#conservablr

You people are literally the reason our government is going to try and strip all our freedoms piecemeal because you can’t even be trusted to not try and use your toasters in the fucking shower and dead people can’t pay fucking taxes.

Instead if we don't correct this what will happen is the Fed will be forced to come down on firearm ownership. We will have no other option to keep our streets save, the same way a father is forced to take his son's BB gun because he shoots at people's pets. Except the Fed is going to ruffle the feathers of radicals who have gone unchallenged, monopolized the conversation about the Second Amendment, and as such their so-called patriotism has only further damaged our nation's moral integrity at a time when we desperately need it.

Major Edmund Rice leading the 19th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry Regiment engages the 14th Virginia Infantry by Dale Gallon.

To protect this country from enemies foreign and domestic - and yes, a mass shooter is a domestic terrorist and an enemy of the Republic - with our own resolve and arms. To form a militia, a nation at arms, to rise up and defend our sovereignty. As a traditionalist for me the most important thing when analyzing law is its precedent and why it was established in the first place. However if it no longer serves a purpose then its existence is pointless and should be done away with. So do I advocate this for the Second Amendment? Not so. I do, however, think the Second Amendment has been hijacked by seditious groups who only serve to further an argument for the repeal of the Second Amendment. If God gave us that right, it is government who enforces it in fact. We are not Ancient Israel, with God following us around in a pillar of flame directly telling us what to do and when. In reality it is the Federal Republic that protects our rights in law and from being taken by foreign overlords; its maintenance is critical to our freedom for it is the only vessel by which we can navigate the treacherous waters of the world and America ought expect every man to do his duty to keep Columbia sailing. Ergo, I would like to actually talk about a system that would enable us to keep our right to bear arms and return it to its pure purpose and fix the problems in our gun laws in this country. I’d like to call this policy the Minuteman Program, because it derives its inspiration from the Minutemen who have since their existence formed the bedrock of our idea of why we should have the right to bear arms at all. Firstly we need a National Firearms Code. People often ask how gun control can work if Chicago which has very strict gun control is subject to so much gun violence. The answer is that neighboring states of Illinois have much more liberal gun laws and smugglers make a living funneling illegal firearms from these places to criminals and their organizations - if any - for their use. Gun control might work if it was on a national scale but as it stands by and large most states have varying gun laws and even different municipalities have at-odds legislation centering around firearm ownership and use. What I propose with this Firearms Code is actually a wider array of options for firearm ownership; if you can afford market prices, you can most certainly own it. Wanna buy an artillery emplacement? If you can afford it, go right ahead. Of course we would also need universal safety standards for such weapons, but that’s covered in my next part of this program. Second, firearms ownership needs to be bound up in the idea of a Nation at Arms that can defend the State and the Republic’s interests; our mutual safety and the independence and good order of our society. Everyone who would own firearms of any kind - beyond perhaps small arms and personal defense weapons - must apply through the government to obtain a license and permit which they will only receive after meeting various mental health, proficiency, safety, and firearms knowledge requirements. This proficiency will also extend to personal fitness, forcing every American to be able to in the least pass something as simple as MEPs or a basic military fitness test. Upon obtaining a license, for any kind of firearm the person wishes to own they must pass different tests both written and practical for each class of firearm. For example the tests for a handgun would be different than the ones for a rifle. They must at that time register their gun, giving full account of its condition, modifications, and the exact amount of ammunition they have on hand for said firearm and the manner of their storage - which must also meet safety guidelines to ensure the weapon would maintain its proficiency and not be a danger to anyone in their household. This could be extended to accessories such as tactical equipment like bullet proof vests and even blades designed for the purpose of defending oneself and if need be killing an opponent. The purpose of such legislation is to ensure that in case of a crisis requiring men-at-arms who can be called up much like selective service or a draft, a ready number are on hand who can be called upon by their locality at any time and given assignment for which they will be financially compensated for their time on duty. Foreign invasion, terrorist attack, or any crisis that requires men who can be ready in a minute for conflict who are trained in the use of their firearms and placed under the direct control of professionals. The flip-side of this is that if one is deemed unfit for service or no longer able to serve they would lose their right to bear arms. I feel a distinction should be made between “sporting” firearms and “military” firearms of some kind to allow for hunters and the like. No one is going to war with a single-shot .306. Many weapons would be absolutely useless on a modern battlefield or a liability and should not be used. Perhaps the older civil firearms code is still adequate for them. One must renew his oath to defend the Republic from its enemies foreign and domestic every year as well as pass the same tests - if not more advanced ones - than the ones he was previously subjected to. In return for this, said person has unrestricted right to bear arms which would function similarly to open carry laws with it being the discretion of private and public institutions whether or not they will allow a person to be on the premises with their weapons. He must keep his identification as a Minuteman on his person at all times, especially if he is armed. Failure to do so should resort in fines and other penalties. Naturally anyone who shows open contempt for the US government as an institution and threatens it with violence or keeps his firearms with intent to overthrow the government should not be allowed to keep and bear arms. If the founders intended us to violently overthrow the government every time something political we didn’t like happened, I daresay they would’ve done it to each other quite a bit in the early years of our Republic when many of them stood in political opposition to each other on various issues including presidential elections. Another caveat is that I feel like such a system should only apply to the next generation, not the current one of firearm owners. Grandfather clauses and all that should be employed to ease the transition; that way, no one’s rights as they have understood them are being trampled underfoot. To me this is the best compromise which allows for a greater sense of safety and trust in our fellow Americans while not infringing upon our ancestral right to bear arms. I feel like every time one of these tragedies rolls around people are more concerned with virtue-signalling and such than actually talking about a way to stop these things from happening. So I hope this gains traction and people start to think more seriously about how we can change our gun culture in such a way as to be more true to the intention of the second amendment and make our Republic domestically safer and stronger.

Where you're not entitled to your own family's estate, but you're guilty of crimes committed 10 generations ago.