Guns and Ammo magazine and writer Dick Metcalf ask the following question in their Dec 2013 issue.
“Do certain firearms regulations really constitute infringement?”
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Lets-Talk-Limits-by-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf
“I wondered whether those same people believed that just anybody should be able to buy a vehicle and take it out on public roadways without any kind of driver’s training, test or license.”
Dude needs to re-read the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution. The Federal and state governments do not have the right to regulate automobiles. Further, pretty much anyone can buy a car without training, a test, or a license. They can’t (legally) take it onto public roadways, but they can fart around with it on private property all they want.
Further, the ability to freely move around inside a country (and to leave or enter it, if one so wishes) is one of the first things to vanish when a government goes tyrannical.
I’m also wondering where the government has regulation allowing the housing of US troops in US homes or where the government is allowed to force you to stand as a witness against yourself at trial. I’m betting that he can’t, because he’s wrong about “all Constitutional rights being regulated”.
In any case, an infringement is an infringement. The government does not regulate how you say something, only what you can say in specific instances. In order to be on equal footing with the First Amendment, therefore, we would have to allow everyone to carry firearms everywhere, but regulate when and where they can be used - which we already do, to a certain extent, as assault- and battery with a deadly weapon are already crimes in most places, as is murder and attempted murder. Which actually makes a lot of sense, although it would mean having openly armed guards (armed with carbines or sub-guns) in courts, city halls, and legislatures.
For a specific instance of the latter (arms allowed everywhere, but not necessarily allowed to be used everywhere) in practical use, see the Viking ‘Thing’. A meeting for all free persons at which all the laws were recited (so every one knew them) and trials were held and any disputes were dealt with in a lawful manner (which might involve fighting the other person in a judicial duel in which death was possible but not common). If you were a free man (or woman), you were allowed to carry arms everywhere (and it was considered foolish not to, both for practical purposes of self-defense and as it established your station as a free person and not a thrall. Unless you’re a woman, in which case you’re not expected to carry arms, but are still allowed to do so). Even when standing before your jarl or king (or any other nobility), while in their hall, drinking their mead and eating their food…. But if you drew your sword, your life was forfeit. Assuming the jarl or king’s huskarls didn’t cut you down, your fellow free people would.
In any case, Dick Metcalf is full of sh__.
Standing ovation!
Now I urge everyone who buys these garbage magazines to contact Guns and Ammo and tell them Metcalf was wrong and needs to go. It was difficult to read so I went back and looked at it again. His argument about training is also stupid. LEO’s, military personnel and even firearms instructors have received training and it still doesn’t prevent them from screwing the pooch.
I think people SHOULD get training, but ultimately doing so is an individual choice as are the consequences of not doing it.
What an idiot.
I can’t believe that with all the analysis of the 2nd Amendment language that has been done, he is actually using the extremely lame “well regulated” preamble. Anyone who has given the slightest amount of effort into looking at what that means would know it means equipped and trained as in regulars vs irregulars.
He deserves to lose his job. He is obviously not qualified to write local obituaries much less about guns or Constitutional law.
Does anyone under the age of AARP even read G&A anymore? It’s the worst Fudd publication I’ve ever seen. The only purpose it serves is to pimp Taurus, Hornady, Stag, and Ruger products. Ole Tricky Dick should probably take his own advice and go get some firearm handling training, his is the worst I’ve ever seen on TV. Hopefully Kyle Lamb doesn’t stick with G&A very long.
Great. This will show up all over the place by progressives and the press as an example of even ‘gun’ people being fed up and ready for more regulations.
Considering what went down over that RECOIL debacle this should go over 10 fold.
What an ass…
Hopefully folks will contact G&A and let them know, but doubt that most people who frequent this forum read G&A or even know about tricky dicks article.
As the token old guy with a cane here, I would like to say Dick Metcalf makes all us old farts look bad. Which doesn’t take much doing some days, but he pulled it off.
Way to snatch defeat from the mouth of victory, Dick.
Was dick snoozing during the Zumbo debacle? Why do these old gun writers have to commit professional suicide and insult the industry that put bread on their tables when they get to worn out to write anymore?
For one thing Dicky Boy, federal or state law does not regulate who can speak, who can buy or possess a typewriter or computer, or anything if the sort as long as you behave responsible. Emphasis on BEHAVIOR for brain addled.
For someone who touts his vast experience in writing gun laws (no more machine guns thank you) and Constitutional law, you are, as a man wise in common sense recently observed, FULL OF SHIT FOR BRAINS.
Metcalf, meet your new pal Zumbo, compliments of the gun owning public.
That tool can get bent.
He needs the old Jim Zumbo and Jerry Tsai treatment!
Metcalf has just marginalized himself…
Saw him on TV once shooting ‘cup and saucer’ style.
Yep. Did they learn NOTHING from the Recoil magazine fiasco.
Metcalf believes there should be limits to my second amendment rights, well I believe there should be limits to his first amendment rights. When he agrees to limits regarding what he can think, say, print or otherwise express then he can have an opinion on the matter.
Oh wait, at that point he won’t be able to decide. Kind of like with guns, funny how that works.
Also let them know how you feel…
I have already Facebooked it and I will be contacting the idiots at We Never Shot Anything That Wasn’t Awesome aka Guns and Ammo.
I did just that, even though I don’t buy that garbage magazine.
I have been reading Guns & Ammo off and on for roughly 30 years and I just received the December issue, which is the last on my subscription. I did not read the article until Skintop started this thread. I understand the mindset of Mr. Metcalf and where he is coming from on this issue. I vehemently disagree with him.
Training is a very good idea, but the responsibility to get training should fall to the gun owner and not be mandated by state or Federal government. People who misuse any object or device should be held individually responsible and further restrictions on that device should not be put in place as a knee jerk reaction in response to a violent act.
I have only been skimming through Guns & Ammo magazines the past few years and had been debating spending money to renew my subscription. This clinches it for me; I will not renew.
If Mr. Metcalf represents the mindset of contributing writers of Guns & Ammo, we need to hold the magazine and the parent corporation accountable. People like Mr. Metcalf need to be reminded that their First Amendment rights are protected by people exercising their Second Amendment rights.
To play devils advocate, maybe there should be, but who gets to decide that? Him? Some group? A group who’s job it is to look at all the Const. Amendments and decided where limitations are acceptable?
Are we ready to start discussing “reasonable limits” the the 1st? The 4th?
We all know the outcry to that by the media, the ACLU, etc would be loud and immediate.
We already know the “common sense” measures offered are made by people who:
• Don’t know a thing about guns
• Ignore data in favor of emotions
• Ignore history
I’ll pass.
Yep, and in their groundbreaking episode about controlling recoil, he scoffed at traditional two hand holds over his tea cup technique because the recoil would “jar your teeth out” if you grip a pistol firmly. I wonder if he realizes that not all of us have false teeth?
The problem with playing devils advocate on this one is that there are no reasonable limits when it comes to my rights.
I think this old fart just stepped on his balls with this one. The gall for someone to say this in a widely publicized form like G&A in out current political climate is possibly demented and definatly misinformed.
Unf**kingbeliveable…