit into to a govt thats run amok, if it has run amok? If a sound and stable govt isnt what we have, what should be the posture then be? My whole life I never had to think about such a question. We had good, lousy, so-so but never this.
"OF THE PEOPLE" is the most important part of the Second Amendment. THAT phrase says the RIGHT is the people's right and that the people are the militia, in plain English.
 
61 - 80 of 86 Posts
Top