PDA

View Full Version : Gun Control


Lucille
07-27-2012, 06:17 PM
Saw this and liked it:

Focal
07-27-2012, 06:47 PM
http://prettysleepy.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/guns.jpg

Metachrosis
09-05-2012, 10:51 AM
Out Standing gun control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EIzDFeVNm8&feature=player_embedded#!

WebSlave
09-05-2012, 05:50 PM
Out Standing gun control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EIzDFeVNm8&feature=player_embedded#!

The cop was a dumb ass to hit someone with a gun in his hand like that. Darn miracle that bullet launched didn't hit someone.

JColt
09-05-2012, 06:06 PM
cop was just a dumb ass period.

Focal
09-05-2012, 06:31 PM
That gave me goosebumps!

Metachrosis
09-05-2012, 06:46 PM
Its the way their trained these days,they have just so many days for the cadets in the academy.What was once taught is now incomplete/replaced with all the DHS(military crap)they fast track cram in their heads.
Law Enforcement across the nation(State/Local) have all reduced their "standards" for hiring,the net return is in that video.

Its now become a daily thing here in the US,sad part is you only hear about the ones that got caught :angry:
The cop was a dumb ass to hit someone with a gun in his hand like that. Darn miracle that bullet launched didn't hit someone.

Metachrosis
09-12-2012, 09:55 AM
What part of “shall not be infringed” is so hard to understand?



http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012/09/11/dangerous-dicta/

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.

Metachrosis
12-23-2012, 09:40 AM
They are coming for your FAT!
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-22/gun-control-today-fat-control-tomorrow

Metachrosis
12-23-2012, 09:50 AM
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/message-nra-four-horsemen-apocalypse

Metachrosis
12-25-2012, 05:52 PM
Pretty scary if you think about how people trust the medical professional

WebSlave
12-25-2012, 06:31 PM
Pretty scary if you think about how people trust the medical professional

So statistically it is far more dangerous to go to a doctor than it is to have guns in the house.

The solution is simple: Ban all doctors. That will solve that problem, won't it? The issue is safety and security, is it not?

hhmoore
12-25-2012, 07:55 PM
I'd rather look at the numbers of intentional deaths from both groups; mainly because I'm surprised that doctors don't kill more of their patients. Some of those people are darned annoying.

WebSlave
12-26-2012, 08:13 PM
I'd rather look at the numbers of intentional deaths from both groups; mainly because I'm surprised that doctors don't kill more of their patients. Some of those people are darned annoying.

:rofl: Based on the statistics, I'm surprised that the reverse doesn't happen more often....

Metachrosis
12-27-2012, 10:47 AM
A populous dependent on an entity to protect them from the exact same entity that's intent on protecting "you" from yourself. :yesnod:



So statistically it is far more dangerous to go to a doctor than it is to have guns in the house.

The solution is simple: Ban all doctors. That will solve that problem, won't it? The issue is safety and security, is it not?

WebSlave
01-03-2013, 03:47 AM
Heck, it wouldn't even take much in the way of metal working skills to build something like this.

MKBaFWfHM84

Of course, shooting REAL shotgun shells would take a bit more robust of a design, I would think. But the concept would be the same.

Metachrosis
01-03-2013, 12:05 PM
Senator Dianne Feinstein,
I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government’s right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma’am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.
I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.
I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.
I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.
We, the people, deserve better than you.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012
http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/01/01/no-maam-letter-from-u-s-marine-to-dianne-feinstein-goes-viral-12897

Metachrosis
01-03-2013, 12:11 PM
Better yet . . . .:thumbsup:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/30/Marine-Tells-Di-Feinstein-No-Ma-am-Over-Gun-Grabbing

JColt
01-03-2013, 02:02 PM
Maybe we should all write same letter but change weapon to Burmese Python and see if it works!

Metachrosis
01-03-2013, 07:42 PM
Pat Quinn BEAT DOWN! :thumbsup:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/12/daniel-zimmerman/a-win-for-illinois-gun-owners-no-really/

Metachrosis
01-06-2013, 07:55 PM
:censored: :censored: :censored:Government

http://isra.org/

:angry:
:angry:
:angry:

I truly hope they get their @$$ handed to them AGAIN
Best of Luck My Mid West Friends!

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 12:30 AM
http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/bank-america-freezes-gun-manufacturers-account-company-owner-claims

Bank of America Freezes Gun Manufacturer's Account

Bank of America has reportedly frozen the account of gun manufacturer American Spirit Arms, according to its owner, Joe Sirochman.

In a Facebook post dated December 29, Sirochman wrote the following:

“My name is Joe Sirochman owner of American Spirit Arms...our Web site orders have jumped 500 percent causing our Web site e-commerce processing larger deposits to Bank of America. So they decided to hold the deposits for further review.

“After countless hours on the phone with Bank of America, I finally got a manager in the right department that told me the reason that the deposits were on hold for further review -- her exact words were -- ‘We believe you should not be selling guns and parts on the Internet.’”(emphasis added)

Sirochman also wrote that he told the bank manager that “they have no right to make up their own new rules and regs” and that “[American Spirit is a] firearms manufacturer with all the proper licensing.”

He also noted that he has been doing business with Bank of America for over 10 years, but will now be looking for a new bank.

According to Unlawful News, this isn't the first time Bank of America has targeted a customer involved in the firearms industry.

McMillan Group International was reportedly told that its business was no longer welcome after the company started manufacturing firearms – even after 12 years of doing business with the bank.

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 01:27 AM
Alex Jones vs. Piers Morgan: "1776 Will Commence Again If You Try To Take Our Firearms"




http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/01/07/alex_jones_vs_piers_morgan_1776_will_commence_agai nst_if_you_try_to_take_our_firearms.html


Alex Jones, one of the people behind the petition to get British host Piers Morgan deported, appeared on his CNN program tonight to explain his support of the Second Amendment and and to denounce those who want to confiscate weapons.

ALEX JONES: We did it as a way to bring attention to the fact that we have all of these foreigners, and the Russian government, the official Chinese government -- Mao said political power goes out of the barrel of a gun, he killed about 80 million people because he's the only guy who had the guns -- so we did it to point out that this is globalism, and the mega banks that control the planet and brag they have taken over -- in Bloomberg, AP, Reuters, you name it -- brag that they're going to get our guns as well. They've taken everybody's guns, but the Swiss and the American people and when they get our guns, they can have their world tyranny while the government buys 1.6 billion bullets, armored vehicles, tanks, helicopters, predator drones, armed now in U.S. skies, being used to arrest people in North Dakota.

The Second Amendment isn't there for duck hunting. It's there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs. Take the woman in india, your piece earlier on CNN earlier, I was watching during Anderson Cooper's show, didn't tell you the women of India have signed giant petitions to get firearms because the police can't and won't protect them.

Te answer is -- wait a minute, I have FBI crime statistics that come out of a year late, 2011, 20-plus percent crime drop in the last nine years, real violent crime because more guns means less crime. Britain took the guns 15, 16 years ago. Tripling of your overall violent crime. True, we have a higher gun violence level, but overall, muggings, stabbing, deaths -- those men raped that woman to India to death with an iron rod 4 feet long. You can't ban the iron rods. The guns, the iron rods, Piers, didn't do it, the tyrants did it. Hitler took the guns Stalin took the guns, Mao took the guns, Fidel Castro took the guns, Hugo Chavez took the guns, and I'm here to tell you, 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms! It doesn't matter how many lemmings you get out there in the street begging for them to have their guns taken. We will not relinquish them. Do you understand?



Jones also addressed gun deaths in the England, where the number is extremely low due to severe restrictions on firearms. Jones points out that people are fleeing the country, including Piers Morgan, which Jones uses as an opportunity to point out Brit's involved in the U.K. phone-hacking scandal.

ALEX JONES: I already said earlier that England had lower gun crime rate because you took all the guns. But you have hoards of people burning down cities and beating old women's brains out out everyday. They arrest people in England if they defend themselves, that's on record. My God, you have a total police state. Everybody is fleeing the country because -- you've had to flee, bud. Yeah, you fled here. Why don't you go back and face the charges for the hacking scandal?

PIERS MORGAN: Answer this question. How many --

JONES: Why did you get fired from the Daily Mirror for putting out fake stories? You're a hatchet man of the New World Order. You're a hatchet man! And I'm going to say this here, you think you're a tough guy? Have me back with a boxing ring and I'll wear red, white, and blue, and you'll wear your Jolly Roger.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/01/07/alex_jones_vs_piers_morgan_1776_will_commence_agai nst_if_you_try_to_take_our_firearms.html

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 01:31 AM
AtyKofFih8Y

Focal
01-08-2013, 08:26 AM
http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/bank-america-freezes-gun-manufacturers-account-company-owner-claims

Bank of America Freezes Gun Manufacturer's Account

I think this happened back in April 2012. Kind of weird nothing ever came of it and no other details were ever released.

JColt
01-08-2013, 09:02 AM
I think this happened back in April 2012. Kind of weird nothing ever came of it and no other details were ever released.

From Facebook. Snopes says undetermined but I doubt a manager would say "we dont think you should be selling weapons online"

This would have been national news if true and most of us would have heard about this back in April instead of now.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/bankofamerica.asp

Focal
01-08-2013, 09:12 AM
The article is being posted all over and being portrayed as "new" because of the upcoming legislation on gun control. I also do not think that the person who would make that decision (to hold the funds because he sold guns) would ever speak to the customer and there would be a million other excuses they could have gave than the one that would be a media nightmare. He obviously got his money back by now or else he would still be kicking and screaming.

Metachrosis
01-08-2013, 09:23 AM
They can launder Cartel Drug Money and yet someone selling "arms"
very successfully via the internet and it is some how not in their best interest
to welcome the cash flow?

http://cnsnews.com/blog/gregory-gwyn-williams-jr/bank-america-freezes-gun-manufacturers-account-company-owner-claims

Focal
01-08-2013, 09:39 AM
http://pjmedia.com/blog/breaking-bank-of-america-reportedly-drops-gun-company-for-political-reasons/

That last line in this article shows the distributor is equally as ignorant.

McMillan is now refusing to accept Bank of America cards from customers for payment.

Metachrosis
01-08-2013, 10:19 AM
Love him or hate him,the facts are the facts.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=v0sE9hAXXB4#!

AtyKofFih8Y

Metachrosis
01-08-2013, 11:44 AM
More "Gun Truth"

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/

http://www.johnlott.org/

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 11:53 AM
I think this happened back in April 2012. Kind of weird nothing ever came of it and no other details were ever released.

Actually you are wrong. I posted links and followed the story last year. It was McMillan Firearms. This is a new incident.

I posted the above story about American Spirit Arms even though it mentions the earlier account at the bottom of the article.

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 12:03 PM
From Facebook. Snopes says undetermined but I doubt a manager would say "we dont think you should be selling weapons online"

This would have been national news if true and most of us would have heard about this back in April instead of now.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/bankofamerica.asp

Well, actually it was. It was both on Fox and CNN as well as online news sources. But both you a Nick aren't even commenting on the correct current story.

Metachrosis
01-08-2013, 12:12 PM
bon·jour :rofl:

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 12:16 PM
The article is being posted all over and being portrayed as "new" because of the upcoming legislation on gun control.

Because it is "NEW"

Dennis Hultman
01-08-2013, 12:30 PM
The other story (from April last year) you can find the first posting on facebook here.

http://www.facebook.com/McMillanGroupInternational

Focal
01-08-2013, 12:58 PM
I was wrong and did get mixed up.

JColt
01-08-2013, 05:52 PM
I did also. Never heard of either story till today.

Helenthereef
01-08-2013, 09:25 PM
Would at least require more effort......

Metachrosis
01-09-2013, 09:21 PM
It will take more,but its coming never the less
Sheep must be lead . . . . . .
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14153-police-chief-seeks-nullification-of-unconstitutional-gun-control

hhmoore
01-10-2013, 07:19 AM
This is why I don't kill people with guns...
It USED to be all about being responsible for your actions, and I could deal with that. Now, it's as if people think the guns are killing of their own accord.

Metachrosis
01-10-2013, 10:57 AM
He is coming . . . . . .
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/when-discussing-second-amendment-keep-first-mind-too

Dennis Hultman
01-10-2013, 12:10 PM
nJ6RVyqTaYs

Metachrosis
01-10-2013, 05:50 PM
HERE WE GO FOLKS!! I guess the corn patch wants its @** handed to it FIRST
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/14161-iowa-state-representative-ban-confiscate-semi-automatic-guns

Dennis Hultman
01-16-2013, 01:33 AM
eUpfEx5b_Ks

Durante
01-16-2013, 08:36 AM
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/15/16515653-new-york-passes-major-gun-control-law-first-since-newtown-massacre?lite

Focal
01-18-2013, 02:09 PM
This is what I call gun control :D

"Two Dozen Men Arrested In "Operation Concord" In Boston. The Boston Herald (1/18, Zaremba, Sweet, 91K) reports that "some two dozen men - with more waiting in line to follow - netted by local, state and federal law enforcement agents in a citywide crackdown on guns and drugs early this morning have been ordered held without bail for 10 days at their joint initial appearance before US District Court Magistrate Judge Robert B. Collings." According to officials, 30 "federally indicted members of two Dorchester street gangs were busted" early Thursday morning "in a series of raids titled Operation Concord and more than a year in the planning that targeted a cocaine, heroin and marijuana-dealing ring." The "FBI-led raid" included "a few hundred" law-enforcement officers, including HSI agents. "As this operation shows, now it's the gang members who have something to fear," said Bruce M. Foucart, special agent in charge of Homeland Security investigations in Boston.

The Quincy (MA) Patriot Ledger (1/18, 37K) quotes Foucart as saying, "This effort shows our collective resolve in Boston and the Commonwealth to attack and dismantle these dangerous street gangs. For too long, gangs here and elsewhere have used violence and intimidation to hold communities hostage. As this operation shows, now it's the gang members who have something to fear.""

IMAJACOBIAN
01-18-2013, 03:08 PM
This sounds like a good idea for those with a problem with NY gun laws
http://news.yahoo.com/yall-come-texas-state-official-tells-york-gun-223149333.html

And now we have this...
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57564578-504083/seven-year-old-brought-loaded-gun-to-nyc-school-police-say/

Metachrosis
01-18-2013, 03:26 PM
Mean while,back in reality . . . . . . . . . . .


The other sad reality, Mr. President, is that almost nothing proposed this week in Washington, D.C., by your administration will do anything to stem the tide of gun violence in our inner cities. Most of these crimes were not committed with semi-automatic assault weapons, they weren’t committed by the mentally ill, and they won’t be stopped by universal background checks.



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/01/18/mr_president_chicagos_gun_victims_need_you_now.htm l

JColt
01-18-2013, 03:51 PM
Be interesting to see how 7 yr old came into possession of weapon.

IMAJACOBIAN
01-18-2013, 04:03 PM
Maybe if he knew about the law then he would have turned it over to law enforcement.:rolleyes_

WebSlave
01-18-2013, 04:14 PM
Hasn't it been said that a good leader leads by example?

Someone sent me this doctored photo recently to drive home an obvious point about the proposed gun laws.

JColt
01-19-2013, 05:08 PM
Be interesting to see how 7 yr old came into possession of weapon.

Police arrest New York woman after her son, 7, brought gun to school

http://news.yahoo.com/police-arrest-york-woman-her-son-7-brought-191930887.html

Metachrosis
01-28-2013, 09:27 AM
For their protection ?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/26/if-assault-weapons-are-bad-why-does-the-dhs-want-to-buy-7000-of-them-for-personal-defense/

Metachrosis
01-28-2013, 02:31 PM
http://lewrockwell.com/wilson-brian/wilson-brian48.1.html
:iagree:



So as a Program and News Director, here’s a Pop Quiz for my fellow media brethren and cisterns [sic] assigned to covering or commenting on this tragedy and its fallout. Before the ON AIR light comes on or the floor director gives you the finger (cue), correctly answer the following:
Have you ever fired a gun? (NB: water, cap, BB, paintball and fingers are not acceptable)
How many guns have you seen become violent? If your answer acknowledges an individual is necessary to operate the weapon, why, then, are you using the term "gun violence" and not "human violence"?
In 25 words or less: What is an "Assault Weapon"? Be specific
(Extra Credit: From Columbine to Newtown, how many involved "Assault Weapons"?)
What is the difference between a "magazine" and a "clip"? Use both in a sentence.
Is a .223 cartridge more or less powerful than the predominant rifle cartridge used by American fighting men in WWII?
(Extra Credit: What was the caliber of the predominant rifle cartridge used in WWII?)
If you had to choose, would you prefer to shot with a .22? .223? 30-06? 00Buck?
("None of the Above" is an understandable but unacceptable answer)
Why is a black gun more dangerous than one made with differently colored components?
If black guns are bad, isn’t that racist?
How does a bayonet lug make the "assault rifle" more lethal?
(Extra credit: How many drive-by bayonetings occurred in the US last year?)
To the nearest 100,000, how many Assault Rifles are made of Nerf?
Within 10,000, how many times a day do law-abiding gun owners prevent a crime without firing a shot?
Approximately how many gun laws (State and Federal) are in force in America today?
With so many laws already in force, what are the compelling reasons to believe criminals and mass murders will obey the new ones?
If faced with a home invasion, would you want to be holding your phone or your firearm?
Since nearly all newspapers, TV and radio News Departments have blown the bottom out of the septic tank to set a new level of journalistic integrity and responsibility, all of the above questions had to be answered correctly. Failure relieves you of any reporting/announcing/discussing responsibilities pertaining to Newtown, the 2nd Amendment and any future stories involving firearms. If you fit this description, please report immediately to the Assignment Desk to cover the latest on Lady Ga-Ga’s bra, Nicki Minaj’s hair or Manti Te’o’s undercover angel.

SERPENTS DEN
01-28-2013, 03:17 PM
The Obama administration is openly escalating its campaign against private gun ownership, and shaking up the top ranks of the military command structure -- but is it also preparing to make war on the American population?
According to a person identified as a former senior military official, the answer to that shocking question is yes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kzT6X3_Bg9o



.

Metachrosis
01-28-2013, 06:17 PM
From 2009 :eek:
http://www.examiner.com/article/is-martial-law-imminent

Durante
01-28-2013, 06:51 PM
William Cooper’s 1991 book Behold A Pale Horse....

http://imageshack.us/a/img541/8352/51643469.jpg

Metachrosis
01-28-2013, 08:12 PM
Chris, that last paragraph is legit as well

Metachrosis
01-28-2013, 10:31 PM
Beware of the Sheep Herders !


RCC-rEx81PE#!

Metachrosis
01-29-2013, 09:22 AM
:AR15firin:2gunsfiri:AR15firin:2gunsfiri

Metachrosis
01-29-2013, 04:10 PM
http://www.infowars.com/wa-post-report-hagel-warned-obama-about-new-world-order/

reticguy76
01-29-2013, 07:20 PM
Nobody can be surprised that all those support gun control. They are far left progressives of the far left progressives, and all elitist supporting organizations.

WebSlave
01-29-2013, 07:38 PM
As for gun transfer background checks, does any one else have a problem with having it a REQUIREMENT to ask the government's permission to buy or sell a gun? Quite frankly, if the sale takes place within the state both parties are residents of, the federal government has no constitutionally legal jurisdiction over such matters.

reticguy76
01-29-2013, 08:03 PM
Its cliche, but I believe it whole-heartedly, the Second Amendment is my gun carrying permit, Period

Metachrosis
01-29-2013, 08:03 PM
EXACTLY the way we have and will continue to do so
I will never register a gun nor persevere some process to own what I already own
or sell what is rightfully mine.
No citizen of the USA should have to settle for anything less,the media cowards are not letting the real news out,non of the gun rally coverage made it to main stream.
Non the less the point was made and heard clearly,Obama and Frankinwench aint to scary to gun owners these days.
Look forward to a major "distraction" event in the coming weeks(bet on it)

Durante
01-30-2013, 11:04 AM
Look forward to a major "distraction" event in the coming weeks(bet on it)

Maybe the latest of such events would have been enough to allow the herders to see proceeding with these "distractions" in attempts to gain support has failed with damaging growth to there true agenda? Lights are slowly turning on & questions are being raised, at least this is what I hope. As far as betting the odds are your right, history has a way of repeating itself.

bliss
01-30-2013, 03:28 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/30/nra-lapierre-to-tell-congress-more-gun-laws-not-serious-solution/

Depending on how reliable you consider fox news to be.. (I usually don't).

I found this (bold text) to be quite funny! Uhh.. It's known as the black market.. for a reason.

LaPierre later got into an argument over the issue with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., after LaPierre argued that more background checks would merely subject "law-abiding people" to more taxes and fees and hassle without going after "bad guys."

"Mr. LaPierre that's the point," Durbin said. "The criminals won't get to purchase the guns because there'll be a background check. We'll stop them from the original purchase -- you missed that point completely. I think it's basic."

Raising his voice, LaPierre said: "Senator, I think you missed the point!" Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., then banged the gavel and called for order.

Metachrosis
01-30-2013, 03:45 PM
:willy_nil:willy_nil:willy_nil:willy_nil:willy_nil :willy_nil:willy_nil:willy_nil:willy_nil:willy_nil :willy_nil:willy_nil

The Second Amendment is Dead, Long Live the Right to Bear Arms

** http://zerogov.com/?p=2928 **
45 human beings legally disarmed the state of New York under the leadership of the Governor Cuomo. A state with a population of 19 million people has been disarmed in a significant fashion for those foolish or sheepish enough to comply with the law. The country is bombarded with media propaganda on a continuous basis on the moral high ground and fairness of democratic processes. In one fell swoop, the rulers of the tax jurisdiction of New York have proven not only the folly and charade that is representative democracy but abridged the most fundamental right of all – the right to self-defense. Ironically, the legislators had accidentally disarmed the only ones who should be subject to total disarmament in the prosecution of their duties – the police. This was quickly remedied by the worthies in Albany and all is well with the continuing weaponization of the police.
As I have mentioned before, absent the police, no political bad actor in history has any power to deny rights or exploit tyrannical rule. None. This would be a reason why the politicos would behave in a most uncharacteristically efficient manner to correct that oversight. Now the governor and his entourage will continue to have heavily armed private praetorians at their beck and call to provide security much like the Private Security Detachments (PSD) that protect VIPs and general officers overseas and in the combat zones in America’s neo-imperialist quagmires around the globe.
As with so much in government, what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the mundanes that dot the fruited plain and have their wealth and resources filched at gunpoint on a perennial basis.
Not only is there a tremendous government animus toward any aspect of self-reliance as I discussed earlier but there is a very real fear of the general population having a peer competitive capability to defend themselves at the same level of a government’s military offensive capability. I will leave it to others to drone on endlessly about the Constitutional Second Amendment and its mystical and sanctified capability to keep Americans in arms. The evidence would prove otherwise with the endless parade of legislation and laws that have effectively removed modern military analogs such as fully automatic firearms and crew served weapons and suppressors and grenades and mortars and the list is endless on what you cannot legally possess without going through a government probe search that would make the NKVD blush in admiration. Most of these items are simply prohibited.
I believe the “20,000 gun laws” is a canard and that 300 may be nearer the number according to the Brookings Institution: All 300 or whatever the true number may be certainly infringe in a substantive and material way on the ability of the common folk to maintain a peer armory and capability against their oppressors.
The most informative answer to the question of “how many gun-control laws?” is then “about 300 major state and federal laws, and an unknown but shrinking number of local laws.”
In my state of Arizona, the local laws are shrinking due to state preemption and the heroic efforts of the Arizona Civilian Defense League. Since the systematic disarmament of blacks toward the end of the nineteenth century and the raft of weapons prohibition legislation since 1934 to include Ronald Reagan using the black possession of firearms a causus belli in 1967 to get the 1968 Gun Control Act rolling, the government assault on individual possession has not ceased.
The Second Amendment of the vaunted but toothless Bill of Rights has been ravaged, savaged and rendered to the point of being a nice slogan and perfect bunting for a rally but effectively an empty promise and a worse protector of individual arming.
One can get all the quaint quotes from the Founding Era and make all the legalistic arguments one wants but you find yourself in the same pathetic position of the wacky and deluded Sovereign Citizens adherents trying to outwit the robed government employees with their rapier wit and deep Blackstonian understanding of the law. Not.
The Second Amendment will do nothing to stop gun prohibition in America. The Constitution was built to create a system first and foremost that fleeces and relieves citizens from their wealth and will concomitantly disarm its citizens if the objections to the former become too disturbing to the rulers.
Those who think another case in front of the Supremes will seal the deal and sanctify their individual rights to bear arms are in for a rude surprise. Remember Scalia’s infamous words in the Heller decision reserving the right of rulers to remove “dangerous and unusual weapons” from the ruled class. It was a curious and ambiguous drawing from the US v. Miller decision concerning the employment of a militia weapon (in this case, a trench style shotgun). As we have seen from so many decisions, the Supremes will find a way to twist the language to suit their propensity for restricting rights instead of expanding them.
Much like the recent decisions on police surveillance, the government rule-enforcers will simply find other means or suborn the law. It is what they do.
I am suggesting that a sole reliance on the Second Amendment will never fail to disappoint if decriminalization of weapons is not the first and only effort. Much like the illegal mood enhancers chased by the Drug War, the worst thing that can happen is legalization because then the Forces of Darkness can regulate and tax to their heart’s content. Decriminalization of weapons and self-defense is the only course of action.
I would like to briefly address the “need argument” so popular with the disarmament talking heads in the government and media. The common canard is that a free people must establish some kind of need and until such time as permission is given by the rulers, this is forbidden. Why do I need a Kalashnikov or grenade or fully automatic firearm?
The answer is deceptively simple: any population in any tax jurisdiction on Earth should be a peer competitor in weapons and training to the standing military and constabulary within those boundaries for a very simple reason; no government on Earth has ever remained within the confines of its creation and none has ever disarmed its population without severe penalties to individual rights and freedoms. At one end of the spectrum, the Communist nations used it as a means for wholesale pogroms against the disarmed citizens and at the other end have guaranteed a hazard-free workplace for those who break laws for a living (the private sector criminal element) leading the ironic position of the vaunted United Kingdom being the most violent nation in Europe.
When politicians ask after the mere needs of a citizen, there will always be an agenda designed to deprive the populace of their loot or their liberty. After all, it is a favored tactic of the collectivists to satisfy their constituents in the Free Shit Army by rhetorically asking why the wealth should not open their wallets wider and be dragooned into surrendering more of their private earnings for the herd.
Why do we need cars that exceed the speed limit? Why do we need to have 120” LCD televisions? Why do we need to have ball bats, hammers and pipe wrenches if they are so harmful?
Some of the worthies and talking heads in the media and blogosphere spend countless hours wringing their hands over the baleful effects of firearms yet they ignore the far greater death toll at the hands of government approved doctors or the government subsidized hell-holes in the inner city where the ruler’s policies have created perverse family structures and the inevitable obesity epidemic that result from following the government diet program. Whatever government touches, it blackens, deadens, and deepens the crisis it raced to resolve.
Draw a line in the sand and just say no to disarmament.

Metachrosis
02-01-2013, 12:04 PM
The confiscations begin,take note of the DHS double speak to lamely justify the actions taken against this citizen
http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/feds-seized-nearly-1500-guns-in-raid

Focal
02-01-2013, 12:15 PM
Good, one less law-breaker on the street making it harder on other gun owners. I see this no different than someone coming on this site and breaking any reptile associated laws. If the charges are proved justified (which you have not a lick of a clue tommy), then good.

Metachrosis
02-01-2013, 12:55 PM
Take note,Im as smart as I want you to believe

Focal
02-01-2013, 01:23 PM
Take note,Im as smart as I want you to believe

I'm not trying to insult your intelligence, but I do not believe you have inside knowledge whether this guy is innocent or guilty. If that guy ends up guilty, do you justify his actions and not those of DHS (personal feelings aside)? If this was a foriegn Cartel doing the same thing, would you view it differently? As a gun owner, do you not feel the same as I do about others making it worse on other gun owners? It seems like you automatically declare the charges as BS just because you do not like the accuser.

Metachrosis
02-01-2013, 01:47 PM
Valid points noted,recent activities with said accusers makes my position
innocent until "proven" guilty.
"Of which" does not support said actions,the long laundry list of charges
shows LE's excessive nature to be "justified at all cost".

Constitutional ?

Focal
02-01-2013, 01:55 PM
"Of which" does not support said actions,the long laundry list of charges
shows LE's excessive nature to be "justified at all cost".
Constitutional ?


Not at all unconstitutional. I don't believe they watched this guy for that many years, only to throw it all out over doing something that would violate his rights.

Also, not to insult your intelligence, but are you saying that some of the items on the "list of charges" are false in the bold statement above? That DHS made up an extensive list to justify their actions? I'm curious to where you find this information.

Dennis Hultman
02-05-2013, 04:14 AM
Good, one less law-breaker on the street making it harder on other gun owners. I see this no different than someone coming on this site and breaking any reptile associated laws. If the charges are proved justified (which you have not a lick of a clue tommy), then good.

As far as I know still no official charges against this guy.

From what I've been reading he deals mainly in antique weapons.

Dennis Hultman
02-05-2013, 04:31 AM
"However, a bigger concern is that no markings on the guns and missing documents mean the guns are not traceable by law enforcement."

Hmmm, I wonder why that is....

Going down his lists on his website

Antique, Antique, Curio & Relic, non firearm...

Look at the accusations again

"The guns were also not properly marked possibly to make the guns more valuable and to avoid paying high import taxes, investigators alleged.

However, a bigger concern is that no markings on the guns and missing documents mean the guns are not traceable by law enforcement."

I wonder why again?

I guess we can gleam some off that off his own website

Those pesky old guns....

http://www.adamsguns.com/

Dennis Hultman
02-05-2013, 04:40 AM
---------------------

I guess it could be that they believe he smuggled these in himself.

Focal
02-05-2013, 09:29 AM
I understand some of your points. I'm interested in seeing some outcome. I still find this hard to blame on the US since this started in Canada, where he was also investigated. I am curious as to what is on the four search warrants that were issued. That's the tough thing about these investigations; nobody is going to know anything until they are ready. Has Bob spoke about this publicly yet?

Focal
02-05-2013, 09:35 AM
Nevermind. I guess he is still detained.

Focal
02-05-2013, 09:37 AM
Found this from another forum. Makes sense:


Originally Posted By usjet:
If a gun is imported, it doesn't matter where or when it was manufactured, the importer Must mark it with his info. Collectors give a premium for guns without such marks. If it can be proved that he imported guns from Canada and re-sold them without marking them (which seems to be what .gov is looking at), he's got some big trouble. Even say, a mint US Property marked 1911 - Once it's left the US, if it's brought back in by a licensed importer, it has to be marked. The 1911 might be worth say, $6500 to a collector in original condition - import marks will drop it to $2500 or less. So the guy had some motivation (not saying this is what he did) to leave markings off.
The posturing and scare-mongering by the local media is sickening to watch, though - "He had a bunker filled with all these weapons, even ANTI-TANK guns, where CHILDREN (OMG!!!) played!" .

JColt
02-05-2013, 11:49 AM
Anything to do with weapons or reptiles has really got media backlash as of late.

Metachrosis
02-05-2013, 12:18 PM
infringing on constitutional freedoms should incur backlash

Metachrosis
02-05-2013, 12:43 PM
pkjIMxf0VyU

Metachrosis
02-05-2013, 01:05 PM
Q2btKEnfuA4

Metachrosis
02-05-2013, 01:10 PM
endscreen&NR=1

Dennis Hultman
02-06-2013, 11:17 PM
NFwEegHQh8w

Metachrosis
02-08-2013, 09:40 PM
just practice rounds right ?

http://www.infowars.com/dhs-purchases-21-6-million-more-rounds-of-ammunition/

Metachrosis
02-09-2013, 11:38 AM
wypFgcqHyvc#!

Metachrosis
02-10-2013, 01:29 PM
If there ever was a situation tailor made for Second Amendment rights it is the ongoing manhunt drama (http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=http://news.yahoo.com/calif-searched-ex-cop-suspected-killing-3-123053269.html) in California following the killing of three people and the injuring of another by former Los Angeles police officer Christopher Dorner. Dorner (33) has promised in notes he left behind to perpetrate “warfare” on police officers and their families. Desperate and heavily armed, authorities are not certain what he is capable of. One report says residents of rural southern California towns are barricading themselves in their homes, some armed to the teeth, in the event Dorner attempts to break into their homes.

Now, you would think that the mainstream media in an effort to provide “fair and balanced” reporting would seize the opportunity and report at least this one time that this is what James Madison had in mind when he wrote the Second Amendment. That is that people have a natural right to self-defense when a madman is on the loose. But, this lack of reporting, as well as other examples of outright chicanery in reporting, is indicative of the MSM’s agenda when it comes to guns.

For instance, there was this headline in the Huffington Post (http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/27/ronnie-chambers-death-chi_n_2562014.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=012813&utm_medium=email&utm_content=FeatureTitle&utm_term=Daily%20Brief) on January 27, 2013, “Ronnie Chambers Death: Mother Loses Fourth Child to Gun Violence…” What followed was a video of the grieving mother (Shirley Chambers) and an article explaining how her fourth child was gunned down “while sitting in a car”. The author of the piece gave no other details about the circumstances surrounding any of the shootings of her four children. In fact, readers were left with the impression that each one was an innocent bystander. What was inferred was that something must be done to stop wanton gun violence before more innocent children are killed – i.e. gun control.

The purpose of the piece was clearly to horrify readers’ sensibilities toward the mother’s loss, get them caught up emotionally, and bring them around to the belief that if only guns could be banned the violence on our streets would disappear.

But, upon further investigation (http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-27/news/ct-met-ronnie-chambers-dead-20130127_1_gun-violence-gunshot-victims-cabrini-green), this observer found that Ms. Chamber’s children were anything but innocent bystanders. Two of her children died as a result of arguments with individuals they knew. One seemed to be a targeted killing by, perhaps, a rival gang. And the last of her children to be gunned down, had been arrested in the past a remarkable 29 times and had four felony convictions! This refutes the Huff Post’s inference that the victims were innocent and merely at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Also from the Huffington Post (http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-horwitz/lapierre-reveals-true-pur_b_2614348.html) was the blog by Josh Horwitz, the Executive Director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, entitled “LaPierre Reveals True Purpose Behind Assault Weapons”. In the piece, Horwitz takes exception to NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre’s Senate testimony that the purpose of the Second Amendment was to ultimately provide Americans with the means to protect themselves from their own government. Horwitz went so far as to label LaPierre’s position “insurrectionist”. He accused LaPierre and others who hold the same belief that they were “ready to wage war on our government”.

Once again, emotional scare tactics were employed by a Huff Post columnist to drive home the point that guns should be banned. The insinuation is that LaPierre and others who hold the view that Americans need guns to protect themselves from their own government are on the far fringes of society. In fact, they are the loony tunes to be feared.

What Horwitz intentionally ignores are those that came before us, who were revered, and who held the same belief that an armed citizenry is the greatest defense against tyranny. Thomas Jefferson said, “What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.” In the Federalist Papers #46, James Madison proclaimed, "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

Lastly, there is this quote from 20th Century liberal Democrat and former Vice President of the United States, Hubert H. Humphrey: "Certainly, one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. ... The right of the citizen to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible."

By ignoring history, Horwitz seeks to taint his readers’ understanding of the gun issue. But he is not alone in this endeavor. The government run schools and most of Hollywood employ the same tactics. Their goal is to convince the public that we need more gun control.

But, for those of us that understand the true meaning of the Second Amendment, we can take solace knowing that the dis-ingenuousness of the gun grabbers is not working because Americans have responded by setting back to back monthly records for arms sales.

Kenn Jacobine teaches internationally and maintains a summer residence in North Carolina

http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2013/02/disingenuous-reporting-on-the-gun-issue-2491584.html

Metachrosis
02-11-2013, 08:42 PM
_52pMg8qQcc#!

Metachrosis
02-15-2013, 05:01 AM
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/guns-and-ammo-production-maxed-out-this-is-a-society-preparing-for-war_02142013

Metachrosis
02-17-2013, 12:20 PM
Now this is effective "Gun Control"
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/15/Gun-Companies-To-State-Governments-With-Strict-Gun-Laws-No-Guns-For-You

Durante
02-17-2013, 12:48 PM
Now this is effective "Gun Control"
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/15/Gun-Companies-To-State-Governments-With-Strict-Gun-Laws-No-Guns-For-You

I love the ideology of the people holding government to the same standards as the people. Yes I know the surplus of firearms already obtained massive & understand there will always be a company or person who's own greed overpowers there civic duty but it's still nice to see a message being sent. I hope the big boys follow suite so it's heard as well.

Metachrosis
03-19-2013, 08:30 PM
BOOM B**CH!!
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/assault-weapons-ban-dropped-senate-bill-193259307--politics.html

:thumbsup::reddevil::thumbsup:

Focal
03-19-2013, 08:33 PM
Woohoo!! I wonder how ol' piers is going to take it.

bliss
03-22-2013, 03:23 PM
Woohoo!! I wonder how ol' piers is going to take it.

Piers knows he liked it when he shot those weapons. :D

And if he has a problem, he can move back overseas. Screw that guy.

Metachrosis
03-22-2013, 06:38 PM
She is small fish compared to the UN
This is far from settled . . . . . . . .
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/21/miller-un-encroaching-second-amendment/