Libercontrarian

Crushed between the wheels of capitalism and big government.

It’s Worth Discussing

There’s a raging debate going on over at AR15.com that’s got the members hot n’ bothered: How to get machine guns legalized.

The reason for the debate is that the “extreme” gun-owner types like me are convinced that the sheeple and the power-hungry weasels in Congress will never permit those individuals willing to “feed The Beast” the opportunity to effectively arm ourselves in the same fashion that the huge (by Continental standards, anyway) standing Army is armed: with full-auto weapons.

The way things sit right now, you can’t arm yourself in the same way the Army does it.

The original intent of the founders was clear: the Militia (and yes, Virginia, the Militia is ALL FREE MEN age 16 – 45, not some friggin’ National Guard that was invented in 1903) was to have access to weapons like the (hopefully small) standing Army. Why “hopefully small?” This was to prevent two things: 1., a struggling country from having to support an expensive habit of keeping a large standing army, well, standing around (idle men-at-arms consume volumes of cash like hookers at Fredericks of Hollywood), and 2., an evil tyrant from using said army to oppress the people – all the better to keep them out of your homes, too.

So you’re saying, “Oh, good, Whacknut-Boy here wants to give every religious fundamentalist/Muslim extremist/ardent Kwikie-Mart owner the right to keep and bear full-auto miniguns.” The more “reasonable” (read: leftist knee-jerk-anti-free-thinker-types) are clicking the “close” box on this window, they haven’t even read this sentence yet. There goes the vaunted "liberal tolerance" of the Left.

That’s one way of looking at it. Another is that there are inherent risks from living in any democracy. Since making things legal or illegal tends to be important only for the people who are interested in obeying the law in the first place, then how will things be any different then than they are right now? If safe, law-abiding Citizens own guns, why does it matter how destructive those guns are? The guns or the owners aren’t going to suddenly become unsafe, or the owners fail to abide by the law because they have a select-fire M2 Carbine, are they? Ridiculous.

So how did we get here?

This is likely a post for another day. I had a SCORCHING tome written in a fit of grand passion about NFA, U.S. v. Miller, “Interstate Commerce Clause,” Chuckles the Clown Schumer, the Feebies and their murderous attack on Randy Weaver’s wife, (armed with her Assault Baby, as all good race-seperatist mothers are want to do), the BAT-Finks and their murderous attack on the helpless Branch Davidians, kitten-stomping lesbians, and some other really cool stuff, but alas, the post managed to mysteriously disappear during a spell-check operation on Motime. It was a “pop-up blocker” fuckup, I think. Anyway, there was considerable upset at the Sergeant Major’s quarters, with much stamping around and cursing, and Mrs. Libercontrarian waking up in a fit of consternation, but all was assuaged by two applications of a golden fluid known as “Budweiser,” and a Note To Self to “NEVER EVER WRITE ANYTHING IN MOTIME OR EBAY” but to type, save, and type in Word – then Paste.

I WILL approach this topic in another post. Several other posts, in fact. Never mind that other gunbloggers have done land-office bidness with this one before. Suffice it to say that the debate at AR15.com (and I intend to be involved) will likely continue to rage about how to accomplish our goals – just how DO you sell such an “unsellable” concept to the masses?

We shall see – this will be revisited here at Libercontrarian. In detail. With photos, and links, and…

P.S. Good to be back! Thanks, Zombyboy!

posted by: underwhelmed at February 21, 2006 00:40 | link | comments (3) |

Comments:

#1  21 February 2006 - 02:40

 

Well being the nitpicky sort I am...

If the militia is between 16 & 45 then what's to keep the .gov from having you hand yours in when you hit the big four six?

A more practical & less problematic definition would simply be anyone capable of bearing arms for the common defense. Cause honestly, if barbarians storm the gates are you gonna be checking i.d.'s? Nope; you'll just hope the 60 year old & his grandson know how to hit what they're aiming at.

But I'm interested in hearing your ideas. Can't really say that I want a full auto my damn self (though those 1918 BAR's are sooo nice) but a STEN in 10mm in a free market would probable be a helluvalot closer to my budget than it would be now ('specially considered they ain't available to civvy's) & thus more tempting.

Anonymous

#2  22 February 2006 - 22:23

 

Sten. 10mm.

Hmmm.

One has to think - 10mm may be the ultimate subgun cartridge. Plenty of mass, hauling ass. By all reports, the Sten was a perfectly suitable subgun, not equal to the MP40 but markedly better than the M3, and not 1/10th as expensive or hard to manufacture as the Thompson, perhaps the most over-engineered 12-lb. monster that ever shot a pistol cartridge.

underwhelmed

#3  09 March 2006 - 13:28

 

"The way things sit right now, you can’t arm yourself in the same way the Army does it."

Actually you can if you like extremely accurate weapons for "one Shot One Kill" situations. Or if you want to be messy about it, you can still buy a Barret 50 cal or one of the others. My preference for close up and dirty is the 12 guage pump every time. All these are legal. It is fun to rock and roll but with the cost of ammo, the frugal, stingey bolt action type rifle or the pump shotgun for close up is best. AND LEGAL for all self and home defense use.

Anonymous

Comments: