Since the gun grabbers, aka liberals, oft like to quote Jefferson on some of the rights laid out in the Constitution, let’s see what Jefferson wrote in regards to the 2nd:

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it.

(That’s a fav of liberals, except when it’s an inconvience.)

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyrany in government.

(Who knew Ice-T was paraphrasing Jefferson.)

No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage then to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.

A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.

(Guess Jefferson wouldn’t be a fan of football.)

On every question of construction (of the Constitution) let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.

Hmm, looks like Jefferson is pro-ownership and pro-carry. I haven’t found any writing where he advocated the need for a permit. Oh, and stop trying to twist the Constitution and read something into that isn’t there. So the 2nd says we can own and carry, then that’s what it meant. Nothing more, nothing less. And to be clear, it cedes that particular right to the individual – not the state.

Wonder what others thought…

Without either the first or second amendment, we would have no liberty; the first allows us to find out what’s happening, the second allows us to do something about it! The second will be taken away first, followed by the first and then the rest of our freedoms. — Andrew Ford

To disarm the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave them. — George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380

If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege. — Arkansas Supreme Court, Wilson v. State (1878)

And just because:
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. — Sigmond Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis

The New York gun law upheld [by the Second Circuit] in Kachalsky, although one of the nation’s most restrictive such laws (under the law’s “proper cause” standard, an applicant for a gun permit must demonstrate a need for self-defense greater than that of the general public, such as being the target of personal threats, id

That may be true in The People’s Republic of New York City, but when I got my unrestricted concealed carry permit in an upstate county, I never had to prove any such thing. I had to successfully complete a handgun safety course and undergo a criminal background check. Not all that onerous. It’s Bloomie that has things AFU.

rayra on December 11, 2012 at 8:31 PM

Thanks for the head’s up.

I went in for a physical (I haven’t seen a GP in 6 years, so I figure I’m due) and got asked about gun ownership.

Their justification was depression and abuse, as in: those who suffer from either of them will get a speech about gun ownership.

My GP was more apologetic than I expected, but still… doctors talking about guns?

Not your business, doc.

No question- SIGs are superb.
I also have an HK45C that I love.
All good guns!

Striker fired weapons are fine.
Not many pistols can compete with a Glock in terms of reliability.
Especially if you don’t over-lubricate it or get lube in the firing pin channel.
Even then, it’s very easy to disassemble the slide on the Glocks and give them a good preventative cleaning.

I’m not a Glock fanatic, but they are very reliable, durable, accurate and an excellent value.

justltl on December 11, 2012 at 7:09 PM

For those who argue 9 vrs 45 there is an answer. 10mm. Glock 20, Kimber, STI, others too. They call it the .40 short and weak for a reason.

For those who like glocks, that firing pin channel also gets gummed up with powder residue, and after less than 100 rounds I get light primer strikes. And back in the day, their instruction manuals didn’t show how to open the channel. Answer…Sig.

Like Strikers?? Keep in mind that police officers wear theirs exposed. Anything mechanical eventually fails. Not in my belt.

just sayin.

That’s a ‘standards and practices’ campaign pushed by the AMA. Particualrly in Pediatrics. Been going on for years. ‘safety hazard’, ‘depression’, lead poisoning. They argue they have several grounds to ask and dispense advice about disarmament. It’s compelte leftist crap and one of the reasons the AMA membership is dropping steadily, even before their Obamacare support.

rayra on December 11, 2012 at 8:31 PM

rayra, is this information legally actionable? I go in for a blood draw, get asked if I have any firearms in my household…Do I lie, deflect, tell the truth?

Can they go after you for your answer?

the Second Amendment guarantees a basic right of self-defense

It guarantees a basic right to own weapons.

It just presupposes all that that means, like occasionally using them to defend oneself, as though everyone already knows it and no one has ever argued about it — sort of like “marriage” in the Bible.

The worlds largest army being every American with a gun, and their no soldier on earth braver or more determined.

Let’s get to the real meat of the discussion – M1911A1 or Glock?

9mm vs. ?

Galt2009 on December 11, 2012 at 6:33 PM

I’m a 9mm guy because I just have never been able to get as accurate shooting a pistol as my rifles. (More chances with my Beretta) :-)

Wider spray with my Judge and 410 rounds.

IL will find a way to keep guns illegal. (tax ammo, make gun owners buy insurance). This ruling means nothing to these lawless zealots.

Let’s get to the real meat of the discussion – M1911A1 or Glock?

9mm vs. ?

Galt2009 on December 11, 2012 at 6:33 PM

I thou8ght that was all resolved a long time ago. It is the 1911 and it should have a .45 hole in the end. At least until someone makes a 1911 in a .46.

Slightly o/t: My GP asked me if I owned a weapon today. I was stunned. What business is it of my doctor’s if I have a weapon?

(Alexandria, VA)

Washington Nearsider on December 11, 2012 at 8:22 PM

That’s a ‘standards and practices’ campaign pushed by the AMA. Particualrly in Pediatrics. Been going on for years. ‘safety hazard’, ‘depression’, lead poisoning. They argue they have several grounds to ask and dispense advice about disarmament. It’s compelte leftist crap and one of the reasons the AMA membership is dropping steadily, even before their Obamacare support.

A 1911 is as much a part of American cultural history as Coca-Cola, Ford, and Levis.

Glock is America’s recent handgun cultural history, Austrian born or not.

(Alexandria, VA)

Looks to me like their current law disappears, and they have no restrictions at all. So, can the pro-carry side muster enough power to block a bad law?

That’s what I’d like to know. All of a sudden, the Republicans would be in a very strong bargaining position. Do nothing, and *anyone* can conceal-carry. What are the Democrats willing to give up in order to restrict that to those of sound mind?

Ever notice that gun grabbers or those who sound off about the evil 2nd Amendment usually have hired bodyguards……..WHO CARRY WEAPONS?

Thanks…I forgot to add that to their long list fraudulent lies and hypocrisy.

“It’s do what I say…not what I do” for these rats.

I don’t think that was trolling per se – it more like sarcasm that needed to be clearly identified as such. Most will pick that up but it can be unfortunate when some don’t.

Galt2009 on December 11, 2012 at 6:44 PM

Next time then I’ll end the post with /sarcasm instead of /troll.

BTW,

Definitely 1911. A 1911 is as much a part of American cultural history as Coca-Cola, Ford, and Levis. My first 1911 was an Auto-Ordnance, when I figured it was pretty close to what my grandfather must have had in World War II.

I love me an HK USP 45, as well.

Never addressing the fact that this is still the USA and that their laws/ outright bans never work as they interpret them.

Chicago-stan is a city totally out of control and virtually run by thugs, hoodlums. Yet the infantile nanny states still believes that you are not entitled to protect yourself…more importantly, outside your home?

Ignoring every provable fact that states with “shall issue” have consistently lower crime stats. And that licensed CCW carriers….have less violations of gun laws than the smarmy scum who carries it illegally?

Demrats are the problem…and the real threat and enemies of this country. Everywhere they go…some flak in a dress wants to deny you your rights and freedom

In the opinion, Posner wrote that “Twenty-first century Illinois has no hostile Indians. But a Chicagoan is a good deal more likely to be attacked on a sidewalk in a rough neighborhood than in his apartment on the 35th floor of the Park Tower.”

Finally a black robe with guts and common sense…FINALLY.