Bruce V 21/28

How come very few of you guys fill out the information on the members profile? I would like to be able to see who lives within driving distance. It was, I think, only by chance that I found out that Bruce L and I live in the same town within ten miles of each other.

I was watching something the other evening on Fort Knox; some of the footage showed guards walking around outside of the building with TSMG. I believe I saw one scene where there appeared to be a guard with a TSMG as late as in the early 70's. Anybody else see the program?

My febal thoughts: Government should not place restrictions (infringements) on our RIGHTS. The law should address the misuse of all of the “tools†necessary to exercise our RIGHTS, not our RIGHTS. Just as the printing press & computer are the “tools†that allow us to exercise our First Amendment RIGHTS, Firearms are the “tools†that allow us the ability to exercise our Second Amendment RIGHTS. It is said that we “regulate†the First Amendment i.e. you can’t print a pamphlet espousing the over through of the government or yell “fire†in a crowd…..true…but we DO NOT REGULATE the “tools†necessary to print that pamphlet or speak those words. We do not regulate what type of printing presses, voice amplification devices, TV sets, radios, computers etc. that the general public can “keep and bearâ€. The Founding Fathers could never have envisioned the computer, TV, or radio, should we restrict their type or availability to the general public because of their (The Founding Fathers) lack of vision? There is no acceptable “regulation†of the “tools†that allow us to exercise our Second Amendment RIGHTS. Just as with the First Amendment, laws are in place to address any misuse of the “tools†of the Second Amendment i.e. just as it is against the law to yell fire in a crowd, it is against the law to commit a robbery or commit murder. The law should be addressing the misuse of the tools of our RIGHTS not the RIGHT itself. Stronger penalties, swiftly placed, on the abusers of the tools of our RIGHTS are the solution to society’s ills.

Phil, as usual your points are right on and I agree (as usual) with what you have written; however, I cannot give up the fight, hence my call to all to make a simple telephone call. Yes, it most likely is just a pressure valve / management tool, but isn't not calling, not getting involved, feeling like "I" can't do any good a major part of the problem? Setting aside this D.O.J. breif, it will be very interesting to see how the Supreme Court handles the issue before them. Once (or if) decided, we will get a clear picture of how much respect the "rulers" have for our Constitution. It is obvious that the current crop of politicians do not respect that document at all.

This is what I was posting about last week. I posted "The Whitehouse comments line is 202-456-1414 call them and express your displeasure with the President's Justice Department's support of the DC gun ban." I also called (I know, not that it makes a whole lot of difference) my Congresman and Senators. It sure can't hurt.

My point is for ALL OF US to get involved. Maybe, just maybe, if the net in 1986 was as big as it is now we might have been able to have affected a different outcome to the Huges Amendment (922). I do know that if we don't at least try we get what we deserve. I would be intrested to know if anybody on this board besides me has at least made one call.

Doesn't matter, makes me feel better!

The Whitehouse comments line is 202-456-1414 call them and express your displeasure with the President's Justice Department's support of the DC gun ban.

I found this on another board. This should be sent to as many people as possible. WHY THE GUN IS CIVILIZATION By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret) Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it. In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some. When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single ##### guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender. There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly. Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable. When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

THANKS guys!!!!

PhilOhio, I checked Ohio Ordnance's site, didn't see any barrel assemblys; do you, or any body else know of another source? I am looking for a resonably priced one to have a suppressor made.

My father was with US Coustoms in Miami from after the war until the early seventies. I remember him talking about wharehouses full of firearms destin for South America; some legal, some illegal. Back then, (pre 68) any of the firearms Customs seized went on the auction block annually; unfortunately I was too young at the time to take advantage of the situation. After 68 they had to destroy everything, Dad was not a "Gun Guy" by any means. He said he fought in WWII and lived with a gun for 4 years every minute of the day and didn't want to have to carry one or clean one again, BUT, he said it even made him sick to have to destroy some of the guns that they destroyed. It is such a shame that even today our government is destroying valuable pieces of our history.

I have often wondered how many Thompsons, BAR's, 1919's etc Castro has in his arsenal form that travisty. Wouldn't it be nice if one day that we could get them back.

Thanks for your comment Phil. I wish we could get more people to understand what the first Ten Amendments actually are. Most people I speak with think that the First Ten Amendments "give" them certain rights. I think if "the people" really understood that they are limitations on the governments power and authority we would have an easier time with our Second Amendment cause. When I talk with the average person who has been educated in our educational system over the last 40 years, most of them have no idea that the "First Ten" don't give them anything. It may seem like a minor point to many, perhaps even some on this board, but I have found that when I get a person (even one who wants "resonable gun control") to look at the Constitution as a restriction on government, if they are honest with themselves, their views usually change.

This whole thing is made easier to understand if people just remember that the first Ten Amendments are RESTRICTIONS ON GOVERNMENT.

Takeing Norm's suggestion I am moving this post to here. Any of you guys know what the following are worth? Spandau watercooled with bipod. Spandau air cooled (aircraft sights) no tripod Jap Lewisgun. Thanks in advance- Bruce

Any of you guys know what the following are worth? Spandau watercooled with bipod. Spandau air cooled (aircraft sights) Jap Lewisgun. Thanks in advance- Bruce

For those who are interested in learning how to shoot professional (1.3g) fireworks, Pyrotecnico will be hosting training seminars this spring in the following locations: Osceola County Fair Grounds 1911 Kissimmee Valley Lane Kissimmee, FL 34744 Pyrotecnico of LA 60 West Court Mandeville, LA 70471 First Assembly Of God 1150 Darling Avenue Waycross, GA 31501 Union Area High School 2106 Camden Avenue New Castle, PA 16101 Dell Diamond Stadium 3400 East Palm Valley Blvd Round Rock, TX 78664 T&S Farm 3500 Pond Branch Road Leesville, SC 29070 To register contact Pyrotecnico direct at 1-800-854-4705 or visit our web page at www.pyrotecnico.com

I know this is premature and wishful thinking on my part, but, doesn't this have a nice "ring" Bureau Of Alcohol, Tobacco,_,& explosives http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Phil, as you requested, below is a recent brief article posted on Subguns. The Morning News Local News for Northwest Arkansas Judge refuses to allow militia leader's testimony By Ron Wood The Morning News FAYETTEVILLE -- Hollis Wayne Fincher's machine gun trial will go to the jury today with the defense having presented no evidence or witnesses to the jury. The defense rested Thursday after U.S. District Judge Jimm Larry Hendren ruled Fincher's proposed testimony inadmissible. Fincher testified for more than an hour with the jury out of the courtroom so Hendren could decide if his testimony was admissible. Hendren has repeatedly ruled the defense can attack the government's evidence but not the law that applies to the case. He also ruled, based on U.S. Supreme Court precedents, laws passed by Congress to regulate firearms do not violate the Second Amendment. After hearing Fincher out, Hendren decided the testimony was aimed at challenging the legality of federal gun laws, not if Fincher had illegal, unregistered firearms in his possession. Fincher maintains possession of the guns, which he does not deny, should not be criminalized because their possession was "reasonably related to a well regulated militia," based on the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Fincher said the group would have been "derelict" not to use inexpensive, available and effective military weaponry to protect their homes and state. According to police, Fincher had two .308-caliber machine guns, homemade versions of the Browning model 1919. The other firearms were 9 mm STEN design submachine guns and a sawed-off shotgun. "They were an ideal machine gun for a militia," Fincher said. While the defense has tried to make the case an issue of the Constitution versus federal gun laws, the government has tried to make the case as simple as possible for jurors -- Fincher had the machine guns and they weren't registered as required by federal law. A major issue has been whether the Militia of Washington County is a valid state militia for second amendment purposes. Hendren ruled it's not. A state militia is an arm of the government under the governor who appoints officers at his discretion, according to case law. Former Gov. Mike Huckabee provided prosecutors a letter saying there was no recognized relationship between the state and the Militia of Washington County. Fincher argued the group notified the governor it was forming and acquiring weapons and when he didn't respond in 10 days, they had the state's approval. Hendren said members appear to have the best interest of their state and country at heart, but the outfit is, at best, an unorganized and unregulated militia. Thursday morning, a federal firearms expert testified guns seized by federal agents at Fincher's Washington County home are machine guns as defined by federal law and are not properly registered. "It's a machine gun," Earl Griffith, a firearms expert with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, told jurors as he examined one of the guns seized. Fincher said he had assembled about 10 of the Brownings and 50 of the STENs for the militia. The Browning 1919s were originally made for the U.S. military and later sold to Israel, where they were modified to fire a .308-caliber round, Griffith said. They were later decommissioned and sold to dealers, who can legally sell the guns in the United States as "parts kits," minus the right-side plates that allow them to function as a fully automatic machine gun. Plans and templates for the side plate are readily available on the Internet and were seized from Fincher's house, Griffith said. The STEN-type guns were likely decommissioned guns from Britian sold as parts kits that were assembled here, Griffith said. The shotgun, a common Remington design that was modified, is too short to be legal unless properly registered, Griffith said. It's been illegal for civilians to own machine guns without permission from the U.S. Treasury Department since 1934. Federal law permits the public to own machine guns manufactured and registered before 1986 under certain conditions. Guns made or imported after that date can be bought by law enforcement agencies but not the public. Each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax and must be registered with the bureau's National Firearms Registry. Both sides will present closing arguments to the jury this morning. Hendren said he is concerned about sending both guns and ammunition to the jury room. He said he'll advise jurors not to explore how the guns operate without a U.S. Marshal present. BTW, I'm not a lawyer, I haven't even stayed at a Holiday Inn Express lately!!! http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Do any of you guys have any thoughts on U.S. vs Fincher?

I hope I'm wrong but; could ATF's inital aproval be a ploy in a bigger and upcomming semi-auto assault weapon ban? I can just see Chuckie-boy and Diann shooting an "AA" for the news media and crying about how easy it is to convert a semi to full auto.

Hmmmm, I say for sale purposes they are at least NRA rated 75% http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I've got a Guidelamp M-3.

Pro Second Amendent groups should adopt the tatics of the anti's. We should have pro gun legislators (if there are any) that are willing to attach pro gun "riders" to any piece of anti gun legislation.