Should there be restrictions on the 2nd amendment? Can I own a rocket launcher or a tank?
Question of the Day, Gun Control
Should there be restrictions on the 2nd amendment? Can I own a rocket launcher or a tank?
If I’m not mistaken the 2nd Amendment was written so the citizen could fight back against a similarly armed government force.
If government forces have tanks and rocket launchers…………..
Correct!
Its already legal to own a tank, but the firing systems have to be disabled. Good luck getting a permit to drive it on any public road.
Zara,me guess is you REALLY need the tank on road you are not worried about permits/licensing and such!
An old saying goes something like this:
In bombing deaths, you blame the bomber. In drunk-driving deaths, you blame the driver. But in shooting deaths, you blame…..the gun??
The rocket launcher/tank question is extreme sensationalism. Nobody is likely to acquire one in your neighborhood. If they did, they know what the response would be. It’s a false question that a Liberal would present for hyperbole.
The response in my neighborhood would hopefully be “yay – we now have the best-protected neighborhood in all of the Atlanta suburbs, and when the riff raff show up some day when the SHTF, we will be more than ready for them while our useless donut eaters will be nowhere to be found.
Common sense would seem to dictate there has to be some conversation and conclusion about the sensible extent of gun ownership by those who voluntarily choose to associate with one another-what once was called ‘consent of the governed’. That would require a deep sense of trust: Which specifically excludes the District of Creatures on the Potomac. They’ve proven with metaphysical certainty to be unworthy of the merest scintilla of trust. Until that changes for the better I favor heavy artillery ownership for all.
The cannons and powder used to be stored in a central community location for use by the community (militia) should the need arise. The whole culture of America would have to return to common sense for this idea to be adopted again.
Here’s an even harder one – should the citizenry own NBC weapons?
If the government has them….
So, you have neither bleach nor ammonia in your house, eh?
Why should I, a human being, be prevented from having weapons that other human beings are allowed to possess only because they wear matching uniforms and have government approval, a government that is supposed to exist solely to represent and protect me, the aforementioned human being. Also, if I did possess such sophisticated weapons of war, they would only be used for self-defense, unlike the aforementioned government forces who use them aggressively and offensively to destroy other nations and human lives.
“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.” – Voltaire
Only in Texas. You can drive tanks & shoot. Time to get in practice.
Anything up to and including select fire weapons. Tanks and RPGs I don’t think so. We have highly trained professionals, the military, that operate those puppies.
Bullshit. Especially if those highly trained professionals turn on me.
How are you supposed to fight tyranny with a BB gun?
A BB gun… A BB gun… ???
Are you crazy?
You’ll put your eye out kid!
Does that bb gun have an orange plastic tip on the end?
Yup. The restriction should be worded very simply.
WHAT’S GOOD FOR THEE IS GOOD FOR ME!
With my rifle I can get an RPG ! With an RPG I can … and so on ! As for automatic weapons short of a GE minigun my rifle and I can take care of business at a respectable distance should it come to that . Make no mistake if the 2nd amendment is eradicated and confiscation insues the just doing my job groups sent out to collect arms from the citizens will have an easy job of it most will back down with too much to lose many will attempt to hide some and then there are a few willing to fall in defense of their rights that limit government and I am sure they will take a few government minions with them on their way out on there feet rather than kneeling to tyranny
I’ve said it before, if law enforcement wants your guns, they will come when you’re not home. When you get home, there will be two documents attached to your front door, a copy of the warrant & a list of what was taken.
I don’t ever expect a mass collection; they don’t have the manpower or budget for such an operation. I do expect a subterfuge like requiring a mental health clearance (which NO psychiatrist would ever sign) or a prohibitively high insurance requirement.
Private citizens owned their own artillery and warships when the 2nd amendment was written.
If they hadn’t we would still be the British instead of Americans.
“Private citizens owned…warships”.
We still could! At least theoretically. The Constitution (Article I, Sec. 8 cl. 11) gives Congress the power to “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal.” This letter is basically a license to commit piracy against the merchant ships of an enemy nation. It was once fairly common for investors to obtain a Letters of Marque and Reprisal, outfit a ship, hire a crew and then prey upon enemy merchant ships. The motivation was the value of the ship & cargo, which the investors kept.
We have entered international agreements not to engage in this practice, but it is still a Constitutional power of Congress.
Even Justice Scalia, who wrote the majority opinion the Heller case, did not believe we have a right to any weapon. In the summary, he wrote:
“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html
I’m a gun owner, but I’d be very nervious if hand grenades and shoulder-launch surface-to-air missiles were available to private citizens.
MarshRabbit, a very wise statement. Scalia was brilliant and his opinion in the Heller case was sound — citizens should NOT have the same weaponry as the military. Posse comitatus exists for a reason, too.
The founders agreed that citizens needed to be allowed weapons to defend themselves against tyranny, but also recognized that armed “revolutionaries” might become a problem. Thus the wording of our Second Amendment.
The more important part of our Constitution is the citizen’s right to remove a government that no longer serves a purpose representing the best interests of The People. This goes far beyond citizen’s right to defense against a tyrannical government, and places the responsibility on the citizens to prevent that type of government to begin with.
Notwithstanding today’s “deep state,” we are responsible for preventing government from becoming too powerful to begin with. We should never have the need to defend ourselves from our own government. We have royally screwed up, if we ever feel the need to.
I believe that an RPG is a beneficial, and perhaps, necessary part of an effective family defense arsenal. All family members should be properly trained to use it.
The RPG..what’s in your closet?
Those Russian RPG-7’s are downright dangerous,
There is no safe way of operating them, you have to arm them and then any hit on the nose of the grenade sets them off.
That means if you’re running along with one that is armed and run into something, BLAMMO! You’re dead.
Even worse, there is nothing to hold the rocket in the tube after you arm it so if you happen to be changing position and tilt it downwards it just falls out and lands on it’s nose, and I’ve already described the result of that.
This happens on a rather regular basis, there is video of Muslim fighters doing this available on the internet.
I recommend against them.
The Constitution is clear: Right to bear “arms”. Missiles, grenades, bombs, etc are “ordinance” – an acknowledged distinction even back then. So no on those. One can own and fire a mortar, cannon, tank or rocket provided they do not utilize “ordonance” or explosive rounds. As for “arms”, the Constitution is pretty clear with the whole “shall not infringe” part.
Since the Constitution specifies “arms” and “Militia” in the same sentence it indicates it means Militia weapons (which would include “ordinance”).
Except you are overlooking the distinction between the individual right to bear arms and the militia which are separate notions – at least according to SCOTUS.
So you’re one of those collective right types that believes the right actually belongs to the State and not the individual.
I’m of a different mind, and the writings and actions of the Constitution indicate they were as well.
Rpg’s, tanks, HE shells, full auto, grenades and all others are owned and possesed legally by millions of civilians.
Right now.
The popular misconception of this never ceases to amaze me. I know personally individuals with both RPG-7’s and RPG-15’s.
There was a cat in Texas who was a specialist in making IEd’s and his vests were the bomb baby. No really, he made all of these serious suicide vests, registered them DD form 4 with ATFE, and voila, legal suicide vest.
So asking if we should be able to own shit is confusing.
What you should be asking is if we need greater civilian disarmament.
Notice how nobody ever, EVER, EVER, suggests we need greater .gov disarmament. Nobody even ever suggests we “talk” about government disarmament.
Funny that.
I advocate it every time the subject comes up. But then I am not allowed to have a public forum for such thoughts. And by the way, plenty of folks spoke out when the FDA, IRS, USDA, and other agencies were allowed to carry fully automatic weapons. Not that anyone listened. I know that Ron Paul for one spoke out.
ISIS is a USSA run, so ISIS taking claim over a Clinton leftist killer of the right is not a surprise.
When you disarm the populations you can then kill them all.
Satan worshippers are global and hold the levers of governmental corporate and religious NGO in a sinners full snake circle of bloody sin…
Only give up your firearms while discharging them towards those who have threatened and illegally made legal the right to take your firearms away…
Not to go to far to the extremes…but by being born in a “country” even one I love I don’t give up my right to self defense. The Founders wanted the States and the Citizenry to be able to oppose the Federal Govt. The States (before incorporation) were able to do whatever they wanted regarding firearms. So logically the goal was to have matching firepower in the hands of States/Citizens equal to that possessed by the Federal Gov’t. A State Militia could have nukes, Thermobaric, subs, a navy etc and that is what was envisioned, like it or not, I think it was brilliant…..though that Civil War thingy kind of crushed the check and balance of the States. The other idea I don’t see mentioned too often is the responsibility that comes with firearms. I would be happy if most NRA members owned a mini-gun….I would not be worried. If however they owned nuclear weapons well I would be more concerned about the contamination, potential leaks etc. not the inappropriate use. Fukushima! Remember the so called Gun Grabbers are not ANTI-GUN they just don’t like guns in the hands of normal people……they love guns in the hands of police (to confiscate individuals guns) and of course in the hands of every Federal Govt agency……Dept of Ed, IRS, Interior, Weights and Measures etc. Those guns they like……..so that they can oppress the citizens. The biggest danger to most people’s lives is the Govt! Just ask anybody from the USSR, China, Nazi Germany, African and Latin American dictatorships and Islamic Theocracies. Nope……not giving up the firearms or my right to oppose tyranny.
This question brings into view the whole topic of weapons of mass destruction, which a tank, RPG or missile would qualify as being.
I guess it boils down to how you define “arms”. Some want to substitute “guns”, but that’s not what the big C says, so I vote yes, without restriction.
Draw the line at nukes, explosives, chemical and viral weapons.
The only weapons that I would ban would be wmd s–biological,chemical,nuclear.
Stephen Halbrook is a renowned constitutional lawyer who argues 2A cases b4 the Supreme Court.
He once gave a talk to the Federalist Society at the local law school and an atty friend asked me to go.
After his speech he had a q&a session.
I asked him if b4 and after the Constitution was in force was it legal to own a cannon.The cannons that fired grape shot were devastating weapons.He said that as far as he knew they were legal.
Weapons banned to all nations by international treaty are the only ones that should be banned to the Militia.
Sadly American Exceptionalism means our government doesn’t give a shit about any international treaty or agreement.
An argument that gun control people often use is that if the Founding Fathers had known how far weaponry would advance they would have written the 2A so as to limit the arms available to civilians.
Don’t believe it.
In addition to what the Founders said about citizens owning guns in the event of an oppressive govt.,they were men who believed in innovating and inventing.They set up the patent office to encourage people to invent new products and they were well aware of innovations in firearms.
I’m not sure but I believe that there was a crude repeater by that time,though not for mass production.One of you collectors can hopefully validate that.
When Jefferson sent Lewis & Clark on their expedition they had a silenced rifle that Jefferson had given them.
The Founders knew exactly what they were doing when they wrote the 2A.
Unfortunately they didn’t know what they were doing when they wrote the rest of the Constitution.
There should be no restrictions. Can you imagine how polite people would be if you had a L.A.W rocket strapped on your thigh? And do you think BLM would block rush hour traffic if everyone carried artillery in their vehicles? Grenades? Yee hawwww bitches!
If I could have a 10KT warhead…I’d finally be able to settle that beef with my pesky next door neighbor.
i likes your thinkin smoker–
especially about settling things with the neighbor–
Just as an aside, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer says Las Vegas shooting is far-left extremism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oYbRXPdflQ
Fuck all a you cocksuckers that gave me a thumbs down. I was referring to the professional training involved to safely operate said weapons. I don’t trust the military leaders or their civilian handlers in the Deep State. Our militarized copfuks are even worse, they are enemies of freedom and liberty. On second thought, go ahead and get yer RPG and blow yer balls off because you don’t know how to use it. How many of you worthless fucks even know what a select fire weapon is?
The final word, IMO. This guy is a straight shooter, no pun intended.
I don’t know how to get the youtube preview to show up. The video is Mark Passio, (what on earth is happening dot com) giving a talk on the 2nd amendment
…shall not be infringed.