Is the right to bear arms outdated?

[Bitter Clinger]

Dear "Acronym Esq":

BLESS YOUR HEART.

[The Annoyed Man]

Perhaps I'm wrong but the standoff in CT is one of the indicators that the politicians are not winning this battle. If you believe the stories of 100K+ people in CT with banned firearms who didn't comply and acknowledge that the CT authorities, after much bluster on the part of some police officers about kicking down doors, have suspended enforcement attempts, you have to conclude that bans have not accomplished their purpose. I did read a story where a citizen in NY was prosecuted for a SAFE act violation but even there, action against those with now illegal firearms appears to be lacking

I agree that enforcement on job situations could result against citizens who defy firearms laws but expect that there would be actions to identify those who have those firearms first. In CT, I suspect that many have their "illegal guns" in alternate locations from their homes so finding those guns would take some extraordinary effort. Given the ease and speed of social media, any concerted effort to find those guns would become news without Main Stream Media participation. I don't think that the situation would be different in any other State. While some might comply as some did in CT, many will not. If I remember correctly, the Australian "buy back" was deemed to be lacking in success by a third.

We all saw the news (and felt the effects in empty store shelves) of the buying sprees on guns and ammo under the 44th President. I cannot imagine too many of those who felt compelled to buy guns under those circumstances willingly turning and around and complying with new gun bans. I see it as unfortunate that those who voted with their pocketbooks were unwilling to do the same at the ballot box.

Right now, the smart firearms investor (if he hasn’t already done so) is investing in large diameter PVC tubing, Visqueen, and heavy grease, and he has already chosen the spot where his collection will be buried. It isn’t something I’ve invested in yet, because I never imagined that things could ever actually come to this. But when I compare the many thousands of dollars I have invested in firearms and ammunition, spending a couple of hundred bucks on PVC tubing, plastic wrap, and heavy grease seems like a paltry - but wise - purchase. Furthermore, if there is a utilities easement under your property (there is on mine) that would seem to be a perfect place to dig, as detection would be made more difficult by the presence of underground utilities lines/pipes.

My long term goal, once I have actually purchased a piece of rural property, is to make most of my collection “disappear” out there, and keep only enough in my city home for the bare essentials of home defense - maybe a single pistol and an inexpensive pump-action 12 gauge. My sincerest prayer is that I can afford to buy such property before the proverbial waste products hit the proverbial fan.

On the 26th of this month, I begin moving into a much larger house. We’ll be living under the same roof with our son, daughter in law, and grandkids. My son’s collection is only a little smaller than mine. It’s going to be a lot of stuff to bury, and I hope it never comes to that, but I fear that it will, and I’m already working on plans for how to do that while not losing inventory to damage from the elements.

I know all of this sounds kind of paranoid, but imagine the possibility of a day when you wished you had been just a little more paranoid, and it’s too late. I’ve always done everything as responsibly as I know how. I’ve always voted as if the results matter, and for the last 30 years of my life, I’ve voted as if gun rights were the primary issue. In my spoken and written words, defense of the 2nd Amendment has been a primary topic for the last 30 years. But it may not have been enough, and I fear the moment when “not enough” comes to pass. That will be the time when anyone who loves the Constitution will be compelled to dig up what they’ve buried, and get about the business of restoring the Constitution to its former place of prominence over our affairs.

[bblhd672]

The right to bear arms for self defense cannot be outdated because it is a basic human right, not provided by the 2 Amendment but protected by it, from a tyrannical government bent on subjugation of its citizens.

[Abraham]

When employed by the left, the term "common sense" means, do as you're told...

[bblhd672]

I know all of this sounds kind of paranoid, but imagine the possibility of a day when you wished you had been just a little more paranoid, and it’s too late. I’ve always done everything as responsibly as I know how. I’ve always voted as if the results matter, and for the last 30 years of my life, I’ve voted as if gun rights were the primary issue. In my spoken and written words, defense of the 2nd Amendment has been a primary topic for the last 30 years. But it may not have been enough, and I fear the moment when “not enough” comes to pass. That will be the time when anyone who loves the Constitution will be compelled to dig up what they’ve buried, and get about the business of restoring the Constitution to its former place of prominence over our affairs.

The question is “Will We Fight?”
http://christianmerc.blogspot.com/2017/ ... e.html?m=1

[Bitter Clinger]

I don't carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don't carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don't carry a gun because I'm evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don't carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don't carry a gun because I'm angry.
I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.

I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don't carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police Protection is an oxymoron. Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

[rotor]

Very nice Bitter Clinger.

[Captain Matt]

It's like the story about boiling a frog. (I never tried it myself so I can't attest to the accuracy.)

Bit by bit they slowly wear down our rights. Each step is small enough that few if any are willing to die on that hill. Then the next step comes and fewer are willing to die on that hill, to be thought unreasonable for not appeasing the wolf at the door.

People get comfortable with their lives. If an AWB passes, many will neuter their rifles by removing the shoulder thing that goes up or the EBR accessory du jour. Many will talk of hiding their banned guns and claim the proverbial boating accident. Few will stand up and say NO and drill the hole for the third pin, thinking "in for a penny, in for a pound."

[GreenMan0352]

Dear "Acronym Esq":

BLESS YOUR HEART.

Yeah I'm new to this forum but I realized he or she is that person you don't argue with. They have moot points and play things off as nothing or as a misunderstanding. If Acronym Esq wants to turn in their weapons then by all means go for it. If anyone thinks disarming is fine and the gov has our best interest at heart just look at Mexico and how their President had disarmed the people before he ruined that country. Now to this day people are still paying for it.

Thats why La Sombra Negra exists in Mexico and South America. They need good people willing to do that to fight what the Gov won't. People that think gun control will change anything for the better are ignorant. We are America. With all our diversity and differences that is what will always keep violence not the guns.

[GreenMan0352]

[BBYC]

The military uses machine guns. If the second amendment doesn't protect machine guns, it doesn't protect semi-automatics either. Any "common sense" restriction on M16s is also a reasonable restriction on AR15s, 1911s and Remington 11-87s.

[The Annoyed Man]

Few will stand up and say NO and drill the hole for the third pin, thinking "in for a penny, in for a pound."

I don’t mind drilling the 3rd hole, if it becomes necessary, but I do mind not having the internals that go with it. Further, it doesn’t require drilling the 3rd hole to think, “in for a penny, in for a pound”. And if I can fire 2-3 rounds/second on semiauto, that’s still 120-180 rounds/minute on semiauto if necessary. However, I don’t think it is absolutely necessary. I don’t think the 3rd hole is nearly as important as the willingness to pull the trigger in the first place if it ever becomes necessary. Aimed, accurate, fast semiautomatic fire can more than effective enough in most cases. If your opponent fires full auto, and it’s your day to die, it’s not going to matter much to you if you’re hit once or five times by a rifle bullet, if any one of those is a fatal hit. The key isn’t going to be the conversion of your inexpensive AR carbine into a machine gun. The key is going to be the willingness to use your civilian AR15 to kill the crews of crew served weapons and then turning those weapons on their former owners. Also, the point at which turning your guns on previously lawful authority becomes a legitimate exercise, is also the point at which decapitating the leadership becomes a legitimate exercise. Don’t think for ONE SECOND that those people currently in elected or appointed office who have it in mind to disarm you and me aren’t worried about that last possibility. It’s almost impossible to defend against it, except by moving yourself into a bunker, and living out the rest of your life there.

According to the sorely missed Weapons Man:

Total US Firearms: Not 300 Million, but 412-660 Million?

Fun With NumbersThe typical estimate of the total number of firearms in the USA is about 300 million, depending on whom is queried.

{SNIP}

We believe that the correct number is much higher — somewhere between 412 and 660 million. You may wonder how we came to that number, so buckle up (and cringe, if you’re a math-phobe, although it never gets too theoretical): unlike most of the academics and reporters we linked above, we’re going to use publicly available data, and show our work.

What if we told you that one ATF computer system logged, by serial number, 252,000,000 unique firearms, and represented only those firearms manufactured, imported or sold by a relatively small number of the nation’s tens of thousands of Federal Firearms Licensees?

Not very many people, gun owners included, but most especially the anti-gun Democrat Steno Pool (AKA “the media”) (but I repeat myself), stop to think that guns are durable goods. There are MANY examples of guns manufactured in this country over 200 years ago that are still hanging on someone’s mantle. Now, those old ones may no longer be safe to fire, but you can darn bet yourself that almost any gun manufactured since 1900, that has been well take care of, is safe to fire if you can find the correct ammo for it.

I used to have links for it but can’t find them any more, but there is more than enough evidence to show that the lowly AR15 has sold more than 20 to 25 MILLION copies since it first entered the civilian market in the 1960s. These guns do not evaporate. They don’t just disappear. Well, I mean literally disappear. Certainly, a certain number of AR15 owners have “disappeared” their guns during fishing accidents, or sold them years ago to a stranger named Joe. He had brown hair and walked with a limp. It is reasonable to assume that the vast majority of those guns are either still in working order, or could be easily returned to working order with a thorough cleaning and a little 30 weight Mobile 1. That’s more weapons than all the small arms owned by all branches of the US military.......and that’s just the AR15.....just ONE example of ONE type of rifle that has militia applications. That doesn’t include the owners of AK47/AK74 variants, M1As, FN FALS, M1 Garands and M1 Carbines, The Keltech SU-16s, the Ruger Mini-14s, SCAR 16s and 17s, TVORs and other “exotic” models, and maybe some more obscure models like the Armalite 180, etc. And let’s not forget the literally millions of owners of Remington, Ruger, and Savage bolt action rifles - some of which are quite precise at extended ranges - and the millions more with 30/30 lever rifles who know how to stalk in the woods. I’d give more for an army of long-skilled users of lever actions with lots of cunning and woodcraft under their belts, who know how to move silently through the woods and tall grass, than any hastily assembled army of conscripts whose hearts aren’t really in it. I say “conscripts”, because at that point the gov’t will have to begin drafting Americans to replace the losses from desertions and mutinies. And on top of all of their guns, American citizens have literally trillions of commercially produced rounds of ammunition to accommodate these guns, and the ability to handload possibly millions more. And I haven’t even mentioned the number of handguns yet, or the ammo for those.

And every year, several millions of all those gun owners head out to the woods to bring home something to eat. They can not only punch paper, but they know darn well how to kill a distant moving target, and they’re not averse to doing it.

Does a fascist gov’t determined to disarm its populace have some advantages? Sure. They have communications advantages. They have the advantage of not having to be particularly secretive about their organizational charts. They have bomb and missile-armed Reaper drones.......assuming that they can convince drone pilots to assassinate CITIZEN civilian targets. Some will, but a lot won’t. They have F16s, A10s, F22s, and F35s, and Apache’s, etc., etc., and they even have some nukes if they’re crazy enough to use them. But SOME of those pilots will turn their weapons against the gov’t that sent them - maybe even the nukes. Maybe they will die in the process - as will a lot of everyday citizens who refuse to disarm - but there is a word for such men and women: they’re called patriots. The United States has lasted as long as it has for two reasons: First, a Constitution which provides a stable structure for gov’t and guarantees the rights of the citizenry; and second, the long line of patriots going back more than 240 years, who stood ready to make the ultimate sacrifice to preserve the first. The further that gov’t strays from the first, the more likely becomes the possibility of the second.

The bottom line, as I’ve written above, is that they can pass all the laws they want, but sooner or later, laws aren’t enough if they are not enforceable. Sooner or later, somebody has to be sent to take the guns, and over the long haul, that is going to go worse for the takers than it will for those who are defending their rights.

I don’t have much faith in the American voter. They elected Obama......TWICE.....based on some pretty flimsy premises and a lot of naïveté, and half of them voted for Hillary Clinton.....possibly the WORST candidate EVER in the history of American politics. On the flip side, the best that “conservatives” could come up with were McCain, Romney, and Trump. I’m supporting Trump....he IS my president....but I don’t think he’s the perfect man for the job, and I kind of wish he’d forget twitter long enough to do some other things. But that would take another Washington or Jefferson - and we no longer have men like that in American politics. HOWEVER, statesmanship aside, roughly HALF of the country DIDN’T vote for Obama or Clinton.....and THAT is the half that owns the bulk of those hundreds of millions of guns, and trillions of rounds of ammo. So I have a great deal of faith in the ability of that half of the electorate to restore Constitutional gov’t if they are ever pressed to the point of having to do so.

There’s one thing wrong with the slow-boiled frog analogy.......none of the frogs have guns.

On a somewhat more pessimistic note, but WELL worth reading and also from the Weapons Man blog:

• Caching your Guns for a Civil War, Parts I and II
• Caching your Guns for a Civil War, Parts III and IV (long)

Point being, none of this is easy, but given enough time, an irritated enough population, and a just enough cause (from the point of view of the underdog), insurgencies CAN win, and history holds many examples of it.

[ninjabread]

That's an inspiring narrative Annoyed Man and I think an overly optimistic one. I think the Weapons Man blog makes compelling arguments in sections 1.2 and 1.3 that are backed up by middle class America's reaction to state and federal restrictions on gun rights in the past 20-30 years. The government didn't have to send anybody to go house to house to round up standard capacity magazines in the states that banned them. The same for the Clinton AWB or the Bush import AWB before that. And the patriots who did fight are all dead or went to prison on felony charges.

[Captain Matt]

Thanks TAM for a well written and well thought out reply. However, I don't share your optimism in the willingness of the heartland to use necessary force to resist government overreach. Other than a few hotheads who are already labeled "extremists" or worse, I don't see suburbanites breaking bad over a ban on bump fire stocks, flash hiders, pistol grips, full capacity magazines, etc. God willing, we'll never need to find out which of us is correct.

Regarding my third pin comment, I was not arguing the tactical superiority of machine guns. I was saying that, if bump fire stocks or "assault weapons" are banned, and possession is a felony...well, in that case, one may as well have a select fire assault rifle as a MSR semiautomatic with a banned accessory. IMHO.

[The Annoyed Man]

This article is a couple of years old, but I ran across it today, and it seems pertinent to this discussion: http://osnetdaily.com/2015/05/the-sides ... civil-war/