Americans Don't Have the Right to Bear Just Any Arms

[happyslug]

53. If you read the article, assult Weapons/rifles are NOT a problem

According to FBI statistics 69% of all murders are done with pistols. In fact knives and clubs EACH kill more people then rifles AND shotguns combined (and that includes AK-47 and AR-15/M16 clones). Thus if someone wants such a weapon, the chances of it being used illegally is way less then someone using a baseball bat.

As to this type of "Militia" Hamilton in the Federalist Papers advocated that the reserve militia (a term he did NOT use, but is the present name for such unorganized parts of the Militia) be called up no more then once a year to see if they have the necessary equipment and then sent home. The purpose of the call up is to make sure the reserve militia is equipped if and when it is called up to duty. In the Militia Act of 1792, this concept was REJECTED in favor of the States during similar call up of its Militia on a monthly basis, something that fell out of favor after about 1820 when the Native American Threat all but disappeared from most of the US.

When the present Militia act was passed in 1905 (It has been changed several times since 1905 for example to include women in the National Guard), it was decided that the reserve militia would only be used in emergency situations and thus best formed up to face such emergencies. The last time the reserve militia showed up was during the massive flooding of the upper Mississippi in the 1990s. They were called "Volunteers" and both the Federal Government and State Government refused to call them Militia (more to avoid having to pay for any medical injuries then anything else), but it was the people as a whole going to the levees building them up to reduce the extent of the flooding.

Now, back to weapons. Pistols are the problems NOT Rifles. We could abolish all regulations on rifles, and that will have no affect on the crime rate. On the other hand, regulation of pistols in another thing all together, These are the weapons of choice when it comes to crimes including mass murder. The Article makes a good argument to banning large capacity magazine (Something I agree with when it comes to pistols, but I believe violates the Second amendment when it comes to rifles) but then points out it is large capacity pistols that are the problem NOT rifles (Rifle with large capacity have been used in mass murders, but no where near the level of pistols and to a lesser degree then bombs).

Thus these people having rifles fit only for combat has no affect on crime rates or murder rates. These people are insane in spending they money on such weapons, but such insanity is perfectly legal in the US and does NOT lead to any social or criminal problems.

Remember, till the 1960s, only 10% of all firearms being purchased were pistols, pistols sales are now 40% of all firearms sales. This massive increase in fire power in the form of pistols makes no sense, except if you remember people will embrace what they are exposed to (Pistols and hand grenades look much more effective on Movie and TV screens then they do in real life, thus that most people get their entertainment via such screens increases the demand for pistols). We need to regulate pistols, and I have long supported that anyone with a license to carry be required to carry only a revolver, for it restricts then to six shots AND if they concern in "Protection" six shots are sufficient AND given the nature of a Revolver, if a round does not fire, the revolver will go to the next round, in an automatic the weapons just jams, this is the primary reason police carried revolvers for decades in the US, till they started to watch to much TV and all wanted automatics.

Such a requirement will reduce the demand for Automatics to a level that most criminals will end up with revolvers not automatics. This will also reduce the numbers of mass murders by the simple fact that the pistol of choice would be incapacity of high rates of fire.