chairboy...ACLU

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Clifra Jones
What indiviual libertarian rights are they defending for an organization like NAMBLA!

The 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution.

[Charon]

What indiviual libertarian rights are they defending for an organization like NAMBLA!

For those who are not aware, They are the North American Man Boy Love Association. One of their members was convicted of murdering a 10 yr old boy after reading information provided by NAMBLA on how to seduce young boys. He stated in court that their materials encouraged him to commit his crime. They are being sued by the parents

I don't know... free speech I guess...

Apparently two individuals committed a horrible crime. They are in prison for committing that crime. No criminal conspiracy involving NAMBLA existed. They were not acting under secret or implied orders from NAMBLA leadership. And, apparently, the Web site didn't encourage the activities these individuals committed. Though I don’t know if it would really change things even if it did. Sounds like a perp trying to cop out of being responsible for his actions.

And while most of us find people like Nazis or pedophiles repugnant, and they don’t have a right to act criminally on their beliefs, they do have the same rights to express personal beliefs as anybody else. There are people who consider extreme conservative or liberal though to be no different from NAMBLA, as far as posing a threat to America. People have vastly different outlooks on what constitutes “extreme” and acceptable, right and wrong. I personally consider that opportunist bellybutton Michael Savage to be extremely dangerous, and a greater real threat than NAMBLA (a pedophile is a pedophile -- no Web site is needed to recruit one into the fold). His language is extreme where “liberals” are concerned (he makes Rush look like Teddy Kennedy) and his hatefulness is dangerously close to a call for action. I would not be surprised if one of his many listeners acts to save America by trying to kill one of his many targets. But, he shouldn’t be sued either if that were to happen. Freedom isn’t easy, neat or always pleasing.

Charon

[lasersailor184]

LOL, go ahead and try it.

I have.

I personally own 4 shotguns.  2 standard pumps, 1 nice over and under and one "Tactical" I guess you could say.


I have shot short shotguns before.




Do you really think I was just coming out of left field with that?

[Charon]

BTW, why I am so Second Amendment lately, is that I have crap like this happening all around me, and when people call them on it it gets ignored by a media that does have, if not a bias, then a deep ignorance of the legal gun owner position and rights beyond the 1st amendment. Check this out. It's actually funny in a Reefer Madness kind of way. Let’s play spot the lies and deception.

http://www.icarry.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=3

The Brady Campaign makes Baghdad Bob look good where factuality is concerned, but nobody in the fourth estate bothers to fact check any of it. The NRA is 100 times more factual in its arguments, but they have been so solidly labeled Gun Nuts (with some justification, IMO) that they are the ultimate ad hominem in any argument. That's why some support from ACLU would be helpful.

In this case, Ryg’s district is just a few miles north of mine. My local Republican State rep is no better, and the local federal Republican rep for my district got a D rating from NRA. The enhanced Crook County “assault weapons” ban was fortunately just shelved saving my $700 collector M1 Carbine (though I might have been safe regardless), because they were caught in time to react while sneaking it though a committee that usually doesn't handle gun issues.

For me, it is very much a personal right that is under attack on a monthly basis. I don’t expect to have to use a firearm to defend my family, but I want to be able to do that should the need arise. As New Orleans shows, we are not living in some Star Trek Federation fantasy world, as much as we would have liked to believe that. I also enjoy shooting as a recreational activity. I grew up around guns (first 22 at age 7, taught safety as a way of life); seven years in the USAR where a main part of my job was weapons instruction and no shame in the solid traditions of safe, responsible and legal gun ownership. But I have to watch my back because Daley would rather spend money on new parks and a Disneyland downtown than address inner city poverty (gun violence among criminals draws embarrassing attention to the neglect). A useless band-aid that screws with my rights in the process. And, in the suburbs the socially liberal but fiscally conservative (have to scratch your head about that these days) “Republicans” are looking to solve gun violence problems that are non existent in their districts to make uninformed (and actively misinformed) people feel better. Or because national politicians lack the guts (or personal political incentives) to finally address both poverty and the wasteful and failed War on Drugs .

Charon

[Samiam]

Interesting excerpt from ACLU site:

If indeed the Second Amendment provides an absolute, constitutional protection for the right to bear arms in order to preserve the power of the people to resist government tyranny, then it must allow individuals to possess bazookas, torpedoes, SCUD missiles and even nuclear warheads, for they, like handguns, rifles and M-16s, are arms. Moreover, it is hard to imagine any serious resistance to the military without such arms.

(I believe this is one issue I can passionately agree with lazs on.)

A) Yes. Why not allow individuals to possess any arms?

B) There are plenty of examples of common people offering serious resistance to the U.S. military using small arms augmented with no more than an RPG or improvised explosives. The Vietcong come to mind, as does Somalia and the current insurection in Iraq. In fact, a well small-armed citizenry can be very effective against a technologically superior force if defending their own homes, streets, or towns is the objective.

[Sandman]

Are these intentional?

Originally posted by Charon
Let’s
Ryg’s
don’t
“Republicans”

[Charon]

Hmmm… Let’s rag, don’t Republicans? If so then yes, I am ragging Look at that link to see what passes for 2nd Amendment debate in this state, and it does impact me. I even left out the televised quote from Chicago’s “Top Cop” where he said you could empty the 30-round magazine on a legally available “Assault Rifle” with two squeezes of the trigger.

I guess guns are just my big yellow Exterra. A lot of people don’t like big SUVs. They endanger the lives of responsible people driving a proper small car by reducing visibility on the highway and increasing the risk in an accident. They are not even particularly safe for their drivers and passengers. And nobody needs one. They are a poor tool compared to both a truck and minivan, which do their standard functions more efficiently. If used for so called off road "recreation," they tend to damage the natural environment. They burn Iraq-invading quantities of fossil fuels, put us at greater risk to Islamic terrorists, pollute the environment at an accelerated rate and help set up a class distinction on the nations highways that can’t be good for society. They aren’t even protected as a formal right. I believe they are even the vehicle of choice for gangbangers and hip-hop artists. In the hands of a woman driver putting on lipstick, or a male stock broker conducting an intense cell-phone conference call, they are death machines pure and simple. The clock is ticking my friend…

Charon

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Sandman
Are these intentional?

Seems like it might be a font. Just guessing.

[lasersailor184]

Every anti gun nut makes the assumption that soldiers aren't people and would do anything they were ordered to.


So any resistance would be futile anyway.

[Charon]

Hmm, are you seeing issues with the apostrophe and quotes? I get it in reverse sometimes. It might be a mozilla thing. They show up accurate at my end.

Charon

[Toad]

Originally posted by SaburoS
LOL, go ahead and try it.
Take a sawed off shotgun without front sight and put some lethal hits on that 10 yard target.
You've got 2 shots.

Now take a regular shotgun (short barrel) and use aimed fire.

You'd be surprised at the dispersion of the shot.

You'd also be surprised at how useless the sawed off is.

First define "sawed off". What length? To date, I've seen no info on the length of the barrel in the Miller case other than that it was "less than 18 inches".

Try any barrel length you like over a foot on a man sized target at 10 yards and use the standard OO buckshot round with 9 pellets. I think you'll find it quite effective.

The Army's new LSS system... available with pistol grip has about an 8"-10" barrel with no sights. It that's ineffective... why did they make it?

In fact, at 10 yards I can put about 7-8 buckshot into a man sized target from a 20" 12 ga Model 97 Winchester. And that's "point and shoot".  I'd be willing to go try it from the hip if you like.

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
I have.

I personally own 4 shotguns.  2 standard pumps, 1 nice over and under and one "Tactical" I guess you could say.


I have shot short shotguns before.




Do you really think I was just coming out of left field with that?

How'd it go with the double barrel sawed off?
Was it as accurate?
Aimed fire?

Now because you've fired some shotguns, doesn't make you an expert if you've not fired a sawed off double barrel.

And yes, you'd be coming out of left field if you haven't.

And if you live in the SF bay area, let me know the next time you're going shooting. I'd like to see nicely grouped shot pattern from a short barrel, unchoked, shot off the hip @10yards.

We're not talking bird hunting. We're talking lethal shot grouping capable of stopping an enemy.

Then we'll compare it to my SigSauer P220-45 and L1a1 (with it's 16.25" Congo front end).

We'll set up multiple targets/distances.

Show me how a bouble barreled sawed off is better.

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Toad
First define "sawed off". What length? To date, I've seen no info on the length of the barrel in the Miller case other than that it was "less than 18 inches".

Try any barrel length you like over a foot on a man sized target at 10 yards and use the standard OO buckshot round with 9 pellets. I think you'll find it quite effective.

The Army's new LSS system... available with pistol grip has about an 8"-10" barrel with no sights. It that's ineffective... why did they make it?

In fact, at 10 yards I can put about 7-8 buckshot into a man sized target from a 20" 12 ga Model 97 Winchester. And that's "point and shoot".  I'd be willing to go try it from the hip if you like.

It has a Pitaniny rail. You do realize what that's for?

How many times has that been actually used in that pistol configuration by our troops?

What can you do with a 10" unchoked barrel?

That's what I'd like to see  

[SaburoS]

Originally posted by Toad
First define "sawed off". What length? To date, I've seen no info on the length of the barrel in the Miller case other than that it was "less than 18 inches".

I missed answering this.

Sawed off is sawing tp make something usually as small as possible lengthwise.
 
Usually involves cutting the barrel to end of the forestock and cutting most of the buttstock off. It is effective for point blank damage.

Now my turn on the yes or no:

Has a sawed off double barrel shotgun ever been introduced and used by any military from say 1900 to present?

If yes, would you consider that as common use?

Second time I'm asking.

[Toad]

Originally posted by SaburoS
It is a bad decision by the courts.

[/b]

It may be a bad decision but it's in the record.

Now, for the record, do YOU think Miller defines the 2nd as an individual or collective right. That's actually what I asked.


 

Originally posted by SaburoS
Overall, no.
I have yet to see them being used outside of its original combined weapons system. Combined, it is not a short weapon.  

[/b]

Well then of course you would say I have the right to own the entire setup, the M4A1 carbine with the LSS attachment, Barrel length: 7.75 in (197 mm) ?

I could have one of those then?

I have yet to see them using the pistol version. I doubt we'll ever see it used as the pistol version if the butt stock were available.

[/b]

If they issue it, how many do they have to issue to qualify in your opinion?

What's is the staus now of the LSS.
How many of our forces are being issued this weapon system outside of the 10th Mountain Division?

[/b]

I don't know. There was supposed to be further investigation last May/June but there's nothing out on it yet.

I can tell you the competition for the military shotgun market is picking up... and the barrels are going to be less than 18".

Remington has a range that includes the 870P pump, 11-87P gas-operated shotguns and the new 870 Modular Combat Shotgun (MCS). The MCS centers around the proprietary REM LOC quick change stock system and allows the weapon to be configured with a 10-inch breaching, 14-inch tactical or 18-inch rifle sighted barrel, pistol grips or stocks and magazine tube capacities to meet changing tactical situations quickly and without tools...

...MCS shotgun systems have just returned from successful combat trials in and around Baghdad. In addition the U.S. Marine Corps and Air Force and the Israeli Ministry of Defence are reportedly showing interest in the MCS....


The Italian firm Fabbrica Bresciana Armi S.p.A. (FABARM) offers the pump FP6 and Tactical Semi-Auto, which are imported and distributed by Heckler & Koch (HK)....For early entry use, HK offers a 14-inch barrel...

...The Knight�s Armament Company (KAC) Masterkey is one example of a derivative design, a 12-gauge Remington 870P with a barrel shortened to 10-inches and a four-round capacity (3 + 1). While this is designed to fit under the KAC Modular Weapon System using MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny rails, a standalone stock module is available....

 

Seems pretty clear that shotguns are going to come into much more "common use" in the military AND that barrels shorter than 18" will be the norm.

Has a sawed off double barrel shotgun ever been introduced and used by any military from say 1900 to present?

Not to my knowledge. In that period the standard was riot guns with 20" barrels for military use.


However, since the M4A1 carbine with some manufacturer's shotgun attachement...LSS, Remington, Knight Armamament.... is going to come into "common use" in the near future, I'm sure you'll agree that I have a right to such a weapon... right?

Just a yes or no.