2257 arguments

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Mishi

So right on all counts...and the scary thing is, it may be the 2257 BS that turns this bleeding-heart liberal into an NRA supporter. Suddenly, I get where they're coming from. Yikes!

Hiya, Mishi!
I'd say it's quite easy to be both progressive and armed. All those Bill of Rights amendments were put in the constitution for a good purpose, and the 2nd amendment was put in not to protect "the rights of hunters" as the often-silly NRA would have it, but to allow the citizens to bear arms as an equalizing force against potential governmental oppression of the people.

[Linkster]

lassiter - that kinda glosses over what the real intent (as has been proven in actual supreme court cases over the last 200 years) of the 2nd amdn. really means - every case that has ever come up falls back to the right of the citizens (this was very important in the Dred Scott case as at that time the blacks were not considered "citizens") to possess arms that could be used in forming a state militia to protect the US, the people of the US from themselves - an insurgency , or against tyrannical government takeover. This has been decided in so many cases by the supreme court when it came to things like sawed-off shotguns (the court felt that these are not really military arms that could be used in a militia) and other arms that - again wouldnt be a normal military weapon.
Keep in mind that at the same time, there was no standing army - as a matter of fact that was prohibited by law - the idea was to have all male citizens between 18-50 available for an army if the need arose. It was also echoed throughout the states laws and in some cases, even more stringent.
It really was not singularly put in there for the protection against government oppression - it was there for any states' needs to protect itself.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by Linkster

l(this was very important in the Dred Scott case as at that time the blacks were not considered "citizens")

Exactly - which is why every subsequent decision ruling against the right of free citizens to bear arms was based on the precedent from the tortured logic of an explicitly racist Supreme Court decision, not on the intent of the founders. Jefferson had quite a few things to say on the topic, including that of an armed revolution being necessary every 20 years or so to keep government power from becoming too entrenched or oppressive.

As for the states, the "National Guard" as the "militia" is another erroneous and tortured reading. The state National Guards were mainly formed in the early 20th century, not in the 1700s, as a way to get around the "posse comitatus" act that forbade the army from being used against the citizens. The Guards were formed to threaten and kill striking citizens who were protesting against working conditions in the factories and mines - again, not a militia of the "people" but merely another arm of state
oppression. And of course, since President Reagan and Congress federalized all state National Guards in the 1980s, they are essentially illegal and unconstitutional forces, since they are now de facto federal military forces used against US citizens in direct violation of Posse Comitatus.

But I won't bore everyone with more of this - there's plenty of info to be found by Googling the topics.

[Ledfish]

Tommy, I think when it comes down to it, if the DOJ tried to go after someone for a 2257 violation where the only part of the law broken was not being available on a particular day for a specific reason, even though it was during the stated hours on the website, they probably wouldn't have much luck with a judge and jury. Further I don't think they would risk everything to go after someone because they were not available due to non-routine circumstances, like voting, doctors appointments, etc. Probably not even a vacation.

When the IRS is investigate an individual or organization, they still make an appointment and try and do it at the tax payers convenience because later on, if they show that they tried to be accomidating and you never accomidated them, then it makes you look more like you have something to hide, So I think with a 2257 inspection, if they tried to inspect multiple times and each time you conveniently were not available, then it might appear you were dodging them and they would probably have a good case against you.

I think Linkster makes a good point though about it being very business like and I even think that will apply unless they have already have a case against you for something really damning. I think even if something seems questionable, inspections will ultimately be handled very business like.

I also think the sky is falling in mentality is a bit hysterical. I don't think that the DOJ has tens of thousands of inspectors trained and ready to go all over the country, just waiting for the word to go start knocking on doors.....which is what some people would have you believe.

P.S. I like the front Porch idea. Personally I'd put them on my back deck. Since it is in the sun all day long, they better hope it's a cloudy day or they better make sure they have plenty of sunscreen.