AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: What Is A Militia?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
A very nice list of statements made by the founding fathers about the second amendment.

Real Science

February 1,2013

EXCERPT:

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

The founding fathers were pretty clear that a militia has nothing to do with an army.

“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46

MANY MORE IN THE LINK
What is interesting is that Alexander Hamilton, a big government Federalist at the time, and not one of my favorite individuals, was in agreement. He too agreed with Madison, Mason, Adams, and others about the right/duty of the entire citizenry to own and bear arms. And if he agreed, it should be unanimous. This is a 'no brainer', that even our buddy, PawnMan, ought to understand by default. S22
I am planning on buying my first gun and currently favor a Glock for personal defense.Maybe a G19 or the G23.

The state of Washington allows the SHALL use gun permit for Concealed Carry and I intend to carry one and eventually help others protect themselves.

Now a member of the USCCA and learning as I go.
(02-02-2013, 11:20 AM)sunsettommy Wrote: [ -> ]I am planning on buying my first gun and currently favor a Glock for personal defense.Maybe a G19 or the G23.

The state of Washington allows the SHALL use gun permit for Concealed Carry and I intend to carry one and eventually help others protect themselves.

Now a member of the USCCA and learning as I go.

God, I'm gonna catch hell for this, but for anyone that I hear about that is considering a handgun for personal defense for the first time, I tell them get a simple high quality double action revolver [38/357]. Glocks are considered save and reliable, but it involves having a round in the tube with various mechanical safeties to prevent accidental discharge. A double action revolver is bone simple and works virtually EVERY single time when the trigger is pulled. (If you're gonna carry concealed get one with a shrouded hammer or DAO). It takes a bit more force to make this occur, but if you're in a situation that you actually need it, physiology virtually ensures that you will be more than capable of having the finger strength to exert that little bit of extra force. Highly trained people that are perpetually in "condition orange" and carry 24/7 will disagree ... but most of us aren't them. (And God Bless 'em by the way). They'll also argue that 5-6 rounds are not adequate ... and this is true. But in most cases of personal defense, you probably will not be facing a long extended gun battle with multiple assailants ... and if you miss a [more likely] single assailant 5-6 times, you probably shouldn't be carrying in the first place.
I agree totally with you Jack.

A revolver is far and away better than an automatic, for the safety value alone. If someone has children, they are less likely to kill themselves with a revolver than with an automatic. It requires intent to pull back the hammer and then the trigger. With an automatic, one never knows if the weapon has no round in the chamber, short pulling back the bolt. And if it was loaded, you will have to squat down and retrieve it, much to your embarrassment if it is in front of others.

Further, in my opinion if you can't take care of business with six chambered rounds, you need a good rifle. I know, what if you are away from home. But I would go for a revolver in any case, just for the safety value. You simply cannot go wrong with a revolver.

They are also easier to maintain, and far more reliable: less moving parts to get intercoursed up.

Tommy, get a revolver, ok?
(02-02-2013, 12:15 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]I agree totally with you Jack.

A revolver is far and away better than an automatic, for the safety value alone. If someone has children, they are less likely to kill themselves with a revolver than with an automatic. It requires intent to pull back the hammer and then the trigger. With an automatic, one never knows if the weapon has no round in the chamber, short pulling back the bolt. And if it was loaded, you will have to squat down and retrieve it, much to your embarrassment if it is in front of others.

Further, in my opinion if you can't take care of business with six chambered rounds, you need a good rifle. I know, what if you are away from home. But I would go for a revolver in any case, just for the safety value. You simply cannot go wrong with a revolver.

They are also easier to maintain, and far more reliable: less moving parts to get intercoursed up.

Tommy, get a revolver, ok?

I think what you're describing above is a single action revolver. I've taken the slightly more progressive step in suggesting a double action revolver. It only one pull of the trigger ... but with more force. But it's still safer and more reliable. Semi-auto technology has only been around for around a century ... much less time to work ALL the bugs out ... S1

I upgraded from a single action (as you indicate, it's THE safest firearm to have for defense ... particularly for kids) to a double action about a decade ago after being shamed by one of the "condition orange" types. The other MAJOR consideration is having it locked down if it is not on your person. I use one of these. (old school version that requires a punch combination) Takes a couple of seconds or so to open. One of the more encouraging 'shortages' that I'm seeing these days is that gun safe companies are moving their inventories much more quickly. This is a good thing.
I also had the double action in mind as well. Obviously a double action is even safer, and the right practice is done without even thinking. I personally don't care for single action revolvers, because the effort of pulling the trigger forces the aim away from the intended target. Thus, even with a single action revolver, I would still go through the double action motions.
(02-02-2013, 11:40 AM)mr_yak Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-02-2013, 11:20 AM)sunsettommy Wrote: [ -> ]I am planning on buying my first gun and currently favor a Glock for personal defense.Maybe a G19 or the G23.

The state of Washington allows the SHALL use gun permit for Concealed Carry and I intend to carry one and eventually help others protect themselves.

Now a member of the USCCA and learning as I go.

God, I'm gonna catch hell for this, but for anyone that I hear about that is considering a handgun for personal defense for the first time, I tell them get a simple high quality double action revolver [38/357]. Glocks are considered save and reliable, but it involves having a round in the tube with various mechanical safeties to prevent accidental discharge. A double action revolver is bone simple and works virtually EVERY single time when the trigger is pulled. (If you're gonna carry concealed get one with a shrouded hammer or DAO). It takes a bit more force to make this occur, but if you're in a situation that you actually need it, physiology virtually ensures that you will be more than capable of having the finger strength to exert that little bit of extra force. Highly trained people that are perpetually in "condition orange" and carry 24/7 will disagree ... but most of us aren't them. (And God Bless 'em by the way). They'll also argue that 5-6 rounds are not adequate ... and this is true. But in most cases of personal defense, you probably will not be facing a long extended gun battle with multiple assailants ... and if you miss a [more likely] single assailant 5-6 times, you probably shouldn't be carrying in the first place.

Hey I am not at all upset with you because you make a good case on other guns to consider.It is wise to read from others who have good experience with firearms and happy to see that you take it seriously.

I am a newbie on guns and want to get up front information before I make the buy and will visit the local training organization to develop my ability to handle and fire the gun properly and effectively.I do not want to miss when I have to defend myself or my family.

But I do want it to be a decently concealable weapon and very very reliable too and that is why I was considering a Glock.
(02-02-2013, 12:15 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]I agree totally with you Jack.

A revolver is far and away better than an automatic, for the safety value alone. If someone has children, they are less likely to kill themselves with a revolver than with an automatic. It requires intent to pull back the hammer and then the trigger. With an automatic, one never knows if the weapon has no round in the chamber, short pulling back the bolt. And if it was loaded, you will have to squat down and retrieve it, much to your embarrassment if it is in front of others.

Further, in my opinion if you can't take care of business with six chambered rounds, you need a good rifle. I know, what if you are away from home. But I would go for a revolver in any case, just for the safety value. You simply cannot go wrong with a revolver.

They are also easier to maintain, and far more reliable: less moving parts to get intercoursed up.

Tommy, get a revolver, ok?

Can you suggest good concealable revolvers for me to look up?
Here is an article from the NRA that shows the quality of a good revolver.

Wheelguns Still Work: Concealed Carry Revolvers

http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2219&cid=26

The Glock 19 seemed to be too light a firepower thus the reason why I looked at the Glock 23 that fires .40 rounds which is better.

But now I am developing interest in the .38 or .357 revolver.

S26
John,

Years ago, I read were the "bill of rights" was only opposed by some who felt they were not necessary, that it went w/o saying these rights were our's.

In 1776, I don't think there were any Americans who thought "big government".

Back then I doubt any state tried to involve itself in so much as our's does.
Palladin, don't forget that our founding fathers fought a war against their government--the colonial government of England. And they won. They certainly were thinking about "big government." Any government that became too tyrannical with taxation.
Ron,

I agree with your view of those folks, my point was "big government" as used by John is all pervasive compared to back then. No one thought back then like a modern American does was all I am saying. We weren't yet pagans is my point, we didn't worship the state.

That began apparently around Wilson's era.
(02-02-2013, 12:53 PM)sunsettommy Wrote: [ -> ]Can you suggest good concealable revolvers for me to look up?

For concealed carry ...
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/produ...+Centenial

I made the "catch hell" comment because many of the serious CCW folks will seriously diss you if you carry anything less than a full size 1911 ... big boys like me should probably be able get away with still having it concealed in an inside the pants rig ... unfortunately, I have trouble getting me in my pants, let alone a large frame auto.

A J frame revolver like the one above has the advantages I described ... but the cylinder makes it wider than a thin semi-auto and a little more difficult to hide the bulge. A caveat concerning that particular revolver be advised that is an absolute wrist breaker with full power .357 loads ... very light ... the physics ensure that you'll experience some very unpleasant recoil. Most people practice with .38s ... if you have to use it, you won't really feel the recoil or hear the report because you will most likely be just about frightened out of your mind. Or at least that's what I'm told ... thank the Lord I've never been put in that position. When I shoot an Elk I don't hear or feel my rifle go off because I'm so full of adrenaline ... and that's just a game animal.

Also, that particular revolver isn't made to have thousands of rounds shot through it. The fancy alloys are intended to minimize weight ... they don't help at all with durability. Don't expect to target shoot with it either ... most shootings involving violent attacks occur at about 10' ... so that shouldn't be a concern. If you are far enough away from an attacker that you require a more accurate sidearm, you should probably consider flight over fight. More accurate generally means harder to conceal, and it's important to remember with a CCW that concealed really means concealed.

[Image: model340.jpg]
Hey Tommy ... I digested this a little more ... and I have to ask ... are you f*cking shitting me? I think you probably have to be. Because it's very unlikely that you'll find the revolver I suggested or anything else for that matter ... and if you did, do you honestly think you'll find any ammo for it? It's been a topic here. Go to the store or online outlet and see if you can find anything ... pretty much all .22LR is gone ... let alone any common handgun calibers ... with endless backorders ... or more often, no backorders options at all.

Maybe I'm being a bit to harsh, but at the retail and on-line level, it's pretty obvious that there just isn't going to be anymore ammo available until 2014 or so. It's all been in the works for a while. If you're sincere, I can only say ... hey sorry dude ... S4

.... edit ...

Actually I'm seeing .357 on Gunbroker for $50-100 per box ... so I guess, for now it's still theoretically possible. Most of it is non-reloadable aluminum case stuff. Good luck.
(02-02-2013, 09:26 PM)mr_yak Wrote: [ -> ]Hey Tommy ... I digested this a little more ... and I have to ask ... are you f*cking shitting me? I think you probably have to be. Because it's very unlikely that you'll find the revolver I suggested or anything else for that matter ... and if you did, do you honestly think you'll find any ammo for it? It's been a topic here. Go to the store or online outlet and see if you can find anything ... pretty much all .22LR is gone ... let alone any common handgun calibers ... with endless backorders ... or more often, no backorders options at all.

Maybe I'm being a bit to harsh, but at the retail and on-line level, it's pretty obvious that there just isn't going to be anymore ammo available until 2014 or so. It's all been in the works for a while. If you're sincere, I can only say ... hey sorry dude ... S4

.... edit ...

Actually I'm seeing .357 on Gunbroker for $50-100 per box ... so I guess, for now it's still theoretically possible. Most of it is non-reloadable aluminum case stuff. Good luck.

I am well aware of the high sale's of guns and ammo courtesy of the Obama administration and MSM attacks on our freedom.

There is no such run of gun sales in my area thus still have a good chance to get a gun for a good price and besides that I can just ask members of the police department since I work under the same boss as they do.

S1
Like I said, good luck ... particularly with the ammo. You might be able to find some ... but plan on paying MUCHO bucks for it.
You could just buy a "public defender" and load it with .410s. Not something one could conceal well though.
(02-03-2013, 10:06 AM)Palladin Wrote: [ -> ]You could just buy a "public defender" and load it with .410s. Not something one could conceal well though.

At close to 2lbs better plan on a heavy duty belt ... and keeping it cinched up pretty tight ... dropping trou while packing is considered bad form. Hiney

Gander Mt. has both arm and ammo currently in stock ... with the latter coming in at about $2 per cartridge. Ouch!
A militia here in this state is defined as any able-bodied man between 17 and 45 or some such. Not military, but civilian...EVERYONE who fits that criteria.
Pages: 1 2 3