i believe firearms laws are a contradiction to the 2nd amendment. the NFA is basically a licensing system for machine guns and short barreled rifles/shotguns, among other things of course. and there are other laws. but just a general reference.
laws that prohibit the manufacture or ownership, buying or selling, transporting or usage of firearms are unconstitutional. laws that limit import, or export are not contrary to the 2nd amendment however. thats a different battle.
basically, anyone that breaks these gun laws are subject to arrest and imprisonment. because of this most people do not break the laws. but by definition these laws are "unconstitutional".
unconstitutional is a funny word. people use it too loosely i think. to me a law that is unconstitutional is a law that does not apply to an american citizen. it is a law that cannot be enforced, and you cannot be punished for breaking this "law"
dont get me wrong, im not condoning unlawful activities. but i question the very concept of these "laws" i and wonder why others dont. i feel that if gun owners as an individual whole were to speak up, they could have these laws over turned.
an individual whole is 80 million people all saying the same thing as a whole, but each individually speaking instead of just standing by.
the very concept of democracy that the founding fathers wanted to instill in us means that taking arms to the streets in violent protest should not be considered until absolutely all other recourse has been exhausted trying to appeal these unconstitutional gun laws.
if i were rich, and could hire the right lawyers, i believe we could challenge the US government on the issue of gun laws, and i believe (and hope) we could win, basically making all restrictive gun laws null and void.
when explained properly, the supreme court must admit that, while gun laws give some security (either false or real) to firearms ownership and usage, they are unconstitutional and therefore, should be repealed.
the name of this thread was a thought that i have been pondering a while. when will the next law come into effect, and when will the next law be enough? will there every be too restrictive gun laws? will another assault weapons ban do it? or would it take a complete ban on handguns? or all guns......
so when do yall think that gun owners will have enough, and instead of talking about it in forums and in dens and living rooms, and actually do something about it. instead of reading about it in the papers or seeing it on fox news and hoping that the vote goes in our favor.
the founding fathers put the second amendment in the constitution for a very good reason... but if we allow them to "vote" out this part.... or restrict it to the point that gun owners no longer pose a threat, then we are in for a government take over like we've only seen in history and the news.
i feel that we are on the very edge of the point of no return, where we either decide to give in and give our rights (not just gun rights, but all of them) up or do something other then talk about it and hope and pray it is all okay.
Location: Little hut in the woods near Blue River Wisconsin
Re: Gun laws, when is enough...enough
There should be no laws against owning or using guns. We have laws making it illegal to trespass on another persons rights whether its breaking into his house, threatening him, stealing from him, assaulting him or murder. Those are crimes that should be punished and for violent crimes his rights to guns should be curtailed. Bad gun laws go back farther than the The National Firearms Act of 1934.
"When once a republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil."~~- Thomas Jefferson
Roman Catholic, Life Member of American Legion, VFW, Wisconsin Libertarian party, Wi-FORCE, WGO, NRA, JPFO, GOA, SAFand CCRKBA
Location: DAV, Deep in the Pineywoods of East Texas, just west of Shreveport, LA
Re: Gun laws, when is enough...enough
At this moment in time there are many different organizations that promote the 2nd Amendment. NRA, JPFO, and GOA, to name just a few. This is where the battles for our 2nd Amendment rights should be fought at this time. There may come a day, and I don't think it's that far off, when we will have to take up arms, God forbid, to protect our freedoms. Statistics tell us that there are 80-90 million gun owners in America, over 250 million guns. A lot of these folks don't belong to any organization, and a lot of them don't even vote. I think that if we could get the ones that don't belong, or don't vote, on board with us, then we will have the strong 2nd Amendment that we want. Remember the last vote from the SCOTUS was only a 5-4 victory for our rights. That is just to close a vote for me. Remember in November!
Y'all be safe now, ya hear!
Without God we have no moral compass. Without Family we have no purpose. Without Guns we can not defend either our religious choice, or our family! Millwright
like carver said there are 80-90 million gun owners in this country. this is a number that gets thrown around a lot by gun owners like myself. but we all know that there are a lot of gun owners that either want stricter laws, or to keep the laws we have.
i know a person that is an avid hunter/trapper. he has a few guns of all types, even has a concealed carry license. one day i was over at his work hanging out (im friends with the owner and go over to see how he is) and was testing out the waters a little with this guy. asking a few questions and such. and the subject came up of ar15's. at the time i happened to have one and since the owner of the store is collector too, the next day i brought the ar in for show and tell. i opened up the hard case and picked the gun up, checked for clear and safe and passed it around. the guy in questions said where did you get all them mags ( i had 3 or 4 loaded 30 round mags in the case too) and i told him the local store. he got this kinda odd look on is face, kinda like if i had just told him i had just robbed the bank or something. he said said "you dont need all those mags" i said...well, no, i dont really need them (atleast right now). he proceeded to tell me about how the general population didnt need a gun like that, that we didnt need that much firepower and if i was ever stopped by the cops carrying that much fire power they would be suspicious of what i was planning to do.
so basically because it was not a "huntin" gun he thinks that i should not be allowed to own and use it. he was nervous to know that i (the regular joe and unsuspecting friend) was basically armed like i was in a militia.
we had some more discussion about things of the nature. and i learn that while he has a concealed carry license, he doesnt believe civilians need hi cap (15 round) mags for their pistols. he doesnt carry even though he has a license, only on trips and such i reckon.
sorry for rambling but the point im trying to make is that it just shocked the heck out of me when i realized that someone can be pro gun, and not want to have guns banned, but be against ar 15 rifles or ak's (i showed him my ak later too) lol.
i was just flabber gasted and still am.
so not only are we going to have to deal with those that want to do away with our rights all together, but we have to deal with those in our own flock that want to impose the limits they deem as proper on us.
it's easier to impose limits if a part of the community being oppressed willfully agrees with the new rules...
Almost like taxes...
Hatch nailed it here.
Your friend's real issue, John, is that he's looking at gun rights from the wrong perspective. He wants people to have "enough" gun, but not too much. Too much could be dangerous.
Speaking from a statical-historical perspective, a person is far more likely to be killed by an oppressive government than by a random citizen. While our government is one of the least oppressive in history, I'll gladly take the lesser evil.
Nothing posted on TheFirearmsForum.com constitutes legal, accounting, gunsmithing, or other professional advice. Readers are encouraged to consult with qualified professionals for real advice.
Your life is lived at your own risk. Don't blame me for the dumb things you do.
I have had nearly the same experience John, people I have hunted with for years and gone to the range with get pretty squeamish when I whip out the AR or even a hi-cap pistol with extra mags. They have no problem with an auto loader .30-06 but give a handful of extra rounds and people think WW3 is just waiting to start. wtf?
Another gun-clinging conservative
A true soldier fights not for what he hates in front of him, but for what he loves behind him. G.K. Chesterton
I've also heard the 80 to 90 million gun owners number and while that sounds like a lot it's still a minority, not even getting into the variations in attitude amongst them.
Personally I think the big problem is that most people's gun knowledge is based on television instead of reality. I'd like to see at least air rifle competition brought to high schools, embrace the 2cd as part of our heritage, teach firearm safety and familiarization.
Bring back college rifle teams, make Camp Perry as big as the superbowl.
For some reason there is a fine line at some individual point between rights and excess. I don't have any problems with AR, AK, high cap but do get a little squeamish over handgrenades and mortars for personal use.
Giving every man a vote has no more made men wise and free than Christianity has made them good.
H. L. Mencken
It is not in the nature of politics that the best men should be elected. The best men do not want to govern their fellowmen.
At the time the constitution was written I believe the intent was to allow common citizens the right to arms equivalent to what govt. and military carried. Any additional laws are "infringements" from a strict constitutional veiwpoint.
jeff, you're correct. in my opinion a strict constitutional viewpoint is the proper one.
some folks would be uncomfortable with the normal citizens having hand grenades and mortars. a person with a devious intent will just go down to the hardware store and get the ingredients to make a home made explosive device, AKA a pipe bomb. so if a a criminal really wanted such a weapon he would make an improvised version.
i dont see much need for a normal citizen to have hand grenades. and im sure there are people that shouldnt have such a weapon. but like i said, those that want such a weapon could make their own. so, while there isnt any need for it I believe it should be "allowed".
if it were not restricted i would have hand grenades provided the cost was not prohibitive. while there is no need for them during my day to day life. should we ever have an invasion by out enemies it would come in handy.
imagine you're a gang banger... your're with the MS13 group... so you and about 10 of your buddies decide you didnt like being run out of the stairwell in the apartment building where you were dealing drugs.... yall go back to get the residents that you suspect called the cops on you. should be an easy endeavor ... old folks and single moms mostly.
since you and your buddies are gang bangers, yall have a fully automatic converted AK 47 and a fully auto tec 9, a few handguns and and some moth top cocktails
now imagine hand grenades, short barreled shotguns and fully automatic weapons are not restricted by gun laws.... much less the 1911's and glocks already in circulation you're going to think twice about causing trouble... because the victims may very well be just as well armed as you and you.