Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    10:46 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: First it's our guns, what next? Back to Topics
americanmade1

Champion Author
Tampa

Posts:11,246
Points:1,798,525
Joined:Nov 2009
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2013 8:54:47 AM

I don't know if anyone realizes that after they come for our guns that maybe next it will cars that go over 60 mph or homes that are too big and luxurious... Hmmm...Hmmm...Hmmm...
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
americanmade1
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:11,246
Points:1,798,525
Joined:Nov 2009
Message Posted: Jan 11, 2013 11:49:31 AM

Somehow I'm not shocked... protected by men with GUNS...
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,840
Points:3,037,720
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 11, 2013 11:46:29 AM

Americans who are naturalized citizens and grew up in other countries have very different views, and very strong views, on the Second Amendment:

I Will Not Be Intimidated

Pravda, Guns, and America

And some home-grown wisdom:
The Second Amendment Is Not About Hunting

Meanwhile, while this Administration is undergoing contortions trying to figure out how to circumvent the Constitution and deeply reduce the free ownership of firearms by citizens, we get this:
Obama Signs Bill Giving Him Armed Protection For Life
Hey, he's not stupid. He just thinks we are.
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,031
Points:3,134,185
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 11, 2013 11:11:26 AM

Green, "confiscation", 1,000 weapons and only 2 owners filed suit from one city, that's it? All this happened during the worst hurricane disaster in American history. I might mention that the confiscation was illegal. This is not the policy of the America govt.

Fly, waste, yes but to do nothing is a bigger disaster.

Maho, The 16th Amendment. Do you have a better way to pay the bills? Your gripes about paying taxes are noted.

Has anyone had a gun confiscated? Please get back with me on that one. In the meantime go out and buy another 1,000 rounds of ammo or a new fire arm that you will hardly ever use and tell me how much safer you feel, Lol. Fear mongering works better on weak minds.
imho

Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,639
Points:331,890
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 11:05:24 PM

"The Govt will never confiscate your guns....... Oh really - your real sure about that now are you".

They will never officially confiscate your guns as long as they are allowed to lie about it.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,921
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 2:01:02 PM

::waiting to see complaints about quoting long articles::
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,588
Points:1,857,935
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 1:54:06 PM

gocatgo, >>Maho, nobody likes a dead beat tax payer. You don't get to deduct what you feel you shouldn't have to pay for when it comes to taxes. I think some yahoo libs tried that one during the Vietnam war. You like the idea of subsidizing western Europe's defense, pay your taxes. Are you for subsidizing Big oil, milk, the sugar industry and rich farmers, pay your taxes. You want more new weapons to be able to blow up the world 10 more times, pay your taxes.<<
***
Exactly what are you trying to say?

Here's my post to what I think you're replying, "It [relating to the US Constitution] is already being dismantled. For starters consider:

The Sixteenth Amendment provides the reason for us to fear our government through the us of the IRS. Passed although our original Constitution forbids direct taxation (see Article I, Section 9.4)..."

Your reply dosen't make sense to me. Did you really mean what you said?
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 1:34:51 PM

Not to worry ever - ((((from greentre's link )))))
.
>>>Confiscation of civilian firearms

Controversy arose over a September 8 city-wide order by New Orleans Police Superintendent Eddie Compass to local police, U.S. Army National Guard soldiers, and Deputy U.S. Marshals to confiscate all civilian-held firearms. "No one will be able to be armed," Compass said. "Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns." Seizures were carried out without warrant, and in some cases with excessive force; one instance captured on film involved 58 year old New Orleans resident Patricia Konie. Konie stayed behind, in her well provisioned home, and had an old revolver for protection. A group of police entered the house, and when she refused to surrender her revolver, she was tackled and it was removed by force. Konie's shoulder was fractured, and she was taken into police custody for failing to surrender her firearm.[79][80] Even U.S. Army National Guard soldiers, armed with M16 assault rifles, were used for house to house searches, seizing firearms and attempting to get those remaining in the city to leave.[81]

Angered citizens, backed by the National Rifle Association and other organizations, filed protests over the constitutionality of such an order and the difficulty in tracking seizures, as paperwork was rarely filed during the searches. Wayne LaPierre, CEO of the National Rifle Association, defended the right of affected citizens to retain firearms, saying that, "What we’ve seen in Louisiana - the breakdown of law and order in the aftermath of disaster - is exactly the kind of situation where the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to protect themselves." The searches received little news coverage, though reaction from groups such as the NRA, the Second Amendment Foundation, and Gun Owners of America was immediate and heated, and a lawsuit was filed September 22 by the NRA and SAF on behalf of two firearm owners whose firearms were seized. On September 23, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana issued a restraining order to bar further firearms confiscations.[79]

After refusing to admit that it had any seized firearms, the city revealed in mid-March that it did have a cache of some 1000 firearms seized after the hurricane; this disclosure came after the NRA filed a motion in court to hold the city in contempt for failure to comply with the U.S. District Court's earlier order to return all seized firearms. On April 14, 2006, it was announced that the city will begin to return seized firearms, however as of early 2008, many firearms were still in police possession, and the matter was still in court.[79] The matter was finally settled in favor of the NRA in October 2008. Per the agreement, the city was required to relax the strict proof of ownership requirements previously used, and was to release firearms to their owners with an affidavit claiming ownership and a background check to verify that the owner is legally able to possess a firearm.[82]<<<

The Govt will never confiscate your guns....... Oh really - your real sure about that now are you.

.
.
.
Then we have more evidence of just how much we need to rely on the benevolent actions of the friendly gubbiment - again from the linked article
.
>>>Federal Emergency Management Agency

The Federal Emergency Management Agency was heavily criticized in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, primarily for its slow response and inability to coordinate its efforts with other federal agencies relief organizations. Chicago Mayor Richard Daley (D) said of the slow Federal response, "I was shocked. We are ready to provide considerably more help than they have requested. We are just waiting for the call. I don't want to sit here and all of a sudden we are all going to be political. Just get it done."[32]

FEMA was accused of deliberately slowing things down, in an effort to ensure that all assistance and relief workers were coordinated properly. For example, Michael D. Brown, the head of FEMA, on August 29, urged all fire and emergency services departments not to respond to counties and states affected by Hurricane Katrina without being requested and lawfully dispatched by state and local authorities under mutual aid agreements and the Emergency Management Assistance Compact.[33]

FEMA also interfered in the Astor Hotel's' plans to hire 10 buses to carry approximately 500 guests to higher ground. Federal officials commandeered the buses, and told the guests to join thousands of other evacuees at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center.[34] In other instances of FEMA asserting its authority to only ultimately make things worse, FEMA officials turned away three Wal-Mart trailer trucks loaded with water, prevented the Coast Guard from delivering 1,000 gallons of diesel fuel, and on Saturday they cut the Jefferson Parish emergency communications line, leading the sheriff to restore it and post armed guards to protect it from FEMA.[35] The Wal-Mart delivery had actually been turned away a week earlier, on Sunday, August 28, before the hurricane struck. A caravan of 13 Wal-Mart tractor trailers was reported in New Orleans by September 1.[36] Additionally, more than 50 civilian aircraft responding to separate requests for evacuations from hospitals and other agencies swarmed to the area a day after Katrina hit, but FEMA blocked their efforts. Aircraft operators complained that FEMA waved off a number of evacuation attempts, saying the rescuers were not authorized. "Many planes and helicopters simply sat idle," said Thomas Judge, president of the Assn. of Air Medical Services.[37]

Senator Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana), was particularly critical of FEMA's efforts in a statement: "[T]he U.S. Forest Service had water-tanker aircraft available to help douse the fires raging on our riverfront, but FEMA has yet to accept the aid. When Amtrak offered trains to evacuate significant numbers of victims—far more efficiently than buses—FEMA again dragged its feet. Offers of medicine, communications equipment and other desperately needed items continue to flow in, only to be ignored by the agency. But perhaps the greatest disappointment stands at the breached 17th Street levee. Touring this critical site yesterday with the President, I saw what I believed to be a real and significant effort to get a handle on a major cause of this catastrophe. Flying over this critical spot again this morning, less than 24 hours later, it became apparent that yesterday we witnessed a hastily prepared stage set for a Presidential photo opportunity; and the desperately needed resources we saw were this morning reduced to a single, lonely piece of equipment. The good and decent people of southeast Louisiana and the Gulf Coast—black and white, rich and poor, young and old—deserve far better from their national government."[38] However, Landrieu's overflight was of the end of the single-lane roadway being built toward the breach. The "single, lonely piece of equipment" was one power shovel, a bulldozer, and two dump trucks. Video did not show the work area a few hundred feet away at the start of the roadway. USACE photos show a variety of equipment at that site the following day.[citation needed]

The New York Times reported that 91,000 tons of ice ordered by FEMA at a cost of over $100 million and intended for hospitals and food storage for relief efforts never made it to the disaster area. Federally contracted truck drivers instead received orders from FEMA to deliver the ice to government rented storage facilities around the country, as far north as Maine. In testimony to a House panel, FEMA director Michael D. Brown stated that "I don't think that's a federal government responsibility to provide ice to keep my hamburger meat in my freezer or refrigerator fresh."[39]

In a September 15, 2005 New York Times opinion column about the privately owned Methodist Hospital in New Orleans, Bob Herbert wrote, "Incredibly, when the out-of-state corporate owners of the hospital responded to the flooding by sending emergency relief supplies, they were confiscated at the airport by FEMA."[40]<<<<

NOT to worry about anything - da gubbiment is here to help you....
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 1:21:06 PM

Gocat - Please read again this portion of the constitution.
.
>>>Article. V.

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.<<<

It takes a 66.6% vote by both houses of Congress adn then a 75% acceptance/ratification by the 'legislatures' of the states to amend the Constitution. Unless you want to have a new convention where we start from scratch and do a whole new document then have 75% of the states legislatures ratify that.

Profile Pic
greentre
Champion Author Pensacola

Posts:1,286
Points:414,805
Joined:Oct 2011
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 12:53:17 PM

"Lastly has anyone heard of a gun recently confiscated from a citizen of the US by a federal or state govt official?"

Not to rain on your parade, but:
Confiscation, US Guns

Controversy arose over a September 8 city-wide order by New Orleans Police Superintendent Eddie Compass to local police, U.S. Army National Guard soldiers, and Deputy U.S. Marshals to confiscate all civilian-held firearms. "No one will be able to be armed," Compass said. "Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns." Seizures were carried out without warrant...

[Edited by: greentre at 1/10/2013 12:55:49 PM EST]
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,031
Points:3,134,185
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 12:19:38 PM

rab, all this talk about changing the Constitution to take away your rights and it still takes a 3/4 majority of congress to do so.

Maho, nobody likes a dead beat tax payer. You don't get to deduct what you feel you shouldn't have to pay for when it comes to taxes. I think some yahoo libs tried that one during the Vietnam war. You like the idea of subsidizing western Europe's defense, pay your taxes. Are you for subsidizing Big oil, milk, the sugar industry and rich farmers, pay your taxes. You want more new weapons to be able to blow up the world 10 more times, pay your taxes.

Lastly has anyone heard of a gun recently confiscated from a citizen of the US by a federal or state govt official? I think we all know the answer to that one. Criminals on the other hand should keep a low profile.
Profile Pic
Guitar_Man
Champion Author Colorado Springs

Posts:8,790
Points:131,570
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 6:58:42 AM

We can just open our eyes and realize our freedoms and liberties in America have been eroding for decades, now.

Look at your driveway...do we realize how many government regulations are imposed on what we can and can't drive? Ever heard of the CAFE standards? This was well-intended to help get America away from having to use so much foreign oil by imposing volumes of government regulations on vehicles. The results have been tens of thousands of deaths in automobile accidents due to cars that aren't as rugged as they used to be. Did that change the standards? Nope....future CAFE standards are even more hazardous because metals will have to be even more lighter to get the MPG's down to code.

Want to build a house? Oh man, you're looking at a library of government regulations and rules and laws and permits and inspections.

Well food is safe, right? I'm free to eat and drink what I want, right? Ha! We have mayors now limiting salt and the size of our beverages! (How absolutely INSANE is that??)

The larger the government is, the more power it has...and those powers come only when freedoms and liberties are taken away from the people. (Nations with big, powerful governments are always accompanied with people who live under crushing regulations, massive taxes, and very few liberties and freedoms.)

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." --Samuel Adams

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." --Benjamin Franklin

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" --Benjamin Franklin

Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,001
Points:3,322,010
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 4:19:45 AM

The constitution is slowly being dismantled by Obumer.
Profile Pic
RockCity
Champion Author Denver

Posts:10,701
Points:2,024,740
Joined:Mar 2009
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 3:03:53 AM

If they come for the goofs, that would be a nice start, perhaps.
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,639
Points:331,890
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jan 10, 2013 1:58:24 AM

After the 2nd amendment is dismantled they will go after the 1st amendment and then I believe they will fall in the order of 4th, 5th, 6th, 9th, 10th 7th, 8th and lastly the 3rd amendment.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,588
Points:1,857,935
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 3:02:06 PM

Snowchoux, >>the constitution will be the next to go. And Obomouth will attempt to make himself a god that runs the country.<<
***
It is already being dismantled. For starters consider:

The Sixteenth Amendment provides the reason for us to fear our government through the us of the IRS. Passed although our original Constitution forbids direct taxation (see Article I, Section 9.4)

The Seventeenth Amendment usurped most of the individual States rights.

The US Supreme Court considers the right to vote as a privilege in spite of Amendments XV and XIX.

Profile Pic
jdhelm
Champion Author Iowa

Posts:16,073
Points:1,792,415
Joined:Dec 2009
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 2:08:34 PM

I personally know this guy and voted for him, no longer tho, he needs to recant his words, imo.
Profile Pic
Snowchoux
Champion Author Missouri

Posts:1,003
Points:145,635
Joined:Sep 2012
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 12:11:48 PM

the constitution will be the next to go. And Obomouth will attempt to make himself a god that runs the country.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 10:26:51 AM

Thanks SGM. While I find we dont always agree on a lot of the externalities of things it is refreshing to see that once again we do agree on the basic and important stuff.

Scary aint it - that some eastern type (more or less liberal) person and some raspy ol crot in the red hills of Utah can agree...
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,588
Points:1,857,935
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 10:14:12 AM

sgm4law, >>Various parameters of the rights described in the Constitution can be altered. Various groups can be added or removed from those eligible to exercise a right. (e.g., now blacks can vote, women can vote, 18-20 year olds can vote).<<
***
While Article I, Section 8.18 does give authority "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." the laws must be within the confines of the powers granted in Article I, Section 8 and the PROHIBITIONS in Article I Section 9, and other Amendments.

What about rights that are specifically prohibited from being infringed? (See Second Amendment)

What about rights that are specifically mentioned? (See the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and then compare it to what happens at airports and what the FBI can do regarding search warrants and to the use of drones to attack an American on foreign soil.)

What about rights that are considered privileges by the US Supreme Court?

There is no right to vote, only the privilege exists according to the US Supreme Court
_______
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,073
Points:2,981,920
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 8:40:26 AM

"Fly, I disagree. Voting at 18 was not a right until the 70's. The 26th Amendment gave us those rights. The Constitution now gives all eligible 18 year olds the right to vote."

I think it is actually fly who is in the right here. The Constitution was written to place boundaries on what the federal government can do to govern a country whose citizens brought the government into existence. The people's use of the right to vote is the reason there can be a federal government in the first place.

Various parameters of the rights described in the Constitution can be altered. Various groups can be added or removed from those eligible to exercise a right. (e.g., now blacks can vote, women can vote, 18-20 year olds can vote).

The 26th Amendment extended the right to vote because people who were older than 20 allowed their representative government to do so. It was not a royal grant by some sovereign.



[Edited by: sgm4law at 1/9/2013 8:41:12 AM EST]
Profile Pic
worryfree
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:27,241
Points:2,412,775
Joined:Oct 2005
Message Posted: Jan 9, 2013 12:25:13 AM

Rest assured one thing that will never be taken away will be your God given right to stupidity. Or your right to watch and parrot FAUX news.(not addressing this to you Fly!)

[Edited by: worryfree at 1/9/2013 12:26:48 AM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 10:15:15 PM

Jay - once more I disagree ---

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Read it - it again specifies what rights the government cannot deny or abridge. It does not say the government 'gives' peopel the right to vote at a certain age. It says they cannot be stopped by the government from exercising the right to vote.

Big difference to me my friend!

Then we have the flavor of this
.
>>>Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.text deleted

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.<<<

Note where it says powers not specifically given to the govt by the people are reserved by the people. Note also that just because we make a point of specifying certain rights (that predated the govt and could not be touched by the govt) that were felt to be really important did not mean that those were the only rights we had. Not given from the govt but the govt could not take them away.

Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,719
Points:2,202,140
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 7:55:06 PM

Fly, I disagree. Voting at 18 was not a right until the 70's. The 26th Amendment gave us those rights. The Constitution now gives all eligible 18 year olds the right to vote.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,921
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 7:50:56 PM

"The call for a bill of rights had been the anti-Federalists' most powerful weapon. Attacking the proposed Constitution for its vagueness and lack of specific protection against tyranny, Patrick Henry asked the Virginia convention, "What can avail your specious, imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances." The anti-Federalists, demanding a more concise, unequivocal Constitution, one that laid out for all to see the right of the people and limitations of the power of government, claimed that the brevity of the document only revealed its inferior nature. Richard Henry Lee despaired at the lack of provisions to protect "those essential rights of mankind without which liberty cannot exist." Trading the old government for the new without such a bill of rights, Lee argued, would be trading Scylla for Charybdis.

A bill of rights had been barely mentioned in the Philadelphia convention, most delegates holding that the fundamental rights of individuals had been secured in the state constitutions. James Wilson maintained that a bill of rights was superfluous because all power not expressly delegated to thenew government was reserved to the people. It was clear, however, that in this argument the anti-Federalists held the upper hand. Even Thomas Jefferson, generally in favor of the new government, wrote to Madison that a bill of rights was "what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

By the fall of 1788 Madison had been convinced that not only was a bill of rights necessary to ensure acceptance of the Constitution but that it would have positive effects. He wrote, on October 17, that such "fundamental maxims of free Government" would be "a good ground for an appeal to the sense of community" against potential oppression and would "counteract the impulses of interest and passion."

Madison's support of the bill of rights was of critical significance. One of the new representatives from Virginia to the First Federal Congress, as established by the new Constitution, he worked tirelessly to persuade the House to enact amendments. Defusing the anti-Federalists' objections to the Constitution, Madison was able to shepherd through 17 amendments in the early months of the Congress, a list that was later trimmed to 12 in the Senate. On October 2, 1789, President Washington sent to each of the states a copy of the 12 amendments adopted by the Congress in September. By December 15, 1791, three-fourths of the states had ratified the 10 amendments now so familiar to Americans as the "Bill of Rights."

Benjamin Franklin told a French correspondent in 1788 that the formation of the new government had been like a game of dice, with many players of diverse prejudices and interests unable to make any uncontested moves. Madison wrote to Jefferson that the welding of these clashing interests was "a task more difficult than can be well conceived by those who were not concerned in the execution of it." When the delegates left Philadelphia after the convention, few, if any, were convinced that the Constitution they had approved outlined the ideal form of government for the country. But late in his life James Madison scrawled out another letter, one never addressed. In it he declared that no government can be perfect, and "that which is the least imperfect is therefore the best government."


Constitution history
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 7:46:31 PM

Jay - you typed - "The Constitution gives us those rights."

I disagree strongly. The Constitution does not 'give us rights'. The Constitution says what rights we already have that the Government cannot take away or infringe on or shall make no law on.

That is - the purpose of naming them within the Constitution or its amendments - is to flat out state where the limits of the federal government are. The specific naming of some is to emphasize that they are to be left alone or are not subject to the govts meddling.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,921
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 7:35:48 PM

Math challenged... 2 > 1.

Borderline or mainstream?



"It may seem reasonable that, in writing the Bill of Rights, the Founders completed the First Amendment, and realized that a tyrant or despot could in fact steal it away. In response, they wrote the Second Amendment"

Great fairy tale.


[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 1/8/2013 7:40:29 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,719
Points:2,202,140
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 6:35:56 PM

Where does it say "god given right" in the Constitution? The Constitution gives us those rights.

[Edited by: jayrad1957 at 1/8/2013 6:37:35 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RAB2010
All-Star Author Kalamazoo

Posts:649
Points:77,710
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 6:32:48 PM

1. Your God-given right to self-defense (Amendment 2).
2. Your God-given right to freedom of speech (Amendment 1).
3. Your God-given right to freedom of association (Amendment 1).
4. Your God-given right to freedom of religion (Amendment 1).

In other words, they have been unsuccessful in taking away your First Amendment rights; in order to complete the task, they must eliminate your Second Amendment rights.

It may seem reasonable that, in writing the Bill of Rights, the Founders completed the First Amendment, and realized that a tyrant or despot could in fact steal it away. In response, they wrote the Second Amendment.

As with the Founders, we now face a choice: Liberty or Death. It's a hell of a pickle they have put you in, isn't it?
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 6:27:33 PM

Marty do you see what I mean about those 'borderline unstables'??????

That guy has a screw loose. Speaking of screw loose - is he tied in with that Mother Jones thing?

Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,921
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 6:02:25 PM

Alex Jones Foams at the Mouth to Piers Morgan over Gun Control

For your listening amusement.

Caution: Raise your splatter shields
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 5:44:34 PM

Jay - you got me for sure in a mistake. That quote was from Gocatgo. Sorry bout that friend. Sometimes my (more or less left) leaning friends get mixed up in my typing fingers.

But gocat or Jay my feeling is similar. The idea of a law abiding people being uncomfortable to have their personal information in a database is distateful. The actions of a far left leaning newspaper just reinforces this idea.

There are many valid reasons tha the govt should not have this information and above all should not give it out for political purposes.

As I said or implied -- The threat of misuse of this information will cause the very borderline unstable people to go underground. The law abiding person who never is a problem will be the one who is castigated and punished.
Profile Pic
greentre
Champion Author Pensacola

Posts:1,286
Points:414,805
Joined:Oct 2011
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 5:18:39 PM

Thank you I75at7am for the BOA article. You won't see that in the mainstream media. I was about to reauthorize my direct deposit from work to BOA; not now. They have done several things against their customers in the past and now I think it is time for them to get a lesson in economics.
Profile Pic
jayrad1957
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:24,719
Points:2,202,140
Joined:Nov 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 5:08:28 PM

Fly, I haven't posted in this thread until now. You have me mixed up with someone else.
Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 5:04:39 PM

Gun Control begins with taking guns away from violent criminals, those who would like to use guns to force you to do their will, and those who will use them to eliminate political opposition when enough people lack guns to stop them.

On the other side of the coin, gun control means not missing those gun controllers when they earned the designation of target.
Profile Pic
Edger
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:41,909
Points:2,705,235
Joined:Apr 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 4:52:22 PM

Good point on BoA.
I just cancelled that cc account.
I won't miss them and they won't miss me.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,921
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 4:41:59 PM

"Speakes the one who wants to abolish the 2nd amendment..."

Thank you. That gives me hope that the abolition of the Second Amendment may actually happen, being that you and others are so concerned about it.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,838
Points:1,831,435
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 4:36:53 PM

"Afs, good luck in the deer stand. If anyone tries to take your rifle please contact the ACLU."

Thanks...unfortunately the ACLU has joined the list of organizations that supports gun control.

"I'm finding more and more gun owners in my group agreeing with that point. If you need more than a 10 round magazine to make a group of 3 in a quarter size circle you should get help from your fellow shooters. That is exactly what I did when I started shooting after retirement."

Here is where I am on gun rights. Something needs to be done about the violence, no doubt about it. Is the answer banning guns, making it harder to get guns, actually enforcing laws we currently have, smaller magazines, etc, etc...the answer? I do not know! I wish I had an answer but the one thing I do know is if we go down some roads the only people that will suffer are the ones of us that have legally purchased and owned our guns.

BTW, speaking of the ACLU...what do you all think their reaction will be to if we have forced mental evaluations and forced people into in-patient care because of irrational behavior?
Profile Pic
sissurf
Champion Author Virginia Beach

Posts:24,611
Points:2,255,080
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 4:31:26 PM



"I don't know if anyone realizes that after they come for our guns that maybe next it will cars that go over 60 mph or homes that are too big and luxurious... Hmmm...Hmmm...Hmmm..."

I've heard a little something about how there will be a special tax of some sort on cars that get great mileage. Now isn't that a kicker?! Now who's stupid idea was that?!!!!



[Edited by: sissurf at 1/8/2013 4:33:17 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 4:22:53 PM

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!!" ---

Speakes the one who wants to abolish the 2nd amendment...
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:21,921
Points:322,465
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 3:14:21 PM

"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!!"
Profile Pic
americanmade1
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:11,246
Points:1,798,525
Joined:Nov 2009
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 2:46:22 PM

There is REAL GUN CONTROL IN Chicago AND THE HIGHEST CRIME RATE THERE too....
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,172
Points:1,523,695
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 1:28:08 PM

Jay you said - "Unless you are a convicted felon you have nothing to worry about." How about you explain just how that works to the folks in NY where the paper just published who asked for a permit to have a handgun.

All this noise and attempts to 'clamp down' on guns is going to have the real effect of driving them underground - just the exact opposite of what the prog/libs say they want.

Someday people will think of unintended consequences --- BEFORE they do something dumb.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:73,840
Points:3,037,720
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 12:46:27 PM

First......
....next?
Bank of America Freezes Gun Manufacturer's Account

In a Facebook post dated December 29, Sirochman wrote the following:

“My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms...our Web site orders have jumped 500 percent causing our Web site e-commerce processing larger deposits to Bank of America. So they decided to hold the deposits for further review.

“After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review -- her exact words were -- ‘We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.’”

I'm sure glad we live in the United States of America, with protections guaranteed by the Constitution, and all laws must be made by Congress and signed by the President in order to take effect.

Who cares what Bank of America believes?

Does anyone still do business with that bank? Other than all the illegal aliens that they give credit cards to?
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,257
Points:3,727,300
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 12:25:09 PM

A1, the rumor is that super chunky peanut butter is next on the list.
Profile Pic
MahopacJack
Champion Author New York

Posts:9,588
Points:1,857,935
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 12:20:32 PM

americanmade1, >>I don't know if anyone realizes that after they come for our guns that maybe next it will cars that go over 60 mph or homes that are too big and luxurious... Hmmm...Hmmm...Hmmm...<<
***
You're about 100 years late.

They've already put themselves in position to take away ALL OF OUR FREEDOM with the Sixteenth Amendment. Should the IRS ever charge anyone with tax evasion, Citizens are GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT.

From 1913, its been downhill since.


[Edited by: MahopacJack at 1/8/2013 12:22:34 PM EST]
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,031
Points:3,134,185
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 11:15:32 AM

Amer, "Diane Finestein has a bill". The chance of getting any bill through congress these days is slim and none. You are not a convicted felon so I fail to see your concern. Btw who exactly told you someone was coming to get your guns?

Pop, "the guys with tin hats". Have you ever been exposed to these people before? I sure have and yes they live among us.

Afs, good luck in the deer stand. If anyone tries to take your rifle please contact the ACLU.

Jd, first I am an armed citizen. I got the chance to fire military weapons in the army. Most military weapons should stay in the military. Nearly all semi auto weapons should be legal. Magazine sizes are a different story which should be limited to 10. I'm finding more and more gun owners in my group agreeing with that point. If you need more than a 10 round magazine to make a group of 3 in a quarter size circle you should get help from your fellow shooters. That is exactly what I did when I started shooting after retirement.
Profile Pic
AFSNCO
Champion Author Montgomery

Posts:19,838
Points:1,831,435
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 10:28:57 AM

Actually americanmade...it was French Fries first up in NYC... :-)

Smile...it is my Friday as I am ready to hit the deer stand for the rest of the week!
Profile Pic
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,531
Points:1,522,065
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Jan 8, 2013 9:20:18 AM

""I have heard these same concerns from people that believe the govt reads their mail and listens to their phone calls. Many of these people are referred to as paranoid schizoid. Worrying about something that has not happened can cause a lot of needless anguish.""

So its the guys wearing tin foil hats being paranoid????
Profile Pic
americanmade1
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:11,246
Points:1,798,525
Joined:Nov 2009
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2013 11:21:34 AM

I'm NOT a convicted felon, but the GOV'T. wants to take EVERYONES GUNS EXCEPT THEIRS, for protection of oDumbo and his kronies, diane finestine has a bill to do just that, oh did I forget to mention that she carries a concealed weapon? Oh that's ok cause she's and oDumbo-ite...
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:19,031
Points:3,134,185
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Jan 7, 2013 10:38:03 AM

amer, "after they come for our guns". Who is the "they" and under what authority will "they come for our guns". Unless you are a convicted felon you have nothing to worry about.

I have heard these same concerns from people that believe the govt reads their mail and listens to their phone calls. Many of these people are referred to as paranoid schizoid. Worrying about something that has not happened can cause a lot of needless anguish.

Post a reply Back to Topics