+- 6.5 Grendel Forum (https://65grendel.com)
+-- Forum: 6.5 GRENDEL FORUM NEWS (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=26)
+--- Thread: "Why do you need an AR15?" (/showthread.php?tid=15447)
"Why do you need an AR15?" - NugginFutz - 03-04-2018
To the range we go, then. Stanc, wish you could join us. Perhaps that might freshen your outlook.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - BjornF16 - 03-04-2018
stanc Wrote:"Calls" for greater protection do not equate to being co-author/creator. Madison alone wrote the Bill of Rights, although he clearly was strongly influenced by Mason.
From the Virginia Declaration of Rights:
Note that, like Madison did with the Second Amendment, Mason only addressed collective defense.
Stanc, I generally enjoy reading your posts; but I must say that you have been very exasperating regarding this thread.
It is pure semantics to say only Madison wrote the Bill of Rights. In your logic, a secretary who types a letter is the sole source of the letter and not the individual(s) dictating.
You seem to have a lot of time on your hands. I really do suggest you read the book The Founders Second Amendment: Origins of the Right to Bear Arms
by Stephen P. Halbrook
. I think you would enjoy it just as I have.Just as the Supreme Court looks to other documents written that give context to the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and laws, this book goes into great detail the events, writings, and legislation that led to the 2A specifically.
For instance Pennsylvania expanded upon Virginia's Declaration of Rights (PA constitutional convention met from July 15 thru September 28, 1776): "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves, and of the State..."
Many other states had similar; all were later clamoring for guarantees within a Bill of Rights that they didn't see in the Constitution, Federalist Papers notwithstanding. Try reading Anti-Federalist Papers as well.
Self defense as well as defense against a tyrannical government were all common themes supporting a RKBA. A narrow literal reading of the 2A is akin to revisionist judicial activism.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - Klem - 03-04-2018
The moral right of a document does not lie with the writer in a situation of procuration. It is quite common for people to direct others to act on their behalf, including writing documents (e.g. CEO's Presidents, the rich and famous)...). There's a convention followed where the person who signs a document then adds 'PP' (Per Procurationem), which mean 'on behalf of' or acting through the authority of. Or PPS Per Procurationem Secretari. In all these cases the responsibility for the document and its contents lies with the senior party or the party that commissioned the document. In the case of 2A where only one person can actually write a document that is clearly a collaborative effort is acting on behalf of others...and that is the end of the argument.
From an outsiders perspective I don't think the word 'need' is relevant here. You don't have to need it at all. You can have one because you are entitled to have one. For me it is different - there is no right to civilian ownership here and so I have to convince others of my need. It is called the 'Genuine need' and I must justify this need on every application for every individual firearm. So, I have been reading this thread quietly with amusement. Your right to ownership transcends the threads question and you should simply enjoy the fact that you can have one without needing it.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
JASmith Wrote:They were not intended to do that. They were in response to your erroneous statement that my posts "are almost all contrary arguments telling folks why we have no rights save those given by the government."stanc Wrote:You are a bit off. What I actually said is that the government defines legal rights and privileges.None of these statements suggest a path towards preserving or returning power to the people.
Driving is legally considered a privilege because the government says it is.
Free speech is legally considered a right because the government says it is.
I have never said that the government gave us rights.
JASmith Wrote:I rest my case . . .LOL. Joe, you never had a case.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
grayfox Wrote:Somebody call me/wake me up when the arguing over minutiae is over and we get back to discussion with substance.Yeah, I have an unfortunate tendency to get unduly focused on minor details like that. My bad. :o
I've enjoyed the research by Montana, Bjornf16 etc, but quibbling over little details does not move me one way or the other.
Example: I don't personally care whether it was one guy, 2 guys or 15 that "wrote" or "authored" or whatever, the 2A...
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
NugginFutz Wrote:To the range we go, then. Stanc, wish you could join us. Perhaps that might freshen your outlook.I wish I could, too. I've only gone shooting once in this century, and that was over three years ago. I miss the smell of gunsmoke.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
BjornF16 Wrote:Stanc, I generally enjoy reading your posts; but I must say that you have been very exasperating regarding this thread.That sometimes happens.
BjornF16 Wrote:A narrow literal reading of the 2A is akin to revisionist judicial activism.I strongly disagree. Ascribing a meaning to a law that is different than what it actually says is judicial activism.
Laws are not poetry. A law should explicitly say what it means, and mean what it says.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
Klem Wrote:From an outsiders perspective I don't think the word 'need' is relevant here. You don't have to need it at all. You can have one because you are entitled to have one.From an insider's perspective, I agree. I think it's a mistake to try to justify owning an AR15 on the basis of "need."
"Why do you need an AR15?" - Klem - 03-05-2018
stanc Wrote:Not quite. Your argument is flawed, but as others have rightfully noted, it is too trivial to continue discussing.
From an insider's perspective, I agree. I think it's a mistake to try to justify owning an AR15 on the basis of "need." (Mainly because nobody genuinely needs to have one.)
'Flawed?' Sorry Stan, I have no inclination to enter into debate. Feel free to think you've won any and every discussion where I am concerned because I'm off to the range to walk the walk.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
Klem Wrote:Your comments are irrational.stanc Wrote:Not quite. Your argument is flawed, but as others have rightfully noted, it is too trivial to continue discussing.'Flawed?' Sorry Stan, I have no inclination to enter into debate. Feel free to think you've won any and every discussion where I am concerned because I'm off to the range to walk the walk.
1. I said it's too trivial to keep discussing, so I am not seeking to debate you.
2. I am not so foolish as to think it is possible to "win" an internet discussion.
But, I do hope that you enjoy your walk.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - keystone183 - 03-05-2018
stanc Wrote:[COLOR="#FF0000"]I'm not, but you obviously are.
[/COLOR]
LOL.
Damn! Go away for a weekend, and miss all the fun.....
Stan, i KNOW you will never admit when you're wrong.......but i'll take that as a solid win! Good talk though!
"Why do you need an AR15?" - montana - 03-05-2018
stanc Wrote:From an insider's perspective, I agree. I think it's a mistake to try to justify owning an AR15 on the basis of "need." (Mainly because nobody genuinely needs to have one.)
Who gets to decide what another person needs are? Every government, rapist, serial killer, abusive spouse-parent, Eugenics lover, elitist, mob, etc believes and exorcises that same perspective. Nobody genuinely needs pets, TV, auto mobiles, sports, alcohol, kids, holidays, the old, disabled, poor, weak, ignorant, over educated, illiterate, religion, atheism, etc, etc.
I agree stan, but not because no one genuinely needs to have one, but by who's standards are our needs decided.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783
"Why do you need an AR15?" - JASmith - 03-05-2018
Montana and others arguing that we dont need a particular item misses the point
In my view, the 2A establishes the need, even though it is not immediately apparent to most.
The need for a defensive weapon is akin to the ejection seat in combat aircraft. One doesnt need it until I need it right now!
Been there but thankfully didn't need it but truly appreciated having an option different than certain death.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - montana - 03-05-2018
JASmith Wrote:Montana and others arguing that we dont need a particular item misses the point
In my view, the 2A establishes the need, even though it is not immediately apparent to most.
The need for a defensive weapon is akin to the ejection seat in combat aircraft. One doesnt need it until I need it right now!
Been there but thankfully didn't need it but truly appreciated having an option different than certain death.
I agree 100%, my argument was with people who refuse to understand that need. Many anti semi-auto or what ever always love to express need or the lack of. I was just turning their argument around for them so the shoe is on the other foot. This debate is a no brainier for anyone who understands freedom, liberty, human nature and history. Yet here we are!
"Why do you need an AR15?" - LRRPF52 - 03-05-2018
[video=youtube_share;5zfysHwGVJo]https://youtu.be/5zfysHwGVJo[/video]
"Why do you need an AR15?" - LRRPF52 - 03-05-2018
[video=youtube_share;WX80P9fRdlY]https://youtu.be/WX80P9fRdlY[/video]
"Why do you need an AR15?" - keystone183 - 03-05-2018
LRRPF52 Wrote:[video=youtube_share;5zfysHwGVJo]https://youtu.be/5zfysHwGVJo[/video]
Unfortunately for those three, the homeowner hadn't talked to stanc.....
stanc Wrote:Indeed. However, assault rifles are offensive weapons. And one is unlikely to have an assault rifle on one's person when desperately needed.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
keystone183 Wrote:Stan, i KNOW you will never admit when you're wrong...Huh? I may not always be right, but I am never wrong. :p
keystone183 Wrote:...but i'll take that as a solid win!Truly, you're a legend in your own mind.
"Why do you need an AR15?" - keystone183 - 03-05-2018
stanc Wrote:Huh? I may not always be right, but I am never wrong. :p
Truly, you're a legend in your own mind.
Look, i've argued enough to know.......when someone throws the 'i know you are but what am i?' out.....they got nothing........which.....is exactly the rebuttal you have been giving....LOL:p
But seriously, if you have some logic or reason to serve, and not...'i know best'........i'm eagerly awaiting!!
"Why do you need an AR15?" - stanc - 03-05-2018
JASmith Wrote:Montana and others arguing that we don’t need a particular item misses the pointThe only need addressed in the 2A is access to weapons for arming the militia. However, that's been rendered somewhat moot, because those state militias that still exist, either are unarmed, or issue required weapons. There is no longer a need for individuals to provide their own weapons; and in fact, modern military forces typically do not permit the use of privately-owned weapons.
In my view, the 2A establishes the need, even though it is not immediately apparent to most.
JASmith Wrote:The need for a defensive weapon is akin to the ejection seat in combat aircraft. One doesn’t “need it” until I need it right now!Precisely. And the only type of firearm practical for "RIGHT NOW!" accessibility on a 24-hour, wherever-you-are basis is a pistol or revolver.