|
Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!
|
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| HG8Harrier |
Posted - 10/02/2006 : 2:58:13 PM
It makes me sad to be an American when I read this:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15105305/?GT1=8618
I don't like getting into politics, but this is just shameful. The greatest thing America had going for it was freedom from religious persecution. In today's world, the Amish have been one of the few religions to have been largely unimpacted by the outside world. Now the problems of the rest of the country have been forced right onto their doorstep and ruined the lives of hundreds, if not thousands, in the community with the passing of these six young women.
Damn our second amendment.
It should read:
A mandate to keep your arms bare of any firearms, and a right to keep a bare ass.
Even if you're not religious, pray for Lancaster County.
I'm not, and I am. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| waytwofast |
Posted - 01/12/2009 : 03:08:07 AM
Randy, that is fine for you to believe, there is a bit of a difference between a Nuclear Bomb and a Gun, if you can carry a nuclear bomb than that is fine, you can have one. Up and to the point when the government finds out you're making them which of course is against the law.
If a person has a gun, they have the ability to protect themselves and others around them. For stupid business to post signs saying NO WEAPONS ALLOWED is just inviting criminals.
I think the following people knew exactly what they were talking about, I would think you'd agree:
When only cops have guns, it's called a "police state".
Love your country, but never trust its government.
-- Robert A. Heinlein.
"The power to tax involves the power to destroy;...the power to destroy may defeat and render useless the power to create...."
-- Chief Justice John Marshall, 1819.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others."
-- Thomas Jefferson
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
-- George Washington
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
-- Mahatma Gandhi
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficient... The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding."
-- Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Tolerance in the face of tyranny is no virtue."
-- Barry Goldwater
"I hold it, that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787
The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their possession any swords, short swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other types of arms. The possession of unnecessary implements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues and tends to foment uprisings.
-- Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Shogun, August 1588
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it."
-- Abraham Lincoln, 4 April 1861
"One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."
-- Constitutional scholar Joseph Story, 1840
"The bearing of arms is the essential medium through which the individual asserts both his social power and his participation in politics as a responsible moral being..."
-- J.G.A. Pocock, describing the beliefs of the founders of the U.S.
Men trained in arms from their infancy, and animated by the love of liberty, will afford neither a cheap or easy conquest.
-- From the Declaration of the Continental Congress, July 1775.
"As to the species of exercise, I advise the gun. While this gives [only] moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion to your walks."
-- Thomas Jefferson, writing to his teenaged nephew.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
-- 16 Am. Jur. Sec. 177 late 2d, Sec 256
"The state calls its own violence `law', but that of the individual `crime'"
-- Max Stirner
"Taking my gun away because I might shoot someone is like cutting my tongue out because I might yell `Fire!' in a crowded theater."
-- Peter Venetoklis
...Virtually never are murderers the ordinary, law-abiding people against whom gun bans are aimed. Almost without exception, murderers are extreme aberrants with lifelong histories of crime, substance abuse, psychopathology, mental retardation and/or irrational violence against those around them, as well as other hazardous behavior, e.g., automobile and gun accidents."
-- Don B. Kates, writing on statistical patterns in gun crime
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."
-- John F. Kennedy
The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
-- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story of the John Marshall Court
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."
-- George Washington, in a speech of January 7, 1790
"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves ... and include all men capable of bearing arms."
-- Senator Richard Henry Lee, 1788, on "militia" in the 2nd Amendment
No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave.
-- "Political Disquisitions", a British republican tract of 1774-1775
& what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that his people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Col. William S. Smith, 1787
"To disarm the people... was the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
-- George Mason, speech of June 14, 1788
"The great object is, that every man be armed. [...] Every one who is able may have a gun."
-- Patrick Henry, speech of June 14 1788
Every Communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.'
-- Mao Tse-tung, 1938, inadvertently endorsing the Second Amendment
An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
-- Robert A. Heinlein, "Beyond This Horizon", 1942
The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.
-- Hitler, April 11 1942
.. a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen...
-- Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App.181)
Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power.
-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the LA Times 15 Oct 1992
You know why there's a Second Amendment? In case the government fails to follow the first one.
-- Rush Limbaugh, in a moment of unaccustomed profundity 17 Aug 1993
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
-- John F. Kennedy
"When you walk into the voting booth, I feel it wise for you to ask yourself one thing... Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago..." - Ronald Reagan |
| ranmoo49 |
Posted - 01/12/2009 : 01:54:08 AM
Have u ever considered the fact that the reference in the 2nd amendment is to the "right 2 bear arms". Nowhere does it define ARMS. It is a little naive on our part to believe that Mr Jefferson could have foreseen the repeating volver much less nuclear arms or stealth jets. By the constitution I have the right 2 have a nuclear bomb in my house. There is a big difference between 1 shot muskets and the firearms used by teenagers to rob the local convience store. That is my story and I am sticking 2 it.
Randy |
| Warmskin |
Posted - 01/12/2009 : 01:35:59 AM
Banning guns is the surest way to usher in tyranny. Why does anybody think that the powerful politicians want to ban our self-protection? They know that we are far more docile and dependent if we have no guns. Our nation was founded on independence, as in Independence Day. If you don't like guns, don't own one.
Interestingly enough, when Florida loosened their gun laws, the crime rate went down. When Australia banned guns there, the crime rate went up, and why shouldn't it? The criminals know you are defenseless. In the USA, they have no idea if you pack a gun of not.
Think about it.
Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto."
Thomas Jefferson |
| waytwofast |
Posted - 01/09/2009 : 6:28:32 PM
I believe the problem is not with the Second Amendment to the Constitution. I believe that it is 1. Parents not teaching their children about firearms at a younger age, teaching them that guns are not toys, and that to shoot someone is not a game. and 2. Parents must have a secure place to put their guns. I will never own a gun, rather it be a pellet gun (shoots plastic or metal pellets) or an assault rifle, without having a safe to put it in. I will also never leave that safe unlocked, or give my children the combination. Children now a days play video games like Grand Theft Auto, and get the idea that shooting people is fun. I on the other hand was raised playing SWAT and Ghost Recon, where we have police officers that only shoot when they have to, and military soldiers who only shoot the bad guy. Grand Theft Auto, is just about crime, and committing as many crimes as possible. Fine game for Adults, not so good for 10-15 year old's. Our Second Amendment is not to blame, and their will always be that disturb person that commits a crime with a firearm. However the answer is not more gun control, it is possibly less. I support allowing teachers, or at least security officers in schools the right to have a firearm in their offices; in a locked safe with only the administration knowing the code. I don't feel they should carry them for the simple fact that they can be taken away easily. I think that is the answer, not redefining our history and tradition. |
| ROB g |
Posted - 08/14/2008 : 10:17:23 AM
The bll of rights is the most important part of our consituition. Regardlees if it's freedom of speach,Religion, assembly, press, protection against illeagel search and seizure,right not to have to testify on grounds of self incrimanation, or the right to bare arms. and we need to fight to keep these rights. The abolishment of slavery runs a close second. The right to let all men age 18 or older regardless of race as long as your an U. S. Citizen vote and the right to let women vote ties for third.
Let's keep this in mind. We live in a free country let's fight to keep it that way. Just one other thought
on the freedom of assembly. Should nudists be able to explore this same right? As long as we are not
desturbing the peace or doing any thing violent? |
| RichNKaren |
Posted - 08/14/2008 : 09:10:36 AM
May I suggest a book called: The Lost Constitution. It is, of course, fiction by a MA Author named William Martin.
The essence of the book is that an annotated copy of the Bill of Rights from the original framers of the Constitution has been lost. It may or may not have the feelings of the framers listed on it. As a result of a terrorist attempted attack on the US, the 2nd Amendment is questioned. Even to the point off voting for a referendum to repeal the 2nd.
Although meant to be fast paced and exciting - it really does cover what the feelings of both sides of the arguement feel and to what extremes they would go to achieve their goals.
It is good reading and bound to arouse even more discussion on this matter - I highly recommend it!
Rich&Karen |
| brazhunter |
Posted - 06/09/2008 : 09:04:50 AM
quote:
I think people should have a better reason to carry a concealed weapon on the streets than simply "something might happen". I see your point. I'm just worried about trigger-happy, paranoid nut-jobs. Basically, it comes down to "who's watching the watch-dog?"
I'm not sure of what point the 'who's watching the watchdog cliche'is supposed to make but the first part I've quoted makes no sense at all. If everyone could predict when they might face attack and bodily harm, it would be simple enough to avoid that time and place altogether and let law enforcement deal with it. For the same reason, I keep a smoke detectors and fire extinguishers my house because I can't predict if and when I might need them. The case for the latter is exactly the same as the former - 'hopefully never'. |
| JohnnyBoy |
Posted - 06/06/2008 : 3:49:20 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Phydeau
I'm just worried about trigger-happy, paranoid nut-jobs. Basically, it comes down to "who's watching the watch-dog?"
Phydeau
As far as "who's watching the watch-dog", criminals are going to do what they do regardless of the law. But in order to legallycarry a concealed weapon in all but 2 states that allow it, (Vermont's laws are silent on concealed carry, therefore it's legal without a permit, and Alaska does not require a permit to carry concealed) one must attend a training course focusing on the laws of that state. When is deadly force justifiable, when is it not, confrontation avoidance and how to de-escalate the situation, situational awareness, (google "the color code of situational awareness"), and you must demonstrate a certain skill level when handling a firearm. Then, you are fingerprinted, photographed, and must pass a state police and FBI background check. Once all that's done, they will issue a permit in those states where it is a "shall issue" permit (in some states you must adequately justify the need to carry).
After going through all that, law enforcement still monitors you. Whenever you have an encounter with LE, even a traffic stop, they know you are a permit holder. Any infraction that violates the terms of your permit will result in suspension or revocation of it. Long way around, but the issuing authority (your state) is watching...
Be safe...
I ain't as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was. |
| Phydeau |
Posted - 06/06/2008 : 06:42:50 AM
Good point. I never really thought of it that way. |
| Bare Warrior |
Posted - 06/05/2008 : 7:59:12 PM
Phydeau,
Your last comment is the point. We are currently defenseless against paranoid nut-jobs. All but one of the mass murders in the past 20 years occurred where guns were not allowed. It is because of the paranoid nut-jobs, as well as violent criminals, that we need the right to protect ourselves. Also note that most of the mass murders were conducted by people who were carrying their weapon openly.
Last year, an off duty security officer, at a mall stopped what was going to be another mass murder. The mall was a "no gun" zone. Because she violated the law, she saved lots of people. In all cases police officers were less than 2 minutes away from the scene. NONE were able to stop the murders.
We all should take responsibility for our on safety and not rely on the government to protect us. Its funny how many of the liberal folks on this site and elsewhere are against any government intrusion in their lives yet they want to turn over responsibility for their personal safety to the very same government.
Take care.
Bare Warrior |
| Phydeau |
Posted - 06/05/2008 : 7:19:24 PM
Fulldraw, thank you. I personally do not own a firearm, but I'll defend to the death the right for free people to own them (kind of ironic, isn't it?). Those statistics should strike fear into anyone who has not abolished the use of reason.
Gun SAFETY is the real issue.
Though I'm going to "stick to my guns" as it were, and say that I think people should have a better reason to carry a concealed weapon on the streets than simply "something might happen". I see your point. I'm just worried about trigger-happy, paranoid nut-jobs. Basically, it comes down to "who's watching the watch-dog?" |
| Fulldraw |
Posted - 06/05/2008 : 08:27:26 AM
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.
In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100- pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.
There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.
Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.
When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act. |
| Fulldraw |
Posted - 06/05/2008 : 08:24:04 AM
There are a lot of places you can go to get away from firearms:
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917,
1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up
and exterminated.
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend
themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to
1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979,
300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and
exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to
1977, one million educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were
rounded up and exterminated
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th
Century because of gun control: 56 million.
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:
List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.
With guns, we are 'citizens'.
Without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America
because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
|
| JohnnyBoy |
Posted - 06/04/2008 : 1:56:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Phydeau
...I don't think there's any reason for a civilian to have the need to conceal a weapon, ...
Just to rebut this point, the need to carry concealed is a tactical need, and in this politically correct society, a practical one as well.
The alternative is commonly referred to as "open carry" where you carry in a holster in plain view. Most (sorry to use the term) soccer moms would freak if they saw a person, not in LEO uniform with a sidearm. This can and usually does brings unwanted attention to the carrier, and can result in non-weapon related charges such as "disturbing the peace". Even though open carry is perfectly legal anywhere in Nevada, try open carrying down on "The Las Vegas Strip" and see what happens. In essence, what they don't see can't scare them.
Concealed carry also gives the carrier a tactical advantage during criminal activity. Consider this scenario... You're in a convenience store when an armed robber enters. He has no qualms about shooting the clerk for whatever is in the register. He sees you with a sidearm and decides to "take you out first" as the only threat to him completing his crime. On the other hand, when carrying concealed, you just appear to be another customer until he draws down on the clerk. You then have the element of suprise at your advantage. If he threatens you first? (eliminate witnesses) Again...suprise.
Carrying a concealed weapon is a great responsibility, one I don't take lightly. Therefore I train. Not only range practice, but also formal training from professional schools such as Frontsight ( www.frontsight.com ).
I ain't as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was. |
| Phydeau |
Posted - 06/03/2008 : 01:25:36 AM
If I might grab someone's soap box for a moment: (ahem)
There's a reason the founding fathers made the second amendment the SECOND amendment. It was foremost on their minds, after the freedom to protest (the first amendment). The reason we exist as a country is because they had the ability to defend themselves against the British military. The founding fathers were very concerned with their new government becoming the same kind of tyranny, so they guaranteed protection to the people.
Now don't get me wrong. I don't think there's any reason for a civilian to have the need to conceal a weapon, let alone carry something that fires 120 rounds per second. But an all-out ban on guns is extreme.
Nut-jobs will kill you with improvised devices if they want to. If nothing else, if someone wants to commit a crime, how much of a stretch would it be for them to commit the crime of obtaining a gun illegally? |
|
|
|
|
| Nudist-Resorts.Org Discussion Forum Bulletin Board Nudism Clothing Optional Resort Naturism Nude Beaches |
© 2002-2020 SUN |
 |
|
|
