Don't Call It Gun Control

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Don't call it 'gun control.' Call it what it is: Infringement on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It's an infringement on our right to the power to keep ourselves free from tyranny. If we keep on using their narrative we will lose.

Biden says We the People don't stand a chance against the government.

Excerpted Biden comments from the above link:

And I might add: The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own. You couldn’t buy a cannon.
 
Those who say the blood of lib- — “the blood of patriots,” you know, and all the stuff about how we’re going to have to move against the government. Well, the tree of liberty is not watered with the blood of patriots. What’s happened is that there have never been — if you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons.
 
The point is that there has always been the ability to limit — rationally limit the type of weapon that can be owned and who can own it.

As for the people being able to overthrow the government, just who in Hell does he think who - or rather what - is the government in this country? And, if those who occupy the positions of power and duty under the Constitution believe they are the government, are sacrosanct, are endowed with their position, hold those positions of power and duty by right; well, they have another thing coming. If they keep on overstepping those positions of power, they will find that We the People are the souls that fly those F-14s, drop those nukes, and will do all that is necessary to see that those who occupy those positions of power and duty refrain from stripping We the People of the power to keep them in check. It is that plain and simple.

Any act of those in government of the same mind as the likes of Biden, Schumer, and their ilk, vis-a-vis limiting or removing the power of the We the People to maintain our freedom, is an act of war against We the People. I predict, if continued, these acts of war will have the same outcome as the war we fought in 1776. Not many of them will survive, but We the People and the Constitution will.  And, remember: The government of this land is not those in government; the Constitution as drafted by We the People and ratified by the several states is.

Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that those of us today are no less one of We the People as those who drafted, established, and ordained the Constitution.

Spread the news.

Woody

[MechAg94]

Why do people always think we can't own a cannon?  You can buy a cannon now. 

[cordex]

How about "attacking civil rights"?

[RoadKingLarry]

When in the course of human events...

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript

[WLJ]

People Control

[sumpnz]

Biden is right to the extent that the will to use the full military capabilities of the nation would be very effective at putting down any rebellion.  But even when fighting in far flung places (e.g. Vietnam, Afghanistan) where the victims of our military might were nobody we knew or had any relationships with we weren’t willing to go that far.  Once you start talking about strafing Amtrak trains, or bombing interstates/airports/shipping ports to starve out whole regions does Biden really think he’d maintain support from any but the fringeiest of far-leftists?

[Ben]

Biden is right to the extent that the will to use the full military capabilities of the nation would be very effective at putting down any rebellion. 

Again though, a not insignificant portion of the cool toys are controlled by governors. It's not like Harris Biden is going against "civilians" with ARs and AKs (though as noted, in the past, people in pajamas and sandals have held off superpowers). Many state governors would not stand for such a thing.

Also, as we have discussed in the past, the actual trained killers in the military may not point their guns in the direction Harris Biden wants them too.

[sumpnz]

Hence why I said the “will to use” that capability would be key.  Doesn’t matter if Biden/Harris has that will.  The military leadership, right down to grunts, also has to have that will.  Otherwise they’ll either desert their post or frag the officers (or even politicians) giving the orders. 

[AZRedhawk44]

Hence why I said the “will to use” that capability would be key.  Doesn’t matter if Biden/Harris has that will.  The military leadership, right down to grunts, also has to have that will.  Otherwise they’ll either desert their post or frag the officers (or even politicians) giving the orders.

They've been working for quite some time to de-right the military.

[sumpnz]

They've been working for quite some time to de-right the military.

Even far lefties in the military still have family and childhood friends and neighbors they otherwise like and such that would be targeted.  Some will be psychotic enough to not care about that, but many, if not most, will be unwilling to target those people.

[Hawkmoon]

I call BS:

And I might add: The Second Amendment, from the day it was passed, limited the type of people who could own a gun and what type of weapon you could own. You couldn’t buy a cannon.

It was not uncommon for local militias in the colonies to have their own cannon. In some (perhaps many?) instances it was the wealthy squire who provided the cannon -- and, by virtue of owning the cannon, he got to be the commanding officer.

At least, that's what I've read. Dunno, I wasn't there. I'm old, but I'm not THAT old.



Army? You don't think the Army would wage war on the populace? In response, I give you this guy -- a retired 3-star general who, among his various roles, was in charge of all Basic Training for the U.S. Army:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xVQXCL2JGA

Who do you suppose he thinks "the wrong people" are?

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Hmm ... Full semiautomatic. There are damn few semiautomatic guns that won't fire full semiautomatic. You know the ones I mean. Those few that are broken ... 

It boggles the mind how they can bastardize the language, lie, mislead the ignorant ... 

Woody

[Pb]

I call BS:

It was not uncommon for local militias in the colonies to have their own cannon. In some (perhaps many?) instances it was the wealthy squire who provided the cannon -- and, by virtue of owning the cannon, he got to be the commanding officer.

You are right.  There were no bans on any sort of weapon in the early USA.  There was no permit required for carrying any weapon openly or concealed either until around the 1820s when the first concealed carry bans were passed (open carry was allowed).  The only gun control in the very early USA was aimed at non-citizens (Indians and slaves).

On my work computer I have a scanned image of an advisement for ship supplies from the late 1700's- they are selling  cannons and loaded hand grenades.  I my try and dig it up tomorrow.

And cannons are legal right now with no restrictions:

http://steencannons.com/cannons/

There was even a state court case in Texas in the 1800s that specifically stated that all military weapons were protected by the Second Amendment; it specifically named cannons and mortars.

[Jim147]

Used to have a cannon. There may have been some alcohol involved in why it's no longer in one piece. But that's a story for another time.

[Nick1911]

Used to have a cannon. There may have been some alcohol involved in why it's no longer in one piece. But that's a story for another time.

We should really build another one.  Ever sandcast brass?  Also, we're going to need to find someone with a BIG lathe...

[Jim147]

Been a long time since I did sandcasts. But I have everything here to do it. And yes it was brass and it didn't like red dot.

[Bogie]

We did a proof on one of my black powder (80 gr) golf ball mortars with Bullseye (also, 80 gr).
 
Or W231... I dismember.
 
It bulged it a few thou.
 
But we kept using it.

[ConstitutionCowboy]

I just had a thought. Next time out with my lever guns, I'm gonna practice some full lever action. (Visions of  "The Rifleman" coursing through my memory ...) Maybe some full revolving with my Security Six as well...

Woody

[HankB]

You are right.  There were no bans on any sort of weapon in the early USA . . .

In Article 1, Section 8, the Constitution explicitly says that Congress has the power to ". . . grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal . . . "

From this it's clear that private ownership of warships is assumed, or at the very least, armed merchantmen. So cannons were clearly assumed to be available and privately owned. (Although this may be the only case where Congress hasn't exerted its power - I don't recall reading about any Letters of Marque ever actually being issued.)

[kgbsquirrel]

In Article 1, Section 8, the Constitution explicitly says that Congress has the power to ". . . grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal . . . "

From this it's clear that private ownership of warships is assumed, or at the very least, armed merchantmen. So cannons were clearly assumed to be available and privately owned. (Although this may be the only case where Congress hasn't exerted its power - I don't recall reading about any Letters of Marque ever actually being issued.)

Good point!

[dogmush]

In Article 1, Section 8, the Constitution explicitly says that Congress has the power to ". . . grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal . . . "

From this it's clear that private ownership of warships is assumed, or at the very least, armed merchantmen. So cannons were clearly assumed to be available and privately owned. (Although this may be the only case where Congress hasn't exerted its power - I don't recall reading about any Letters of Marque ever actually being issued.)

I read about some American privateers as late as the war of 1812.

[Pb]

Okay, I found it- an ad for a business selling cannons, hand grenades etc to the public in 1789 in Philadelphia:

https://www.loc.gov/resource/rbpe.1470090a/?st=text

[Hawkmoon]

For reference:

https://www.guns.com/news/2020/06/30/biden-fails-fact-check-on-revolutionary-war-cannon-ownership