Friday, January 18, 2013

So The Second Amendment is About Muskets is it?

No argument for gun control gets me more aggravated than the common Liberal/Feminist claim that it only applies to muskets.

Even if we ignore the obvious claim of then placing the first amendment into the realm of news papers and  hand bills to counter this insane argument there is another way.

For those of us in the Western States (And YES Missouri is a Western state remember the arch and gateway thing?) There is a simple means to put these Musket Liberals in their place.

All we need to do is pull out our own State Constitutions.

Missouri Constitution - Bill of Rights -  Section 23. 

Right to keep and bear arms—exception.—That the right of every
citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when
lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not
justify the wearing of concealed weapons.


Adopted almost 50 years after the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States it makes no mention of flintlock or caplock. Nothing about any modern advances being exempt or limiting the ownership of a so-called "Military" firearm.

By 1875 Colorado's Constitution repeats verbatim the same words in their Bill of Rights

Sec. 13 - That the right of no person to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called in question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons.

Again we have no restriction or mention of "modern" advances in firearms and by the time of Colorado's Constitution metallic cartridges were well into use along with even modern day types of mechanical repeaters.

Of course none of this is going to sway the mind of today's common Liberal/Feminist because really they are not concerned with the concept of bearing arms only the hope of disarming everyone who may oppose their actions.

Yet it is pretty obvious to me that advances in firearms for well over 100 years had no bearing on the rights of citizens to own them. The legal trail is undeniable.

Keep Prepping Everyone!!!



10 comments:

  1. I always think of Missouri to be a Southern state, but likely that is because I tend to focus on the 1850s. Others seem to think of it as Midwestern, but it seems to me that it is on the wrong side of the river.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Having lived in Missouri for 45 years, I can assure you it's a Midwestern state in attitude & posture. It was split during the war, with a couple of large battles fought there. Battlefield Mall in Springfield is on such a site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. RP and Russ - OMG You guys ARE SO MISSING MY POINT :)

      I guess I should have said any one living in a state that wrote a Constitution after the US one LOL

      Focus my Friends Focus :)

      Delete
  3. OMG I'm SOOOO frekking sick of the "musket" argument. I then tell them that if they want to express their First Amendment rights then the only way they should be able to do so is to go into the town square and shout their feelings to passers-by without the use of a microphone, amplifying system, ect. and their freedom of speech rights wouldn't be upheld if they expressed it in ANY modern forum like mass media, TV, internet because they didn't have TV or internet in 1776 either.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Carolyn - Yes it irritates me as well but the fact that the State Constitutions continued the wording more or less after many improvements were made to firearms in general proves they are completely wrong.

      In my opinion anyway.

      Delete
  4. By any rational reading muskets, hunting rifles, and most shotguns can be banned; its modern military weapons that are protected. I think one of the supreme court decisions on short barrelled rifles relied on the fact that military used them so they weren't protected.

    Best,
    Dan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very true in some ways Dan, especially with the National Constitution. The state ones seem to rationally include home protection which would make shotguns and other non-military weapons (more or less) also protected.

      Delete
  5. Don't worry PP once they see what a .58 cal mini ball does to a human body they will be banned too!

    China
    III

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CS - Ain't that the truth. I lib would faint right over if they really knew what a musket ball would do.

      Delete