< Back to the Main Site

Author Topic: What do you think is Constitutional?  (Read 6178 times)

Offline barmandr

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2010
  • Posts: 316
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2014, 01:59:28 PM »
Could not have said it better myself. +10


So you think the mentally handicapped should have access to guns?  Or children?  Or those with documented severe psychological issues?

Offline Hardwood83

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Location: West Omaha
  • Posts: 447
  • Molon Labe
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #21 on: July 09, 2014, 02:27:53 PM »
Don't forget the 'what' along with the 'who' is being infringed. I believe the constitutional framers intended that we should be able to buy a FN M240 over the counter without ANY government interference what so ever. If you can't be trusted to own a gun then you can't be trusted to vote, drive, own property etc.

The NFA, GCA etc are ridiculous and OBVIOUS infringements.
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." Sigmund Freud

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #22 on: July 09, 2014, 03:10:39 PM »
Bar, I have no idea how old you, but when I was in the 10-12 year age range I had my own .22 rifle and single shot shotgun.

http://nebraskanews.blogspot.com/2004/10/what-can-one-say-about-something-like.html

In the summer, after the chores were done, a group of other kids and I would head out with our rifles and fishing poles. No one thought a damn thing about it, because our parents were instilling responsibility from an early age. They used to teach hunter education and gun safety in the classroom as well. Now a days, in some places it is consider child neglect to introduce a child to firearms safety. (Aside _ But it okay to give our eleven year old daughters access to condoms and birth control without parental knowledge)

Parents are charged with neglect for instilling responsibility in their kids, but the welfare moms of gang-bangers get a pass on the same charge when their kids shoot somebody??

It is all about responsibility. The mindset now is that the entire population has to suffer the consequences of the actions of a very, very few.

Why should my kids and grandkids suffer because other parents are derelict about instilling responsibility in theirs?

Mentally handicapped have guns? That should be the responsibility of their care givers whether they should have guns, sharp steak knives, baseball bats etc..

Severe psychological issues? If they are that severe they are or should be confined without access to anything not approved by their caregivers anyway.

Now I know, because of the ACLU, a lot of them are not. They used to be!

Some years ago the ACLU challenged the confinement of those with severe psychological issues. The result was; If a properly medicated individual can function in society then they must be released.

Many of these people have been disowned by their families and released into society with no support system at all. One of the first things they do is STOP taking their meds because the side-effects are worse than the cure. Since there is no support system to ensure the meds are taken these psychos regress to their former selves.

(Aside - Because of the above Peace Officers are having to deal with these folks on the street in situations that often result in the use of deadly force. There is increasing pressure for police departments to find a solution to the problem that has been forced on the by the Mental health community, ACLU and the family that will come out of the woodwork after "Joe Crazy" was needlessly shot down after attacking a peace officer with a weapon. Then the family sues the crap out of the PD for wrongful death of a loving family member they haven't had anything to do with for years.)

So my question is because there is a small segment of our population that has been unleashed on the rest of us by a touchy feely sing Kumbya group why we must suffer the unreasonable restrictions on our RKBA?

It all boils down to responsibility and accountability. Leave people alone and only when necessary hold them accountable for their actions rather than punishing the entire population in advance.
Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #23 on: July 09, 2014, 03:18:11 PM »
Hardwood, SCOTUS alluded to that fact in their examination of Miller; We cannot determine that a short-barreled shotgun is a tool of the militia because you have no tasked us to.

Their implication was if it is a tool of the militia then it would be legal for Miller to possess and not subject by the GCA of 1934 that required a Tax stamp for weapons used by gansters.
Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM

Offline Mntnman

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 509
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #24 on: July 09, 2014, 03:42:37 PM »
Great reply, Gunscribe. In the mid eighties, I had unfettered access to a .22 and shotguns starting about ten years old when I bought my first gun with money I earned working and birthday cash.

Bad things can/ do happen when guns fall into the wrong hands but that is just one of the risks we have to live with. We seem to accept that with other tools but guns are targeted because too many people fail to realize all of the good things they are used for, mainly liberty preservers.

 

Offline farmerbob

  • Steel Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2013
  • Location: S.W. Nebraska
  • Posts: 610
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #25 on: July 09, 2014, 04:40:02 PM »
It all boils down to responsibility and accountability. Leave people alone and only when necessary hold them accountable for their actions rather than punishing the entire population in advance.

I personally think this is the answer to all our 2nd. amendment issues.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2014, 04:53:57 PM by farmerbob »
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"-- George Washington

Offline grumpy old man

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Apr 2014
  • Posts: 113
    • Stand Up For It !
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #26 on: July 09, 2014, 07:29:14 PM »
This is why I love this forum, you all are making me really think through this stuff.  I appreciate all your views!
"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.” Thomas Jefferson

Offline Mntnman

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 509
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #27 on: July 09, 2014, 07:53:13 PM »
This is why I love this forum, you all are making me really think through this stuff.  I appreciate all your views!

That was my intention in starting this so I am glad to hear that. Our side is seriously fractured and most only care about what is acceptable in their opinion. If we want to keep our rights, we have to accept even the parts that scare us.
« Last Edit: July 09, 2014, 07:58:17 PM by Mntnman »

Offline Mntnman

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 509
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #28 on: July 09, 2014, 08:02:59 PM »
Should I be able to have a brand new full auto M16 with a ten inch barrel and titanium silencer without paying a $600 tax? You bet!

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #29 on: July 09, 2014, 08:22:05 PM »
Should I be able to have a brand new full auto M16 with a ten inch barrel and titanium silencer without paying a $600 tax? You bet!

Yes!

SCOTUS alluded to that fact in their examination of Miller; We cannot determine that a short-barreled shotgun is a tool of the militia because you have not asked us to.

Their implication was if it is a tool of the militia then it would be legal for Miller to possess and not subject by the GCA of 1934 that required a Tax stamp for weapons used by gangsters.
Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM

Offline Mntnman

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 509
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #30 on: July 09, 2014, 08:56:13 PM »
Reagan is my hero but he really effed up when 86ed new full autos. I wish we would pull together and reject all this crap that we accept because most just think it is legal just because it is the law.

Offline grumpy old man

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Apr 2014
  • Posts: 113
    • Stand Up For It !
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #31 on: July 10, 2014, 04:12:47 PM »
My favorite (non relative) is Thomas Jefferson so I asked him what he thought.  He told me the answer by reading one of his books.  Here it is.

 “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”  Thomas Jefferson
"One man with courage is a majority." Thomas Jefferson

“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.” Thomas Jefferson

Offline Ronvandyn

  • Pollywog
  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2009
  • Location: Bellevue NE
  • Posts: 561
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #32 on: July 10, 2014, 07:56:07 PM »
IMHO actions have consequences.  Some good, some bad, depending upon the action taken.  If John Q. Public decides one day to take his 38 S&W and rob a bank, he knows that if caught that there will be consequences.  One of those consequences is, known by John or not, that he will never ever be allowed to legally own a gun again.  Has nothing to do with if he is rehabilitated or not, it’s a small part of the price he pays for his decision on that cold November day at the bank.  He made a decision, decisions have consequences.  Even in 1776 this simple concept was true.  They had prisons and jails, courts and penalties, laws and law enforcement.  Even the famed Thomas Jefferson knew these things, and I strongly suspect that he supported the idea of consequences for actions.  I can do and support no less.
NE-CHP Holder, USAF Veteran, NRA Member,  ENGC Member
KC0MXX

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #33 on: July 10, 2014, 08:17:53 PM »
Actions do have consequences yes!

From the Founding days persons that paid their debt to society had all of their Rights restored upon completion of their sentence. In the 1800's there were ex-cons that went on to be well respected lawmen.

All convicted felons loose their RKBA. You alluded to an armed bank robber. How about a car dealer convicted of turning back the speedometer on a used car? How about a woman convicted of embezzling a couple thousand dollars? How about any of the non-violent crimes classified as felonies.

This felony thing is a product of gun control. Make as many crimes as possible felonies and you will only need one gun law and 3/4's of the population will be convicted felons.

Most people can't make it through any given day that without doing something that could be construed as a felony.

So the 2 years a guy gets for turning back a speedometer is actually the same life sentence as murder. Most murders spend less than 25 years behind bars.

He paid his debt when will he ever be a free man again?
Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #34 on: July 10, 2014, 08:37:35 PM »
At one time I believe it was Arkansas had a law on the books that stated when a prisoner was released from the penitentiary he was to be given a twenty dollar gold piece and his firearm back.

I am not sure when the felons can't own guns thing started, possibly with the GCA of 1968, but it is a recent invention in American history.
Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM

Offline Mntnman

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 509
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #35 on: July 10, 2014, 09:23:59 PM »
I wish that I had crossed paths with Gunscribe earlier in life. He really has things nailed down.

Offline DenmanShooter

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2014
  • Location: Denman, Nebraska
  • Posts: 357
  • Fear No Evil
    • SolidRed
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #36 on: July 10, 2014, 09:32:08 PM »
None. Period. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

"Shall not be infringed."  Means shall not be infringed.  Any and all restrictions are infringement.  It is pretty plain, simple and straight forward English.
The golf course is a willful and deliberate misuse of a perfectly good rifle range!      Jeff  Cooper

Offline Gary

  • NFOA Full Member
  • **
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: Lincoln
  • Posts: 1199
    • Guns 2 Roses
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #37 on: July 11, 2014, 01:44:35 AM »
SHALL. NOT. BE. INFRINGED.  I see nothing ambiguous in that statement.
We had prisons in the colonial times, and I doubt the 2nd A was penned for those folks.

I have no problem with a lawless segmant of society getting locked up, and staying locked up.

But what do we do in Nebraska?   We not only make them more crazy in jail as is the case of Ninko,  we then turn him loose when he asks to be helped.   How many people did he kill?  We know of 4.  There are more murders in that time period he may be guilty of, but his stragegty is to use that to bargan with later?   

Not only do we not know how to handle our own undesirable factions in our population, we now bus children from central america and mexico to live in Nebraska.  Those kids and adults need to be put on planes headed south ASAP   NOW.

I think if you sit down to play gin, it would be pretty foolish to start playing 21 in the middle of a hand. 

In the 1830s if someone served his time, and was given full rights back, that was the rules then. 

In 2014, if someone if a felon out of jail, I dont want this guy buying guns in walmart.   It is the law of the land today, and if his parents and teachers were on the ball, every child knows the difference between right and wrong.  They knew better, and they knew the consequences,  or should have known. 


« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 01:55:22 AM by Gary »

Offline Mntnman

  • Powder Benefactor
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2013
  • Posts: 509
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #38 on: July 11, 2014, 09:37:05 AM »
What does a law making it illegal for felons to buy guns at Wal Mart do? Does it keep them from getting a gun if they want one? I would say almost never. What it really does is provide a crack in the foundation of our protection. That crack gets worked and worked until we are left with nothing.

The 2A is 27 words of liberty. It is still the law of the land but too many folks have been fooled into not believing it. If we don't stand together and support the full gravity of it because we find some parts scary, we are handing the antis the hammers and chisels.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 10:06:35 AM by Mntnman »

Offline Gunscribe

  • NFOA Co-Founder
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2008
  • Location: Horsethief, NM
  • Posts: 359
Re: What do you think is Constitutional?
« Reply #39 on: July 11, 2014, 10:10:08 AM »
Gary, you don't know how much I agree with you in principal. Lock them up and keep them locked up.

This is a very emotional issue and it is easy to make a law that says ______ can not possess firearms.

But what does that truly accomplish? Those felons that do their time and lawfully get on with their lives without a firearm are not the problem.

The problem is those felons that return to a life of crime possessing and using firearms. The law means nothing to them. Breaking the law is in their job description.

The only people that obey gun laws are those law abiding citizens that are disinclined from criminal activity and that includes felons that have put their past behind them.

Gun laws only effect and make life more dangerous for the law abiding.

In states that have registration a felon can not be charged with failing to register a firearm because it they tried to they would be incriminating themselves. What good does registration do if only lawful citizen can be charged with failure to?
True, there are members of society that have no business being around firearms and we all know some that have never been in trouble a day in their life.

I appreciate your example of Nikko, but I think it may not be the right one for this situation.

As I understand the case he was sentenced to 21 yrs. of that he did 10 yrs. in incarceration. That means he still has an 11 yr. parole obligation to the state, so even if he had kept his nose clean it would still be nearly a dozen years before he could be considered a free man having fully paid his debt to society.

The fact that he had a gun means the law forbidding felons from possessing a firearm did not accomplish one damn thing anyway. Why have useless laws on the books?

I understand it provides an opportunity to prosecute a felon when caught, but how many more companion charges have they already broken that should be enough to put that person away for a very long time? Rape? Bank robbery? Car Jacking?

True most of these people do not get the sentences that they deserve, but that is a function of the courts. Passing more laws to take up the slack in the courts is the lazy feel good way out.

Why should society be subjected to laws that are enacted because panty-waist judges refuse to do their jobs.


Sidearms Training Academy
La Luz, NM