RKBA - Why do we only talk guns?

I

Ironbarr

New member
RKBA... Right to Keep and Bear ARMS

In most discourses of 2nd A/RKBA, why do we talk mainly - if not ONLY - of firearms? There are, of course - nonfirearms.

Looking at the definition of the word "arms", there are, among various other usages, these randomly selected definitions (from a Google "dictionary" search reflecting many on-line dictionaries):

Terms Synonyms
1. arms [N] (Arms): arm, arms, weapon, gun, rifle, revolver, deadly weapon, armament, armor, defense, armory, ammunition, powder, bomb, missile, explosive.
.................

2. take up arms [V] (Warfare): arm, mobilize troops, take up arms, draw the sword, go to war, wage war, do battle, give battle, join battle.
..................

Arms

(n.) Anything which a man takes in his hand in anger, to strike or assault another with; an aggressive weapon.
(n.) Instruments or weapons of offense or defense.
..................

Weapon

weapons and equipment used to kill and injure people:
..................

To supply or equip oneself with weaponry.
To prepare oneself for warfare or conflict.
..................
//////////////

weapon noun [C]
a gun, knife, or other object used to kill or hurt someone
Click to expand...

The gist of this minor diatribe is that "arms" and "weapons" are synonymous and "arms" is not limited to guns; that knives, swords, pole-axes, slings, rocks, etc., if for defense or offense, are "arms" and as such - are they not generically banned from infringement? However, let me speak of personal arms, those carried on or about the body for defense.

Bearing with the language and understanding of the then times, and applying the "arms of the current times" - why do we not insist that "arms" as in RKBA include not only firearms, but the bayonets, knives and other personal weapons which exist in today's world. (NOTE: Insert "military" if it's necessary to your beliefs.)

I bring up this "other than firearms" issue since I am in the market for a good SD blade, a folder, no doubt, but I find that blade length is restricted in many states. While I'm not sure where the every-day "official" blade length is in Virginia - it is less than 3" in/on/around school property (with exceptions for tradesmen, etc.) and I see little use in a blade of less than 3" for self-defense.

I believe this to be an undue restriction - or "infringement", if you will, under 2 A., yet, while my CCW now uses the word "Weapons", the statute limits the CCW to "Handgun". This precludes my carrying a reasonably sized (3" or so) blade concealed.

What say you?

-Andy
 
This was summed up very well a long time ago ....

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? ... 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." - Tench Coxe
 
Lak...

but why do WE not insist? WE always talk guns when talking RKBA. WE who are activists in our own area, state, etc. do not emphasize "arms", mostly just guns.

Is it that if guns are no longer infringed that other arms will automatically fall too? Somehow I doubt it.

These little nibbles, successes, are a pain. 2A should be the rule of law across the land.

-Andy
 
Andy,

Quartus is right; we have been boiled collectively speaking.

There are many aspects to this, and one problem is the way in which issues like the RKBA is compartmentalized in political terms. This is fine when merely discussing the legal codification alone in that context, but the broader issue is one of ideology and culture. And this is a part of an ideological and cultural war.

My own opinion is that the bull should have taken by the horns a long time ago. Clearly a well-defined stand is needed - and especially that the individuals and groups, mainly in the political elite strata are identified, exposed and openly attacked for their ideology and agenda which is foreign to the ideology and culture of - and hostile to - the United States.
 
especially that the individuals and groups, mainly in the political elite strata are identified, exposed and openly attacked for their ideology and agenda which is foreign to the ideology and culture of - and hostile to - the United States.
Click to expand...

Yep. Theres a time to play defense, but wars are won on offense.
 
There's plenty of talk about knives on the knife forums with as much passion as we have here about firearms. And I support the right to carry a knife (which I do more) as much as I do a firearm....

Firearms, per Samuel Colt, are the great equalizer. If we lose those, then our next civil war won't be won by steak knives & "tactical folders".

The line is drawn here.... :mad:
 
Less Restrictions

Granted, I live in weapon-friendly Arizona, but in my experience, knives of all sorts are always allowed anywhere guns of all sorts are. The opposite as not always true.

The restrictions on knives are not nearly as strict as they are on guns. You can't take a knife of more than three inches into a school, but you cannot take a gun in at all. If you fight to get CCW permits honored in public schools, I'm sure the knives laws would fade away (for the admin and teachers, at least)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top