MOONDOG wrote to KAELON <=-

Manufacturing and private ownership in the States was also a must have
in the early days due to the king not having the money or sympathy to protect the new colonists from natives and aggressors from other countries. Telling the subjects to arm themselves was a critical move towards not needing a king and his army.

Add to this discussion the fact that "civilians shouldn't own military hardware" is another misnomer... Civilians WERE the military, and they
could own canons, battleships, you name it!




... If at first you don't succeed, redefine success.
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ wcQWK 8.0 ÷ Omicron Theta * Cordova, TN * winserver.org

JIMMY ANDERSON wrote to MOONDOG <=-

Manufacturing and private ownership in the States was also a must have
in the early days due to the king not having the money or sympathy to protect the new colonists from natives and aggressors from other countries. Telling the subjects to arm themselves was a critical move towards not needing a king and his army.

Add to this discussion the fact that "civilians shouldn't own military hardware" is another misnomer... Civilians WERE the military, and they could own canons, battleships, you name it!

If one were to be a student of the American Revolution and the Founding Fathers, one would come to the conclusion that the populace should be allowed the same access to arms and munitions as the military/government. In essense, ANY law restricting access of weapons to the population is unconstitutional and therefore illegal.

The Second Amendment was NOT put in place to guarantee the ability to hunt. It was NOT put in place to guarantee the ability to defend against criminals. It WAS put in place to guarantee the ability to defend the populace against a government acting in an over-reaching and tyrannical manner. The Second Amendment put in place the FOURTH branch of the government, The PEOPLE, armed and able to defend the Constitution on its own terms. We need to defend the Second in order to protect the other nine!

... Direct from the Ministry of Silly Walks
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
þ Synchronet þ The Lost Chord BBS - Cheyenne, WY

On 6/26/22 06:43, JIMMY ANDERSON wrote:

Add to this discussion the fact that "civilians shouldn't own military hardware" is another misnomer... Civilians WERE the military, and they
could own canons, battleships, you name it!

Pragmatically, I would probably draw a line closer to nuclear materials
and arms than a cannon or tank. Worth noting that civilian arms dealers
have jets with missiles... they sell to the US (and Australia, Israel,
etc) but they are civilian companies.
--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com
---
þ Synchronet þ Roughneck BBS - roughneckbbs.com

Re: Re: the American Traditio
By: Tracker1 to JIMMY ANDERSON on Thu Jul 07 2022 01:46 pm

On 6/26/22 06:43, JIMMY ANDERSON wrote:

Add to this discussion the fact that "civilians shouldn't own military hardware" is another misnomer... Civilians WERE the military, and they could own canons, battleships, you name it!

Pragmatically, I would probably draw a line closer to nuclear materials
and arms than a cannon or tank. Worth noting that civilian arms dealers have jets with missiles... they sell to the US (and Australia, Israel,
etc) but they are civilian companies.
--
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1@roughneckbbs.com

Arms dealers fall into the category of trusts and corporations. In order to make what is regarded as "destructive devices" according to the BATFE, a special license is required to manufacture and sell such items. There is no individual right involved. That is a ruse the anti-gunners have been trying
to use, saying the National Guard and centralized armoriesis what was intended other than individuals owning and storing private arms. Having such permits opens your doors to inspectors to veridy you are making and selling items within the rules of your license level. For example, if an AR lower receiver is made to 100% functionality, there is a window of time where it must be marked and recorded in your inventory books. A few years ago Stag firearms
was forced to shut down because of possessing un-documented recievers in
their assembly facility. Their reason was they occasionally get custom
orders for special names or number runs. Also, if a gun is made to order, fails QA, and the lower was the culprit, they could serialize a replacement lower with the same serial number of the defective lower (which is then destroyed.) While it's a good service, the BATFE didn't care. They had to jump through hoops to re-open and part of that meant new owners who could legally hold manufacturing FFL.

---
þ Synchronet þ The Cave BBS - Since 1992 - cavebbs.homeip.net