The 2nd Admendment is a (supposed) right that is not equal for everyone

[Kaleva]

It costs money and for some, it's a right they cannot afford to exercise.

Here is some info from a post I made a few years ago:

"RUGER SP101 .357MAG $395.00


RUGER SP101 holster (Amazon.com) $20.74

Speedloader DBL Pouch with 3 Loaders for .38/357(Ebay) $25.00


Federal Premium .357 Mag ammo $24.00 for a 20 round box

Tula Cartridge Works .357 ammo $18.00 for a 50 round box

PMC .357 ammo $400.00 1000 rounds

MBI .38 Special ammo $290.00 1000 rounds (.38 Special rounds can be fired in a .357 Magnum gun)


NRA Basic Pistol Shooting Course $75.00

NRA Basic Personal Protection In The Home Course (satisfies MI CPL training requirement) $90.00

NRA FIRST Steps Pistol Orientation (satisfies WI CPL training requirement) $100.00

NRA Basics of Personal Protection Outside The Home Course $200.00


MI Concealed Pistol Application fee $105.00

WI Concealed Pistol Application fee $50.00


Range fees
Action Impact Gun Range & Firearms Store in Southfield MI (near Detroit).

Gun range fee $10.00 per 1/2 hour

MI CPL Certification course $99.00

Handgun rental $10.00

The store gives a limited amount of free range time if one purchases a qualifying gun there.


The more experienced here could give some ideas as to how often one should go to a gun range to practice, how long they should be there and about how much ammo one can expect to shoot each time. "

Freedom of speech, from unreasonable searches, the right to a fair and speedy tria, letc. costs nothing.

Can the 2nd Amendment be argued that it is a right equal for all when there are mandated government and also private costs attached to it which thus prevents some from exercising the supposed right?

[uponit7771]

1. I've believed for a long time the 2A is a whites mostly amendment the way its eneacted today

[Kaleva]

2. I was thinking more of an economic divide then a racial one

[spin]

3. I've known a number of blacks here in Florida who legally owned firearms ...

and also had a concealed weapons permit.

I introduced one to the shooting sports and we used go to the range together. Unfortunately he died from diabetes a few years ago.

When he qualified on the range to get his concealed weapons permit the white instructor was so impressed with his skills that he tried to convince him to get into competitive handgun shooting. Unfortunately that was largely impossible because of the number of hours he worked every week.

[Odin2005]

4. The first modern "gun control" legislation was because racists were scared of the Black Panthers.

[Dem2]

6. 2A is in the Constitution in the 1st place in order for southern whites to put down slave revolts

Had almost nothing to do with defending the nation or self defense.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1465114

[jmg257]

8. Well, that and the whole standing army thing. "Enforce the laws, repeal invasions,

And surpress insurrections" worked better with efficient militias trained to arms.

[Dem2]

11. The militias were lazy drunks more likely to shoot their buddies than defend a supposed "invasion"

You should read the linked article. Yes, it's 102 pages, but it's entertaining and enlightening as well.

[hack89]

15. They did pretty well at Bunker Hill

and formed the core of the colonial army. Their performance was why the founding fathers felt comfortable rejecting a large standing army.

[Dem2]

16. Educate yourself

If you would have read the article, you'd see how off-point you are.

[hack89]

17. One revisionist opinion does not eradicate all other opinions

even though it supports your point of view. In Rhode Island we were fighting violent Indian wars as late as 1722 - the militia was not a bunch of drunk slave hunters.

[Dem2]

18. Eh, go take your gun and...

enjoy being on ignore. I deal with enough of your type in my Republican area, I certainly don't need it here.

[Igel]

5. Freedom of the press requires a press.

Or some way of publishing.

Freedom of speech is without price. On the other hand, it's still uneven: If you live in NYC you can stand on a street corner and reach hundreds; live 15 miles SW of Eugene, OR, and you may see 20 cars go by a day. I imagine even if somebody got up on a soapbox in NYC and signed using ASL furiously, few would notice. Some might report him.

Right to a trial is fine; but if you don't have money for bail, you sit and wait. And if you rely on a public defender, well, good luck with that.

I rather enjoyed my right to vote. However, it really depended on having a car. I've lived where polling places weren't on bus lines and you'd have to walk a ways to get to the building. In Los Angeles when I had a bike it was okay. In Eugene, I had a car, so I didn't hardly notice the lack of accessibility to those who were car-challenged. (Yeah, you could bike. In November. In the rain.)

Treat the high cost of gun usage the way you do voting. If you want to vote, you need ID. If you don't have a BC or the right documentation, it can cost you a bit. This is deemed unacceptable hindrance to the pursuit of a right. Some state/local fees could be reduced. Otherwise, you're stuck with expenses just like accessing the free press has expenses: Computer, Internet access, the cost of print media, or of a radio and electricity.

[Kaleva]

14. It costs little to write a letter to a local newpaper editor...

or be interviewed by a reporter. Absentee ballots are provided for those qualified voters who cannot make it to a polling place for various reasons. While a poor person accused of a crime may get a court appointed attorney free of charge, that same person cannot expect to get a gun from the government at no cost.

[sarisataka]

7. So would you agree

that the proposals for prohibitively taxing guns and ammo would only serve to further the divide between rich and poor?

There is much debate on shooting frequency. As often as possible is the stock answer. Competitive shooters will shoot at least weekly, if not daily. Many say shooting a 50 round box once a month is the minimum for proficiency. There are many who own guns more casually however. If a person wishes to have a gun for home defense, I would suggest at minimum 50 rounds, twice a year to maintain familiarity with their defense gun. Monthly if a person plans to carry outside of the home.

[X_Digger]

9. That's concealed carry, not the right to own.

*shrug*

[Kaleva]

12. With every right comes responsibilities

One will have a hard time contributing to the security of a free state if one has no ammo for their gun, doesn't practice shooting on a regular basis and take training courses.

[jmg257]

10. It would be more fair if all people (with certain exemptions) between 18 and

45 were mandated to buy their own arms and serve in their state militias, as was intended.

But the people decided that well regulated militias were NOT the best security, and so 'equal for all' would be just about being able to make your own choice to keep arms.

[ileus]

13. I want that SP101 for 375.....that hardly buys an M&P Shield.

That being said you can buy a personal safety device that's reliable for 189 (Taurus PT111 G2)

But you could be right, maybe everyone should be issued a nice conceal carry firearm.