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.

Too Many of U Are 2 Hardline

tr foxtr fox Member Posts: 13,856
Yeah, I'm gonna come out and say it. Too many of you here are way too hard line about gun rights. I value my guns rights too and feel there are several good arguments as to why none of us lawful citizens should ever lose our gun rights. But I'm just not going to go the hard line route. If we all lived on some tiny island, with a small population and could make hard line work then I might be in favor of it. But we live in a huge country with over 250 million fellow citizens. And human nature being what it is, and political power being what it is, to a strong degree you have to have the support of many of those non-gun owning citizens if you are going to hang onto your gun rights. And showing a hard line attitude towards those citizens is not going to get much cooperation from them.

Do the math. Gun owners are in the minority in America. Very active gun owner are part of an even smaller minority in America. You hard liners are part of an even much smaller minority in America. This means that no matter how much GOA tries, or how how much you claim the 2A gives you absolute gun rights, you will not be able to enjoy those gun rights unless you get some cooperation from millions of other Americans, who are reasonable, but don't see things exactly like you do. This is true even if the 2A named you by your full name and declared in bold letters that you had absolute and total gun rights. Unless you act in such a way so as to get cooperation from millions of non-gun owning Americans, you will not keep your gun rights very long.

In regards to those here who boldly claim they are just quietly waiting for the "shooting war, the gun rights revolution" to start so they can jump into action, you make me laugh. Each and every day our federal, state and even city governments put the shaft to you in ways other than gun rights. And instead of going on some kind of rampage, you just quietly take that sodominizing without so much as a word of complaint.

And yeah, you remind me of the Taliban or the extremist Muslims. Christians and Muslims seem to believe in the same God. You would think that with that connection both could find some way to get along. And I believe generally the Christians do get along with the Muslims; at least in modern times. But the Muslims and Taliban take a hard line on the issue, just as some of you do here. Since Christians don't believe in religion exactly like the Muslims do, the Muslims hate the Christians and even go so far as to kill them for their beliefs.

I see that here. YOu hardliners and I have a lot of agreement. We all own and like guns. We all have a belief in the US 2A (and in my case a belief in the KS Constitution) but we don't have the exact same belief about gun rights. We all resent the anti-gun crowd who want to disarm us while leaving the criminals and police armed. So you would think that even though you hardliners and I don't exactly agree on gun rights, we have many, many more areas of close agreement than we have of disagreement. You would think we could find someway to be friends and allies. But you hardliners can't seem to do that.

Over the years I wonder how many potential friends your hardline rantings have run off. And regarding your crusade against the NRA, you have obviously weakened it, at leaste here on GB.com. But a question you need to ask yourself is, while you have been busy weakening the NRA, what exactly have you built up in the NRA's place? Over the years I have seen a lot of tearing down of the NRA, but I haven't seen anything being built in its place.

I'm through with you. Like it or not, but we gun owners need all the friends we can find. You hardliners and people like me could have been friends. But I give up. It will be a cold day in hell before you see me reading or posting on the gun rights forum part of GB.com.


Yeah, yeah, I know. Believe me I WON'T left the door hit me in the * on the way out. And same to you.
«13

Comments

  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,845 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by tr fox
    Yeah, I'm gonna come out and say it. Too many of you here are way too hard line about gun rights. I value my guns rights too and feel there are several good arguments as to why none of us lawful citizens should ever lose our gun rights. But I'm just not going to go the hard line route. If we all lived on some tiny island, with a small population and could make hard line work then I might be in favor of it. But we live in a huge country with over 250 million fellow citizens. And human nature being what it is, and political power being what it is, to a strong degree you have to have the support of many of those non-gun owning citizens if you are going to hang onto your gun rights. And showing a hard line attitude towards those citizens is not going to get much cooperation from them.

    Do the math. Gun owners are in the minority in America. Very active gun owner are part of an even smaller minority in America. You hard liners are part of an even much smaller minority in America. This means that no matter how much GOA tries, or how how much you claim the 2A gives you absolute gun rights, you will not be able to enjoy those gun rights unless you get some cooperation from millions of other Americans, who are reasonable, but don't see things exactly like you do. This is true even if the 2A named you by your full name and declared in bold letters that you had absolute and total gun rights. Unless you act in such a way so as to get cooperation from millions of non-gun owning Americans, you will not keep your gun rights very long.

    In regards to those here who boldly claim they are just quietly waiting for the "shooting war, the gun rights revolution" to start so they can jump into action, you make me laugh. Each and every day our federal, state and even city governments put the shaft to you in ways other than gun rights. And instead of going on some kind of rampage, you just quietly take that sodominizing without so much as a word of complaint.

    And yeah, you remind me of the Taliban or the extremist Muslims. Christians and Muslims seem to believe in the same God. You would think that with that connection both could find some way to get along. And I believe generally the Christians do get along with the Muslims; at least in modern times. But the Muslims and Taliban take a hard line on the issue, just as some of you do here. Since Christians don't believe in religion exactly like the Muslims do, the Muslims hate the Christians and even go so far as to kill them for their beliefs.

    I see that here. YOu hardliners and I have a lot of agreement. We all own and like guns. We all have a belief in the US 2A (and in my case a belief in the KS Constitution) but we don't have the exact same belief about gun rights. We all resent the anti-gun crowd who want to disarm us while leaving the criminals and police armed. So you would think that even though you hardliners and I don't exactly agree on gun rights, we have many, many more areas of close agreement than we have of disagreement. You would think we could find someway to be friends and allies. But you hardliners can't seem to do that.

    Over the years I wonder how many potential friends your hardline rantings have run off. And regarding your crusade against the NRA, you have obviously weakened it, at leaste here on GB.com. But a question you need to ask yourself is, while you have been busy weakening the NRA, what exactly have you built up in the NRA's place? Over the years I have seen a lot of tearing down of the NRA, but I haven't seen anything being built in its place.

    I'm through with you. Like it or not, but we gun owners need all the friends we can find. You hardliners and people like me could have been friends. But I give up. It will be a cold day in hell before you see me reading or posting on the gun rights forum part of GB.com.


    Yeah, yeah, I know. Believe me I WON'T left the door hit me in the * on the way out. And same to you.



    Just quoting before it changes "edit" as it so often does.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by tr fox
    Yeah, I'm gonna come out and say it. Too many of you here are way too hard line about gun rights.

    Sorry you feel that way tr. Some of us simply understand the clear intent and verbiage of the US Constitution and its Bill or Rights, particularly Amendment II.

    Speaking for myself, I fail to see any room to compromise away ANY portion of, or to make ANY concession to Amendment II. Once conceded, the original position/intent is gone, never to be regained.

    Seems pretty simply to me, but then again, I AM a "hard-liner".[;)]

    I value my guns rights too and feel there are several good arguments as to why none of us lawful citizens should ever lose our gun rights. But I'm just not going to go the hard line route. If we all lived on some tiny island, with a small population and could make hard line work then I might be in favor of it. But we live in a huge country with over 250 million fellow citizens. And human nature being what it is, and political power being what it is, to a strong degree you have to have the support of many of those non-gun owning citizens if you are going to hang onto your gun rights. And showing a hard line attitude towards those citizens is not going to get much cooperation from them.

    I am simply not interested in "cooperation".

    I am "demanding" that government resume its proper role and I expect that citizens be made to face up to what Constitutional Governance means.

    Nothing more, nothing less.


    Do the math. Gun owners are in the minority in America. Very active gun owner are part of an even smaller minority in America. You hard liners are part of an even much smaller minority in America.

    True statement.

    To me, it is indicative of just how far we have fallen from America's original intent and how good a job the government has done in watering down our basic understanding of the Constitution, and in flooding us with those who will never have a grasp of America's Founding Principals.

    Regardless, I am quite content to be part of that small group, that group which seemingly is the last remaining bastion of Americans with the understanding of our Constitution and how the government has gradually subverted it AND who have the balls to call things as they are.

    This means that no matter how much GOA tries, or how how much you claim the 2A gives you absolute gun rights, you will not be able to enjoy those gun rights unless you get some cooperation from millions of other Americans, who are reasonable, but don't see things exactly like you do.

    I am simply not looking for cooperation in my exercising my God-given/Natural RTKBA amongst other rights that are continually under attack and being eroded.

    I am simply looking for an acknowledgment and an understanding, that my rights exist and that this FACT is the bottom-line of the whole debate, period.

    Frankly, if "cooperation" means me consciously accepting a perversion of the US Constitution, then you can stick your "cooperation" somewhere.

    It is YOUR position and the positions of those "millions of others" which has allowed our government to become predatory and which have given it the "green light" to continue the march toward some form of tyranny.

    Those who advocate strongly and consistently for the clear intent and meaning of the Constitution, well, we are certainly marginalized....we are certainly minimized.......we are certainly blamed for the "loss/weakening" of certain rights......but in reality our position is the ONLY proper one for an American to take.

    Any other position is contrary to the Constitution. Of course, we all know that this old, "out of date" document is just a "GD dirty piece of paper", right? We've moved beyond the need, or obligation to follow its tenants, right?

    This is true even if the 2A named you by your full name and declared in bold letters that you had absolute and total gun rights. Unless you act in such a way so as to get cooperation from millions of non-gun owning Americans, you will not keep your gun rights very long.

    In regards to those here who boldly claim they are just quietly waiting for the "shooting war, the gun rights revolution" to start so they can jump into action, you make me laugh.

    Speaking for myself, I make no such claim....beyond being prepared to do what I feel is right in any given circumstance, regardless of what that circumstance is.

    Regardless, denigrating a stance that is consistent with our founders previous actions and the clear "bottom-line" intent of Amendment II is illustrative of your mindset and the position of ignorance and acceptance that most revel in.

    Each and every day our federal, state and even city governments put the shaft to you in ways other than gun rights. And instead of going on some kind of rampage, you just quietly take that sodominizing without so much as a word of complaint.

    Another true statement.

    The problem with your generalization tr, is that most of the "hard-line" crowd are smart and also realists. They realize that government is out of control and in their own individual ways, try to peacefully avert the looming catastrophe through consistent advocacy and at the ballot box.

    The "hard-liners" also realize that Amendment II is the line that government can NOT be allowed to cross: for retaining it retains the last and only hope/chance of keeping government in check and in maintaining some vestige of individual freedoms.

    One would think that a purported "smart guy" would get that simple point.

    And yeah, you remind me of the Taliban or the extremist Muslims.

    Another illustration of your far-out, off-base thinking.

    Comparing adherents to the Constitution, which places "limits" on government and which enshrines "individual freedoms", to the "Taliban" or to "extremist Muslims", is ludicrous at best.

    Christians and Muslims seem to believe in the same God. You would think that with that connection both could find some way to get along. And I believe generally the Christians do get along with the Muslims; at least in modern times. But the Muslims and Taliban take a hard line on the issue, just as some of you do here.

    You sir are an idiot.

    If you can't separate the difference between radical Islam and its quest for a world-wide, freedom suppressing Caliphate, from solid freedom loving, freedom demanding Americans, who are simply advocating a return to Constitutional Government....well then, as I said, you are an idiot.

    Since Christians don't believe in religion exactly like the Muslims do, the Muslims hate the Christians and even go so far as to kill them for their beliefs.

    I see that here. YOu hardliners and I have a lot of agreement. We all own and like guns. We all have a belief in the US 2A (and in my case a belief in the KS Constitution) but we don't have the exact same belief about gun rights.

    You have demonstrated many, many times that you do not understand, or at least you fail to acknowledge, the simple meaning of Amendment II.

    We are not in agreement there.

    You have also advocated for and displayed a clear perversion of what a "right" is, as opposed to what is a government granted "privilege". This "privilege" is what you continually push for, tout and advocate for, by preaching "acceptance" and "compromise" and other such tactics.

    Not only are we not in agreement tr, I see you as a Quisling.

    It is that simple.

    We all resent the anti-gun crowd who want to disarm us while leaving the criminals and police armed. So you would think that even though you hardliners and I don't exactly agree on gun rights, we have many, many more areas of close agreement than we have of disagreement. You would think we could find someway to be friends and allies. But you hardliners can't seem to do that.

    Over the years I wonder how many potential friends your hardline rantings have run off.

    First off, I don't really care if someone "ran off" due to harsh, but true and direct information about our very own rights.

    Or.....how many may the "hard-line" crowd have caused to take a hard look at their own positions and beliefs?

    Those who choose to go along with the current "government granted privilege program", should at least have been forced to look at themselves and acknowledge that they have no real Constitutional Principals.

    You and your "government lackeys" can march forth in full knowledge that you are Quislings amongst Constitutionalists.

    And regarding your crusade against the NRA, you have obviously weakened it, at leaste here on GB.com.

    Good, It deserves to lose the support of freedom-loving Americans, for all the previously described reasons.

    But a question you need to ask yourself is, while you have been busy weakening the NRA, what exactly have you built up in the NRA's place?

    The NRA's "place" is with you tr.

    You both espouse ignoring the original intent of Amendment II and you both espouse changing our God-given/Natural
    "RIGHT" into a government granted "PRIVILEGE", that "privilege" being for whatever "reasons" the government chooses to "allow" a citizen to have that "privilege".

    Why the hell would we want to "replace" that flawed monster?

    Over the years I have seen a lot of tearing down of the NRA, but I haven't seen anything being built in its place.

    I'm through with you. Like it or not, but we gun owners need all the friends we can find. You hardliners and people like me could have been friends. But I give up. It will be a cold day in hell before you see me reading or posting on the gun rights forum part of GB.com.


    Okay then....bye.[;)]

    A perfect illustration of the childish mentality of "pick up your bat and ball and go home".

    Yeah, yeah, I know. Believe me I WON'T left the door hit me in the * on the way out. And same to you.
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Jeepers !!.

    Like a bolt of lightning, the good captain has laid bare the soul of a Quisling.

    I have absolutely NOTHING to add to the above critique of a Loyalist and Quisling save for changing the title of the thread.

    [red]"Not Enough of Us are HARDLINE about Our Gun Rights"[/red]
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    TR,

    Let me say this:

    First you call us "hardline" because we BELIVE in what is written. WE know the history of this country. WE know the history behind our founding documents.

    WE belive in freedoms just the way the PEOPLE that founded this country did. WE demand that politicians follow the "rules" that they SWORE to follow. We aren't asking for "alternate" rules, like you and your ilk do. While I may not care for those "radicals" in religion, we demand that the politicians follow the "rules" in allowing those people to practice their religion, so long as no harms comes to others from it. Same thing with amendment two.

    We don't lie in wait for a war, but we prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

    AGAIN you compare us to the Taliban. Are you that delusional? WE are not trying to oppress anyone. We want freedom, not to oppress anyone. I could care less what, if any, arms you or anyone else CHOOSE to own, nor do I belive that ANYONE should be able to tell me what I "MAY" posses.

    Truth be told, who wants you for a "friend" anyway? Who really wants a "friend" that will jab a knife in your back when given the oppertunity. You never "thought over" any info you were given. You have your mind set from go, that the NRA is the savior of amendment two. You never cared about history and the "rules" set forth. You want alternate rules. IF you knew history and our foundation, you would know things are such, so that one group can't squash another. IOW Mob mentality is not allowed to rule this country. You and your ilk want a democracy, NOT a constitutional republic.


    I say good riddance.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Highball
    Jeepers !!.

    Like a bolt of lightning, the good captain has laid bare the soul of a Quisling.

    I have absolutely NOTHING to add to the above critique of a Loyalist and Quisling save for changing the title of the thread.

    [red]"Not Enough of Us are HARDLINE about Our Gun Rights"[/red]


    Many thanks Highball.

    The differences in our positions along with tr's flawed logic seemed crystal clear to me.

    Of course, it always has. Go figure.
  • Mk23Mk23 Member Posts: 127 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    First of all, God knows that I agree 100% that the 2nd amendment is meant to be an unquestionable absolute.

    Unfortunately, if someone were to say that the 2nd amendment as it stands is no longer an unquestionable absolute, I could not argue without feeling like a liar.

    For better or for worse, TR's statements on the effects of political power are completely true. Every single amendment on the sacred document that is our Constitution can be curtailed, suspended, or even completely revoked if popular opinion were in support of it. Every. Single. One. Even if there is no legal method for this, it could happen, simply because there would be nobody to cry foul, or at least nobody to listen.

    And we obviously all agree, that there are too few hardliners. Definitely too few to make any difference all by ourselves. Without popular support, any and all of our protests, regardless of our moral and legal right, will fall on deaf ears, and we will be forced to watch helplessly as all liberties and freedoms plummet to their sad end after our 2nd amendment rights are taken.

    I say that if we can get any form of support from moderates/quislings/whatever you wish to call them, we take it. This is not about morals, principles, or beliefs. This is about survival. The survival of the principles that we are 'hardline' about. And even if it survives in a weakened state, I still find that to be better than seeing them die completely.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mk23


    I say that if we can get any form of support from moderates/quislings/whatever you wish to call them, we take it. This is not about morals, principles, or beliefs. This is about survival. The survival of the principles that we are 'hardline' about. And even if it survives in a weakened state, I still find that to be better than seeing them die completely.


    *sigh*

    Think about those words. Liken the death of Amendment 2 and the 20,000 cuts to this scenerio:

    Will they attack a healthy man, strong, and WELL able to defend himself.
    OR will they prefer to kill him AFTER disease, starvation, and old age has weakened him to the point of no resistance?

    Negotiating your rights is futile. YOU are the one losing, NOT them. THEY gain more from you EVERY TIME YOU BARGIN. Look how much they have taken. WHAT? You going to go slink away and let someone else fight the battle that you won't?

    It was once said (and should be forever rememebered):
    "If there is to be trouble, let it be in MY day, so that my children may have peace."

    Cowering from this problem won't make it go away, nor make it better. Why do people INSIST in following the same BAD decisions that got us here to begin with?
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    quote:and we will be forced to watch helplessly as all liberties and freedoms plummet to their sad end after our 2nd amendment rights are taken.
    So be it. If there are no men left in America..let us have total tyranny.

    I am willing to gamble...simply because I feel the loss of freedoms and Rights more keenly then the TrFoxes and perhaps you,MK23...I think we ALREADY live under tyranny.

    Bring on the government purges of masses of people...that you and Fox make the tough decision to be an American...or a slave.

    Let us stop pretending that we are free..that the Foxes of the world can prattle on about their "Right to Carry a gun" just like they had good sense.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mk23
    First of all, God knows that I agree 100% that the 2nd amendment is meant to be an unquestionable absolute.

    Unfortunately, if someone were to say that the 2nd amendment as it stands is no longer an unquestionable absolute, I could not argue without feeling like a liar.

    For better or for worse, TR's statements on the effects of political power are completely true. Every single amendment on the sacred document that is our Constitution can be curtailed, suspended, or even completely revoked if popular opinion were in support of it. Every. Single. One. Even if there is no legal method for this, it could happen, simply because there would be nobody to cry foul, or at least nobody to listen.

    Many of us ARE calling foul and many others are not listening, right now, not in some hypothetical distant future.

    We are to what, give up, fall in line, adopt the "conventional wisdom" of the "majority"?

    I think not.

    And we obviously all agree, that there are too few hardliners.

    tr doesn't agree. He thinks there are to many hard-liners.

    Definitely too few to make any difference all by ourselves. Without popular support, any and all of our protests, regardless of our moral and legal right, will fall on deaf ears, and we will be forced to watch helplessly as all liberties and freedoms plummet to their sad end after our 2nd amendment rights are taken.


    Isn't this exactly what is going on right now?

    So, should we strict constitutionalists simply give up, or shall we get with "the program" of "compromise" to "save" our Constitution?

    You think that THAT course of action will work? You think having the "hard-line" shut up and "go along to get along" will improve the education of people to constitutional issues and save what remains?

    You are not serious, are you?

    I say that if we can get any form of support from moderates/quislings/whatever you wish to call them, we take it. This is not about morals, principles, or beliefs.

    This is absolutely about morals, principals and beliefs. It is about the very heart and soul of America and about America's morals, principals and beliefs.

    This whole issue hinges on not only the principals of "America", but upon the principals, integrity, ethics, courage and morals of each of us.

    This is where the rubber meets the road sir, and if we can't even stand up for what we believe and what we hold sacred, what do we stand on?

    How then is anything miraculously going to improve when we give up the very heart and soul of what makes America?

    This is about survival. The survival of the principles that we are 'hardline' about.

    What is your point?

    You state above that this is not about principals, then you turn around and acknowledge that it IS about the very survival of constitutional principals.

    Which is it?

    And even if it survives in a weakened state, I still find that to be better than seeing them die completely.

    I'll close with an acknowledgment that you seem to mean well.

    The bottom-line for me and for many others, is that we simply refuse to willingly concede any portion of our rights being eroded. Once any portion of, or any entire right is conceded, it is forever gone, period.

    We refuse to follow the path of compromise, concession and/or willing acceptance of an overreaching and predatory government.

    It is that simple.
  • triple223taptriple223tap Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    That's an interesting claim, lt496 -

    Some of us simply understand the clear intent and verbiage of the US Constitution and its Bill or Rights, particularly Amendment II.

    I wonder which "of us" you refer to, and what your understanding is.

    Care to enlighten us?

    Is your understanding the same as the that of the nine justices of the Supreme Court, men and women who have established a record of knowledge and expertise which earned them presidential nomination, and who have withstood rigorous examination by the US Congress?

    Is your understanding the same as that of professors of Constitutional Law who have earned tenure at our best universities?

    Is your understanding the same as men like Robert Byrd and Arlen Specter, who have spent their entire adult lives studying the Constitution and protecting and defending it?
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by triple223tap
    That's an interesting claim, lt496 -

    Some of us simply understand the clear intent and verbiage of the US Constitution and its Bill or Rights, particularly Amendment II.

    I wonder which "of us" you refer to, and what your understanding is.

    Clearly not you.

    Care to enlighten us?

    Not particularly.

    Of course, you could clarify who you mean by "us" first. If by that, you mean "you", I choose to not waste my time. Your positions are previously stated and contrary to mine.

    Okay with you?

    Is your understanding the same as the that of the nine justices of the Supreme Court, men and women who have established a record of knowledge and expertise which earned them presidential nomination, and who have withstood rigorous examination by the US Congress?

    You mean the current crop of political hacks appointed by various liberals, globalists and quasi-socialists, or some other, more historical SCOTUS?

    Clearly, taking an easily reviewed historical perspective, we can clearly establish that the modern SCOTUS and the various SCOTUS of the past 80-90 years, is merely a microcosm of the rest of America's political elite and I can make the clear argument that they come up lacking in adhering to the intent of the Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

    Is that the SCOTUS you are referring to sir?

    Is your understanding the same as that of professors of Constitutional Law who have earned tenure at our best universities?


    Clearly not.

    Seems as if most of our "esteemed" professors are as "inventive" of constitutional issues as many on the past and present SCOTUS and as our legislature and executive have been.

    Why do you ask, do you have difficulty in reading and understanding the simple verbiage, meaning and easily researched intent of the Constitution?

    Is your understanding the same as men like Robert Byrd and Arlen Specter, who have spent their entire adult lives studying the Constitution and protecting and defending it?

    Good Lord I hope not!

    Arlen Specter and Robert Byrd are two typical political hacks who circumvent the Constitution at will and when it suits them. They've done so for decades.

    Neither one has done jack-snit to "protect and defend" it IMO. Oh, Byrd trembles and babbles about it constantly, holding himself up as some "elder statesman", but take a look at his voting record sometime.

    I need not even go into Specter and his antics.

    You sir, have just shown your own ignorance or willful disregard of the Constitution. Somehow, I am not surprised.

    It doesn't take an "entire life" to study the Constitution sir.

    It is relatively short, very easy to read, very simple to understand and very easy to use as a measure for government actions and SCOTUS rulings.

    Sadly, government and the SCOTUS continually come up lacking and both clearly and repeatedly circumvent, erode and/or ignore the Constitution on a regular basis.

    Anything else I can do for you sir?
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    What an absolute joy ..sitting down and reading the absolute shredding, spindling, and mutilation of a Socialist.

    Hardly seems fair, sometimes ..they operate out of a deep devotion to authority and worship of tyranny ..sad creatures lacking the skills necessary to survive in the bustling arena of freedom.
  • triple223taptriple223tap Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Anything else I can do for you sir?

    Nope. You've made your position quite clear. We can do away with the SCOTUS, and no longer require Constitutional Law as a course of study.

    Should some Constitutional question arise, we can simply ask you.

    Anything else I can do for you sir?

    Actually there is one thing - tell me about the extent of the President's powers during wartime. I've read the Constitution, but it isn't quite clear to me.


    LMAO!
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by triple223tap
    Anything else I can do for you sir?

    Nope. You've made your position quite clear. We can do away with the SCOTUS, and no longer require Constitutional Law as a course of study.

    Should some Constitutional question arise, we can simply ask you.

    So, tell me about the extent of the President's powers during wartime. I've read the Constitution, but it isn't quite clear to me.


    LMAO!




    Your laughing your * off notwithstanding, you at least admit the truth in your last statement.

    As to your non-substantive response, I did not address any of the issues which you now pose as a red-herring.

    My post to you was direct and responsive to the questions you asked me. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Since my response came off somewhat different than you preferred, your typical sophomoric tactic is to divert attention from what the actual issue was and to attempt to ridicule.

    Nice try though sir.

    You are a perfect illustration of the main-stream of America and why we are in our current dire straits.

    You should run for office, you'd fit right in.[;)]
  • triple223taptriple223tap Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    That's a lot of words, when you could have simply said "I don't have a clue".

    quote:Originally posted by lt496
    quote:Originally posted by triple223tap
    Anything else I can do for you sir?

    Nope. You've made your position quite clear. We can do away with the SCOTUS, and no longer require Constitutional Law as a course of study.

    Should some Constitutional question arise, we can simply ask you.

    So, tell me about the extent of the President's powers during wartime. I've read the Constitution, but it isn't quite clear to me.


    LMAO!




    Your laughing your * off notwithstanding, you at least admit the truth in your last statement.

    As to your non-substantive response, I did not address any of the issues which you now pose as a red-herring.

    My post to you was direct and responsive to the questions you asked me. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Since my response came off somewhat different than you preferred, your typical sophomoric tactic is to divert attention from what the actual issue was and to attempt to ridicule.

    Nice try though sir.

    You are a perfect illustration of the main-stream of America and why we are in our current dire straits.

    You should run for office, you'd fit right in.[;)]
  • Mk23Mk23 Member Posts: 127 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I would never suggest shutting up, or compromising, or falling in line with the masses.

    The only thing I feel that you overlook is that, while these compromisers are largely sheep, they can be as much poison to the cause of our enemies as they have been to our own. And considering how much we've already lost, we really have little to lose by using these masses the same way our enemies do.

    Why do you refuse to plant poisonous seeds to the ranks of our enemies, even when you can recognize them already deep rooted in our own cause?

    Popular opinion is everything. There are as many that would be mindless voices to our cause as there would be to our enemies if they could only be convinced it is right. In fact, most of the people listening to us cry foul fall into this category!

    And as sad as it is that there are these poisonous seeds that have taken root, digging them up would leave us frail, isolated, and if the leftist media finally decides to label us 'terrorists', likely dead to the last man without accomplishing a damn thing.
  • PA ShootistPA Shootist Member Posts: 671 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The tone of this forum reflects the tone of the moderator to a large extent. While I can appreciate men or women with convictions and strong feelings, I can also appreciate logic and common sense. It has been a tough battle, keeping what gun rights we have, in the face of the realities of being in the minority in a modern USA. It will continue to be a tough battle. We gun owners and gun rights advocates must use every weapon in our arsenal. One of the most effective voices for all gun owners, even the hard-liners here, has been, and will remain, the NRA. Why do certain members and the moderator here loathe their best ally? It is not a perfect organization. Like all of us, they have made some mistakes. But there is no current replacement, no stronger voice.

    I read the "Taliban-like" rantings of the hard-liners here, and shudder. The anti-NRA stance offers nothing in return, only name-calling and bashing of any who would disagree. I think the Gunbroker owners need to see the harm inflicted on a just cause by what is said here.

    I supppose I'll get bashed for having an opinion that isn't in agreement with all the rantings and ravings, as are most who don't follow the moderator's hard line. I think I represent a better avenue for the future of gun owners' rights than they. But it looks like it's time for a shake-up here.
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    PA Shootist

    quote:The tone of this forum reflects the tone of the moderator to a large extent. I understand your angst here...Strong convictions that the NRA has sold us out need poofed..INSTANTLY..so you can re-enter your comfort zone.
    quote:While I can appreciate men or women with convictions and strong feelings, I can also appreciate logic and common sense. You just cannot appreciate the logic and common sense of the FOUNDERS...only the basturdized version of the modern day weak-kneed cowards need apply here...
    quote:It has been a tough battle, keeping what gun rights we have, What some of us have patiently explained over and over and over is;
    You HAVE no 'gun rights' anymore..just permissions granted from overweening government...and MOST of that is directly laid at your doorstep..you barterers that dance with the Beast.
    quote:in the face of the realities of being in the minority in a modern USA. What you fail to understand...TOTALLY..is that the Constitution was DESIGNED to protect the minority Rights of the citizens of this country..and because you and Fox and millions more refuse to hold the people responsible for the loss of those Rights accountable.

    quote: It will continue to be a tough battle. We gun owners and gun rights advocates must use every weapon in our arsenal. Sure.
    Just remember..as many of us here are pointing out...and you refuse to accept... YOU are not a "Gun Rights Supporter"...YOU support 'Governmental permissions'. That is perfectly understood by your undying defense of the NRA.


    quote:One of the most effective voices for all gun owners, even the hard-liners here, has been, and will remain, the NRA.
    Proof that you refuse to even LOOK at the facts..all the data presented right here on this forum.


    quote:Why do certain members and the moderator here loathe their best ally? No...that would be YOUR best ally..not those of us actually supporting the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    quote:It is not a perfect organization. Like all of us, they have made some mistakes. But there is no current replacement, no stronger voice.
    Yes..there is. Called the Bill of Rights. You cannot support the Second Amendment AND the NRA.

    quote:I read the "Taliban-like" rantings of the hard-liners here, and shudder.That states your position perfectly. You also drew the line between us.
    I support the Constitution and Bill of Rights. YOU, on the other hand, support the government.


    quote: The anti-NRA stance offers nothing in return, only name-calling and bashing of any who would disagree. I think the Gunbroker owners need to see the harm inflicted on a just cause by what is said here. I haven't yet called you a Taliban. You have, indeed, spit on the Founders..and turned your back on the great experiment of freedom here in America.

    quote:I supppose I'll get bashed for having an opinion that isn't in agreement with all the rantings and ravings, A mazing how revealing these words are. Calling forth the words of the Founders of this country is considered 'ranting and ravings' by the dumbed down remnents of those Founders...run-out seed of giants of men.

    quote: as are most who don't follow the moderator's hard line. I think I represent a better avenue for the future of gun owners' rights than they. The moderator here has poofed and locked topics that I argue about more times then I care to mention. It is indeed amusing that you consider HIM 'hardline'..certainly I can understand why you consider ME Taliban.

    UNDERSTAND; What I attempt to do is point to the clear line between us to the outside world.
    You talk of 'gun rights' as a function of government...whatever they allow you to do today...subject to revision anytime they wish.

    I speak of "GUN RIGHTS"..those rights mentioned in the Second Amendment..absent 'infringement' from governmental authorities.


    quote:But it looks like it's time for a shake-up here.

    Now THIS is no surprise at all.
    No shock at all. You accept restrictions and infringments of your Second Amendment Rights..you willingly crawl on your belly to exercise a basic Right..begging Daddy to buy a gun....You certainly would have no heartburn in advocating the restrictions on the First Amendment, even to the point of attempting to push that agenda where it does not exist.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by PA Shootist

    First off, let me just say that everyone has the ability and means to say their piece here on this forum. Some merely don't like being called, or challenged, on the things they say.

    You can damn sure expect to get challenged, or questioned, or hammered, or agreed with, reference to what you are opining about....this is, after all, the "Gun Rights" and "Constitutional Law" forum.

    The tone of this forum reflects the tone of the moderator to a large extent.

    Can't speak for anyone but myself, but I march to my own drummer and have my own opinions and beliefs. I take no direction from the moderator, or anyone else.

    It is true however, that a handful of posters here, including the forum mod, have strong "pro-freedom" and strong "pro-constitution" views. Therefore, I can feel a certain "kinship" with them.

    This is a natural association, since it is a given that those expressing strong views of individual liberty, get told to and/or "suggested", that we tone down, or back off, or otherwise not express our beliefs and how we see things.

    These opinions and beliefs seem to somehow be "threatening" to many who read them. Curious, why is that?

    Go figure.

    While I can appreciate men or women with convictions and strong feelings, I can also appreciate logic and common sense.

    Does that mean that those of us with strong convictions are somehow lacking in "logic and common sense"?

    Care to support that hypothesis with something?


    It has been a tough battle, keeping what gun rights we have, in the face of the realities of being in the minority in a modern USA. It will continue to be a tough battle. We gun owners and gun rights advocates must use every weapon in our arsenal.

    Is that the "compromise weapon"? You know, the one that shoots and wounds the wielder of it.

    One of the most effective voices for all gun owners, even the hard-liners here, has been, and will remain, the NRA. Why do certain members and the moderator here loathe their best ally?

    Wrong and easily provable, as has been done many, many times. Yet you persist in pushing them as some panacea for gun-rights.

    Why do I see the NRA as a danger? How many time does the reason and the myriad of facts to support that reason need to be posted?

    This then, is the crux of the diametric opposition.

    There is a clear difference in the views of we "hard-liners" and the rest of you. A small group of us advocate for our basic and fundamental rights and individual freedoms.

    I know, I know, such thoughts are "dangerous" and "radical", aren't they? Such views are somehow "unAmerican", or somehow "wrong", right?

    I read the "Taliban-like" rantings of the hard-liners here, and shudder.

    This one you get ZERO pass on sir. Step up and back it up, or shut up.

    It is a sad day in America when someone simply advocating a return to basic Constitutional Principals and ESTABLISHED Constitutional Government, are likened to the "Taliban".

    Once again, statements like this just piss me off.

    Do you not have the simple intelligence to see the difference between advocating for fundamental individual rights and a non-tyrannical/non-predatory government -vs- a world wide, Caliphate which exists to suppress individual freedoms and foster the "iron hand" of Islamic Law upon everyone?

    Our Constitution is already established and it clearly outlines what government is authorized to do and it also enshrines certain unalienable rights that government is to keep its hands completely off of.

    We don't follow it sir. that is the issue at hand and what I advocate for.

    The spirit and understanding of our very founding and of fundamental liberty seems to be all but dead in America, God help us.[V]



    The anti-NRA stance offers nothing in return, only name-calling and bashing of any who would disagree.

    Another fundamental example of your failure to understand.

    It isn't about "bashing" and name-calling of organizations with which we disagree, it IS about pointing our provable facts, and trying to educate the fooled, or the ignorant, to those facts.

    As far as the NRA goes, it is a "Quisling Organization" that deliberately facilitates the erosion of Amendment II.

    This is not arguable in a real sense. Folks with your outlook simply see this as proper and/or "a good thing", or you say yeah, "but" they do alot of good.

    NRA actions are just like being pregnant sir. You either are, or you are not.

    The NRA either supports Amendment II, or it does not. Fact is, it does not. It is as simple as that.

    I think the Gunbroker owners need to see the harm inflicted on a just cause by what is said here.

    Another example of a big baby, who can't substantiate a flawed view and just can't stand someone to say harsh, albeit supportable, things about a beloved organization.

    Mommy, Mommy, they are being mean to the NRA!!!!

    This, posed as a veiled threat to "snitch off" the hard-liners. Simply pathetic.[:(!]

    I supppose I'll get bashed for having an opinion that isn't in agreement with all the rantings and ravings, as are most who don't follow the moderator's hard line.

    Again, it is not the moderator's "hard-line", this one is all mine, got it?

    You are not being bashed, you are being called to task for what you say. It is that simple.

    Attempting to characterize your being challenged and/or called to task by pre-identifying it as "rantings and ravings" is a sorry tactic at best.

    I think I represent a better avenue for the future of gun owners' rights than they.

    That is certainly your right to think. We simply happen to disagree on that point.

    That's the beauty of it, we can agree to disagree after fleshing out our views and beliefs.

    Why this is threatening to so many seems a weakness in, or inability to defend, certain positions, more than the debate/exchange of views itself.

    But it looks like it's time for a shake-up here.

    Is this another example of the type of freedoms you hold dear and/or the "better avenue" for gun-rights you tout as your position; Threatening to run and tell on us (hard-liners) with the purpose of shutting up our freedom to speak, or to get us to "moderate" our positions to conform more closely to your positions?

    Somehow the term "hypocrite" comes to mind......
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,138 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    In another post, Highball stated something to the effect that when properly viewed, those that advocate original intent are the true centrists. I thought that statement very important, as it should be obvious that the strict interpretation of the Constitution should be central, not fringe.

    As tr fox and triple223tap demonstrate, the strict interpretation of the Constitution is now considered fringe, and those that would obstruct the rights guaranteed therein are deemed moderate.

    Just as McCain-Feingold clearly reduces that which is guaranteed in the First, the innumerable type and location bans on firearm ownership clearly reduce what is guaranteed in the 2nd. If we can agree for this discussion to put aside the restrictions for cause (felony conviction, etc.) it should be obvious to all that a right is being infringed.

    Therefore, is it 'hard-line' to know that a ban on handgun ownership in Washington DC is a direct infringement on a guaranteed right, regardless of what the SCOTUS decision is? I would suggest not. Clearly the right of the people to keep and bear arms is being infringed.

    The 14th Amendment states, among other things, that 'No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States...'. It does not take a directed study of Constitutional law to understand that the 'citizens' in the 14th and 'the people' referenced in the 2nd (now with the inclusion of blacks) are one and the same.

    Therefore, the NRA, with its acceptance of type and location bans is selling us out by collaborating with governments in deciding what we should own and where we are allowed to own it. This is not a 'hard-line' position, it should be viewed as a centrist position.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Have said it before ..and will repeat it one more.

    I will take the tiny little group of centrists (hardliners, to the run-out seed) we have here ..the above two posters, the moderator, a handful more that post here ..in preference to the millions that the weak-kneed keep whining about.
    Those millions are perfectly willing to accept a stale, moldy crumb from the table of the Elites in place of the steak of freedom.

    Those few men are the backbone of freedom ..the 3 % I speak of now and again.
  • dannavy85dannavy85 Member Posts: 12 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Yeah, I'm gonna come out and say it.

    Fine, you said it. I'm sure there are many veterans of the armed services who'll prove you wrong.
  • trapguy2007trapguy2007 Member Posts: 8,959
    edited November -1
    To satisfy my own curiosity ,I would like to know how many on this thread have bought a weapon in a store since 1968 and if you have a
    carry permit .
    Not trying to start anything, just want to know where you are coming from .
    Thanks
    Roger
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    quote:have bought a weapon in a store since 1968 and if you have a
    I have. I seriously doubt I will buy another. The crawling and begging has become entirely too onerous for me.

    Just on a side note;
    I have no bones to pick with those getting a CCW...as long as they understand that they have traded their Rights for privileges.
    Bowing the knee to the Beast, when done to stay alive, is not a crime. (At least..until the chip)
    Bowing the knee with pleasure.."Thanks , daddy, for the CCW..I got my rights back.."

    IS.
  • trapguy2007trapguy2007 Member Posts: 8,959
    edited November -1
    Understand what you meen .
    Remember going with my grandfather to buy shoes ,seeds and a new remington 1100 all in the same store in the early 60's. Walked out with all 3 that day !
    Pitiful that it is not that easy now .
    Thanks for honest answer .
    Roger
  • trapguy2007trapguy2007 Member Posts: 8,959
    edited November -1
    Took longer to be fit for the shoes than to buy shotgun .
  • slumlord44slumlord44 Member Posts: 3,702 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Tr Fox
    I am one of the few who participate in this forum that prety much agrees with you 100%. Talk is cheap. I spend a little of my cash to help the cause. Many of the so called hardliners do nothing but blow a lot of hot air. A lot of these guys talk tough but when the men with badges and guns come to there door to confiscate their guns, how many will have the gonads to resist?
  • CUEANDCUSHIONCUEANDCUSHION Member Posts: 79 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Have bought a couple guns in the past year. I own my own business and in MO you can have a gun at work( if you own it) , at home, in your tent, mobile home etc, and in your vehicle without a CCW. Was thinking about getting one anyways. They have actually made the CCW and gun buying laws easier now. You used to be forced to go to a local sheriff and fill out a form which was mailed in and couple weeks go by and you pay them a permit fee and then you get to buy a single gun. Now they just call it in to make sure you are legal and you buy a gun on the spot. My last gun purchase took about 2 or maybe 3 minutes to call in and get confirmed. Very nice improvement in MO law recently. [:D]
  • slumlord44slumlord44 Member Posts: 3,702 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    clueandcushon
    As a resident of your neghiboring Socialist Soviet State of Illinois I am jealous of your situation.Wish we had it so good here. There is something wrong when I can go across the river to St. Louis or St. Charles and buy a gun easier than I can here. I can also get a Florida Concealed Carry Permit and carry in Mo and many other states but not in Illlinois. If all of my friends, relatives and property were not here, I would move. Things are actualy better in some places contrary to what the hardliners here seem to think.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by slumlord44
    Tr Fox
    I am one of the few who participate in this forum that prety much agrees with you 100%. Talk is cheap. I spend a little of my cash to help the cause.

    How's that been working out for you (us)?

    Many of the so called hardliners do nothing but blow a lot of hot air.

    And you know this to be true because.........oh, yeah, you said it in you own post....talk is cheap.

    Keep talking.....or "sqwawkin", as that seems to fit better. [;)]

    A lot of these guys talk tough but when the men with badges and guns come to there door to confiscate their guns, how many will have the gonads to resist?

    According to you, tr and the "New Americans", it is a good thing that you have the NRA, because they keep the "wolf howling at the door", right?

    Hell, if it wasn't for them, we'd have no Amendment II at all, would we?

    Rant on...

    Posts like this merely confirm that many Americans do not even comprehend the very concept of true freedom, individual liberty and the way in which American government was created by the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights, how it was meant to operate and how it is to be restrained

    I see continual examples of citizens who display outright ignorance, willful culpability in keeping a predatory government system, the old "I can't fix it so I must accept it attitude" e.g. apathy, denial of cause and effect, resignation to the current paradigm and other examples.

    This simply adds up to the fact that we will never achieve a change in the direction of government, without some awakening of "the people".

    Sadly, I don't see that happening.

    More likely, there will be a major event (government sponsored or not) through which the Fed will reach out and snatch our remaining freedoms in the name of "security" and "maintaining order".

    By then, it will be too late to act, because we will have squandered our very constitutional system of government and allowed our individual liberties to have eroded away.

    Rant off....
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,138 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by CUEANDCUSHION
    Have bought a couple guns in the past year. I own my own business and in MO you can have a gun at work( if you own it) , at home, in your tent, mobile home etc, and in your vehicle without a CCW. Was thinking about getting one anyways. They have actually made the CCW and gun buying laws easier now. You used to be forced to go to a local sheriff and fill out a form which was mailed in and couple weeks go by and you pay them a permit fee and then you get to buy a single gun. Now they just call it in to make sure you are legal and you buy a gun on the spot. My last gun purchase took about 2 or maybe 3 minutes to call in and get confirmed. Very nice improvement in MO law recently. [:D]
    My last gun purchase involved an exchange of cash only. Perfectly legal, just as it should be.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • Rack OpsRack Ops Member Posts: 18,597 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Sometimes I find myself wondering if incrementalism, the bane of our existence it seems, can work both ways.

    Victory is to come in one fell swoop, while defeat is measured in baby steps.

    CCW permits are often lambasted as being an instrument that has transformed a "right" into a "privilege". Its hard to disagree with that sentiment, but it seems that "privilege" is becoming increasingly seen as a "right" of the law-abiding.

    I haven't given up hope just yet
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
    Sometimes I find myself wondering if incrementalism, the bane of our existence it seems, can work both ways.

    Victory is to come in one fell swoop, while defeat is measured in baby steps.

    CCW permits are often lambasted as being an instrument that has transformed a "right" into a "privilege". Its hard to disagree with that sentiment, but it seems that "privilege" is becoming increasingly seen as a "right" of the law-abiding.

    I haven't given up hope just yet



    Something to ponder:
    They make new laws everyday. They will never be satisfied UNTIL they effectively ban weapons from the citizenry.

    All these laws NOW don't stop criminals, they only disarm the people that FOLLOW the rules. Wait until after the next election. My bet is your attitude will change.
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,138 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
    Sometimes I find myself wondering if incrementalism, the bane of our existence it seems, can work both ways.

    Victory is to come in one fell swoop, while defeat is measured in baby steps.

    CCW permits are often lambasted as being an instrument that has transformed a "right" into a "privilege". Its hard to disagree with that sentiment, but it seems that "privilege" is becoming increasingly seen as a "right" of the law-abiding.

    I haven't given up hope just yet
    Rack Ops:

    I have not given up yet either. The trend is positive, but we must recognize that where this is occurring it is simply older, more restrictive laws being replaced with newer, less restrictive ones. The mentality of privilege is ingrained in the body politic, and it is ingrained in the thinking of almost every elected representative and most voters.

    What is necessary is not for our elected representatives to craft 'shall issue' legislation, rather to strike existing law from the books without seeing a need to replace it. Only by legislatures recognizing that they do not have the power to impose these laws does that right return.

    For now, I tolerate the fact that I have been granted the privilege to carry a concealed weapon within my home state and the 4 or 5 that have a reciprocity agreement with it. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but is not the Constitution a national document? It seems that there is a large number of states that have crafted legislation that limits and in most cases, removes that right from me, a U.S. Citizen who happens to reside in another state.

    Again, until it is universally recognized that a right is not fungible, there is little chance for success. This universal recognition, and only this universal recognition, will be the one fell swoop that will be our victory.
    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    quote:slumlord44
    New Member



    USA
    80 Posts
    Posted - 04/08/2008 : 12:20:56 AM

    Tr Fox
    I am one of the few who participate in this forum that prety much agrees with you 100%.
    Don't feel too bad about it...General is full of people that agree with you. So is the NRA...and many millions more gun owners.

    Try to remember...that doesn't make you right. I call to mind something my daddy told me several times growing up..(My REAL daddy, by the way...not the daddy that you and Fox and the rest answer to)
    "50 Million Frenchmen CAN'T be wrong."

    I didn't understand what he meant, back then....
    quote: Talk is cheap. You and the New Americans well ought to know that...for talk will sure enough be ALL you ever do. Except, of course, that one other little thing or two..send cash and beg big daddy to 'please don't take my guns away'...

    quote: I spend a little of my cash to help the cause. Many of the so called hardliners do nothing but blow a lot of hot air. I spend nearly every dollar I have to advance the cause. I damn well guarantee you that your cause and MINE are vastly different...make book on it.


    quote: A lot of these guys talk tough but when the men with badges and guns come to there door to confiscate their guns, how many will have the gonads to resist? Time will tell, will it not ?
    But one thing is obvious. They won't have to come to YOUR door..for you will be first in line to turn YOURS over..as will Fox.

    After all..it will be the LAW then..and it will be for your own good. ALL you New Americans will line up to turn them in...so don't feel bad about it...
  • Old IronsightsOld Ironsights Member Posts: 93 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    All I have to say is:

    "The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one MAKES them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. ... Create a nation of law-breakers, and then you cash in on the guilt." -- Ayn Rand "Atlas Shrugged"


    If you aren't AGAINST Tyrany & Corruption you are FOR "Government".
  • w3500w3500 Member Posts: 43
    edited November -1
    I'm with Highball. When the 3% of the real people stand up, I am with you,
  • triple223taptriple223tap Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Go ahead, stand up, whatever that means. Here, Highball and I'll hold your coat.
  • HighballHighball Member Posts: 15,755
    edited November -1
    Don't ever believe that whatever the last poster states about me is fact.
    He operates out of a world barely clinging to the edge of reality...and has NO RELATIONSHIP WHATEVER to the world of the Founders.
    He exhibits nothing but contempt for their ideals ..and demonstrates a nothing but slavish obedience to `authority' ..whatever that is at present.

    Make no mistake about it;
    He is indeed a New American. The Founders would have ..indeed DID ..hold such in deepest contempt.for their loyalty to the King was unquestioned. Today that loyalty is transferred to Washington, D.C., and the various state governments scattered about.
  • triple223taptriple223tap Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Don't ever believe that whatever the last poster states about me is fact.

    I'm looking into my crystal ball...far into the future...what do I see? Ahhh, it's Highball, grown old, but still defiant...

    "Yep, sonny, one day, one day, one day, one day...we're gonna....ah...were gonna'....ahhhhh...gonna'.....Nursie! Nursie! Come Quick! My diaper is full!"
Sign In or Register to comment.