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.
California
shark92651
Member Posts: 9 ✭✭
Just testing to see if there is some kind of robot that automatically locks any thread that includes that horrible word that is the subject of this thread.
It seems any attempt to engage in a meaningful debate on this forum is shut down without notice if it includes the dreaded "C" word. There has to be at least a few adults on here that can keep a meaningful debate going without the name calling, right? I just read the posting guidelines and I don't see anything about all discussions about California are off-limits. Instead I would expect the moderators to actually do some moderating and keep the bomb throwers in check. Is this too much to ask?
It seems any attempt to engage in a meaningful debate on this forum is shut down without notice if it includes the dreaded "C" word. There has to be at least a few adults on here that can keep a meaningful debate going without the name calling, right? I just read the posting guidelines and I don't see anything about all discussions about California are off-limits. Instead I would expect the moderators to actually do some moderating and keep the bomb throwers in check. Is this too much to ask?
Comments
WE couldn't give a flying fig about the problems you have allowed to be created, or the repercussions from your lack of good judgement. The Kommiefornia BS is getting REAL old.
Your constant pecking, crying, argueing, and general stupidity is getting you all NOWHERE. You want to actually WIN people to your side? Get some damn results allready. Get those STUPID UNconstitutional laws OFF the books. Do something for real for once.
quote:So to all you guys outside of CA, what are you going to do when the president you just elected tries to spread the CA private-party transfer laws to the rest of the country? He is still talking about "closing the gun show loophole" which is in effect what the stupid private party transfer law in CA is. Will you offer anything other than bravado on an internet chat forum or are you actually going to do something?
If I need to spell out what's wrong with it in context of the thread, there can be no anything meaningful, as it would be one-sided, which anyone of us can do without help from some halfwit trolls.
The Founders knew if they stood up, they would surely make a trip to the gallows if caught.
They stood up anyway.
WE couldn't give a flying fig about the problems you have allowed to be created, or the repercussions from your lack of good judgement. The Kommiefornia BS is getting REAL old.
I don't think dismissing CA is the correct action, however, if these clowns is all there is left, it is the only solution to cut losses.
There hasn't been a single post acknowledging that CA problems exists and suggesting something constructive, note also, that I've been asking them the same question over the course of at least a couple of years of what exactly have they done, never to get any answers. I am pretty sure with a bit of a different approach they could have a very wide support.
Again, I have lived in CA, and am about to again, and know more than I'd like to about the mentality of an average CA "gun owner" (and gun owners is all they are, neither citizens nor Americans). Nobody has to take my word for it, calguns is open to everyone, besides, they just demonstrated to the whole wide world what they are all about.
Organize a ten thousand man march on your state capital.
Make some noise, over there.
We have been treated to the philosophy that that tactic has no possibility of succeeding...I guess the method of sitting down in back-rooms and chatting up politicians is better.
Or ..even better...just start gathering supplies and provisions for a long haul without being subservient to the beast. Vow to support the Constitution as written ..and vow to resist.
Why does everyone automatically assume that I have and am doing nothing to fight anti-gun attitudes/legislation/etc... After my very first post on this forum the thread was locked before I could even get another word in. This makes a two posts on a single thread so at least that is progress.
Nice welcome, thanks guys - glad to be here.
Why does everyone automatically assume that I have and am doing nothing to fight anti-gun attitudes/legislation/etc... After my very first post on this forum the thread was locked before I could even get another word in. This makes a two posts on a single forum so at least that is progress.
It's your attitude. You want to talk business, talk business, you wanna trough around childish accusations, shift blame and spin the agenda -- well, that's why the topics get locked. If that's impossible to comprehend, well, then, like I said, one-sided conversations aren't much fun.
How can one engage in a meaningful conversation with someone who's best argument is along these lines:
quote:So to all you guys outside of CA, what are you going to do when the president you just elected tries to spread the CA private-party transfer laws to the rest of the country? He is still talking about "closing the gun show loophole" which is in effect what the stupid private party transfer law in CA is. Will you offer anything other than bravado on an internet chat forum or are you actually going to do something?
If I need to spell out what's wrong with it in context of the thread, there can be no anything meaningful, as it would be one-sided, which anyone of us can do without help from some halfwit trolls.
Well Rock that was a hypothetical I put out to make a point and engage some debate - as usual it was met with claims of "whining" and "changing the subject". Before I got a chance to respond again the thread was locked, which is why I created this new thread to find out just what the big deal is. Of course from seeing the way I am attacked before I can even get two words in it appears a lot of the long-standing members here have their minds made up about anybody from CA and just lump us all into the same category. The fact of the matter is that CA is not the only state grappling with an erosion of our 2A rights, it is just one of the worse. Every state in the union has had their rights eroded to some degree but if anybody tries to point that out we get typical replies such as yours. Don't ask us "what are we doing" and then get all bent out of shape when someone asks you the same question.
To answer the general question about what I have done, I write and call my legislators to voice my opposition to any new gun legislation, I am a member of the NRA, give donations to pro-gun legislators, vote for those pro-gun legislators, take non-gun people to the range to educate them (turned a couple into gun owners already), etc... I just got my FFL so I am also selling guns and parts to others in my state, therefore growing our numbers. Not huge steps but certainly not deserving of disdain from other members of this forum.
quote:Originally posted by Rockatansky
How can one engage in a meaningful conversation with someone who's best argument is along these lines:
quote:So to all you guys outside of CA, what are you going to do when the president you just elected tries to spread the CA private-party transfer laws to the rest of the country? He is still talking about "closing the gun show loophole" which is in effect what the stupid private party transfer law in CA is. Will you offer anything other than bravado on an internet chat forum or are you actually going to do something?
If I need to spell out what's wrong with it in context of the thread, there can be no anything meaningful, as it would be one-sided, which anyone of us can do without help from some halfwit trolls.
Well Rock that was a hypothetical I put out to make a point and engage some debate - as usual it was met with claims of "whining" and "changing the subject".
In context of what was going on, I think I was more or less justified.
quote:Originally posted by shark92651
Before I got a chance to respond again the thread was locked, which is why I created this new thread to find out just what the big deal is. Of course from seeing the way I am attacked before I can even get two words in it appears a lot of the long-standing members here have their minds made up about anybody from CA and just lump us all into the same category. The fact of the matter is that CA is not the only state grappling with an erosion of our 2A rights, it is just one of the worse. Every state in the union has had their rights eroded to some degree but if anybody tries to point that out we get typical replies such as yours.
It's not "the states", it is people in those states. The wide spread opinion about Californians is based on their behavior, not the fact where they are or what they do. Return to that locked thread, or search and read any of the CA discussion in these forums, it'll clear it up for ya.
quote:Originally posted by shark92651
Don't ask us "what are we doing" and then get all bent out of shape when someone asks you the same question.
Here we go again... Are you able to comprehend that YOU come to US with YOUR problem? Are you familiar with the concept of spinning the topic of a conversation?
quote:Originally posted by shark92651
To answer the general question about what I have done, I write and call my legislators to voice my opposition to any new gun legislation, I am a member of the NRA, give donations to pro-gun legislators, vote for those pro-gun legislators, take non-gun people to the range to educate them (turned a couple into gun owners already), etc... I just got my FFL so I am also selling guns and parts to others in my state, therefore growing our numbers. Not huge steps but certainly not deserving of disdain from other members of this forum.
Again, you started good, but ruined the whole thing with your ego in the last sentence, but I'll ignore it.
Now, you do understand that "growing our numbers" don't mean much while you're growing numbers of people who just will comply with unconstitutional laws? Most people in CA have gun control so far embedded in their minds that it makes them even bigger threat than dumb or corrupt politicians. You don't have to be a gun owner or even own a firearm or a weapon to support the Constitution the way it was written, buying and selling guns is great, but if one thinks that it's okay to ask for a bureaucrat's permission to carry a loaded firearm in a fashion of choosing, then it makes that person nothing more but an aide to gun control.
Now, I'll repeat, I have lived in CA for 12 years, and have met a lot of "gun owners". So far I can recall only one guy who was more or less on the same page as many people on this forum, the rest were complacent with how things are going and if they couldn't have AR's, so be it, nothing was done, just some grumbling and whining. Any of attempts to do anything about it were responded with apathy or "you're nuts".
Perhaps those of us on the outside would be more sympathetic if there was concrete evidence of actual gun-owner commitment to their cause. If a good proposition is submitted and sufficient signatures are gathered, I'd contribute to that cause.
I would not become part of Sacramento's data base to support a group the says it is working hard, yet has not availed themselves of the most obvious weapon in their arsenal.
Brad Steele
It seems any attempt to engage in a meaningful debate
Debate? All I see is name calling and insults, from BOTH sides.
There has to be at least a few adults on here that can keep a meaningful debate going without the name calling, right?
That would be nice, for a change.
Instead I would expect the moderators to actually do some moderating and keep the bomb throwers in check.
And how do you propose to do that?
Since you are new here, I will try to explain. It was not any one post that got the threads locked. It was the accumulative name calling and insults.
People from Ca. have been coming here since the new law about shipping to Ca. was enacted. Each with a chip on their shoulder. Venting about how some sellers will not sell to Ca.
Without exception, every one of these thread degenerates to a third grade level, where both sides are just name calling and insulting each other. There is NO DEBATING going on. After so many of these kinds of threads, both here, and on the General Discussion forum, it is not hard to predict the outcome. As evidenced by the locked threads.
I'll let this one go.....for now.
If it goes the way I believe it will, I'll lock it too.
(Go ahead....Surprise me)
If it continues, I'll just start poofing the whole thread, no matter who started it, or who said what.
Don't like it?
Don't let the door..........
The reality is that for the past few decades we had some activists in appointed positions who were enforcing laws which did not exist and going about persecuting gun owners as part of their own liberal agenda.
It took a lot of work, but we got rid of them (or at least most of them... we still have a few more to go after) One notable example is that of Iggy Chinn, who received a 'lateral transfer' from being the head of the DOJ's firearms division to being a beat cop working the night shift in oakland.
Because of these people who were abusing their authority, CA residents had to tread very carefully with regard to firearms in this state for a very long time.
Things have changed substantially over the past few years, and have done so for the better.
The case of Harrot v. County Kings enabled us to purchase ar and AK type rifles, when the DOJ illegally persecuted some gun owners and FFL's for selling them the entire CA firearms community rallied, became organized and has been fighting back ever since.
We put togeather a crack legal team and have been chipping away at the laws, and have been working hard to educate the next generation of gun owners as to what the real laws are and not the makebelieve laws which we have been subjected to as a result of the bad information that the CA DOJ has been pumping out for the last two decades.
Regardless of whether or not you agree with those of us who have decided to stay and fight, those of us who have drawn a line in the sand and said "NO I will not leave my family's land, I will not retreat from ONE INCH of American soil, I will not flee like a coward for the 'privilege' of exercising my RIGHTS" There are those of us who are standing our ground, painting large targets on ourselves so that the liberals will not turn their sights to the rest of you. We are bearing the full brunt of the liberal agenda, and we are winning.
I have to ask you... How is it that you feel you are supporting gun ownership, how is it that you feel you are helping us to throw off the reigns of tyranny by vocally advocating that our supplies be cut off and that we be isolated and ostracized from our brothers in free America?
Some of us fight by remaining behind enemy lines and drawing fire, others fight by shipping supplies to those who are fighting.
I pray that the day never comes when we are forced to resort to arms, but if the day does come.... I would hope that you, as an American, would not deny us the tools necessary.
If you truly believe that the day is coming when we will have to take up arms and make a stand... Why do you advocate denying your brothers that which they will need to fight?
Wade into the breech, Shark ;
Organize a ten thousand man march on your state capital.
Lets see here, 10,000 / 33,871,648 = 2.95% of the population of this state. Do you really think that will do JACK SHAT? Thats right, less than 3% of our states population of nearly 34 million residents. You're also pretty quick to judge the firearms owners of this state yet I bet you have never even been here. Not all of this state is full of liberals, in fact we have quite a few republican counties where firearms owners don't have to worry about being persecuted. We also have a lawsuit going on in this state right now that is likely to get the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights incorporated into the states, I bet you didn't know that only the 1st, 4th, 5th (except for the right to indictment by a grand jury), 6th, 8th (only the protection against "cruel and unusual punishments") and 14th applied to the states. What have the people in your state done for the rights of all citizens lately?
You make a powerful, eloquent appeal to reason.
I appreciate your time and impute into this matter.
That being said...my personal belief is that conditions have deteriorated to the point that gaining back a tiny desperate handhold off the edge of the cliff is counterproductive.
That simple fact drives my arguments. We live under tyranny...EVEN in what I have referred to as `Free States'. Let us not kid ourselves, here....
WE ARE NO LONGER FREE !!
I am truly sorry that you are out there are on the chopping block. SOMEBODY, somewhere has to lead the way into oblivion ... and your state and a few more are very near that. Right here in Oklahoma...heartland...USA... THE LOCAL MAYOR of Tulsa is demanding a tightening of the gun laws.
Will I fight it ? Hell no...for the only solution to this problem is sweeping gun laws passed by corrupt officials. The average Joe out here MUST be presented with the absolute final decision ;
Be an American, or be a slave.
Not until that terrible moment arrives is there the slightest chance for freedom to once again ring out from the hilltops.
Its going to be a tough som of a buck. I feel for those out there that actually understand and BELIEVE in what "Shall not be infringed" mean. To us will be left the job of cleaning up America, one of these days.
For those that believe that government has the authority and MUST control weapons, `for our safety'...I wish them a speedy trip to hades.
Thank you for responding.
The main thrust of my message is that no matter where the battle lines are drawn there will always be a cliff, there will always be a ragged edge where we will fight.
Here in CA we have seen what happens when we give an inch: those who would subjugate us are more than willing to take it as their own.
But those who would see us stripped of our rights are insatiable, they will not stop with that one inch on the edge of the cliff, they will keep reaching, keep grabbing, keep heading east with their 'for the children' mantra and 'reasonable restrictions'
American soil is American soil, The line in the sand must be drawn somewhere. Those of us who have remained in CA are keeping the soil we have, and we are working on getting that which we have lost back.
Every gun you send to CA, every magazine, every round of ammunition is a small victory for freedom and a small blow against the tyranny we face.
Every rifle we can put in the hands of an American is one more recruit to our cause, one more reinforcement for our strained battle line.
Yes we live under tyranny,
Triage does not work when fighting tyranny, every American you cut off behind enemy lines and leave to his unarmed fate, every man who you choose not to support, who does not have a rifle to teach his son how to use, is one more American those who would oppress you do not have to concern themselves with.
I ask you to consider this, If the time comes to stand cheek by jowl, to raise arms as well as voices against oppression, will you hold an Americans home against him? Will you say:
"Brother, you believe as I do, you stand for the same things that I do, you are willing to fight and die for the hope that tomorrow our children may breathe free air.... BUT you were born in an America on the other side of a line, you chose to stand and fight tooth and nail for your god given right to live free on that scrap of mud instead of leaving the graves of your ancestors untended... Had you but abandoned that patch of sodden earth and crossed the line I would stand with you, but you did not..... I am sorry"
How can we hope to win if we abandon those who draw the skirmish line a bit farther west... those who believe that our rights exist not because of where we stand, but rather they exist because we do stand.
How can men hope to hold the line against tyranny anywhere if they do not support other men who drew the line differently?
In CA, we stand against a growing tide, an onslaught which seeks to demonize our lifestyle, to corrupt the ideals of our forefathers, and to outlaw that which secures our freedom and offers us a final means of redress.... This onslaught is intended to be a death by a thousand cuts so that as the years progress there are fewer men to hold the line, fewer children who's fathers had a rifle to teach them to shoot, fewer magazines, fewer munitions, fewer ranges, fewer stores where men who would be free can go about obtaining the tools that they will need.
When you refuse to send a rifle to an American, when you turn a blind eye, you do a greater injustice to him than those he is fighting.
In trying to buy a firearm, He turned to you as a fellow American and said "Brother, I need the means to defend my self, my family, my country, and the rights I hold sacred. I am not asking for charity. I am not asking for pity. I am not asking you to break the law (unjust though it is). I am not asking you to come and fight this battle in my stead. All I ask is that when I am standing on the line and I reach back... please do not leave me grasping at air"
Oblivion is not the path to freedom, Triage of American Soil is unacceptable.
We must hang together, or surely we will hang separately
Let's assume you're correct, and trying to fight for our rights within the system is doomed to fail, and the only way to restore them is through active armed resistance. Personally, I actually agree with that fighting for our rights from within the system IS ultimately doomed to fail, as the system has become corrupt and self-serving.
However, if it ever comes to that, how many people will you have on your side? The past 8 decades show that if the infringements on people's rights are small enough and don't affect people's daily lives, such infringements will be tolerated and accepted by most. Most in the country have accepted NFA, GCA, and various other restrictions on firearms ownership.
Moreover, the campaign to restrict and eliminate gun ownership in the US has been smart enough (or lucky enough) to chip away at it rather than mount a full frontal attack on it. By doing this, it created different classes og gun owners, thus dividing them. For example, many hunters don't care about an assault weapons ban. After all, it doesn't touch shotguns and bolt action rifles, right? Only a gun nut would use those evil black rifles for hunting, after all, right? Then when it comes to hunting, a lead ammo ban only really affects those hunting in some areas, and they can buy copper bullets from Barnes, it's just a bit more expensive, so not a big deal, right? After all, if you go target shooting in those same areas, it's ok to use lead ammo. If we're putting stupid restriction on gun owners in, say, Montana, it's ok, for it only affects those in Montana. If we're restricting the size of handguns in the City of Los Angeles, that's ok, for it only affect those who want to buy a small handgun in Los Angeles. And so on, and so forth.
So whenever any "gun control" legislation is being passed, the people in question only have to deal with a small enough group of their constituents.
The worst part is that it makes most people get used to restrictions of this kind, and they begin to appear normal to most. Which is where one can impose more restrictions unopposed. That's when such restrictions begin to appear "reasonable" enough to enough people to make those people support, or at least not oppose such restrictions.
The more such restrictions are passed, the more people get used to them, the harder it becomes to own and shoot a gun, the fewer people do that, and in the end you have fewer people opposing such restrictions, which makes passing new restrictions even easier, and the cycle repeats.
The same applies to all other rights enumerated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, of course.
So, when you're ready to take your stand, how many people will be there with you? Will there be enough of them to win? So is it smart to ignore and not fight such small restriction and just wait for the last stand to happen?
Here in California we do fight those restrictions, and we're winning. We have some of the hardest fights of all, as we got the liberal fruits and nuts from the whole country moving here and screwing up (well, they already screwed it up) our state. We introduce people to firearms, fight those restrictions in courts, and try to take our state back from the morons who run it now. Aside from everything else, it takes numbers, and we're fighting to prevent our numbers from dwindling (as described above) and to increase them instead. So when/if your last stand comes, we might have the numbers to win it. Or, maybe, get to the point where we don't have to have it at all. Have you been to a war? Have you seen a civil war? I've been to two wars, and I've seen a third-world civil war myself. I've heard about such from my grandparents, too. If I can avoid it without becoming a slave, I would. As such, I'm not as fond of the "last stand" idea of yours, and I, and many others here in California and elsewhere, try to resolve this problem without resorting to any such thing. It doesn't mean we won't do it the other way, it only means we don't want to.
Just a thought. Why wasn't there a major successful uprising against Nazi rule in Germany? The population was disarmed (and initially not by force), and there weren't enough people who would support such an uprising. Do you really think that without fighting the lesser restrictions on our freedoms and promoting our lifestyle (and those freedoms) there will be enough people supporting such an uprising in this country?
I thank you.
THIS is the dialogue I had hoped for.
Now then ;
There must come a time that there are no more arms available thru normal means. At that juncture , Americans will do what is necessary to secure those arms.
Has that time come in California ? I don't know...it has been 40 years since my time there.
The point being ..the appeal you make is one that reaches into the heart of me.
Were I convinced that the majority of those weapons going out there were to be used as the Founders intended..I would attempt to organize a trainload of such weapons to be delivered to your doorstep...and I would ride that train there, to join you.
I knew that there MUST be a decent gunowner in California...there just hadn't been any happen by...till now.
Naturally, we haven't asked the pertinent questions yet...for example, does "Shall Not be Infringed" give the government latitude for ANY gun laws...
If there are indeed gun owners ..even a few ..in California that actually embrace the Constitution and Bill of Rights EXACTLY as written...I will cease my highly vocal objections to sending anymore weapons there.
So far...NOT ONE POSTER FROM CALIFORNIA has seen fit to answer that question in the negative .
I suggest that you take that question to your fellow gun-owners on Cal-Guns and just straight out ASK ;
Does the Second Amendments' `Shall Not be Infringed" allow the government .. State OR federal... the authority to enact ANY gun laws ?
"Brothers" ? Not hardly...unless that question is met with a resounding NO.
Bluntly,
we have reached a period in history where we no longer can call `American' those that advocate gun control.
Excellent !!
I thank you.
THIS is the dialogue I had hoped for.
I suggest that you take that question to your fellow gun-owners on Cal-Guns and just straight out ASK ;
Does the Second Amendments' `Shall Not be Infringed" allow the government .. State OR federal... the authority to enact ANY gun laws ?
"Brothers" ? Not hardly...unless that question is met with a resounding NO.
Bluntly,
we have reached a period in history where we no longer can call `American' those that advocate gun control.
This question has been asked on CalGuns several times in the last few months even.
Does the Second Amendments' `Shall Not be Infringed" allow the government .. State OR federal... the authority to enact ANY gun laws ?
A simple and direct question deserves a simple and direct answer.
No, of course not. Citizens should be as well armed as the military. If they choose to be.
Our Second Amendment is there so we are able to enforce our Freedoms with our own Government and oust that Government if we as Citizens decide there is a need to do so.
This is clear from our Founding fathers letters and writings.
To me that option comes only after we've fought the battle of hearts and minds with our fellow Citizens by teaching them and their children how to shoot and enjoy guns ensuring another generation of gun owners Who will vote and fight to keep that freedom.
Fought in the Court's and with Lawmakers to reclaim and ensure our freedoms.
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Does the Second Amendments' `Shall Not be Infringed" allow the government .. State OR federal... the authority to enact ANY gun laws ?
A simple and direct question deserves a simple and direct answer.
No, of course not. Citizens should be as well armed as the military. If they choose to be.
Our Second Amendment is there so we are able to enforce our Freedoms with our own Government and oust that Government if we as Citizens decide there is a need to do so.
This is clear from our Founding fathers letters and writings.
To me that option comes only after we've fought the battle of hearts and minds with our fellow Citizens by teaching them and their children how to shoot and enjoy guns ensuring another generation of gun owners Who will vote and fight to keep that freedom.
Fought in the Court's and with Lawmakers to reclaim and ensure our freedoms.
So then....
You are saying 4473's NIC checks are unlawful?... The carrying of arms concealed without a permit is perfactly fine?
ANY freeperson, NOT imprisoned is allowed to be armed?
I understand you correctly then?
Carefully read your own last post.
Contained within that very post, in a nutshell, is the Alpha...and the Omega.
The instrumentalism of which you speak...and refer again to concerning the Nazis ..is taking place right before our eyes.
Fighting the good fight merely is slowing the juggernaut ..ensuring absolutely that our children will live in darkness for a thousand years.
We old timers are the last source of information for the youngsters..and the last to fully understand what freedom was.
Better by FAR to withdraw from the political cesspool, allowing these evil savages to reveal themselves to even the most abjectly STUPID among us...so that there can be no possibility of misunderstanding about the need to restore liberty in this country.
Better for America that it happen sooner, then later.
We the 3% that I speak of..7 million or so)..get the picture ? Must absolutely obey all laws, for the present. We must offer NO VIOLENCE..for that will be used as a tool to destroy us.
No.the move must come from the Beast.
We the 3 % must then defend ourselves...AND this great Country.
quote:Fought in the Court's and with Lawmakers to reclaim and ensure our freedoms.
Good luck with that.
I assume that you are one of those that feel you achieved a stunning victory last summer with the Supreme Court decision.
If so..you have no concept of what 'shall Not be Infringed" means. Even a ten year old child knows EXACTLY what 'you shall not' means...but we have ever so many adults in this country that have not the slightest grasp of those four words.... How very sad.
Kayzap;
quote:Fought in the Court's and with Lawmakers to reclaim and ensure our freedoms.
Good luck with that.
I assume that you are one of those that feel you achieved a stunning victory last summer with the Supreme Court decision.
If so..you have no concept of what 'shall Not be Infringed" means. Even a ten year old child knows EXACTLY what 'you shall not' means...but we have ever so many adults in this country that have not the slightest grasp of those four words.... How very sad.
Stunning victory? No, a surprising victory in a battle.
A war is won or lost on many battles. Battles like which Politician or Judge gets elected. Which law gets struck down or from pressure from the public does not get passed. How many you've brought to your side to fight with you.
Kayzap;
quote:Fought in the Court's and with Lawmakers to reclaim and ensure our freedoms.
Good luck with that.
I assume that you are one of those that feel you achieved a stunning victory last summer with the Supreme Court decision.
If so..you have no concept of what 'shall Not be Infringed" means. Even a ten year old child knows EXACTLY what 'you shall not' means...but we have ever so many adults in this country that have not the slightest grasp of those four words.... How very sad.
Highball, I must say I like your last few posts, and I agree that "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means what it means and I have a BIG problem with the 5 to 4 rulling, it should have been 9-0 [:(!]. !!!!
Stunning victory? No, a surprising victory in a battle.
How is it a victory: quote:Like most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
pdq_wizzard: it wasn't about the number of judges, it was about the courts opinion, see above.
quote:Originally posted by kayzap
Stunning victory? No, a surprising victory in a battle.
How is it a victory: quote:Like most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
pdq_wizzard: it wasn't about the number of judges, it was about the courts opinion, see above.
I have had a few beers so maybe I should not post but here goes [8D]
I know that, I just can't for the life of me understand how 4 of them could read the 2nd and not believe it is an individual right, when they wrote the B of R they used the 13 colonies bill of rights (used that as there blueprint) I have looked at the writings of the bill of rights from some of the 13 colonies and (the ones I could find with out to much time looking) all used "an individuals right to keep and bear arms" or "a persons right to keep and bear arms"
I just thought the US Supreme Court should and MUST take into account what the founding fathers were thinking when they drafted the 2nd. (And all the amendments for that mater) with a 5-4 decision there liberal bias got in the way.
I just can't for the life of me understand how 4 of them could read the 2nd and not believe it is an individual right
I don't think the case is that they don't believe it's an individual right. They simply have their own agenda.
But then again you can't stop bad people from doing bad things.
quote:Originally posted by kayzap
Stunning victory? No, a surprising victory in a battle.
How is it a victory:
I don't think the case is that they don't believe it's an individual right. They simply have their own agenda.
And there lies the problem! As a SCJ they are to READ the constitution and not interpret it. (it says what it says)
pdq_wizzard: and this is why there's only one solution in sight.
kayzap: you're missing the point, it's explain a number of times on this forum, just read.
pdq_wizzard: and this is why there's only one solution in sight.
Rockatansky,
I understand your point. My difference is only with your approach in that there are many other steps to be taken first so as to grow your own strength and weaken the opposition.
Thats why we will continue to try and get dealers to ship to us so we can grow our numbers and weaken our enemies.
Rockatansky,
I understand your point. My difference is only with your approach in that there are many other steps to be taken first so as to grow your own strength and weaken the opposition.
Thats why we will continue to try and get dealers to ship to us so we can grow our numbers and weaken our enemies.
Pointless
Starting Member
4 Posts
Posted - 01/09/2009 : 10:58:17 PM
By the way I don't have a problem with crazy people not having guns so in that it is not unlimited, (the crazy people would not be out and about in the days of our founding fathers) but that is a moot point today so I don't want them to get there hands on guns.
But then again you can't stop bad people from doing bad things.
You cannot control a few crazy people by infringing the Rights of hundreds of millions of decent Citizens.
Not and call your country a `free Republic'.
Either call it was it is.. FASCISM ... or control the crazies by Constitutional means.
Given a REAL Justice system, and a public with the stones to do what is ABSOLUTELY necessary .. execute the vicious animals that roam at will among decent Citizens .. there would be a vastly lessened problem with crazies.
The FRIGHTENING thing about the Supreme Court decision was NOT the four that directly snat upon the Constitution. Those men could be dealt with by removal from office.
No...it is the FIVE that disturb me the most. They took and analyzed the Second, word by word...EXCEPT for those four magic words.
"SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" !!!!
THOSE five are the real traitors...for they took the clear-cut dividing line between action and further erosion of liberties squarely away from us.
Had just ONE more `justice' sided with the Communists on the Court, we out here would have had a decision to make.
RESIST...... or submit as subjects.
We got the very worst decision from the Court...and never believe for a second that these people are not brilliant. They are not quite ready to take us on head to head...so they just cut the ground out from under our feet, with their decision.
Many, many people that WOULD have been on `our' side...the side of the Constitution..are now smiling smugly over their `victory'. Gag a maggot.....
You are saying 4473's NIC checks are unlawful?... The carrying of arms concealed without a permit is perfactly fine?
ANY freeperson, NOT imprisoned is allowed to be armed?
I understand you correctly then?
I guess our new California members would rather avoid answering questions......
quote:So then....
You are saying 4473's NIC checks are unlawful?... The carrying of arms concealed without a permit is perfactly fine?
ANY freeperson, NOT imprisoned is allowed to be armed?
I understand you correctly then?
I guess our new California members would rather avoid answering questions......
OK I will see if I can answer this.
4473's now this is a hard one as there are mentally ill people that should not have access to buy a gun. (Like I said before mentally ill people were not allowed to live among us in times past).
The thing that pisses me off is that I have to fill one out every time I buy a gun and that is not right, if I already own a firearm why should I have to continue to fill them out? (I know the answer to this) because it is a form of gun registration and not right!
On CC I think anyone that can lawfully own a gun should be able to CC if they so chose.
"ANY freeperson, NOT imprisoned is allowed to be armed?" now this is another hard one because again we let too many people that are murders walk on the same streets as you and me. I don't think all felonies should be treated the same. And there are many felons that have paid there due to society and as such should have all of there rights restored. But murders should be executed then we would not have to worry about them getting guns and doing harm.
These are just my thoughts.
Bad people should NOT be free to roam society. Ever heard "Those that are willing to trade freedom for security, deserve neither."?
Those words are just as true today, as they were over 200 years ago.
Where does restricting a citizens rights, give ANY saftey to society? There is NO answer to that.
For us, that belive in the people's contract, known as the constitution, we KNOW there is absolutely NO room, for government making ANY laws reguarding arms and ammo. It is for people able to THINK, what the difference IS between a RIGHT and a PRIVILAGE. Government can and DOES regulate privilages. Right or wrong, they do.
If government is allowed to make one, teeny tiny law, on arms or ammo, it has become a privilage, NOT a right.
quote:Originally posted by pdq_wizzard
quote:Originally posted by freemind
quote:So then....
You are saying 4473's NIC checks are unlawful?... The carrying of arms concealed without a permit is perfactly fine?
ANY freeperson, NOT imprisoned is allowed to be armed?
I understand you correctly then?
I guess our new California members would rather avoid answering questions......
OK I will see if I can answer this.
4473's now this is a hard one as there are mentally ill people that should not have access to buy a gun. (Like I said before mentally ill people were not allowed to live among us in times past).
The thing that pisses me off is that I have to fill one out every time I buy a gun and that is not right, if I already own a firearm why should I have to continue to fill them out? (I know the answer to this) because it is a form of gun registration and not right!
On CC I think anyone that can lawfully own a gun should be able to CC if they so chose.
"ANY freeperson, NOT imprisoned is allowed to be armed?" now this is another hard one because again we let too many people that are murders walk on the same streets as you and me. I don't think all felonies should be treated the same. And there are many felons that have paid there due to society and as such should have all of there rights restored. But murders should be executed then we would not have to worry about them getting guns and doing harm.
These are just my thoughts.
pdq_wizzard: so all-n-all, you do belive in some "reasonable" gun control?