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.
quote:anyone that has knowledge of ruby ridge, waco, texas church group or has seen swat teams take out targets knows that civilians cannot resist govt action...civil rights have to be protected by political action beforehand or it is generally to late...check out some points of the patriot act...........
How does it feel to be a shill for the government ?
quote:Originally posted by quickmajik
what do you think would happen if we were?
Nothing in your lifetime, or mine. Crime would rise slightly, but that's about it. Most gun owners are unarmed already. Some would * and moan, some would find some other hobbies, most wouldn't do anything. And, it's just a matter of time, again, maybe not our lifetimes.
I do agree that most gun owners will bend over, after dropping their pants. They seem to enjoy being buggered by the Beast.
However...ALLL will not...and enough will not submit so that the dead beat shirker New American will have his bacon pulled out of the fire...yet again.
Perhaps THIS time we will flat out forbid those who will not defend freedom to possess arms.
ONLY supporters of the Second ought to be armed, perhaps...so as to never again confuse the issue with weak, cowardly Quislings willing to trade everything for security.
I admire the way you and Lt string words together...you are able to appeal to 'civilized folk'.
Me...I just slap 'em upside the head and trust that shakes the cobwebs loose.
Certainly has made for an interesting life. Most folks take it personal...and want to kick my az.
Even happened..now and again. [:D][:0]
Me...I just slap 'em upside the head and trust that shakes the cobwebs loose.
Certainly has made for an interesting life. Most folks take it personal...and want to kick my az.
Even happened..now and again.
I'd be willing to bet that you're quite capable of "giving" too.[:D]
Same here. If we have a busy shift at work, when I get up in the morning, the reality of not being 18 anymore hits me square in the face; and neck, and arms, and back, and legs...........
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Firedude;
Pot calling the kettle black ? [:D]
I admire the way you and Lt string words together...you are able to appeal to 'civilized folk'.
Me...I just slap 'em upside the head and trust that shakes the cobwebs loose.
Certainly has made for an interesting life. Most folks take it personal...and want to kick my az.
Even happened..now and again. [:D][:0]
Smooth words are overrated at times HB. Ws and I can do okay in that respect, but you can too, if so inclined.
Once in awhile, nothing is better to get a point across than a swift kick in the nuts.
When I choose to deliver a swift kick, it isn't near as brutal as yours.
Like I have said before, it is a beautiful thing to see.[:D]
You deliver those like few others that I have seen.[;)]
Well, gentlemen...between us all...we perhaps will sift the wheat from the chaff.
After a few years on the net...I begin to believe that long posts were not being read. I set out to "keep it simple, stupid". Since I already was long tired of the lengthy arguments over gun Rights that I engaged in every day..it was a small step to "short and ugly".
Generally had upwards of a dozen men engaged in these arguments...and mostly they supported gun controls.
At least...at first......
After 12-15 years, management basically forbade discussions about anything meaningful..and I realized that it was time to leave the job.
quote:Originally posted by wsfiredude
Agreed 100%.
Oftentimes there is no substitute for the cold hard truth delivered in a straight-forward, blunt, and unambiguous manner.
Oftentimes yes, but in my time I've learned that short and blunt will get you about as far as leader as it will with a cheerleader, in some cases, especially communication. Long and smooth runs in my family and I have talked way more flies down with honey, I have made more friends with that mode of being as well.
Fighting is a different story, so is living, but this is isnt that, I want people to think, not get pissed and wallow and stew in some bass emotion while they should be stimulating that grey mush between their ears.
On warfare
-If you dont have atleast three contingency plans in most situations you are probably already screwed.
"About as far as leader", 'cheerleader. ect...'
Well, feller...you certainly nailed the average gun owner to the wall..because the average gun owner is all fluff flitter...just like the cheerleader you mentioned.
Your mistake is in assuming that I have the slightest interest in that guy.
I wish to discuss serious issues with MEN.
You also would be wrong...I have never wished to be a 'leader'. Wiping azes and drying runny noses has no place in my life.
However..I have confidence that out there is a man that IS a leader...and if ONE thing I say causes him to take hold and do what must be done .. my job on the soapbox is finished.
Now back to those 'men' I speak to on a regular basis; Those guys DO have the 'communication skills' that I lack.. or refuse any longer to exercise.
Just by being brutally frank and blunt.. I can get points across that otherwise would take pages to elucidate.
These men I am speaking about are intelligent .. they have no need of me filling in the blanks, normally.
I am telling them nothing they don't already know...but may be presenting it in just enough different light that they take the tiny seed planted and then they run with it.
EXACTLY as I do...from things THEY say.
They take some of mine, some of theirs, some of the next guy . things not normally available locally...and are putting those ideas into that presentation you so desperately desire..smooth, flowing, SEAMLESS...irrefutable by the garbage facing us.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Most gun owners are unarmed unmanned already.
be it as it may, semantics. What I meant to say is that most have given up on their _right_ and see gun ownership as a permit, but we all know it and agree on it, so no point reiterating over it.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
However...ALLL will not...and enough will not submit so that the dead beat shirker New American will have his bacon pulled out of the fire...yet again.
Perhaps THIS time we will flat out forbid those who will not defend freedom to possess arms.
ONLY supporters of the Second ought to be armed, perhaps...so as to never again confuse the issue with weak, cowardly Quislings willing to trade everything for security.
It's a good sentiment. What this country needs is a redefinition of citizenship and voting privileges. Don't see any other way to turn things back to "normal" (original) state.
quote:be it as it may, semantics.
No, I don't think it is merely semantics.
An unarmed 'Man' is still dangerous, if he must be..
We live in a nation of armed people that are helpless...unless authorized to use those weapons by the government.
The average 'man' today is only dangerous if you get between him and the tv...or scratch his car.
Rather pathetic.
A test for citizenship would not be out of the question, were we ever to have the chance to actually affect change here.
What is going to be the catalyst for change? Is it going to take something big to wake the rest of America up to the fact that we've allowed our rights to be eroded? IMO, I think it will.
Most of this country has growth apathetic towards almost everything. They expect the government to do more and more, they abdicate their responsibilty for their own lives, and demand that the government handle that which they wish to not devote thought to dealing with. Health care, parenting, education - you name it, they would rather run up their credit cards, or borrow what they can't afford to live a lifestyle they don't deserve, then they expect to be bailed out when failing to excercise proper judgement in their lives. This has gone on for FAR too long, and it has given those who are supposedly there to serve an over-inflated ego and now feel it is THEY who should be served.
Call it the nanny state, big brother or what have you, but I believe they see themselves as little kings running their fiefdoms collecting taxes, granting privileges and trampling on the serfs in order to appease their own appetites. The corruption is so deep you will more than likely find it's poisonous, seductive roots have wound their way down deep into every political office down to the smallest town mayor or city council.
It's going to get worse before it gets better, they will want to have control over more and more of what happens in our lives. And to gain that control, they will have to remove any ability that remains of resistance to their agenda. This is why they have been pushing their gun control agendas for so long. Our founding fathers referred to arms as the peoples liberty teeth, and that the beauty of the second amendment is that it won't be necessary until they try to do away with it. They wish to sweep it all away "for the greater good" they'd say, for "safety and security" they'd say. I for one see through The Great Lie, and will not lay back in the chair and let them pull my teeth "just to be safe" in case I might bite someone or myself.
What would you say if I told you that your thoughts arent just speculations and assumtions. Rather that you are indeed spot on and that you are in opposition to the beast that is within and without. wether you want too be or not. You can not unsee things once they have been seen.
Most of this country has growth apathetic towards almost everything.
Very true. However, most of this country has always been apathetic to start with, most of any country is apathetic. And that is not a bad thing, I'd rather have most of the country apathetic than openly propagating opposition to freedom. The other issue is that what constitutes "most" now, is while living in this country has nothing to do with it -- at least a quarter are immigrants unwilling to accept the values of this country and assimilate. Include their offspring -- and you got 80 million registered dems. All runs in their families too, and almost never breaks out of the cycle, however, if a few brave men were to change the whole situation, at least they wouldn't resist.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
quote:be it as it may, semantics.
No, I don't think it is merely semantics.
An unarmed 'Man' is still dangerous, if he must be..
We live in a nation of armed people that are helpless...unless authorized to use those weapons by the government.
The average 'man' today is only dangerous if you get between him and the tv...or scratch his car.
Rather pathetic.
Agreed.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
A test for citizenship would not be out of the question, were we ever to have the chance to actually affect change here.
I was speaking in Heinlein's terms, test would have to be a personal sacrifice, nothing academic. Just imagine the change it would've made, but it opens doors to a other abuses. My personal opinion is that humans just have to go through periods of readjustments and there will never be a close to perfect formula, just wonder how long 'til ours...
Everything is futile in the end. Life has always been and still is a struggle until death. Everthing here fails to entropy in time, nothing gold can stay. The question is, are we well passed our half life and succomed too that inevitable point yet? Or is this simply another recession in our time so that the struggle can begin anew? That is a greater question then I can answer, but there is one thing you can count on, time will tell. Also, we have wasted more potential in centuries then our predecessors wasted in eions.
I live in Canada. I wish my constitution said that I had the right to bear arms because I do not have this right. I have the permission to have a firearm and this permission has many limitations.
Have people become less violent because they do not have firearms? The answer is no.
Will I become more violent if I have a firearm or more firearms? The answer is no.
quote:Originally posted by Dabluz
I live in Canada. I wish my constitution said that I had the right to bear arms because I do not have this right. I have the permission to have a firearm and this permission has many limitations.
Have people become less violent because they do not have firearms? The answer is no.
Will I become more violent if I have a firearm or more firearms? The answer is no.
You're wrong on one count. Your government may not recognize it, but you HAVE a right to be armed, it's a natural right, our constitution does not grant us the right, what it does is recognize that right exists and is not to be infringed by government. Not that this gets in the way of government running roughshod over our liberties. But I digress. Just because you live in Canada doesn't mean you have no right to be armed, it mereely shows your government does not trust you in the excercise of said rights. Which in turn indicates to me that your government should not be trusted.
Sorry, but there is nothing in our bill of rights or our constitution that explictly states that anyone in Canada has the right to own a firearm. Only the native indians have this right.
Owning a firearm in Canada is a privilege. Yes, in Canada you have the right to own a car. Any one in Canada can own a car....even a 1 month old baby or a convict. But owning a firearm is a privilege. You must prove that you merit this privilege. You must take a course and pass an exam and then get a series of signatures from people of good standing that also state that you merit a firearm.
I know this because I worked for the police for 11 years and I was an instructor in gun safety (obligatory course for obtention of a permission to own a firearm).
Native indians do not have to attend any courses or pass an exam.
quote:Originally posted by Dabluz
Sorry, but there is nothing in our bill of rights or our constitution that explictly states that anyone in Canada has the right to own a firearm. Only the native indians have this right.
Owning a firearm in Canada is a privilege. Yes, in Canada you have the right to own a car. Any one in Canada can own a car....even a 1 month old baby or a convict. But owning a firearm is a privilege. You must prove that you merit this privilege. You must take a course and pass an exam and then get a series of signatures from people of good standing that also state that you merit a firearm.
I know this because I worked for the police for 11 years and I was an instructor in gun safety (obligatory course for obtention of a permission to own a firearm).
Native indians do not have to attend any courses or pass an exam.
Governments do not grant rights - they are something you already possess. That they do not allow you to excercise your right I understand, but I also understand that the concept of inalienable rights may be difficult for people to understand as many are still under the illusion that "the government" grants us "rights". This is how they keep us in control, by fooling the masses into believing in the benevolence of governments granting rights to its populace, not the other way around.
There was a time when owning a firearm in Canada was a right. Even a baby could own a firearm though being able to use it and having the permission to use it had limitations. This was also due to the fact that people under the age of 16 to 21 at that time were not considered to be full citizens.
Since owning a firearm is not in our constitution, there was no way to stop the government from changing the rules and this is where a constitution is important. Even the governement cannot change a constitution....at least I hope not.
Most Canadians (who bother to do a little bit of free thinking) are behind the Americans who struggle to keep their constitution intact. However, you have to admit that your freedom of free speech and your right to privacy are taking a beating.
If we are disarmed those are the only two chioces we will have.[xx(]
Bring a club to a gun fight and see what happens HB![;)]
PS: Go back to page 5 of the 'would you fight' thread for my answer!!!
If the ghouls in power waved a magic wand and vanished every weapon in the hands of civilians..some of us would be cutting throats with a butter knife and building new weapons in their basement.
Talk is VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, cheap, cheep, cheep, cheep. As the chick would say!!!![}:)]
If you keep shooting off your mouth you will be one of the first ones they 'take out'.[xx(]
Walk (and talk) softly and carry a big stick![8D]
There are those of us who would rather die than submit, and live our lives in servitude. You also stated,
"Bring a club to a gun fight and see what happens"
Already happened a little over 2 centuries ago. We know how that one turned out. A man forced to choose between liberty and slavery makes for a very formidable and dangerous foe. The deciding factor(s)in a fight are not always equipment and numbers. I can cite several examples from history to prove that. Many times, the spirit and heart with which a man fights is enough to make him victorious.
Jim, who do you suppose will be the ones charged with, how did you put it?, "taking us out"?
Comments
How does it feel to be a shill for the government ?
what do you think would happen if we were?
Nothing in your lifetime, or mine. Crime would rise slightly, but that's about it. Most gun owners are unarmed already. Some would * and moan, some would find some other hobbies, most wouldn't do anything. And, it's just a matter of time, again, maybe not our lifetimes.
There...that is closer to the truth.
No thanks neccessary.
I do agree that most gun owners will bend over, after dropping their pants. They seem to enjoy being buggered by the Beast.
However...ALLL will not...and enough will not submit so that the dead beat shirker New American will have his bacon pulled out of the fire...yet again.
Perhaps THIS time we will flat out forbid those who will not defend freedom to possess arms.
ONLY supporters of the Second ought to be armed, perhaps...so as to never again confuse the issue with weak, cowardly Quislings willing to trade everything for security.
You have a way with words.[:D]
Pot calling the kettle black ? [:D]
I admire the way you and Lt string words together...you are able to appeal to 'civilized folk'.
Me...I just slap 'em upside the head and trust that shakes the cobwebs loose.
Certainly has made for an interesting life. Most folks take it personal...and want to kick my az.
Even happened..now and again. [:D][:0]
Certainly has made for an interesting life. Most folks take it personal...and want to kick my az.
Even happened..now and again.
I'd be willing to bet that you're quite capable of "giving" too.[:D]
In SPITE of what Pickenup thinks...I have gotten plumb mellow in my old age.
The healing takes lots longer, nowadays...the main reason.
Firedude;
Pot calling the kettle black ? [:D]
I admire the way you and Lt string words together...you are able to appeal to 'civilized folk'.
Me...I just slap 'em upside the head and trust that shakes the cobwebs loose.
Certainly has made for an interesting life. Most folks take it personal...and want to kick my az.
Even happened..now and again. [:D][:0]
Smooth words are overrated at times HB. Ws and I can do okay in that respect, but you can too, if so inclined.
Once in awhile, nothing is better to get a point across than a swift kick in the nuts.
When I choose to deliver a swift kick, it isn't near as brutal as yours.
Like I have said before, it is a beautiful thing to see.[:D]
You deliver those like few others that I have seen.[;)]
Oftentimes there is no substitute for the cold hard truth delivered in a straight-forward, blunt, and unambiguous manner.
After a few years on the net...I begin to believe that long posts were not being read. I set out to "keep it simple, stupid". Since I already was long tired of the lengthy arguments over gun Rights that I engaged in every day..it was a small step to "short and ugly".
Generally had upwards of a dozen men engaged in these arguments...and mostly they supported gun controls.
At least...at first......
After 12-15 years, management basically forbade discussions about anything meaningful..and I realized that it was time to leave the job.
Agreed 100%.
Oftentimes there is no substitute for the cold hard truth delivered in a straight-forward, blunt, and unambiguous manner.
Oftentimes yes, but in my time I've learned that short and blunt will get you about as far as leader as it will with a cheerleader, in some cases, especially communication. Long and smooth runs in my family and I have talked way more flies down with honey, I have made more friends with that mode of being as well.
Fighting is a different story, so is living, but this is isnt that, I want people to think, not get pissed and wallow and stew in some bass emotion while they should be stimulating that grey mush between their ears.
On warfare
-If you dont have atleast three contingency plans in most situations you are probably already screwed.
Well, feller...you certainly nailed the average gun owner to the wall..because the average gun owner is all fluff flitter...just like the cheerleader you mentioned.
Your mistake is in assuming that I have the slightest interest in that guy.
I wish to discuss serious issues with MEN.
You also would be wrong...I have never wished to be a 'leader'. Wiping azes and drying runny noses has no place in my life.
However..I have confidence that out there is a man that IS a leader...and if ONE thing I say causes him to take hold and do what must be done .. my job on the soapbox is finished.
Now back to those 'men' I speak to on a regular basis; Those guys DO have the 'communication skills' that I lack.. or refuse any longer to exercise.
Just by being brutally frank and blunt.. I can get points across that otherwise would take pages to elucidate.
These men I am speaking about are intelligent .. they have no need of me filling in the blanks, normally.
I am telling them nothing they don't already know...but may be presenting it in just enough different light that they take the tiny seed planted and then they run with it.
EXACTLY as I do...from things THEY say.
They take some of mine, some of theirs, some of the next guy . things not normally available locally...and are putting those ideas into that presentation you so desperately desire..smooth, flowing, SEAMLESS...irrefutable by the garbage facing us.
Most gun owners are unarmed unmanned already.
be it as it may, semantics. What I meant to say is that most have given up on their _right_ and see gun ownership as a permit, but we all know it and agree on it, so no point reiterating over it.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
However...ALLL will not...and enough will not submit so that the dead beat shirker New American will have his bacon pulled out of the fire...yet again.
Perhaps THIS time we will flat out forbid those who will not defend freedom to possess arms.
ONLY supporters of the Second ought to be armed, perhaps...so as to never again confuse the issue with weak, cowardly Quislings willing to trade everything for security.
It's a good sentiment. What this country needs is a redefinition of citizenship and voting privileges. Don't see any other way to turn things back to "normal" (original) state.
No, I don't think it is merely semantics.
An unarmed 'Man' is still dangerous, if he must be..
We live in a nation of armed people that are helpless...unless authorized to use those weapons by the government.
The average 'man' today is only dangerous if you get between him and the tv...or scratch his car.
Rather pathetic.
A test for citizenship would not be out of the question, were we ever to have the chance to actually affect change here.
Most of this country has growth apathetic towards almost everything. They expect the government to do more and more, they abdicate their responsibilty for their own lives, and demand that the government handle that which they wish to not devote thought to dealing with. Health care, parenting, education - you name it, they would rather run up their credit cards, or borrow what they can't afford to live a lifestyle they don't deserve, then they expect to be bailed out when failing to excercise proper judgement in their lives. This has gone on for FAR too long, and it has given those who are supposedly there to serve an over-inflated ego and now feel it is THEY who should be served.
Call it the nanny state, big brother or what have you, but I believe they see themselves as little kings running their fiefdoms collecting taxes, granting privileges and trampling on the serfs in order to appease their own appetites. The corruption is so deep you will more than likely find it's poisonous, seductive roots have wound their way down deep into every political office down to the smallest town mayor or city council.
It's going to get worse before it gets better, they will want to have control over more and more of what happens in our lives. And to gain that control, they will have to remove any ability that remains of resistance to their agenda. This is why they have been pushing their gun control agendas for so long. Our founding fathers referred to arms as the peoples liberty teeth, and that the beauty of the second amendment is that it won't be necessary until they try to do away with it. They wish to sweep it all away "for the greater good" they'd say, for "safety and security" they'd say. I for one see through The Great Lie, and will not lay back in the chair and let them pull my teeth "just to be safe" in case I might bite someone or myself.
Most of this country has growth apathetic towards almost everything.
Very true. However, most of this country has always been apathetic to start with, most of any country is apathetic. And that is not a bad thing, I'd rather have most of the country apathetic than openly propagating opposition to freedom. The other issue is that what constitutes "most" now, is while living in this country has nothing to do with it -- at least a quarter are immigrants unwilling to accept the values of this country and assimilate. Include their offspring -- and you got 80 million registered dems. All runs in their families too, and almost never breaks out of the cycle, however, if a few brave men were to change the whole situation, at least they wouldn't resist.
quote:be it as it may, semantics.
No, I don't think it is merely semantics.
An unarmed 'Man' is still dangerous, if he must be..
We live in a nation of armed people that are helpless...unless authorized to use those weapons by the government.
The average 'man' today is only dangerous if you get between him and the tv...or scratch his car.
Rather pathetic.
Agreed.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
A test for citizenship would not be out of the question, were we ever to have the chance to actually affect change here.
I was speaking in Heinlein's terms, test would have to be a personal sacrifice, nothing academic. Just imagine the change it would've made, but it opens doors to a other abuses. My personal opinion is that humans just have to go through periods of readjustments and there will never be a close to perfect formula, just wonder how long 'til ours...
Please. If you can help this fellow American, look into it.
You need ask? Just look at all the lovely freedoms they have other places in which this happened! First example could be Cuba.
Have people become less violent because they do not have firearms? The answer is no.
Will I become more violent if I have a firearm or more firearms? The answer is no.
I live in Canada. I wish my constitution said that I had the right to bear arms because I do not have this right. I have the permission to have a firearm and this permission has many limitations.
Have people become less violent because they do not have firearms? The answer is no.
Will I become more violent if I have a firearm or more firearms? The answer is no.
You're wrong on one count. Your government may not recognize it, but you HAVE a right to be armed, it's a natural right, our constitution does not grant us the right, what it does is recognize that right exists and is not to be infringed by government. Not that this gets in the way of government running roughshod over our liberties. But I digress. Just because you live in Canada doesn't mean you have no right to be armed, it mereely shows your government does not trust you in the excercise of said rights. Which in turn indicates to me that your government should not be trusted.
Owning a firearm in Canada is a privilege. Yes, in Canada you have the right to own a car. Any one in Canada can own a car....even a 1 month old baby or a convict. But owning a firearm is a privilege. You must prove that you merit this privilege. You must take a course and pass an exam and then get a series of signatures from people of good standing that also state that you merit a firearm.
I know this because I worked for the police for 11 years and I was an instructor in gun safety (obligatory course for obtention of a permission to own a firearm).
Native indians do not have to attend any courses or pass an exam.
Sorry, but there is nothing in our bill of rights or our constitution that explictly states that anyone in Canada has the right to own a firearm. Only the native indians have this right.
Owning a firearm in Canada is a privilege. Yes, in Canada you have the right to own a car. Any one in Canada can own a car....even a 1 month old baby or a convict. But owning a firearm is a privilege. You must prove that you merit this privilege. You must take a course and pass an exam and then get a series of signatures from people of good standing that also state that you merit a firearm.
I know this because I worked for the police for 11 years and I was an instructor in gun safety (obligatory course for obtention of a permission to own a firearm).
Native indians do not have to attend any courses or pass an exam.
Governments do not grant rights - they are something you already possess. That they do not allow you to excercise your right I understand, but I also understand that the concept of inalienable rights may be difficult for people to understand as many are still under the illusion that "the government" grants us "rights". This is how they keep us in control, by fooling the masses into believing in the benevolence of governments granting rights to its populace, not the other way around.
Since owning a firearm is not in our constitution, there was no way to stop the government from changing the rules and this is where a constitution is important. Even the governement cannot change a constitution....at least I hope not.
Most Canadians (who bother to do a little bit of free thinking) are behind the Americans who struggle to keep their constitution intact. However, you have to admit that your freedom of free speech and your right to privacy are taking a beating.
Senior Member
USA
1180 Posts
Posted - 08/29/2008 : 1:36:00 PM
We would submit or die!
FINALLY...all is revealed.
Bring a club to a gun fight and see what happens HB![;)]
PS: Go back to page 5 of the 'would you fight' thread for my answer!!!
Submit, indeed.
If you keep shooting off your mouth you will be one of the first ones they 'take out'.[xx(]
Walk (and talk) softly and carry a big stick![8D]
We would submit or die![xx(]
Jim,
There are those of us who would rather die than submit, and live our lives in servitude. You also stated,
"Bring a club to a gun fight and see what happens"
Already happened a little over 2 centuries ago. We know how that one turned out. A man forced to choose between liberty and slavery makes for a very formidable and dangerous foe. The deciding factor(s)in a fight are not always equipment and numbers. I can cite several examples from history to prove that. Many times, the spirit and heart with which a man fights is enough to make him victorious.
Jim, who do you suppose will be the ones charged with, how did you put it?, "taking us out"?
Read the other thread, can't you hear that loud thumping sound???[;)]
Read the other thread, can't you hear that loud thumping sound???[;)]
???????????????????????????????
Why?
What is your point ?
My life for not telling the truth ?
Hmm ? Should I adopt your position, Jim..."Gun Control is Good".???
I reckon I will continue to tell the truth...and let the chips fall where they may.
See..I also believe in God. The Beast will be allowed to kill me right after God says so...and not one second sooner.