28th Amendment - Prohibition of Firearms

Thank you, captain obvious.

Congress can clearly require that everyone fit for militia service purchase an AR15 (or whatnot) and a number of magazine and ammunition for same, under penalty of a punitive tax.

This is no way means Congress can limit access to arms to only those people and weapons so specified without violating the 2nd.

 

Unless it is a known drug house, I am telling you the chance of going to court for a felony is virtually nil except if it is white on black shooting which now brings out the PC crowd.

 

Get serious dude! No 5 year old could get into my home at night. 15 year old, yes but then you are not known for making reasonable posts.

Glad I don't live in a dinosaur state like you. In my home facing any direction, bam, dead.

I agree!

Bulloney! Credible threat is ANYONE intruding in my home uninvited.

 

Further, the Organized Militia is furnished the EXACT ARMS as the standing Military. The people who make up the Unorganized Militia are not required to have the exact arms but will be issued arms to replace personal arms when needed.

BTW, An AR-15 as a semi-automatic arm is acceptable for all citizens to own providing they are not felons or mentally ill.

 

the model 700 is a Remington. the model 70 is a Winchester.

 

There was a Remington Model 70 also. I hunted with it in India in 1952 and 53.

 

Ayuh,... Remington has built alota guns in the last 200 years, but I can find no mention of a Model 70,....

Model 700,....

Model 770,....

But no Model 70,.....

 

It appears that my memory was incorrect. Checking on my papers, it was actually a Remington 720 30-06. Sorry about that!

 

The Mod-70 is the Winchester Mod-70 not the Remington Mod 700.

Now if it's a pre-64 Winchester Mod-70 you have a rifle with a Mauser action and you have a collectors item.

I have a Pre-64 Winchester Mod-70 chambered for the Winchester .270 and the last time I had it appraised, $1,800. It has the original iron sights with a Leupold 9x40mm Rifle Scope.

The pre-64 Winchester Mod-70 chambered for the 30-06 was the sniper rifle of choice during the Vietnam War.

It's the Mauser action that makes the pre-64 Mod-70 one of the best rifles ever produced.

 

Lets put it this way... if guns are illegal to own then people can't get them lawfully, which sounds good... but people who SHOULDN'T have guns will get guns illegally and nobody following the law can do anything about it. I don't want to kill somebody but somebody starts shooting at me I won't hesitate to put a round or two in them. It seems like insanity that I could possibly kill another human being, that I would even consider that, but shootings happen "(*)(*)(*)(*) Happens" and if that happens to me, I am willing to kill for the defense of myself, friends, loved ones, and family... if I were to meet lethal force I would answer as human instincts insist with lethal force.

 

If there is a knife fight, smart people take a gun.

 

Doing a google search I was unable to find any information on a Remington Model 70 - it always refers to the Model 700. Would you mind providing a link to the Remington Model 70 to verify your claim?

 

While it doesn't currently exist efforts are underway to develop a nonlethal weapon that is equal to or more effective than a firearm when it comes to self-defense.

If you had the choice between a lethal firearm or a nonlethal weapon that was more effective than a firearm for use in self-defense which one would you choose to defend yourself and others with?

 

You need all jury members though. Chances are at least one of them isn't a pathetic excuse for a human being.

 

We have a Second Amendment.

Better aqueducts, better roads, and more well regulated militia is a necessary and proper solution.

 

The founding fathers expected that THE PEOPLE have firearms sufficient to overthrow a tyrannical government, THE PRIMARY reason for the 2nd amendment.

 

No, it isn't. We have a First Amendment for that. Our Second Amendment announces a Purpose or Intent, in the first clause.

 

Having served on a criminal jury I wouldn't classify any member as being "a pathetic excuse for a human being" but perhaps you have a lower regard for people than I do. Everyone was very intent and sincere about trying to reach the correct verdict based upon the criteria established by the judge in providing instructions to the jury.

When it comes to the use of deadly force by a private citizen (not law enforcement that has different criteria) the general instructions from the judge would be based upon the following:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Deadly+Force

The small child that I used in my example would not have "threatened death or bodily harm" and the jury, based upon the instructions from the judge, would likely convict a homeowner that used deadly force even though the child was an intruder in the home.

 

While this claim is often made, and it was one that I believed in for a long period of time, it's arguably false.

The founders created a Constitutional Republic to prevent the tyranny of government in the United States so there's no need for an armed militia to safeguard that which is already protected.

In point of fact the 2nd Amendment is a supportive amendment to Article I Section 8 where the militia is an instrument of our government based upon the following provision:

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

- See more at: http://constitution.findlaw.com/article1.html#sthash.CtZpye1G.dpuf

If citizens took up arms against our government then it would be the "militia" that could be called upon by Congress to take up arms against those committing an insurrection against our government.

 

As an Australian I am used to manslaughter prosecutions for people who use reasonable deadly force proportional the attack, simply because they prepared themselves. In Australia it is illegal to be in possession of anything the police consider a weapon at the time, from pepper spray to tasers.

As far as I'm concerned, if you convict someone for that "crime" of self defense, you are scum of the highest order and have no moral compass whatsoever.

 

Not to mention fully auto weapons and explosives by terrorists. Like the saying, if it's a crime to have guns, only criminals will have them. Sorry for responding to an old post.

 

Especially considering the deadly potential of such a hypocritical government to defend itself in this dangerous world. Clearly, such a lofty and self righteous mindset is foreign to a real and fit people. Australians have been screwed.

 

No one is likely to be convicted of actual self-defense but as the hypothetical example demonstrated there's no need to use deadly force as a form of self-defense against a young child that doesn't represent any threat of bodily harm or death. Nor in the hypothetical case of a "non-lethal" weapon being developed that is equal to or superior to a firearm (deadly weapon) is there any justifiable reason for employing deadly force in self-defense because a firearm (deadly weapon) would be unnecessary for self-defense.

 

1st amendment refers to free speech, free press, right to worship as one wishes.
The second amendment is to protect the right of each and every person (the people) to keep and bear arms.

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

"On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

"To disarm the people...s the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787