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.
Hey Milonga
kingjoey
Member Posts: 8,636
What's your take on the gun rights organizations? Are you a member of any groups like the JPFO by chance? Just curious[;)]
Love them Beavers
Here's an extra one for you Hairy
Love them Beavers
Here's an extra one for you Hairy
Comments
Love them Beavers
Love them Beavers
Just follow this simple rule: "Do as you wish just watch what you're doing!"
[;)]
I personally am a member of NRA and GOA. I have recently been monitoring SAF and JPFO and am considering an offer of financial support to them as well.
-WW
MOΛΩN ΛABE
-Samuel Adams, Patriot/Brewer
They wouldn't have envisioned a Columbine-type shooting spree. On the other hand, most crimes are committed with regular handguns.
A massacre on the scale of Columbine could have also been done with bats and knives unfortunately. Someone looking to kill a lot of people is going to find/build the means to do so. The law-abiding people have no intention of harming innocents, I have guns in my closet that could eclipse the Columbine statistics before having to reload. Would I go on a spree? Never, I have no reason too. It's not the weapons, its the motives. Evil motives bring about evil results
Love them Beavers
Milonga, welcome to the forum. From your 3 brief posts in this thread, I just want to warn you to be prepared to defend your position. The most vocal members of this forum tend to believe in the "unrestricted" application of the 2nd Amendment, regardless of "assault weapons" or Columbine-style murders.
I personally am a member of NRA and GOA. I have recently been monitoring SAF and JPFO and am considering an offer of financial support to them as well.
-WW
Thank you for the welcome!
It would be boring if everyone thought exactly the same. [:)] I'm just not sure how I feel about automatic weapons, while at the same time, I believe that the violence being promoted in movies and television might be a bigger culprit.
The founders couldn't have imagined communications as sophisticated as what we have either, does the 1st Ammendment not apply to the Internet, TV, radio, or telephone?
Molon Labe
I noticed how you tried to very cleverly slip in the automatic weapons quip in relation to assault weapons. Now come on HAI....Milonga, you know the assault weapons we are talking about aren't assault weapons at all, don't you? You know very well we are speaking of semi-automatic weapons- one trigger pull, one shot, right big guy[;)]Even though true "assault weapons" should be 100% legal to all Americans without these ridiculous hoops we have to jump through and without BATFE controlling market pricing........Hey guys I may have something here! Do you remember how we were talking about how they (BATFE) were able to get around the Constitution in enforcing their laws? Seems to me they used the Commerce Act, if so I have to believe there is something in there about Government controlling free trade and price gouging. When you can look on a gunbroker auction and see one M-16 Select Auto Fire for $1,200 and see another one for $16,500 and find out that 'by law' you are only allowed to buy the $16,500 one, there has got to be something wrong with that!
Is a machine gun built in 1985 any different than a machine gun, of the same make and model, made in 1995? I think not, they both have a high cyclic rate and are made of the same materials, so one is no different than the other, thus the BATFE is illegally controlling the price of goods to be sold in a free market. Ruh Roh Shaggy......we may have something here.....I'm going to do research.......shut up HAIRY!
There are two kinds of people in this World.....Those that lead....And those that get the hell out of the way....GUT CHECK!...Which one are you?
Hope you last longer than "NYPD32".......[;)]
Molon Labe
Integrity is what you do even when no one is looking.
"I agree with the realistic Irishman who said he preferred to prophesy after the event." G.K. Chesterton
Volenti non fit injuria
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a brave and scarce man, hated and scorned. When the cause succeeds, however, the timid join him...for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." -Mark Twain
Now...........
quote:Originally posted by Milonga
I believe the 2nd Amendment includes them, although at the time the law was drafted they were using muskets [:D] I'm just not sure about assault weapons.
Of course they were using muskets. Muskets were the "modern" firearm of that time period. Military style weapons are the "modern" firearms of this time period. Muskets were the "Arms" of that day, military style weapons are the "Arms" of today.
Just where would you draw the line? What is covered under the 2nd amendment? With the muskets, the matchlock, the flintlock, the paper cartridge, the percussion cap, the rimfire, the bolt action, the semi-auto, the full auto? Where?
With the progression of the firearm, I can't believe (I know, I'm injection my own opinion here) that the intent of the 2nd, when it was written, was for the people NOT to have the best firearm available of the "time period." Is the militia supposed to use muskets to fight against machine guns?
As the laser, rail gun, or whatever powered firearm is invented, would not THEY be the "Arms" of THAT time period? Or are we still supposed to use muskets, against those types of weapons, to protect the security of a free state?
The gene pool needs chlorine.
The very essence of the debate, is that we have one, at all. This is not up for debate. I have read about as much literature, official documentation, and case study to fill a small library and no matter from which angle I assault the second amendment, I can not base any possible victory on facts. To the contrary, I can not find one angle in support of the second amendment which is not substantially supported. Therefore, being a moderately intelligent person, I think it only prudent that the only conclusion can be in favor of the second amendment as it is written and no interpretation otherwise can be supported by factual documentation.
Information that was managed to be poured over in support to the contrary as to the validity of the second amendment was also used in an attempt to thwart off the ratification in it's original state and time.
They failed miserably and therefore should not be considered today as they were defeated then.
Blatant disregard for the Constitution is a violation of the BAR and any justice magistrate or subsequent judicial court judge to the Supreme Court that violates, argues and decides against the Constitution, is in breach of their contract with God. An affirmed oath to uphold the Constitution being broken shall not be considered to be law and therefore is indeed void.
These are facts and all can be proven, this is not a debate. This is an injustice that must be undone. Debate requires that a topic be of some lack of clarity or of a moral like dilema. This can be considered neither for if one sets precedents to the contrary of the "law of the land", the United States Constitution, he can only be found guilty of treason as the constitution is every fiber of our existence. To disfigure this document is to hand control to the governments both foreign and domestic. These rights are not independent of each other rather they are dependent upon each other. No right exists without the other for each is in support of the last and enumeration plays no part.
The National Firearms Act of 1934 is unconstitutional. The Gun Control Act of 1968 is unconstitutional. The Brady Bill is unconstitutional. The "assault weapons" ban was unconstitutional. Every gun law in effect within the 50 united states are unconstitutional. Any state that settles into law any gun ban or regulation of any kind is acting in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution. As "the supreme law of the land" no state can enforce any law to the contrary of the constitution and such laws are void.
Where in the hell is just one gifted attorney that can rise above it all and get it done?
There are two kinds of people in this World.....Those that lead....And those that get the hell out of the way....GUT CHECK!...Which one are you?
Where in the hell is just one gifted attorney that can rise above it all and get it done?
I've been wondering that for years.....
Molon Labe
They wouldn't have envisioned a Columbine-type shooting spree. On the other hand, most crimes are committed with regular handguns.
I believe the 2nd Amendment includes them, although at the time the law was drafted they were using muskets I'm just not sure about assault weapons.[:0]
I believe in the people's right to keep arms although I'm ambivalent about assault weapons and, no, I'm not a member of any pro-gun groups.
I don't know, you sure seem to know more than your letting on. Those were somewhat intelligent answers. How would someone who knows nothing about guns make such comments? I'm gonna' pass on this one. Kj, you buying this?[}:)]
There are two kinds of people in this World.....Those that lead....And those that get the hell out of the way....GUT CHECK!...Which one are you?
There are two kinds of people in this World.....Those that lead....And those that get the hell out of the way....GUT CHECK!...Which one are you?
Love them Beavers
Working together to keep the "Hairy League" in check since 1948
Molon Labe
Seems strained, big change in writing style and word choice. If there was some story about being a 19yr old girl who wants to know about guns then it would fit the 'profile'. I don't know what to make of this[;)]
I think you better start working on getting a life...
quote:Originally posted by kingjoey
Seems strained, big change in writing style and word choice. If there was some story about being a 19yr old girl who wants to know about guns then it would fit the 'profile'. I don't know what to make of this[;)]
I think you better start working on getting a life...
Nah, too expensive[:o)]
Love them Beavers
Working together to keep the "Hairy League" in check since 1948