TexasCHLforum.com

LarryH wrote:
It may not be "punitive taxation", but every time I've spent the day at the courthouse for jury duty, the parking fee was more than the pay I received from the county. IMHO, jury members should get free parking, at the very least.

I second that, and in a secure parking lot since you aren't allowed to carry. The trip to and from your car at the courthouse should be the safest you could be.

Anytime a citizen is stripped of his right to self defense by an authority then the authority should be under bond to protect the citizen. Utterly. Until they were forced to strip off their defenses they held their own protection in their own responsibility.

When that is taken away then it falls to the presiding authority that strips them to guard them.

It sounds like the author is overlooking the common law right to self defense that used to be inherent in law and should be restored to its rightful place.

The concept that each adult male should own a weapon that was, in its day, a state of the art "assault weapon" was solid, but it went without saying that no one was prohibited from owning every other kind of firearm he wanted. It would never cross their mind that their choices would be limited by anything but their own power to purchase, barter, inherit or be gifted.

If your goal is to field an army to fight as the founding fathers understood war then having weapons of a common pattern, common caliber and common accessories would be ideal. It eliminates logistical nightmares that often rose up during the Civil War with units that provided their own weapons.

Our standard issue weapons are different today. There is no reason why the interpretation should be different except to keep from frightening the politically correct.

Were we to hold our modern militia to the standards in hardware then it would be required that most of them would own at least one A4-type select-fire weapon with several 30 round magazines, an M9 or other Beretta that uses the same magazines. Some members would be encouraged to own a squad based machine gun and others would be expected to have shotguns with short barrels. Grenade launchers would be a good accessory, either dedicated like the old M 79 or something like the M203 fitted to the basic rifle. Specialized persons with long range weapons such as a .50 BMG or other long range rifle would also be part of the militia. Access to anti-tank weapons would need to be common.

Anything LESS than that standard is, in my opinion, a violation of the 2nd Amendment and any tax levied against being so equipped is, again in my opinion, unconstitutional. The government should never be engaged in taxing its citizens who are exercising their public obligation. You don't tax people punitively for performing jury duty. Why tax them for performing their public duty as members of the militia?