The key word is "Capable". If the weapon cannot chamber lethal ammunition, it doesn't meet my definition of being able to project lethal levels of force. If it can, it is, no matter what's shoved into the barrel. It's kinda the way the law acts if you rob a store with an unloaded gun. It's not able at the time to harm anyone, but by law, it counts as a deadly weapon. Ron Wanttaja
Couldn't show a receipt on the way out. The War of 1812 is an interesting period; lofty goals for the US (Stop the British from seizing our ships and forcing our sailors into their Navy) combined with territorial ambitions ("All those people in Canada want to join the US"). Unmitigated disasters on land, unexpected victories at sea. Within the space of several months in 1812, an Army general cravenly surrendered the city of Detroit, while his nephew dealt the British a stunning loss at sea (USS Constitution vs. HMS Guerriere). Must note that the 200th anniversary of the US' worst loss at sea during that war is coming up in less than a month... USS Chesapeake vs. HMS Shannon, 1 June 1813. Lift a glass to Captain Lawrence and Captain Broke, and declare, "Don't give up the ship!" Ron Wanttaja
Way to even further ruin the joke that I ruined sufficiently on my own. :wink2: Anyway, I'm off to Miller Park to look into some of that malt stuff. Maybe some hopps too.
Yeah, the founders were no fans of a standing army. They made specific provisions in the constitution for a navy, and specifically excluded an army. The plan was for the states, and the citizens to make up the 'citizen-soldiers' when needed to defend the nation, and not to have an army on call. They saw what Sulla did in Rome and absolutely wanted to avoid an Imperium at all costs. So, me and my buddies can make up a militia, and we can train, and we can follow the letter and intent of the 2nd A. I think this might be the future of the way the US will eventually get back on track. But, as it relates to Oshkosh, they won't know anything about anything, and that's what I say.
Interesting insight. I see "Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Gibbons was published at the same time as the American Revolution. I know the book had a widespread effect, but never realized it was simultaneous with the Revolution until I looked it up after reading your post. I'm aware of the "Society of Cincinnati" that many American officers joined after the war; really ties in with the Roman-inspired decision-making. While the Constitution allowed for a Navy, it was not all beer and skittles. The Navy had a rough time getting started, with frigate construction started and stopped. The war with France put a bit more urgency on it, but many of the Captains were political appointees, mostly older retreads from the Revolution. Some still had it, most didn't. Jefferson was initially anti-Navy, but finally decided he needed one to resist the various Barbary Pirates. Good there, but he afterward he declared that the US didn't NEED a Navy, and mothballed all the ships. all he left operational were little one-gun gunboats for harbor patrol. But then, since he'd banned US merchant ships from engaging in international trade, there wasn't much call for a blue-water fleet. Those officers and seamen in the Navy spent their time enforcing the hated embargo. What do you expect from a Democrat? Or a Republican? (Jefferson belonged to the "Democratic Republican Party." I kid you not.) There's a guy who comes around occasionally giving lectures as "A Night with Thomas Jefferson." I've got a reproduction US Navy Captain's uniform from that period, and I've been tempted to show up and give him hell. Ron Wanttaja
I'm not advocating the banning of anything, I'm just observing the bizarre fixation on firearms that many Americans seem to have. Especially the gussied up, plastic adorned wanna-be assault type weapons. Unlike small airplanes there really doesn't appear to any real purpose for them. For home defense I'd rather have a good ol' 12 ga pump action cause I really don't have any plans to snipe anybody.
I have about 15 hand guns in my bedroom closet alone that serve no purpose. I own the because I want them (and that's all the explanation anyone should need). And if I'm lucky, they'll continue to serve no purpose.
If that gussied up plastic carbine is good enough for the armed forces, I guess it's good enough for a militiaman. Nice thing is, it'll chamber the same rounds as the fed boys. That might come in handy in the event of a situation. I also have a Mossberg pump for close quarters AP work. I don't have an AR15 style. My distance choice is from Russia with love and is chambered for 7.62x54R.
Like Diet Coke and Mentos, probably.... A REAL good combination: Champagne and Keebler Fudge Stripes (original). Yum! Ron Wanttaja
I think if you combine adequate quantities of the above with the vintage Navy uniform prior to participation in the Jefferson lecture, you'll generate plenty of newsworthy commentary.
Who the hell needs a firearm at Oshkosh? You have to be kidding..... The PC nonsense is sad though, as is much of EAA these days.
It is clear that you are pointless. Many guns do not project lethal force. A Very Pistol is a simple example. Perhaps someday you'll climb down off your soapbox. Perhaps not.
Many here are reading every word about Zoom, but haven't read Heller and are experts on the 2nd. Heh.
Let me know when you are doing that. I just might make the drive up to watch. Bill of Rights, not the bill of needs. I have what I have because I want them and I enjoy shooting them. No further justification needed. He just might. And I'd bring a camera to record the fun.
Well, you'd think THIS would put the fear of Madison into him, wouldn't you? http://www.wanttaja.com/rjw.jpg Fortunately, I have the legs to pull off this look. Indeed. There's no Amendment in the Bill of Rights that protects the rights of citizens to own draft animals, farm implements, musical instruments, or fancy-schmancy breeches like mine in the picture above. The Second Amendment is the *only* one that refers to a specific personal possession. The First Amendment lumps a number of rights into one sentence (freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition), but the Second Amendment only has one subjecti. It's obvious that it was an important issue to the Founding Fathers, and shouldn't be casually diddled with today. Ron Wanttaja
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/very pistol See any mention of the word 'gun'.....Talk about soap boxes....or simple.....
While rolling your eyes perhaps you could be bothered to look up "pistol." Then again, perhaps you can't be.
Amazing how little it takes to stir up a know-it-all. I've got some reloading to do........ I'll check in next week and see if you're still whining....
I remember reading "Roughing it" by Mark Twain when I was a kid and being puzzled to hear him tell that, by and large, most people in the wild west didn't own a gun - or even a horse for that matter unless you had the money to feed and board the darn thing. Most people just plain walked or rode the stage and didn't have a shiny Winchester or Colt. Hollywood had me thinking it was totally different than that.
Yes it is, it falls under my "...have it available to use against a hostile creature" reasoning. Humans are creatures, too. Ron Wanttaja
I think most states allow businesses or property owners to restrict carry on private property. Whether it's a criminal offense to do so depends on the state law. I recall when Nebraska passed CC we had a couple other members of our Exec Committee for our company who thought we should put signs up prohibiting carry in our stores. Our founder shut that down in a hurry with "you're not putting any d@mn signs up .. you're just going to pi$$ everyone off". The rest of us agreed. Personally, even though I like to carry when I can, I still think property owners should be within their rights to prohibit it on their own property. CCW holders just have to decide if it's important enough to them not to go there.. RT
Exactly!! Property owners have the right to decide who goes on their property and how they are expected to act. Again I agree. It's the same risk management we use when we fly. As PIC, you have to decide if an area is, or isn't too risky to fly into. If Air Venture is just a great big sanctuary for criminals to commit robbery and murder with impunity, maybe one shouldn't go. Personally, I'm willing to take the risk, just as I do every time I leave the relative safety of the traffic pattern.
Coming from a CCW Permit holder in 38 States, my research shows as long as they have signs that are 5 x 7 inches, it is the state law. http://handgunlaw.us/states/wisconsin.pdf
