Military grade?

[USNRet93]

Most of our leaders no matter the party affiliation or political beliefs really don’t want us to have weapons. The only difference is some can get a bunch of free votes by simply saying that they are for gun rights and some garner votes by saying that they support gun control.

I simply don’t trust any of them, they’ve all said things that are untrue about topics in which I have knowledge or experience; therefore I can only assume that they are being dishonest about things in which I am ignorant.

I disagree..they don't want to be on the receiving end of criticism if there's a mass shooting in their district or state, using a scary black 'assault rifle'. Most look to reelection and support those things that will help in that endeavor, whether or not it is 'pro' or 'anti' gun..I think very few have the courage of their convictions..most just want to be re-elected.

But generally I agree..

 

[44 AMP]

"The militia of these free commonwealths,
entitled and accustomed to their arms,
when compared with any possible army,
must be tremendous and irresistible.
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves?
Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms
each man against his own bosom.
Congress have no power to disarm the militia.
Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier,
are the birth-right of an American ...
the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands
of either the federal or state governments,
but, where I trust in God it will ever remain,
in the hands of the people."

Quote by:
Tench Coxe
(1755-1824) American political economist
Source:
Pennsylvania Gazette, February 20, 1788

is there really any more that needs to be said on the matter?

 

[M88]

...is there really any more that needs to be said on the matter

Boy do I have a few people in my circle I want to show THAT to!

 

[44 AMP]

Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier,
are the birth-right of an American ...

I always felt this was the heart of the matter.

And I feel that the stupid, or criminal behavior of some does not invalidate anything for the rest of us.

 

[USNRet93]

Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier,
are the birth-right of an American ...

I always felt this was the heart of the matter.

And I feel that the stupid, or criminal behavior of some does not invalidate anything for the rest of us.

It does not but it sure makes it complicated...

 

[rickyrick]

Pretty much what I always say is in line with the above quotes. We have a right to own weapons because they are dangerous. But that’s an old idea that is not compatible with the way our country is turning. We are in a soft revolution, the old republic is dying one lost freedom at a time. There’s no patriots left, no one willing to stand up. The USA is slowly dissolving. The new country is being installed one piece at a time, at an
Ever increasing rate, each piece sooner than the last. The population doesn’t want the “Good Ol’ USA” any longer; anyone that doesn’t realize that is simply in denial.
Ban after ban passes with no real challenge, a few fringe characters speak up, but that’s about it.
The leaders don’t want us to have guns.
The population doesn’t want us to have guns.
The corporations do not want us to have guns.
The media.
The celebrities.
The world.
The only thing that is stopping them is a few lines scrawled on an ancient outdated document that is increasingly disregarded.

 

[M88]

...The leaders don’t want us to have guns.
The population doesn’t want us to have guns.
The corporations do not want us to have guns.
The media.
The celebrities.
The world.
The only thing that is stopping them is a few lines scrawled on an ancient outdated document that is increasingly disregarded.

While this sounds pretty damning, and for the most part I agree with who doesn't want us to have guns, what keeps be from being more pessimistic is that there are still millions and millions of American citizens that DO want their right to own and defend themselves with their guns, and the majority of them from what I can see vote accordingly. Are there more of them than us, and is that ratio increasing? I think yes. Back to my original post, that is precisely why I try and tactfully correct false narratives from the folks that are spreading them. Explaining that the made up term "military grade" is just that, a marketing tool, is one thing I can correct and plant the seeds of truth.

I certainly agree that our constitution is "ancient" from the perspective of the history of this country, but I don't necessarily agree that it is outdated. But that's another discussion, that has little to do with my original post.

 

[rickyrick]

I do sometimes post doom and gloom.
But, that’s because I live in a state that passes or at least attempts to pass gun restrictions every election.
I do believe in the constitution and the bill of rights as written, but large numbers of the population do not.

The constitution in no way limits a particular type of weapon or any weapon features. Any restriction is a violation of the second amendment.

 

[M88]

I hear your pain Rickyrick. I live in the RELATIVELY gun friendly state of Pennsylvania. We actually have open carry here, although 95% of the people don't seem to know that. So, while I CAN strap my Vaquero on my waist and walk around in public WITHOUT a permit, at least here in SW PA, I would attract unwanted attention and there is really no need to do that. The Sig P938 in my pocket is my peace of mind. As one heads west to more rural PA, it would be OK, and I see people open carry as soon as I get couple hours west of the Philadelphia area. For those that have tried that in SE PA, people call 911 and they have been confronted by police pretty quickly. My personal take on that? While it is perfectly legal, unless absolutely necessary, why do that and attract that kind of attention other than to make a point! Also, as I said any PA citizen CAN strap a gun on their waist without a CC permit. HOWEVER, according to a cop I talked to at a gun show, as soon as you get into your car with that weapon (unless you're heading to the range or a gun shop), it is now concealed once you close your car door, even if it is on the seat next to you exposed. I live in PA, but am surrounded on three sides by MD, NJ and NY, which are not gun-friendly, and don't recognize PA permits. That is why I often do not carry every day, as I need to run across the border into those states for various reasons, and I would be a felon in that case.

Again... back to my original post, THAT is precisely why I try and tactfully correct false anti-gun narratives from the folks that are spreading them. I've planted lots of seeds and even changed peoples mind by TACTFULLY simply telling them the truth.

 

[44 AMP]

HOWEVER, according to a cop I talked to at a gun show, as soon as you get into your car with that weapon (unless you're heading to the range or a gun shop), it is now concealed once you close your car door, even if it is on the seat next to you exposed.

I'd suggest that a cop at a gun show is NOT qualified legal advice. No cop anywhere is, and there's nothing penalizing them if they give you completely inaccurate information. Look at the laws, yourself, or get a lawyer to do it and give you a qualified professional legal opinion (and for a fee) but don't take a cop's advice as fact just because they are a cop. Trust, but VERIFY!

Lots of people have been busted for a crime that existed only in the cop's interpretation of the law, and we seldom hear of it, simply because the DA tossing the charges out isn't newsworthy.

It would seem to me that a gun in plain sight inside a vehicle isn't concealed, but I don't know the exact law in your state, all I'm saying is not to take the cop's word alone.

There is a situation where a gun can legally be "loaded" without any ammunition physically in the gun. Sounds stupid, but its true, in some places because of the way the laws are worded. Some places, a gun isn't loaded unless there is ammunition inside it. Other places, if the gun, ammo, and you are all in the same compartment of the vehicle, the gun is legally loaded, even though it may not be physically loaded.

Cop A may tell you something, and Cop B bust you for doing exactly what Cop A said. Get independent advice from other sources, and you are better informed.

one thing about military grade, it is often not what most people think it is. I have no idea what it is today, but I do remember the "military grade", overseas shipment acceptance standard for accuracy of the M16A1 rifle in the 70s. 8 MOA. EIGHT MINUTE OF ANGLE was acceptable accuracy for the rifle to be shipped overseas for combat use. Rifles that shot worse than that were retained in the states, for training use.

And, interestingly enough, no unit I was ever involved with ever tested their rifles to see if they met that standard. including units overseas.

There is a "military grade" standard for everything the military uses and does. Whether or not items meet that standard, or are even tested against it, is another matter.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

HOWEVER, according to a cop I talked to at a gun show, as soon as you get into your car with that weapon (unless you're heading to the range or a gun shop), it is now concealed once you close your car door, even if it is on the seat next to you exposed.

I'd suggest that a cop at a gun show is NOT qualified legal advice. No cop anywhere is, and there's nothing penalizing them if they give you completely inaccurate information. Look at the laws, yourself, or get a lawyer to do it and give you a qualified professional legal opinion (and for a fee) but don't take a cop's advice as fact just because they are a cop. Trust, but VERIFY!

My understanding as a PA LTCF holder who has spent several years on the PAFOA forum trying to understand the laws is that what M88 wrote is exactly correct. Except for Philadelphia, PA is an open carry w/o license state (except when under a state of emergency, and I believe one is still technically in effect), but that applies only to carry on the person, outside of a vehicle. Once in a vehicle, different rules kick in.

 

[M88]

Cop A may tell you something, and Cop B bust you for doing exactly what Cop A said. Get independent advice from other sources, and you are better informed.

Good advice for sure 44. As I posted in this thread earlier, I've gotten different advice from different MD state cops when I called about bringing my AR-556 with 30 rd mags into MD to a buddies rural farm to shoot. Never did get a strait answer and not going to post on a public forum exactly what I did as a result!

I have to admit that since I have a PA CC permit, I never bothered to get exact correct info re: whether a gun INSIDE of a car is considered concealed. With my permit... it didn't matter, and thus I didn't really take the time to dig further. However, seems like the advice given by that cop at the gun show according to Aguilar was correct. once the gun is inside the car, different rules apply. That seems as silly as 44's example of an unloaded gun being called loaded if the bullets are in the same compartment. How do they get away with nonsense like that?

Frustrating to us that even if we want to follow the law to the letter, we can't easily know exactly what the laws ARE. Add to that that those laws change. A politician gets elected and wants to make some points by telling his constituency he/she will make them "safer", which is usually a fallacy at minimum, and often has the opposite effect.

As for "military grade"... I do wish there was a more definitive definition rather than the nebulous and often confusing way it's used today.

 

[M88]

oops... that post about the AR-556 may have been in another thread...

 

[pete2]

Military Grade means acceptable by the military......... Usually from the lowest bidder. It may also mean that all the paperwork was filled out correctly and have nothing to do with quality. Been there done that.

 

[44 AMP]

That seems as silly as 44's example of an unloaded gun being called loaded if the bullets are in the same compartment. How do they get away with nonsense like that?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the principle is called "constructive possession".

It's a very useful idea for arresting people before they actually commit the crime. Sometimes, we think its a good thing, like when they prosecute a bomber who didn't set off a bomb, or better yet, before he even builds one. Other applications? I'm not really good with. I don't think its right to say a gun is loaded when it isn't, but reason cannot upset the law, so they say..

DOT regs about transport of firearms and state laws may NOT be identical.

 

[M88]

It's a very useful idea for arresting people before they actually commit the crime. Sometimes, we think its a good thing, like when they prosecute a bomber who didn't set off a bomb...

It's not a simple world, that's for sure. This is yet another example of there always being two sides to every story or idea. I looked into "constructive possession", and yes there are situations where it's a good thing. If it looks like a criminal duck and quacks like a criminal duck, do you have to wait till it spreads its criminal duck wings and flies away before you can apprehend it? Still... the magazine sitting NEXT to the gun or in the same glove box, while making it easy to quickly load the gun, still doesn't make it a loaded gun. That said, from a legal standpoint, maybe referring to intent?... I can see the other sides argument. Example, while I don't necessarily like it, I'm OK with FOPA telling me I have to keep my guns locked and unloaded crossing state lines where my CC permit is not recognized, and my ammo in a separate part of the car.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Here's the applicable Pennsylvania law: https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdoc...ype=HTM&ttl=18&div=0&chpt=61&sctn=6&subsctn=0

§ 6106. Firearms not to be carried without a license.

(a) Offense defined.--

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license under this chapter commits a felony of the third degree.

(2) A person who is otherwise eligible to possess a valid license under this chapter but carries a firearm in any vehicle or any person who carries a firearm concealed on or about his person, except in his place of abode or fixed place of business, without a valid and lawfully issued license and has not committed any other criminal violation commits a misdemeanor of the first degree.

A couple of things to note: The law does not make carrying in a vehicle "concealed" carry -- carrying in a vehicle is addressed as a separate issue from concealed carry outside of a vehicle. Second, note that paragraph (2) says if you are otherwise eligible for a license to carry, unlicensed vehicle carry is a misdemeanor rather than a felony. Still a crime, but a lesser crime.

There are a bunch of exceptions, too -- refer to the link to review them.

 

[Scorch]

Military grade means nothing. As noted above, it is a marketing term. "Weapons of war" is the same. These people have been brainwashed into thinking that the firearms are the problem, not their children and the violent videos and movies they watch. Not a diatribe on training videos, but the military uses similar tools to train people to shoot other people. From a defect elimination perspective, you generally go after things that are causing the highest number of undesirable results. Generally, you go after the largest numbers first, which in the case of violent crimes means hand/feet, clubs, knives, cars, and firearms are waaaay down the list. Or if you want to eliminate deaths, go after obesity, alcohol, prescription drugs, illegal drugs, and again, firearms are way down the list. But the things that bother me the most about people vilifying firearms is that it is an unreasoning desire to ban a tool that can be used for good or bad, not the desire to eliminate the underlying causes, and the ignoring or facts and lying to make their point. If you have to resort to lies, you are on shaky ground morally/ethically anyway.

And trying to stop people from commiting crimes before they have committed a crime is just so wrong from so many perspectives. Like the candidates that claimed they would go after and kill NRA members. Really? What possible justification do you have before someone commits a crime? If I shoot someone in the street because they "might have hurt me" I would probably be a candidate for capital punishment. Same applies to state/local government, you have to wait for the person to actually commit a crime before you take action against them.

 

[44 AMP]

Or if you want to eliminate deaths, go after obesity, alcohol, prescription drugs, illegal drugs, and again, firearms are way down the list.

And if you succeed, we can all die thin, sober, in pain, straight, and disarmed.

We all die of something, pretending otherwise is fooling yourself. Violent behavior cannot be prevented by anyone but the individual. It can be controlled, only by each and every one of us, as individuals.

I understand the frightened soccer mom wanting "weapons of war off our streets". But, that is a much, much different thing than taking those weapons out of our hands.

I hold the opinion that owning and possessing "military grade" weapons are our right, and beyond that it our duty and responsibility. Its that whole "militia" thing that is so unpopular with so many people today.

Having such things, and using them responsibly is our right. Criminal misuse is not. You don't ban fire because someone commits arson. You punish the arsonist, not the people who didn't burn anything.

 

[danco]

..."military grade" means practically nothing....