The Right to Own a Bazooka

Discussion in 'Carry Issues' started by Netfotoj, Jan 9, 2008.

  1. Netfotoj

    Netfotoj Premium Member

    2,652
    2
    0
    This is a bit old (and a bit odd), but I just found it, so it’s new to me, some online cartoons by Reason magazine. Not sure I agree with or even understand some of it, but it’s interesting anyway. Site says it is not affiliated with the Libertarian Party, but it does have several articles on Ron Paul on it. :think:

    The Right to Own a Bazooka

    And also What We Believe: America's favorite myths, which is even older.
     
  2. SELFDEFENSE

    SELFDEFENSE Premium Member

    3,817
    31
    48
    Interesting question of where the 2nd A ends.
    Is it restricted to handgun, rifle, or all shoulder bearable "arms" (e.g., bazooka) or does it mean that the people have the right to whatever the government's army has (which was primarily long guns in 1776, although the cannon was in use by the Brits)?
     

  3. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,284
    9
    38
    I think that you can own a bazooka, as a destructive device. Functional shells might be tricky to obtain, and each is probably a DD itself.

    I do believe that infantry-class small arms should be the defining guidelines, and I'm not sure that shoulder-fired rockets (surplus LAW, RPGs, etc) are small arms. The police or government agencies should be able to own and possess anything the citizenry may have, with similar red tape and bureaucratic hassles. No special classes or easements for the various agencies to possess forbidden infantry class weapons. This means that if 10-round mags are all the regular folks need, then they damn sure are all the police or Feds need. No exceptions. No creation of samurai-class government warriors or strike teams with armament that the lawful citizenry is forbidden. It is an outrage and unConstitutional to do so, but that that is exactly the way we have allowed the laws to develop, and continue to allow the rogue agency BATFE to operate the way it does, making up rules and hammering lawful citizens with .gov power. The Founding Fathers would be sickened by the current state of affairs.

    Ben
     
  4. Syntax360

    Syntax360 Premium Member

    5,073
    13
    0
    Great post, ThaiBoxer! I agree wholeheartedly. :beer: