Jump to content

ScottFM

Members
  • Posts

    1,081
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

598 profile views

ScottFM's Achievements

Member

Member (21/24)

  1. You misconstrue what I am saying. I am not talking at all about the individual right nor have I made any claim about it. I am not really sure why you you think I am arguing the point of individual right vs group right when I have not said anything about that. I am saying that the claim by one writer in this thread that the 2nd Amendment was meant to create a "militia to fight a tyrannical government" is NOT anywhere written in the Constitution and in fact the 2nd Amendment contradicts that intent by specifically and unambiguously stating that the right is their to quell insurrection and quell invasion.
  2. I get that you might have another opinion. I welcome your counter argument if you have any. In the meantime it is even noted in DC vs Heller and written by Justice Scalia that: Four States adopted analogues to the Federal Second Amendment in the period between independence and the ratification of the Bill of Rights. Two of them— Pennsylvania and Vermont—clearly adopted individual rights unconnected to militia service. Pennsylvania’s Declaration of Rights of 1776 said: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves, and the state . . . .” §XIII, in 5 Thorpe 3082, 3083 (emphasis added). In 1777, Vermont adopted the identical provision, except for inconsequential differences in punctuation and capitalization. See Vt. Const., ch. 1, §15, in 6 id., at 3741. North Carolina also codified a right to bear arms in 1776: “That the people have a right to bear arms, for the defence of the State . . . .” Declaration of Rights §XVII, in id., at 2787, 2788. This could plausibly be read to support only a right to bear arms in a militia—but that is a peculiar way to make the point in a constitution that elsewhere repeatedly mentions the militia explicitly. See §§14, 18, 35, in 5 id., 2789, 2791, 2793. Many colonial statutes required individual arms-bearing for public-safety reasons—such as the 1770 Georgia law that “for the security and defence of this province from internal dangers and insurrections” required those men who qualified for militia duty individually “to carry fire arms” “to places of public worship.” In all of these cases the bearing of arms was there to protect the state, not mount an insurrection, revolution, etc against it.
  3. I am surprised that it is new to you. It is actually in the Constitution, that is why I quoted the section from Article 1 Section where is specifically says that is the role of the militia. "Section 8. The Congress shall have power..... To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;" Plenty of history books talk of it too! When Jefferson actually did get rid of the standing army, that laid the ground work for the British to get in and burn the capital. The militia actually failed to defend against invasion and afterwards we have had a standing army. But one that still needs to be re-funded the budget every two years. Nowhere in the Constitution is there a right for one to overthrow the government. The whole "we need the 2nd Amendment to defend against a tyrannical government" is a 20th century talking point and is derived from ideas in the Declaration of Independence not the US Constitution. What is interesting, and a bit off topic, is the Constitution is not rigid and itself includes a method via the amendment process so it can be adapted to subsequent generations.
  4. The 2nd Amendment was NEVER meant for the citizen to fight against a "tyrannical government" that is simply a modern lie that has been feed to many. If you read the Constitution and the history of the era the idea of a standing army was what was feared. That is why the army may only be funded in two year increments (not so for the navy BTW), instead the idea of a citizens militia was to be the norm and why was that militia needed? Well we can look right in the Constitution for that answer: Section 8. The Congress shall have power..... To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions; IOW the militia was to quell internal uprising against the government aka PROTECT the government from being overthrown not to be the cause of overthrowing it.
  5. I got a second FOID/CCCL card in the mail today. This less than a month from when I got a previous one. BOTH have the indicator as CCL, so it is not part of the misprinted group. The X-Number is different. I do not know why and I do not know why I got a second one! Anyone know What the hey!!! is up with this?
  6. 11 Mar 2022 My CCL/FOID was once again in the mail Anyone know why they sent a 2nd one less than a month after the previous one? Both are printed correctly and there was no explanation why the new one was sent.
  7. To answer a couple of Q's 1. the 1911 is not for carry. I carry a P365. The 1911 is because I have always wanted one. 2. I have prints on file for the CCL 3. I have only gotten instant approval once, about 6 years ago! The rest always seem to take longer but have been within the 3-day wait anyways. This one took the extra day. 4. Yep, did not think that FTIP is not NICS.
  8. AR's are all fun until you have to clean them and get the sand out of the lower. 🙂
  9. Not sure where to put this question, so I'll put it here, but if it should be moved hopefully an admin can do it. In the 4th Quarter last year I submitted my re-qualification for my CCL. I recently received it on the new combined FOID card. Also my FOID was renewed so it now is good to 2032. All of this is great then last week I went to buy a new handgun. If anyone cares it's a Sig Sauer 1911 Nightmare in 45ACP. My background check took almost 4 days to clear. Why would it take so long? The FOID is supposed to be constantly monitoring my background, I had just recently had the ISP do a background check to issue the renewed CCL. So why, Why, WHY would I not get instantly cleared? Very frustrating!
  10. I got one of the new cards today. There is no additional number(s) at the bottom of the card. There is at the top though. Along with the FOID number and an indictor that for me says CCL
  11. The Indicator says CCL the red wording at the bottom says "CAUTION: This card does not permit the bearer to UNLAWFULLY carry or use firearms"
  12. I live NW of Chicago in the burbs out that way. FWIW the postmark on the envelope shows that card was mailed 14 Feb from zip 62703, which is Springfield.
  13. 9 November 2021 I submitted my CCL renewal 6 January 2022 the status was changed to Under Review with this detail: We have completed our initial review of your submission and have determined that all necessary items are present. Your application has been moved to the background review queue. 26 January 2022 the status is still Under Review but with the following detail: Your submission successfully completed the background review and has been sent to await printing. 31 Jan 2022 status was upgraded to Printed 17 Feb 2022 Arrive in the mail: It is one of the new combined FOIDs with CCL Indicator. Also FYI there is not expiration date printed on the card, there are expirations dates on the ISPFB website.
  14. 9 November 2021 I submitted my CCL renewal 6 January 2022 the status was changed to Under Review with this detail: We have completed our initial review of your submission and have determined that all necessary items are present. Your application has been moved to the background review queue. 26 January 2022 the status is still Under Review but with the following detail: Your submission successfully completed the background review and has been sent to await printing. 31 Jan 2022 status was upgraded to Printed 17 Feb 2022 Arrive in the mail: It is one of the new combined FOIDs with CCL Indicator. Also FYI there is not expiration date printed on the card, there are expirations dates on the ISPFB website.
×
×
  • Create New...