Good Reason To Have An AR-15

[Revoltingest]

It also doesn't eliminate your need to justify why you think the intended right entails what you claim it does.

This is unclear.

Are you in as great a danger of attack by an Indian raiding party as a homesteader on the Virginia frontier in the late 18th Century?

No. Is this specific danger significant to you?

Because when you don't have a good response to an argument, you might as well make fun of the name of the person putting it forward, right?

Huh?
That makes no sense as a response to my calling "bogus" your claim that the 2nd Amendment is about controlling slaves.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Huh?
That makes no sense as a response to my calling "bogus" your claim that the 2nd Amendment is about controlling slaves.

You've made jokes before about how person who really brought this argument forward in recent memory was Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University. Your choice of terms suggested that you were using this tactic again.

Abstract:
Professor Bogus argues that there is strong reason to believe that, in significant part, James Madison drafted the Second Amendment to assure his constituents in Virginia, and the South generally, that Congress could not use its newly-acquired powers to indirectly undermine the slave system by disarming the militia, on which the South relied for slave control. His argument is based on a multiplicity of the historical evidence, including debates between James Madison and George Mason and Patrick Henry at the Constitutional Ratifying Convention in Richmond, Virginia in June 1788; the record from the First Congress; and the antecedent of the American right to bear arms provision in the English Declaration of Rights of 1688.

The Hidden History of the Second Amendment by Carl T. Bogus :: SSRN

 

[Revoltingest]

You've made jokes before about how person who really brought this argument forward in recent memory was Professor Carl T. Bogus of Roger Williams University. Your choice of terms suggested that you were using this tactic again.
The Hidden History of the Second Amendment by Carl T. Bogus :: SSRN

His name is familiar, so I might've mocked him before.
But I didn't this time. (Note that you didn't cite or link him here.)
I used "bogus' to describe his facile, empty, self-serving, bonkers, simplistic, myopic agenda laden view.

I suppose that now you'll chastise me for dissing some guy named Professor Bonkers, eh?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

His name is familiar, so I might've mocked him before.
But I didn't this time.

Okay.

(Note that you didn't cite or link him here.)

... except for the citation with link below the abstract I quoted.

I used "bogus' to describe his facile, empty, self-serving, bonkers, simplistic, myopic agenda laden view.

Have you actually read enough about his view to make a proper determination?

His paper is available for download for free at the link I provided in my last post.

 

[Revoltingest]

Have you actually read enough about his view to make a proper determination?
His paper is available for download for free at the link I provided in my last post.

I vaguely recall perusing it before, & being thoroughly unimpressed. It reminds me of reading
creationist screeds. Once I suss their message, I seldom commit it to long term memory.
There is much literature supporting the purposes I listed, so any argument to make it primarily
about enforcing slavery is bogus because it ignores most of our history. Btw, I don't support
slavery. (It's a libertarian thingie.) Anti-gun types so love to find sins with our side, in lieu
of real analysis of the issue.

Note: This country has made efforts to prevent black folk from owning guns, but you don't see
me making the argument that this is your goal. Fair is fair.

Note again: If my last name were "Bogus", & I wanted to publish papers, I'd change it to "Expert".

 

[Enai de a lukal]

I find that having and applying common sense, situational awareness, and general intelligence renders owning an AR-15 unnecessary. Then again, it wouldn't be fair of me to assume that everyone has or can obtain these things.

It's still sadly adorable how many people fantasize that they would or could effectively use a firearm in a crisis situation.

:yes:

You just dropped the mic.

 

[CMike]

So you do think the Second Amendment means "you can have any gun you want without restriction"? Who's really making up their own law?

BTW: the Supreme Court disagrees with you:


Annotated Constitution Prototype

The Supreme Court is wrong.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I am sorry you missed it.

"the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

But you specifically name a particular weapon which is why I asked. I believe Maryland banned the sale of AR-15 Combat Weapons regardless of the second amendment so obviously you don't have a right under the 2nd Amendment to own that gun....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

It says what it says. I think my interpretation is a lot more reasonable than the interpretation "you can own whatever gun you want without restriction", which isn't what the Second Amendment says either.

And it isn't what SCOTUS ruled either....so you are correct.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Supreme Court is wrong.

Of course it is. :kissbette

 

[Revoltingest]

But you specifically name a particular weapon which is why I asked. I believe Maryland banned the ownerships and sale of AR-15 Combat Weapons regardless of the second amendment so obviously you don't have a right under the 2nd Amendment to own that gun....

Some problems:
- MD law does not defeat federal law or the Constitution.
- While not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, a reasonable interpretation of the 2nd would treat as a protected type of firearm.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Yeah... the 2nd amendment clearly states that you have the right to bear flamethrowers and machine guns.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah... the 2nd amendment clearly states that you have the right to bear flamethrowers and machine guns.

If you face palm your own posts you risk going blind.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

In my time posting here, I've developed a palm mark on my forehead that I think is permanent.

 

[Revoltingest]

In my time posting here, I've developed a palm mark on my forehead that I think is permanent.

I know the feeling.
It helps if you lower your expectations of us.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Some problems:
- MD law does not defeat federal law or the Constitution.

Never said it did....

- While not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, a reasonable interpretation of the 2nd would treat as a protected type of firearm.

But this wasn't my argument. CMike centred his argument around the 2nd amendment being a right that gives him the ability the own any firearm and it shall not be infringed...except we know that the states have the ability to ban specific firearms. Maryland is a prime example. They have a ban on Combat Weapons and high capacity magazines....So I fail to see how the 2nd. Amendment applies when the state has an active ban on a specific weapon in place.

Don't get me wrong..I could care less whether one owns a Combat Weapon or not and I don't care to be on the side of those wanting a ban on those types of weapons. As a gun owner I'm not making the case for such a thing....

 

[Revoltingest]

Never said it did....
But this wasn't my argument.

The problems remain.

 

[oldbadger]

Maybe the referenced video might explain to some of you why a AR-15 is necessary. You will notice when the CNN Anchor ask about a 10 round magazine the reporter stated that a 30 round magazine was needed for the person to be more effective.

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#...5-hog-swat.cnn

Hardly the spirit of the 'Deer Hunter', is it? :biglaugh:
You. Yourself. Your knowledge of nature and all. A rifle. 2 rounds. One shot.

or.....

Jerk with a semi-automatic, ten clips of ammo. This the American way?

 

[Revoltingest]

Hardly the spirit of the 'Deer Hunter', is it? :biglaugh:
You. Yourself. Your knowledge of nature and all. A rifle. 2 rounds. One shot.
or.....
Jerk with a semi-automatic, ten clips of ammo. This the American way?

Since you don't hunt here, & you know us only thru movies, we will forgive your face palmworthy impressions.

 

[oldbadger]

Since you don't hunt here, & you know us only thru movies, we will forgive your face palmworthy impressions.

Oh yeah? And just how many folks who actually do live in your country know anything about the mindset of a hunter who takes the most tremendous personal risks, self disciplined to the utmost level, totally humbled by all around, with an understanding about a quarry reaching almost to love, who, having gone to all that trouble, will not shoot unless a kill is almost absolutely certain, clean and final?

Go on..... tell me another one.... just like the first one.