Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
A couple things jump out here. First, the linkage between citizen ownership of firearms and militia was rooted in the desire to avoid the need/practice of maintaining a large standing army (which could then be used against citizens themselves). We moved away from the original militia model around the turn of the last century, and strongly towards a large professional standing army during the cold war . . . so we kind of blew that one. Unfortunate wars like Iraq and even Afghanistan would have been much harder to start and prolong if we had the old system. Bob seems to ignore the fact that when militia were called up, they were expected to show up with a full infantry kit, including weapon (if not they were issued one and charged for it)
Within that context, the muskets of the founding fathers' time were indeed the assault rifles of their day, ask any redcoat at the receiving end of accurate sustained fire from revolutionary minutemen. If citizens can own and thus "bear" arms in a manner sufficient to serve as a foot soldier . . . then the semi-auto rifles (often mistakenly ID'd as "assault rifles") are actually already a grade less capable than they would need in military service, or face in the hypothetical confrontation with a tyrannical government.
As someone who thinks the likelihood of needing to call up a citizen militia or stop tyranny is remote at best, I nevertheless support the perhaps archaic provisions of the 2nd Amendment because is it our Constitution. I was equally offended by the wanton disregard paid to our privacy and due process protections after 9/11. I don't hold truck with anyone playing fast and loose with Rights they don't agree with or value, on the left or right. If we as a society have come to a place where our codified gun rights are truly inappropriate, the path forward is clearly constitutional amendment, not end runs.
Neither gun control or gun rights advocates seem able to meet in the middle and discuss common sense laws that don't abridge rights. The NRA and it's ilk have a zero compromise approach (while taking zero responsibility) and gun control advocates are disingenuous about their ultimate goals (disarmament through general and specific weapon/carry bans). Both groups severely disappoint.10 months ago