1911Forum banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
You and I need assault rifles. Why? Because it may very well come down to having to protect your property, freedom, and/or your rights from our own government or invasion by foreign country. I don't know if and when this might happen, God Willing, never will. But if the ATF, FBI, Natl Guard, etc., ever come on my land with the purpose of taking my guns or because I refused to register them through any process, I will, by my own principles, have to defend by "assaulting" the attackers.

I truly believe that the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution intended for the right to keep and bear arms solely to protect our liberties from being taken by force. I read a topic here that said the 2nd Am. was only for militias, not the private citizen. A militia is nothing more than armed private citizens!

No firearm in any way should be restricted. Hell not even fully automatic weapons. I understand that you're not going to go hunting with a machine gun, but the 2nd Amendment was not written so we could hunt, or shoot clays or bullseye or whatever. It was to protect and defend our rights from our government or from attack by a foreign nation. Sorry, your 10/22 is not adequate.

I'm not exactly sure about the pre and post bans and all that, but somewhere awhile back, gun-owners laid down and let a little legislation through, and them some more and now we have states setting extremely restrictive anti-gun laws. Even the manufacturers like Bill Ruger caved in, as did Colt's newest CEO, a former Marine. And then there's S&W. They're winning though, everywhere I turn, I see "No longer imported"
not because there isn't high demand for those "assault" rifles either.

The reason we need assault rifles is that it is best weapon to protect. Yes my 1911 is a nice gun but when they are beating your door down, I'll take an AK with 30 rd mags and a grenade launcher. Or an UZI. Whetever is illegal, it's sure to be the right tool for the job. Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I don't see this scenario ever really happening. The gubmint knows that to try a door-to-door disarmament they would ignite a civil war. There would be desertions and defections from the military on a massive scale, because many of the people in the military are on our side. Instead, rather than assaulting militarily, they are doing it politically and sociologically by utilizing the media to paint us all as dangerous whackos and using the public schools to brainwash kids into seeing us in that light as well, to breed us out.

They are succeeding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
Don's fall for the legal fallacy of the "need" argument. I don't need many of the things I have but that is why we are here in America. I can darn sure get them if I work hard and am willing to pay the price. I get ticked off when people start that "pay your fair share" argument. I started off at 17 years old as a private in the Army. Still in and am now in the position to buy a weapon every now and then or go out and eat a steak when I want to. When I retire, I hope to go out and make a bunch of money, sit in my barco-lounger and drink an occasional beer. People who claim I "won life's lottery" are more than welcome to have joined me in the 0200 CE jumps; the death treks at McKall; the visits to the worlds "garden spots"; the night compass swims; etc, etc. I refuse to share my hard work with some bum who expects a hand out and expects the government to support them in a particular way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by MuzzleBlast:
Instead, rather than assaulting militarily, they are doing it politically and sociologically by utilizing the media to paint us all as dangerous whackos and using the public schools to brainwash kids into seeing us in that light as well, to breed us out.

They are succeeding.
And the very reason that they are succeeding is because we have a propensity to make this kind of statement:

Originally Posted by TomP

Why? Because it may very well come down to having to protect your property, freedom, and/or your rights from our own government or invasion by foreign country. I don't know if and when this might happen, God Willing, never will. But if the ATF, FBI, Natl Guard, etc., ever come on my land with the purpose of taking my guns or because I refused to register them through any process, I will, by my own principles, have to defend by "assaulting" the attackers.


TomP may be a very reasonable law abiding person but such statements are simply throwing gasoline on the fire. No one, but no one, who does not understand the issues, and that is about 99% of the population, will look at such statements as rational. The Press and other “Social Engineers” just love to publish such things so as to show that we are dangerous and not law abiding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,692 Posts
Not my quote but it is a good one:

I suggest now is the time for all of us to start telling our gun control friends that this is an issue we will not compromise on any more. Here is what I have started to do. I do not argue with my liberal friends about gun control. I do not try to change their minds, I do not lecture them about the historical perspectives on the Second or the dangers of the power of the state. I do not mention Lott or a thousand other sources that speak so
eloquently of the practical reasons to be armed. I do not try to explain the feeling of freedom that comes from the acceptance of my position as a citizen with the right and obligation to defend myself or our liberty. Instead, I ask them politely and calmly the following question: "Is gun control an issue you are willing to die for? Does this mean
so much to you that you would give your life to make it so?"

I then explain that to the us, the Second Amendment is the keystone of the Constitution. It is the most important right to us. It guarantees all of the others. It is to us what the First of the Fifth is to them. I tell them in a cold, sober tone, that we have been backed into a corner by their side, and that is always dangerous to do. I tell them that by never once considering, much less acknowledging, the validity of our views, they have waged a war on our liberty that has forced us to consider an option that none of us would have thought possible just 5 years ago.

I tell them that just as no Black man would ever go back to segregation, just as no American would give up freedom of speech, that just as none of us would stand by and let the government herd the Jews to another holocaust, so will we never, ever give in on the Second. I tell them that we are at fault for never making this clear to them. I explain that while you may think this is something of little importance, it is the one issue that can, and will, lead to a revolution in this country. Not one other issue on the political scene has the power to do this.

I conclude by telling them, as calmly and rationally as I can, that I do not want war, I do not want to kill anyone; I simply want to be left alone to live my life as a free American. However, I know my duty to my ancestors, who fought at Bunker Hill, to my children, who are counting on me to preserve their liberty until it is their turn, and to every American who values our liberty today, and if they persist in attacking a basic human right, they can, and should, expect us to fight back.

They inevitably respond that "You can't really expect to stand up to the army or the police." I then give them this example: Last year, about 20,000,000 Americans bought some type of hunting license. Toss out half of them as duplicates, kids, guys who enjoy the field but don't care if they shoot or not, and the like. That leaves 10,000,000.
Assume just 10% are deadly serious about this. That leaves one million, well armed, skilled Americans who are not going to sit back while the anti's take their freedom. Imagine a guerrilla war with one million Americans doing nothing more than resisting an assault on their basic rights? It would be unwinnable without the imposition of a total police sate, and that is something even the anti's should fear.

Even one hundred thousand Americans, willing to pay the price and to fight back, would be enough to make this a reality. Selectively fighting back against those who take your liberty makes a lot more sense that blowing up innocent Americans. Targeting those who would enslave you makes them personally liable for their actions against us. Remember, they will paint us as terrorists, but in this case, we are doing nothing more than resisting the kind of tyranny that would have long ago prompted our ancestors to act. The issue here is whether we really have that resolve. I believe we do, but we have never made that clear to the other side.

I have no problem with anyone exercising their First Amendment right to speak against gun ownership, to lobby for passive acquiescence to crime or tyranny just so long as they never, ever attempt to make their personal views into laws that affect the rest of us.
______________________________


------------------
"What most of these people need is a good slap upside the head. What I don't need is any more lawsuits." John "The Tooz" Matusak
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,157 Posts
Geee... I don't own a single Assault Weapon... I do have a few AR-15's, and a variety of other DEFENSE WEAPONS, and SPORT UTILITY FIREARMS, but no Assault Weapons here.

FWIW, the Gun-Grabbers and their "No Sporting Use" mantra has always been a smokescreen. People like Fienstien & Schumer talk about the lack of "Sporting Use" with something like a Big 50 (BMG) "sniper rifle", but when the people who compete with these very sophisticated Hi-Power target rifles in Long Distance matches illustrate and display the fact that, in fact, they participate in a unique sport, and the cost to play is rather high ($4-8k for the rifle, $1-2/round), they still continue to scream how there is no ligitimate sporting value for these weapons.

The public needs to be educated that there are Shooting Sports, and that these athletes are no different from those who play tennis, or golf. We all strive hard to perfect our craft.

The 2nd Amendment was written to guarantee that the 1st Amendment could always be upheld, and the 1st is not only about speech, it's about the freedom to enjoy the pursuit of happiness, and one of my favorite pursuits is Shooting Sports.

We can waste time preaching to the choir here, but our only hope to sustain the love of our sport is to educate those who have been blindly misled by those who would disarm you. I have taken my fight to the soccer moms, and nice "church ladies", and it's surpising how many of them are now beginning to understand what this is all about, and in some cases, finding an interest in our sport.

Try to introduce a new person to the shooting sports every chance you get, by education, and increases in numbers, we will be successful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
if the gubba-nint says we cant have them, then we NEED THEM.
i dont own any AWs, they are just semi auto Sport Utility Hunting guns

------------------
Caspian frame + Colt parts = Col-spian? or Cas-olt?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
Originally posted by Patrickl:
---snip---
TomP may be a very reasonable law abiding person but such statements are simply throwing gasoline on the fire. No one, but no one, who does not understand the issues, and that is about 99% of the population, will look at such statements as rational
---snip--

You nailed that one. Even if TomP is right (and I think he is), phrasing it this way is way too easy to take out of context.

It reminds me of friend who was running for Congress. He messed up and the press was hounding. They asked over and over about this one thing, but he kept using pronouns or inserting other quotes they couldn't air. Finally, he said, "I've already answered that 10 times, what do you want?"

The reporter answered, "We need you to say it one time completely so we can record it."

Steve refused! They wanted to run that one soundbite out of context, without the full explanation, to make him look bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hi all, I've been away from the Board for awhile, I would like to respond to some of the more interesting takes. In My Opinion:

Muzzleblast I agree with you in that the war on our 2nd Am. rights are being waged on several levels (and They're gaining ground quickly). I disagree about the whole military thing, they will do what they are told--there's been quite a few times the military has forcefully and bloodily violated the civil rights of our citizens. Also the government has shown contempt to our armed services recently. I'm
saying that they may or may not consider the military.

Patrickl, I am law-abiding and I am also reasonabe. It may look like my scales are tipped way to the right, and while I don't feel extreme, I look upon the manner and ferocity in which our government--federal, state, and local have attacked our constitutional rights as extreme. I am against any type of ban on any type of arm. I'm not sure what percent of the people "understand" the issues surrounding gun control, nor will I guess. What's important is that gunowners of this country who DO understand, stand up and refuse to have their rights to own guns of their choosing be chiseled.

I applaud you BillD for your powerful post. That may be the most succinctly worded method to refute the gun control faction in our society. It takes strong resolve to not give in to their invitation to fight when they slander us in every medium and they spit on our country's constitution.

MY statement or any like it have not cost us gun owners anything. Our failure to vote for like minded represenatives to our governments have cost us dearly. Who knows when the fully automatic Thompson machine gun was banned from your average Joe? It was certainly less than 70 years ago. It used to be you could flip open your Sears Roebuck catolog and right there, you had your 1911 waiting for you to order. The FBI didn't require you to wait. Unfortuanately now the start of much more covert and manipulative methods are being used by the HCI and the others bent on reforming current gun laws to suit their agendas. The funny thing about gun owners is that we all have our own personal reasons to have them. To you it may be to hunt or compete or to defend your home,
to carry, etc. and these are all as valid as the next.

God Bless, Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
I don't know how many armed service members are on this board, active or retired, but I'd like to say something on our behalf. I believe that the military will not play a part in disarming the American people. First, the government is too smart to try that, and second, most of us are on your side. There would be widespread resignation and desertion if the armed forces were ever used in such a way. We have this thing called the Constitutional Paradigm, which basically gives us the hierarchy of entities we must obey. Guess what's at the top of the list? The Constitution.

In short, we have an obligation to disobey un-Constitutional orders. I'm not saying everyone in the military would have the courage to do so, but enough would to make the difference. I would personally obey orders up to a certain point; my commanders would have to step way over the line for me to disobey (i.e., "Kill that man, he refuses to turn in his weapons"). That's when the term "fragging" starts getting taken seriously.

Well, I will shut up before I say something I'd regret.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,986 Posts
Guns are tools. Period. They have no power by themselves. This is kind of like what we all learned about the computers: garbage in, garbage out. Anti's need to make people believe otherwise. They have good support in the government and the press. The press controls the "sheep." "Sheep" are the people that must do something, and are looking for someone to tell them what to believe. Sheep are people who live in america.

On the other hand we have Americans. Those are the people like you and I. People who think for themselves. If during this republican time, we can repoint the sheep, we can save America and make more Americans. To be and American you must live the constitution to it's fullest. To do that you must shoot and train in preperation for self defense.

If we lead the sheep to our side, we can change the vote. The vote is where we will win ultimately. It would be great to have more americans in the government. People who say no to money and do what they want and promised. I hope we can elect some libertarians soon to rebuild.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
TomP,

Hopefully you understand that I in fact believe you are rational. What I am trying to say is the Press and others only look at the words, not the underlying structure. When they are done cutting and snipping we end up looking like crazed anarchist.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
725 Posts
To the liberal anti gun press owning any type of firearm is irrational.

------------------
"Gun Control is Only to Protect Those in Power."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I never said that it would be the military to be the ones to come-a-knocking. There's plenty of other agencies to do the dirty work. And no slight was intended to the people who serve either, hell, I PROUDLY wore my C.I.B. over my heart. But it doesn't mean that there would be a mass falling out within the ranks either. There's been many anti-gun laws passed and I can't recall the military having a widespread negative reaction. Lots of sheeple there too, I'd guess roughly proportionate to our society in general.

The year was 1968 when it became illegal to offer or order firearms through mail order.


Tom

1/41st INF., "Straight and Stalwart."
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
725 Posts
Tom, You're right on the money. To think confiscation can't happen in America is not living in reality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
853 Posts
Originally posted by TomP:
There's been many anti-gun laws passed and I can't recall the military having a widespread negative reaction.
Tom

1/41st INF., "Straight and Stalwart."

Let us be fair and also state that there hasn’t been widespread reaction in regards to gun control laws anywhere in our society. However, there is great hope. Consider the Masters Thesis by a USMC LTC. In the course of his studies he devised a survey that was administered to Initial Entry Recruits and NCO’s alike. Two of the questions pertained to gun confiscation by the military. Although I do not recall the specific wording one question asked the respondents if they would follow orders to confiscate firearms from American Citizens. The other question asked if they would use deadly force if resistance to confiscation were encountered. Both questions were based on the premise that Congress had enacted a law outlawing the private ownership of firearms and therefore the orders given to the respondents were lawful.

The overwhelming response to the survey was NO and NO again. This survey was interesting specifically in the responses by Marines, who are noted for unerringly following orders. It is also noteworthy to realize that recruits overwhelmingly demonstrated that they would refuse. As we know recruits have an extremely strong bias towards doing whatever they are told.

Gun confiscation may be attempted in this Country someday but I have to state that it would be the end of this nation. Any such action would ignite a civil war.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Anyone who has seen "Schindler's List" should know WHY banning guns (ANY guns) is dangerous. The revolt in the Warsaw Ghetto started with a handful of pistols and lasted for quite some time. History is a greater teacher than any. Free folk are armed.

------------------

Those that beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those that don't
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,987 Posts
...the war of attrition is the one we are losing...

A little here, a little there...

They won't have to come for them...

A.V.E.R.T. AntiViolenceEmergencyRescueTool

...That's all they are...


------------------
>>>>>>>>>>g2<<<<<<<<<<

I Like The Shade Too!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
Originally posted by Kevan:
Anyone who has seen "Schindler's List" should know WHY banning guns (ANY guns) is dangerous. The revolt in the Warsaw Ghetto started with a handful of pistols and lasted for quite some time. History is a greater teacher than any. Free folk are armed.
I really wish Schindler's List had portrayed the ghetto uprising, with details on how it came about. That is one history lesson the popular culture really needs.

On the political front, there is cause for some optimism. We, the NRA, kept Al Gore out of the White House. Even Klinton admits this. Do you guys have any grasp of how huge that is? The NRA has gone from merely an organization that teaches and promotes marksmanship to an organization that can change the outcome of a presidential election! The Idiot Left can bleat and screech all they want, but the politicians can no longer ignore us. The war isn't over by a damn sight, but we have won a HUGE battle on the political theatre of operations. The Million Morons Movement is out of business. HCI is in retreat, and is even changing their name. The focus of the war is now in the popular culture and public education fronts. That is where we win or lose.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top