Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #45938
    Profile photo of sledjockey
    sledjockey
    Bushcrafter
    member8

    GS:

    You sidestepped my entire response. The door was already opened and a foothold was allowed for this sort of attack many years ago. I am not arguing philosophy or even stating the ideology of pussified “Murica….. What I am saying is that our Judicial Branch already has an established control measure put in place with that law in addition to the NFA laws of the 1960’s. Our government allowed it and there really have not been that many challenges to those laws because it is hard to prove a “harm” that allows it to go to review.

    This is no different than the allowances that have been made for shari’a law as of late. Now that a precedent has been set by our court systems we will have a hard time stopping it from spreading in the future.

    http://ageofdecadence.com

    #45939
    Profile photo of namelus
    namelus
    Survivalist
    member7

    https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/federal-firearms-licensees/ffl-tip-sheet-for-non-u.s.-citizens-purchasing-firearms-1

    but hey let immigrants buy guns not citizens this makes sense fighting terrorism

    #45941
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    A few States might have the ability to pass new onerous gun legislation but I don’t expect to see it happen in my life time, not with foreign born individuals attacking civilians in mass. I’ve never seen pictures of waiting lines outside of gun shops like is happening now. Last night my wife admitted she wanted a gun. That fact is showing a unprecedented change in public opinion.

    Here a link to an article written about Obama banning centerfire rifles; http://bearingarms.com/obama-bans-guns-declares-nra-terrorists-happens-next/

    #45943
    Profile photo of L Tecolote
    L Tecolote
    Survivalist
    member8

    but hey let immigrants buy guns not citizens this makes sense fighting terrorism

    Namelus, What has the fedgov done in the last seven years decade or more, that makes sense? Nothing, that I can think of, if the aim were to fix problems, and make the citizens better off. But everything, if the aim were to ruin the nation’s future, and impoverish the citizens.

    All too often, we get lost in examining the details of some new piece of legislation, or court ruling, never bothering to understand just what the real purpose of such bad governance is. Whatever noble purpose is claimed, when the government (courts included) see the bad effects, then not only refuse to repeal or rescind the ruinous law, but instead, praise its alleged “purpose,” then “double down” by reinforcing it with more of the same, they have shown that they fully intended the results it actually produced. Cut to the chase: if their rules injure us, and they just tell us to shut up and take it (because they “meant well,” they are our enemies, plain and simple. Ignore their words, judge them by their actions.

    Remember that phrase meant to apply to The 9-11 attack: “They were at war with us, but we weren’t at war with them.” It applies to the fedgov versus the citizens: they have declared war on us, but most citizens have not yet caught on. They’re not ready to round us up, wholesale … yet. But they keep passing new laws to spy on us, to restrict our control of our earnings, to force us to subsidize people who harass and threaten us, to make us cautious of what we dare to say, to prevent us from having the abilities, legal, intellectual, and physical, to stand up to them, all done proudly, with claims of superior purpose, and with snarky assertions that, if we don’t like it, there’s something morally lacking in us.

    Claim what they will, one small piece at a time, they’ve already shown themselves at war with us.

    Cry, "Treason!"

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by Profile photo of L Tecolote L Tecolote.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by Profile photo of L Tecolote L Tecolote.
    #45947
    Profile photo of namelus
    namelus
    Survivalist
    member7

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/nyregion/connecticut-to-ban-gun-sales-to-those-on-federal-terrorism-lists.html?_r=2

    love this being put on terror/no flywatch list means no guns for you…. they never make mistakes and the appeal system exists yeah right

    #45950
    Profile photo of freedom
    freedom
    Survivalist
    rnews

    74, I see the same as you, my mother asked me to help her get a gun, a .22 lr revolver. She is 83. I will have to take her to the range once she purchases her first gun. This is something I never thought she would ask for. Now my wife is also thinking about it for the first time. So things(minds) are changing.

    #45952
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    We’ll know that the general public has woken up when either my wife or my daughter wants one. That’ll be the true test. My daughter has already nudged a bit in that she didn’t flip out when her husband said he wanted me to teach their girls how to shoot when they’re older. I told them my son would be the better one being he’s an Appleseed instructor.

    #45954
    Tolik
    Tolik
    Survivalist
    member10

    frame of mind is an interesting thing . I come from a pioneer family , my grandmother and mother grew up on a ranch in rural AZ , both know how to shoot and were doing so at an early age . Its a very foreign mentality to us that anybody , man or woman ,would not see a firearm as a tool and something needed . Nothing to be feared . Thats why I look at modern society with disdain as cowards. Perhaps we have had it too easy for too long ? Philosophy is for those with too much idle time . Not wishing hardship on anybody , but too much prosperity and idle time , tends to make a society weak . if things get down and dirty , those that were against firearms , will be looking for one , as they will see the need for one…………..the hard way .. When riots were going on in Kalifrnia , remember the Korean business owners ? they were armed , and showed the rioters , they would not allow their property to be destroyed , the rioters left them alone ………..imagine that .

    #45957
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    Tolik, much of the difference lies in the timing of settlement out West vs here in the Northeast. In your mother and grandmother’s youth, people in the rural West weren’t that many generations removed from fighting Indians. That era ended by about the mid-1700’s here. Personal protection hasn’t been an up front and personal issue for folks in New England since the Revolutionary War. As you will come to appreciate, there still remains a great resiliency in rural New England thanks to the Puritan legacy that still lingers. They were a very hardy bunch that wrested a living from the rocky soil and cold climate, and in 1775 were the people that stood up to what was then the mightiest military on earth. Yeah we’re pretty soft these days comparatively, but I wouldn’t totally count us out.

    Edited to add that my ancestors began arriving in what is now New England in 1604, the English, French & Dutch all coming in the 1600’s and the Irish & Germans in the mid-1800’s. In the past 400+ years the furthest West and the furthest South any of my ancestors came from has been Northern New Jersey, so New England runs very deep in my veins.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by Profile photo of MountainBiker MountainBiker.
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 10 months ago by Profile photo of MountainBiker MountainBiker.
    #45960
    Profile photo of
    Anonymous
    Survivalist

    You sidestepped my entire response. The door was already opened and a foothold was allowed for this sort of attack many years ago. I am not arguing philosophy or even stating the ideology of pussified “Murica….. What I am saying is that our Judicial Branch already has an established control measure put in place with that law in addition to the NFA laws of the 1960’s.

    Sledjockey, my apology if I wasn’t more clear. Frankly, I was largely responding because of, not to your response. I thought yours could stand alone on its own merits, and I had no argument whatsoever with it. My tangential response was, in effect, saying that BECAUSE the courts now have their precedents firmly entrenched, it will be even harder to break that loose because the other prong of that attack is on the people. There will be limited challenging IN the courts, because the arguments will be kept in the realm of the media and the other two branches of government (Congress and President), both shaping, and catering to the emotional responses of the public. When the “public safety” issue comes up, it doesn’t come up in the courts. It doesn’t have to because of case law. Therefore, all the President (and his “team”) have to do is keep the public moving more and more toward further restriction, so he can successfully keep using his cell phone and pen..

    I don’t believe the 2nd Amendment is in substantial danger in the near term, at least. Though few in America understand it, or even much of anything about the Constitution, there’s still a general reluctance to actually change the document itself. That could come later, but not yet. It will all be accomplished through restrictions on what types of weapons will be available for legal purchase, where and how they can be purchased (edging toward background checks between private individuals, perhaps even relatives), what kinds of ammunition is legal for the public to own (we’ve already seen test runs of that with the term “cop killer bullets” in the media), etc. And they’ll chip away at who can own or have access to guns. “Of COURSE there will be no assault on the 2nd Amendment, Mr. and Mrs. America – that’s constitutionally protected!” Even Hussein has told us that very recently. No, it will only be the “common sense” {choke!} measures of taking away those that pose a “public safety” risk – get them out of the gun-buying loop. It will be partial arguments, framed as complete justifications and explanations, fed to a clueless and well-groomed public that believe the media is reporting what’s really happening, how others are really feeling, etc. Who could possibly favor handing a gun to a paranoid schizophrenic? That has nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment (they’ll keep telling us – as if that constructs a complete logical argument, and the public will buy it).

    I have no quarrel whatsoever with your post, and just didn’t feel it needed amplification directly. I simply chose to go on a tangential (but I believe closely connected) route from there. The “opposition” is looking at all angles, and coordinating them “beautifully.” And few see just how well they’re doing and getting away with it. The courts are already largely sewn up, as you point out. (Now – somehow give Obama the opportunity to appoint at least two more Supremes – possibly even just one – and we may find a reawakening of the courts not because they have to be reawakened, but because they see more opportunities to establish further radical precedents. And it will be harder to get the people to argue with that “progress” if it comes.)

    #45963
    Profile photo of L Tecolote
    L Tecolote
    Survivalist
    member8

    Now – somehow give Obama the opportunity to appoint at least two more Supremes – possibly even just one – and we may find a reawakening of the courts not because they have to be reawakened, but because they see more opportunities to establish further radical precedents.

    That’s a bigger danger, to me, at this point, than the next presidential election. If Hussein gets to make the Extreme Court into a rubber stamp (it almost is now, but not reliably so), we would soon learn all the sad lessons the Germans and the Russians learned.

    Cry, "Treason!"

    #45965
    Profile photo of 74
    74
    Survivalist
    rnews

    Thankfully the justices on the right side appear to be in good health. What can happen to them in the course of a day is open to conjecture. At the Federal level gun bans are not going to happen unless the Democrats gain all three branches of government. After having Obama in the WH and the mess we have, I don’t expect to see the Democrats reign over the populous in my lifetime.

    The law in question is only functional in states not having a strong RTBA (Right To Bear Arms) in the State Constitution. 40 states have a RTBA; https://www.guntrustlawyer.com/2008/06/39-states-have-constitutional.html

    #45966
    Profile photo of MountainBiker
    MountainBiker
    Survivalist
    member10

    74, that list can be a bit misleading. It includes Massachusetts which restricts those rights severely. Concealed Carry permits are subject to approval of the local police chief who does not need a reason to deny them. Gun groups maintain lists of which Towns are gun friendly and which are not. Gun owners must notify their local police and the State if they change addresses and if to a different Town also notify the police of the Town they are moving to. Unless you have the gun on your person it must be inoperable either by a trigger lock or being in a safe. That means keeping a loaded gun in your nightstand when you go to bed is illegal. Guns may not be stored in the same place as ammo. The only guns that can be sold in MA are those makes and models specifically approved by the State Attorney General. They recognize nobody else’s gun licenses and it is a mandatory year in jail if you are caught with a gun in MA without a MA license. This is why MA State govt does not like Vermont where there is no licensing at all (and we inconveniently for them have a far lower crime rate than they have in MA).

    Did I say how happy I am to have moved to VT?

    #45967
    Profile photo of sledjockey
    sledjockey
    Bushcrafter
    member8

    GS:

    [attachment file=”hattip.jpg”]

    http://ageofdecadence.com

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #45973
    Profile photo of namelus
    namelus
    Survivalist
    member7
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.