Article

2019-08-06 China-Japan-Koreas

While Anti-Gunners Hate It, Hong Kong Residents Long For Second Amendment

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2019-08-06 07:43|| || Front Page|| [4 views ] Top

#1 Same with Venezuelans. Something about having commies in charge.

Posted by Procopius2k 2019-08-06 08:13|| 2019-08-06 08:13|| Front Page Top

#2 And the anti-gunners long for being the boss in a system like the one the Chinese have.

Posted by charger 2019-08-06 09:44|| 2019-08-06 09:44|| Front Page Top

#3 People who despise freedom are themselves despicable.

Posted by M. Murcek 2019-08-06 10:30|| 2019-08-06 10:30|| Front Page Top

#4 Lets talk scope.

I believe in gun ownership. If you don't own one you are irresponsible in regards to protecting the family.

When the Second Amendment was ratified by we the people, a gun was a one shot musket. 6 shooters were not even around yet.

My father, the proud owner of at least 10 guns of which one was an AR15 with a 30 round banana clip was a WWII vet. He fought the japs. He brought back a jap sword, medals, a jap bayonet. One of the souvenirs he was not allowed to keep per military and bring back home when he made it back to stateside was a jap machine gun. He took out the machine gun nest of 3 japs with a grenade and his 45. They did render a flesh wound to his leg during the conversation.

The shooter in Ohio had a gun that had a 100 round barrel clip. Dozens upon dozens of people were sitting ducks to this device bought "legally".

Should the Second Amendment include that device? Should the Second Amendment that was ratified to allow the people to have one shot muskets be modernized with some restrictions in modern times????

Posted by Phaick Uneretle6310 2019-08-06 16:15|| 2019-08-06 16:15|| Front Page Top

#5 ..the First Amendment cover a 'Free Press' which was a manually operated press, the technology of the times. It didn't envision radio, tv, cable, or mechanical automated printing.

The second militia act of 1792 required citizens to arm themselves - to wit

Militia members, referred to as "every citizen, so enrolled and notified", "...shall within six months thereafter, provide himself..." with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a box able to contain not less than 24 suitable cartridges, and a knapsack. Alternatively, everyone enrolled was to provide himself with a powder horn, ¼ pound of gunpowder, 20 rifle balls, a shot-pouch, and a knapsack.

In simple language, the same equipment that the regular army soldiers of the time would carry. Remember they had just gotten rid of the King's army and we more than suspicious of any governmental standing army in their midst. By the standards so shown by the Founders, every able body citizen should be carrying the same standard weapon issued to our contemporary infantry.

Posted by Procopius2k 2019-08-06 16:27|| 2019-08-06 16:27|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm with Phaick. A responsible family man.

An Ukranian AKM, a 12.7X45mm VKS very russian, a 2A1- Indian version of the SMLE Mk3 chambered for hog teeth, two very old 98 Ks more russians ! , a fully licensed snub nosed .32 Taurus for the yet more responsible wifey, and a disassembled 20mm anti-materiel (!) Vidhwansak - an Indian version of a South African 22 kilo lamentation.

I even have an IOF made willy pete lying around somewhere, I thought I'd use it on some diwali but it seemed like a waste. We once used them to burn drugs and counterfeit currency.

But my most prized possessions are these.

Don't laugh. They're important.

This piece of shit is the staple weapon of the commonest Indian criminal, the ones no paperwork is needed to dispose of. Needless to say, a perforated body found with this in one hand and it's lone pathetic cartridge fired, the Lestrades pretty much take it from there.

Something way more important than using your fancy armaments, is knowing the traps and pitfalls SJW lawyers can use to put you away for protecting yourself ! Of course this whole approach is very Indian. American gun rights and your stand-your-ground laws give you so many easy choices.

Posted by Dron66046 2019-08-06 17:32|| 2019-08-06 17:32|| Front Page Top

#7 I have seen over and over law enforcement armed with hand guns take out an rookie offender who was armed with an assault weapon.

The exception was in Dallas where 12 police officers were shot by one well trained ex-army veteran armed with an assault weapon. But he had a huge element of surprise on the unexpecting officers.

Precopius2k presented the position that the US 2nd Amendment supporters have always maintained for a couple hundred years. However, now infantry have weapons that fire 800 rounds a minute and in one case a US soldier took out almost a dozen AK47 armed jihadi's in a house going room by room with that infantry weapon.

Just like computer technology, small arms technology is getting smaller and more devastatingly more powerful.

Posted by Phaick Uneretle6310 2019-08-06 18:31|| 2019-08-06 18:31|| Front Page Top

#8 Lets talk scope.

As compared with iron sights? Goofing aside, the 2nd Amendment is not about hardware, it's about protecting yourself from an abusive government.

After any successful revolution, the first order of business, after throwing their rascals out and putting our rascals in, is making sure nobody overthrows *us*. Tasks like executing suspected traitors, settling old scores, and of course, confiscating guns.

Our Founding Fathers took a different approach. Having a profound distrust of governments, or perhaps just a deep understanding of human nature, they built a system to limit government overreach. The right to bear arms is a critical part of that.

Just one more reason why America is the most interesting political experiment in the last few hundred years.

Posted by SteveS 2019-08-06 21:37|| 2019-08-06 21:37|| Front Page Top

#9 Should the Second Amendment that was ratified to allow the people to have one shot muskets be modernized with some restrictions in modern times????

Not even if the government limits itself to one shot muskets.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Posted by Snakes Sheper7862 2019-08-06 23:04|| 2019-08-06 23:04|| Front Page Top

#10 Oooh, a shutter gun! Is that an early mark .303 cartridge? Could be more dangerous to the shooter than the shootee.

Posted by Snakes Sheper7862 2019-08-06 23:24|| 2019-08-06 23:24|| Front Page Top

23:24 Snakes Sheper7862
23:04 Snakes Sheper7862
23:03 Raj
23:00 SR-71
22:48 Captain Grumble3862
22:22 Captain Grumble3862
22:22 Dron66046
21:42 Dron66046
21:37 SteveS
21:31 Iblis
20:00 chris
19:30 chris
19:28 Regular joe
19:25 Captain Grumble3862
19:24 Regular joe
19:22 chris
19:15 Captain Grumble3862
18:55 trailing wife
18:31 Phaick Uneretle6310
17:32 Dron66046
17:01 Charles
16:32 Lex
16:27 Procopius2k
16:25 Abu Uluque