In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Defense Authorization Act: We Better Wake Up

n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
edited November 2011 in General Discussion
S 1867 the National Defense Authorization Act...A short McCain vs. Rand Paul clip, followed by a must watch 9 minute video of Rand Paul breaking this issue down.

It is coming. What side will you be on?

http://youtu.be/aUHh1iqe43w

http://youtu.be/rghhz_t5POo

Comments

  • airbornerizzairbornerizz Member Posts: 674 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Wasn't there a vote on this today?
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    And they say Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist. He has been saying for years this was comming.
    Youtube clip on the same subject.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3t4wgZCO5M&feature=player_embedded#!
  • tomahawktomahawk Member Posts: 11,826
    edited November -1
    i think you know what side i'm on[;)]
  • scottm21166scottm21166 Member Posts: 20,723
    edited November -1
    If someone is conspiring with AlQuida, they should be waterboarded but habius corpus should apply, as well as the 4th and 5th amendment.
    The government, by any office or authority, should have evidence to support their position and it should convince a judge.
    I still can't believe McCain would sign on to this anti-constitutional crap.
    Now if the "citizen" in question is Muslim, I reserve my judgement on a case by case basis
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by tomahawk
    i think you know what side i'm on[;)]
    Absolutely, tomahawk...always have, always will, Brother.[:)]
  • grumpygygrumpygy Member Posts: 53,466
    edited November -1
    Just posted this on another topic. I found the Bill and find McCains name is not on it. Not that if it was I would be surprised.

    Also found the bill But need somebody to point me to the evil section they are all talking about.

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.1867:
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    There was an Amendment proposed (1107) that would change Section 1031 which relates to 'Covered Person(s)'.
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by lt496
    There was an Amendment proposed (1107) that would change Section 1031 which relates to 'Covered Person(s)'.




    And it failed to be removed on a vote today if my understanding is correct. It stands as written.[V][:(!]
  • KSUmarksmanKSUmarksman Member Posts: 10,705 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I hate to say this about anyone...especially considering my career choice...
    but I hope that the Imperial scum McCain has his cancer come back... I really think he WAS brainwashed by the Vietnamese...or maybe KGB advisors
  • CaptFunCaptFun Member Posts: 16,678 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    PrezBO says he will veto...

    just for what its worth...

    It is an amendment to a Defense Apportionment act. Lots of pork in that.

    Kinda surprised McCain was in on it. 'Bout time for him to go.
  • mlincolnmlincoln Member Posts: 5,039 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by BTDT
    I'm gonna wait til Herman Cain chimes in. [:X]




    He's a little busy dodging dinner plates and rolling pins right now, but he'll get right back to you ASAP.
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    "Guilty!"
    "Why?"
    "We say so"
    "Whats the charge?"
    "We don't know yet, will let ya know."

    traffic_cam_617_347.jpg
  • dongizmodongizmo Member Posts: 14,477 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by CaptFun
    PrezBO says he will veto...

    just for what its worth...

    It is an amendment to a Defense Apportionment act. Lots of pork in that.

    Kinda surprised McCain was in on it. 'Bout time for him to go.

    It's time for most, if not all to go...
    Don
    The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.
  • dongizmodongizmo Member Posts: 14,477 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by FrancF
    "Guilty!"
    "Why?"
    "We say so"
    "Whats the charge?"
    "We don't know yet, will let ya know."

    traffic_cam_617_347.jpg

    You should see the observation camera towers they put up on the
    st clair river border with Canada....
    Don
    The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Border cameras, I don't have a problem with that. But we will have a problem if Citizens of the USA are not allowed due process granted by the constitution.
  • dfletcherdfletcher Member Posts: 8,162 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by FrancF
    Border cameras, I don't have a problem with that. But we will have a problem if Citizens of the USA are not allowed due process granted by the constitution.


    (a) IN GENERAL. Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

    section 1032, subsection (b)(1):
    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

    subsection (b)(2):
    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

    I would however keep an eye on things, governments have tendencies.
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by dfletcher
    quote:Originally posted by FrancF
    Border cameras, I don't have a problem with that. But we will have a problem if Citizens of the USA are not allowed due process granted by the constitution.


    (a) IN GENERAL. Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

    section 1032, subsection (b)(1):
    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

    subsection (b)(2):
    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

    I would however keep an eye on things, governments have tendencies.


    If this is the new text/language/amendment. It did not fly. Keep an eye out.[:)]
  • dongizmodongizmo Member Posts: 14,477 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by dfletcher
    quote:Originally posted by FrancF
    Border cameras, I don't have a problem with that. But we will have a problem if Citizens of the USA are not allowed due process granted by the constitution.


    (a) IN GENERAL. Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

    section 1032, subsection (b)(1):
    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

    subsection (b)(2):
    The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

    I would however keep an eye on things, governments have tendencies.

    This is sec 1032 regarding custody, under 1031 s-1107, they will be able to detain[;)]
    Don
    The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.
Sign In or Register to comment.