Petition Against Proposed US Automatic Weapons Ban!

**Blue** · 12 Jul 08,, 00:36

There are petitions circulating all over for just about everything. I was wondering if anyone can give me an example where a petition, such as this one, has ever changed anything or even been heard by the gov't. Does it simply serve as a smoke signal to like minded people letting them know that others are out there who think accordingly?

How about a petition, that if signed, that person promises, that if the gov't attempts any type of unlawful weapon confiscation, we the undersigned promise to not give up those weapons until you are taking them off our dead bodies. I'd sign that! Bet if that rolled into ol' D.C. some eyebrows would go up.

With that being said, I signed this one a couple months ago.

**BrokenArrow** · 24 Jul 08,, 17:14

DC v Heller makes this proposed legislation more interesting. May not pass constitutional muster now?

One way of looking at Heller is arms in common use for lawful purposes cannot be banned, and another is that unusual and dangerous weapons can be banned.

There are millions of these weapons in common use, and used much more often for lawful purposes than criminal. How unusual and dangerous are they when knives and baseball bats kill more people every year?

There is a lot in Heller that we will arguing about in reference to US gun laws for a long time to come:

"absolute ban", "within the home", "sensitive places", "conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms", "arbitrarily and capriciously", "in common use at the time", "dangerous and unusual weapons", "exception for self defense", "laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents", and "operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense."

**NishanbazKhan** · 07 Aug 08,, 17:35

brokenarrow don't think the lunatic gungrabbers won't address that issue. They'd just as soon make it illegal to carry or use for defense knives, swords, crossbows, and even baseball bats after taking your guns. They'd probably make it a crime to sharpen a stick and use it for defense. You have to realize there is no end to madness of people who will state with a straightface and believe that a 750 grain bullet the size of your thumb could derail a train or down an aircraft in flight from 35000 ft in a single shot.

**Grey Wolf** · 18 Dec 08,, 02:35

Originally Posted by Stan

your all nuts, defending your right to bear arms is the thing that makes most of us roll our eyes at the USA.

You have by far the highest amount of gun related deaths in the country. You might say but its not the law abiding people doing the killing.

Well actually it is, kids getting hold of guns from their parents and killing people, husbands suicidal and killing their families and them selves.

You remove the guns from society, yes mainly the law abiding ones, and you make it impossible to buy them legally and I gurantee you, guns deaths in the US will go down by a long way.

And seriously your constitution doesnt protect you and your guns. You dont have a militia and you dont need one.

Grow the heck up and realise that your tamed the west. Act like a responsible grown up and give up the guns.

And I suggest you read this from the Founding Fathers;

Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788

During the Massachusetts ratifying convention William Symmes warned that the new government at some point "shall be too firmly fixed in the saddle to be overthrown by anything but a general insurrection." Yet fears of standing armies were groundless, affirmed Theodore Sedwick, who queried, "if raised, whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?"
[W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

The Virginia ratifying convention met from June 2 through June 26, 1788. Edmund Pendleton, opponent of a bill of rights, weakly argued that abuse of power could be remedied by recalling the delegated powers in a convention. Patrick Henry shot back that the power to resist oppression rests upon the right to possess arms:
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.
Henry sneered,
O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation...inflicted by those who had no power at all?
More quotes from the Virginia convention:
[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
---George Mason

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun."
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

"The ruling class doesn't care about public safety. Having made it very difficult for States and localities to police themselves, having left ordinary citizens with no choice but to protect themselves as best they can, they now try to take our guns away. In fact they blame us and our guns for crime. This is so wrong that it cannot be an honest mistake."
Malcolm Wallop
former U.S. Sen. (R-WY)

By statutory definition, the National Guard is "that part of the organized militia of the several States" that is "armed ... wholly or partly at Federal expense" and "is federally recognized."[319] "In addition to its National Guard, if any, a State ... may, as provided by its laws, organize and maintain defense forces."[320] The U.S. Government issues arms to the National Guard, but not to the states' defense forces.[321] "So far as practicable, the same types of ... arms ... as are issued to the Army shall be issued to the Army National Guard ...."[322]
The availability of uniform arms to a portion of the state militias pursuant to the National Defense Act of 1916 greatly enhanced defense capabilities. As explained in Maryland for the Use of Levin v. United States:[323]
From the days of the Minutemen of Lexington and Concord until just before World War I, the various militias embodied the concept of a citizen army, but lacked the equipment and training necessary for their use as an integral part of the reserve force of the United States Armed Forces .... Pursuant to power vested in Congress by the Constitution [Art. I, section 8], the Guard was to be uniformed, equipped, and trained in much the same way as the regular army, subject to federal standards and capable of being "federalized" by units, rather than by drafting individual soldiers. In return, Congress authorized the allocation of federal equipment to the Guard ....[324]
The states are entitled to require members of their defense forces and reserve militias to provide themselves with the same arms which are used by the National Guard. The ideal of a uniformity of arms for all militia members has been recognized since the Constitution was framed.
Based on the above, Congress has no power to prohibit possession of such militia arms as the states are entitled to require that its citizens or a part thereof furnish themselves with and keep in their homes. The states' concurrent power to organize and provide for arming their militias is a reserved power which (p.204)federal legislation may not contradict.

There is every indication that the Founding Fathers would have been horrified at what they are trying to do now. Banning weapons will do nothing, only make law abiding citizens criminals. There are too many laws on the books now that are not enforced.

And YES I do fear a goverment that believes what Sara Brady wrote below and her latest quote since Obama won, "We haven't had it this good in a long time"

"Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
Sara Brady
Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum
The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.