Disrming America. Who is behind it???????????

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/01/gun-safe...turm-ruger.html

Wealthy people control big banks. That is a fact. Why are they so determined to disarm us? I don't have an answer but I believe the reason can't be good for everyday Americans who like freedom. its time to stand up. Demand the repeal of ALL firearm laws. People who are dangerous should stay in prison or mental hospitals.

The super wealthy and they set up puppet lobbying organizations to give the peons the illusion of a voice.

The wealthy don't want to disarm anybody. They can afford gated communities, walls and security.

The people that want to disarm you are the "that ain't fair" folks.

They will understand "that ain't fair" a lot better when civil war breaks out and only one side has guns. Incidentally, I plan to be on the winning side.

I believe its the Deep State, you cant control the masses until you remove the only thing that prevents them from making total socialism. Other countries are making it happen, little by little.
You cant fight overwhelming corrupt power with sticks and stones.

Your mistake is thinking people can only be killed with guns.

People that are removed from reality. They live in the modern world with all it's safety and convenience and don't realize just how quickly things could go horribly wrong.

Those that have forgotten or ignored history. Governments have been turning on their people for as long as their have been governments or rulers. To think that it can't happen here is folly.

Then their are those who are fully aware of the ramifications but want to be in the ruling class. Disarming the peasants makes perfect sense to them.

I hate to think what will happen when society finally breaks down because of whatever reason. Too many people on this rock.

If Rugers shareholder start acting too yuppie their customer base will drop them like a hot rock.

Maybe that is the plan...

Money-Greed-Power-Control

Many different agendas. None with a vision for anyone's future but their own. They have forgotten, ignored, and even re-written the past, but it's a past they will know well, as it is our future.

Absolutely correct.

They have turned on the tax payer years ago. They are using schools to brainwash our kids, media is brainwashing society, gadgets monitor your where abouts and now rich banks are controlling the money.

Within 20 years I say they will make a big move to control our country like a dictatorship.

The survey results are in. When some states passed draconian gun ban laws 99.99% of the residents did not leave that state.

So, there you have it......its will be widely accepted and the perfect tool for enforcement is in use. Geo located smart phones that take geo tagged pictures have been purchased by almost everyone. Take a pic of the gun owning criminals and text it to the gestapo. That will earn you extra phone credits and maybe some food rations.

They even have the kids protesting in favor of having their rights taken away.

All the wealthy elite that want 'change' have to do is figure out how to unplug the internet. Then you will have a global financial meltdown followed by social meltdown and the everyday person begging to be taken care of in return for anything they dictate.

No internet = no banking, no ebt cards, no credit/debit card functioning, loss of the grid to a large extent, wall street down and so much more.....maybe even meltdown of some nuke plants due to lack of power/fuel.

We are basically the flip of a switch away from chaos at large.

Tech folks call it a fire sale. Financial-grid-comms...everything must go.

Yep

Maybe this old saying will shed some light....."Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely". Anyone that believes it is about anything other than power and money ($ is power)is kidding themselves. And don't believe for a second that the "Anti" crowd hasn't figured out drama means more money for themselves, just like the other side.

Sure isn't your God fearing, work for a living, hunting and trapping conservative country boy!

I think it’s deep state type elitists who want a greater amount of control. The rest are simply leftists who’s motives are questionable at best. Maybe they think it’s a good way to curb gun violence, but I suspect what they’re more interested in is humiliating gun owners, since they view our way of life as inferior. You remember the mean popular girls in high school? That’s basically who they are. Male or female. Watch the View one time and you’ll agree.

It's people like George Soros who hates America and all it stands for. He would like nothing better than to see America implode.

Pogo had it right.

I agree T7, and I also believe it's about globalism. We are the last of the mohican's so to speak and they need us to fall to accomplish OWO.

Agenda 21, not a pleasant way to live. Coercion by food rationing or force would be necessary to make majority of Americans live that way. Unarmed civilians much easier to control. There are those people in very high places that beleive the carrying capacity of the land
"EARTH" has been exceeded by SIX BILLION
unwashed masses, that's you and me. The winds of change are blowing hard and they have a familiar SMELL.

And we ALL know what these people are, so vote accordingly.


https://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/district-of-columbia
This should give anyone the idea.

There has to be “reasonableness” on both sides of the issue of guns. I don’t sense a lot of this on Tman. Everybody wants access to “assault” type weapons. Lots of people are seeking silencer information as if it’s a necessity for shooting game. The whole idea that “ da gobermint is gonna take our guns and dissolve the second amendment” seems alive and well toooooo often on Tman. I JUST don’t understand this attitude by what I assumed were educated people. Guess I was wrong.

Some history to think about:
1). Back in the 1980s the federal govt opened the doors of state hospitals and other treatment facilities leaving tens of thousands of mentally challenged, schizophrenic, severely depressed, Lewy-body dementia stricken individuals and a plethora of others out on the streets. The rights of these individuals were not to be trampled upon even if it meant the rest of us could be harmed. Getting someone “committed” to a care facility was no longer possible unless the individual consented to the treatment.
2). I took my carry permit class a couple years ago. At that time, Obama was president. I remember the run on guns that was caused by the suggestion that the govt was going to ban certain weapons. Our instructor gave us the gun purchase statistics which said over 65,000,000 guns had been purchased while Obama was president. That represents 20% of the US population buying guns though it doesn’t actually equate to that. I saw a statistic put out by the Justice Department the other day that suggested there are well over 200,000,000 guns in the hands of Americans today. And if this statistic is off by 50% it’s still over 100,000,000 guns in the hands of private individuals in America today.

When is enough, enough? I’m not anti-gun ownership. But I’m against the drumbeat that says we can never have enough and the idea that Everybody has the right to bear arms. In my humble opinion there’s enough fire power in the hands of our organized professional law enforcement and military to protect us. Since I don’t watch “zombie apocalypse” or “aliens are coming to suck our brains and take away our freedoms” movies, I don’t believe there will ever be a time when we’ll have to form a neighborhood militia. And for the record, I don’t believe my city council will ask me to turn in my two .22 caliber revolvers because the police feel I’m a threat to society, UNLESS by my actions, I’ve proven I’m not mentally balanced enough to own them.

Yes, you couldn't be more wrong teacher.

It's pretty simple really.
One group wants to take your guns, one is defending them. I don't give a rats behind what other issues there are, that is plain fact.

The reason the gun grabbers have traction? Too many people think, "they really won't take them, i can vote for my union or whatnot." WRONG.

The 2nd was set up to give us the right to protect ourselves against the very people YOU are trusting and relying upon to keep you and yours safe. When, not if, when they turn sour people like you will lose everything. I guess you don't care about our Constitution or protecting your own. Your way of thought on this subject matter is disturbing IMO.

Here's another way to look at it Teach..........

Why do you vote Dem, for your union?

Seems unreasonable to me to vote Dem since the unions are still here after 100 years and the Rep. haven't killed them yet. (same reasoning?)

Ya have to decide which is more important to you, the constitution and the second amendment or a perk the union gets ya.

And this is what we allow to teach our kids!!!

Proof our school systems are failing.

Teacher, I would urge you to do a little homework. Research AVERAGE RESPONSE TIME FOR 1st responders when 911 is called.
Second assignment; research how many seconds elapse between home invasion until the next one occurs.
Third assignment; research court decisions stating that the police are not mandated by law to protect you or your possessions. I think if you honestly research these things you may begin to understand why some of US don't see what you insist are reasonable positions are reasonable at all. You have a bad case of head in the sanditis.

How about researching the 2nd amendment And why it's written.

And you, my friend, have not answered the question, “when is enough, enough?”

Every concealed carry class I attended said the reason to carry was to keep yourself alive in the event someone tried to take your life. They could take it in seconds even if you are armed. So, how is law enforcement going to save you based on that?

During Obama's presidency gun owners knew his stance on gun ownership. They bought up guns because they felt if ever there was a threat to gun ownership, it was during his presidency. I heard from a guy in Australia who said, they got too complacent when rumors abounded that there was a threat to take our guns. They kept saying it would never happen. You know the rest of that story.

Whenever there is an anti-gun president or leaders in charge, we must be vigilant and not take them lightly.

Why don't you answer that question teach?
When do you have enough money to stop voting the way you do?

Just how many guns do YOU think is enough?

In the end, it all comes down to if you defend the second or not. It really is that simple! Doesn't matter if a guy has 1 gun or 100 guns, it's if you believe in the Constitution or not.

That question needs to be asked to the party that you represent. They ignore laws already in place. They refuse to use systems in place. They allow criminal behaviour to go unpunished. They only care about their agenda on getting the guns.

If your party was not playing the games they were and still are some of the shootings would have been prevented.

I think you should start wondering why cause it's evident they don't care about the victims until they can use them for their agenda.

It's followers like you that has been brain washed beyond common sense.

So your answer is to stop producing guns because of a few whack jobs? Ok then...

A older fellow who teaches firearm training with us must own a couple hundred guns. Probably 95% of them, he's never fired. Many can't be fired either because of Damascus barrel, no ammo available anymore, condition issues, etc.

He loves to bring some of his odd collection to show the kids every session. He often says, "I saw this unusual shotgun and decided I would like to add that to my collection. So, I did when I bought it." John has everything imaginable from a Thompson submachine gun replica to a 22 caliber shooting caseless ammo, to a 5 barreled pistol. As a show of authenticity, he brings the Thomson in a violin case. If you were to ask him, when is enough, enough? He might say when he feels like it or never.

Couldn't agree more. For all President Trump's many and glaring faults, I believe he is fighting the globalists. That's the big overarching enemy that probably needs to be our top priority.

My answer is to be reasonable when it comes to guns. How sane was the shooter in Florida? Or at Sandy Hook, or at Columbine, or at the theater where Gabby Giffords was shot, or in Las Vegas shooting, or the gay night club shooting, or when president Reagan was shot, or when Martin Luther King was shot, or when Kennedy was shot, or when the any number of people are or were shot by people who legally or illegally got their hands on guns. Because they could.

I’m asking for a reasonable response to the complex question of gun control in the 21st century. Applying an amendment written when local militias served as the backbone of the standing army, doesn’t make sense. That, to me, is putting your head in the sand. What we need is open minds, willing to address today’s conditions, and a population willing to discuss (without threats) an outcome we can all agree upon.

I didn't expect you to answer any of your questions thrown back at ya. Typical leftist procedure.

I take it you do agree the left is the group wanting to disarm us?
Haven't seen you dispute that.

I have a friend who owns many guns and is a staunch democrat. He agrees wholeheartedly it's the democrats who want stiffer gun control and if they could would either register or confiscate your guns. But, his weak excuse is that it will never happen because the gun manufacturers are too powerful.

Your answer would be.....Who did he disarm?

Nope. That's a question.

Answer one, you answered both.

May not suit you, but you know.

Teacher your question, when is enough, enough? Is easily answered, when I as a law abiding citizen say I am comfortable with what I have. I have been comfortable for some time now.
Let us ask the same exact question of the other side. There are literally thousands of laws already on the books, some "reasonable" some idiotic. And none of them are being played the slightest attention to by the bad guys.
So I ask you, when is enough, enough.
And as an aside. When you look in the book sent to FFL dealers by the BATF&E
that covers the laws that are set by STATES in addition to federal statutes why does NY need thirty pages single spaced and double sided. Illinois need twenty some odd. New Jersey couple dozen
to accomplish the same thing that WYOMING uses one HALF OF ONE PAGE ON ONE SIDE?
When is ENOUGH, ENOUGH.
I don't watch zombie apocalypse movies.
I don't pronounce government as gubbermnt
I do see a steadily increasing number of
sketchy individuals that I know from brief conversation would not hesitate to do whatever to secure their NEEDS.
And history is replete with examples of government runamuck.
I have a hard time believing an educated person (American) could be so ignorant regarding matters of such critical importance.
And then I think of my sister also a teacher, retired. And I think of my brother in law, a union worker, retired.
Both of these people hold opinions similar to you. Is it the liberal arts education my sister has? The union brainwashing my brother in-law got? Or both?

Everyone of the shootings that have happened have been by people with mental issues there lies the problem not the guns.
Teacher if your figures are right that is a lot of law abiding citizens that mean no harm to you or yours or me.
Why have we never been attacked other than pearl harbor? Because they know we are a well armed militia.
Everybody in the city's seem to think all guns are for killing people why is that.
How many people die on the highway every day and they keep making these death machines when is enough enough. I would bet money that there are more children die in car wrecks than by guns but you send your children on there way everyday in a death machine.

WAKE UP CALL TEACHER !!!!!!!!!!
Chapter 8 title 17 Wyoming state constitution. As a qualified resident of the state between the age of seventeen and seventy I AM AUTOMATICALLY PART OF THE STATE MILITIA.

I'm done with it. Must be a troll

I can tell you that. I have had about ENOUGH of your BS.

I think it is the same people that think is all right for coyotes to run free in the streets of CA and let Mountain lions kill people and do little about it. JMO

lawd

If a person is sane enough to own one gun them why does it matter if they have 100 guns. Your argument makes no sense

Actually most of the big banks are owned by the public. Mostly through mutual funds and direct stock purchases.

I find calling out one group or another as the reason for “gun control” as an excuse for not considering we need to do something to control the violence America has to endure because, or as a result of, the availability of firearms. It isn’t a Democrat thing. Or a Republican thing. Or a libtard thing or a conservative thing. It is an international embarrassment that we all have to endure, until we get a grip on mental health and guns. This goes beyond the singular idea on Tman that someone is going to take away our guns. This is about protecting America FROM its self-interests over the interests of the whole.

This guy gets it.



....because some wish to limit the freedoms of others.


I bet he has a book, or even 5 books. “Who really needs more than a couple books?” We need to get a handle on all of this education. There are people learning how to make bombs from books. For the love of man, let’s limit books to common sense numbers like 2 or 49. It’s for safety, and if you don’t get it, you must be against public safety.

Approx. 30,000 gun deaths a year, most of which are suicide. I believe 11,000 was the latest figure for non suicide gun deaths.

A little math:

350,000,000 population/30,000 gun deaths= .00008571 % of the population killed by a gun every year on average.

without suicides it looks like: 350,000,000 population/11,000 gun homicides or accidental deaths =.00003143% of the population killed in gun violence or accidents every year on average.

Those numbers destroy the "gun violence epidemic" myth currently being perpetuated.

While each one of those deaths is tragic and we should prevent every one we can, taking away or curtailing the ability of the 2nd Amendment to work as designed for the sake of .00003143% of the population on a yearly basis is ludicrous.

I have two shoot guns, and two rifles that belong to my dad. By a stroke of the pin now one of the rifles is considered and assault rifle. Looks and the list of assault weapons and what makes them assault weapons. It is amazing! In a great many cases the police come after the fact. I have had a home invasion. My 410 stop him from coming in, I call the police and the came and got him. If you feel safe enough good for you, but do not tell me how many guns I should have or not have. The odds are not in you favor of getting assaulted. By the way I have 12 fishing poles, and about 75 baits, so I have the upper hand on the fish. JMO

Teacher, you can trust in law enforcement to protect you. Me? I'm not going to. Not because I think they are incapable but because the nearest officer is 20 miles away.

As far as when is enough, enough? It's never enough. If I want to own 1 gun or a hundred why is it anyone's business.

When is enough gun control laws enough?

By the way, even the Supreme Court gets it: Police (or like some like to call them—“Law Enforcement”) are NOT responsible for YOUR protection. YOU ARE.





Do what you want, but when you try to restrict MY RIGHTS, you’re on a fast track to losing friends, so when you come to a forum that believes the Founding Fathers got it right, maybe it’s YOU that got it WRONG.


That’s just how it is.

when governments adhere to the limits placed upon them by the US Constitution.

what does the Tenth Amendment say?

What does it mean?

Teacher have you ever thought of a career change? I have heard through the grape vine that hey are looking for salespeople at Dicks in the Yeti cooler department. You would fit right in.

You tell me when enough is enough...

When you're being loaded on a rail car to be sent to a reeducation/labor/extermination camp? Will that be when enough is enough?

Think it won't happen? History has proven over and over and over that it will.

And the useful idiots are the first ones loaded in cattle cars... And if you are too old to live to see it... Don't worry your kids and grandkids will.

Mike

Can we talk about banning "assault trucks" like the one rented from home Depot to run over people last Halloween or the poor folks in Canada a couple weeks ago? That guy probably didn't even have to pass a background check... I can shoot a maximum of 2 guns at once, but I have twenty or so. Do I have enough, too many, or not enough?

If they outlawed "assault rifles" tomorrow Comrade Teacher strikes me as the type who would turn in his neighbors for keeping them.

Mike

Teacher, what do you mean by "when is enough is enough" ?? Are you referring to the total number of guns in America, or something deeper, just what is the cockle burr under your saddle blanket ??


RTT

You cannot fix stupid but you can get them to agree that outlawing guns will stop murders....

The older I get, the lower my tolerance lever gets for those idiotic morons.

My e&u gauge is on empty.

me, too.

but what scares me MOST is that there are many more of the same RIGHT HERE at T-Man!

X2

He would make top salesman in no time selling to his yuppie friends

I agree

I think he is a risk to have on this forum.

For sure a anti

Lots of folks on here believe in "reasonable" gun control, not just teacher. They don't all agree on what reasonable is but a lot of people think "reasonable" gun control is a real thing. Including you racerboy. Just the other day you posted how wonderful the background check was and how it made it us all safer.

White17, the way I understand it there is a handful of wealthy people with enough stock to outvote the smaller investors. Somebody is behind these large banks making waves against firearm related business. I would like to know who and why.

Teacher,

How many guns I own is none of your business or the governments.

Danny what I said about background checks is it eliminates the criminals that surrendered their rights from getting guns.

I said I have no problem taking 10 minutes and filling out a form to prove I deserve my right.

This is way different than someone taking our rights away because of their agenda.

White17 look up the Rothschild's
And then tell me the public owns the banks

Lots of folks on here believe in "reasonable" gun control, not just teacher. They don't all agree on what reasonable is but a lot of people think "reasonable" gun control is a real thing. Including you racerboy. Just the other day you posted how wonderful the background check was and how it made it us all safer.

White17, the way I understand it there is a handful of wealthy people with enough stock to outvote the smaller investors. Somebody is behind these large banks making waves against firearm related business. I would like to know who and why.


Control both sides of an issue,..you control the issue!

It's weakness and compromise of our forefathers that brought us here. Constitution or not. Rights are IN you. Cheeto-in-chief (author of the book "ART of THE DEAL(compromise)" is coming to speak to what is supposed to be the backbone of our most important right. We Cheer? I dont. I want government out of it most rikki tik. Imagine all those that pay money to be members of 'our defense' disarmed in His Presence. Speaks volumes.

Better stand up soon for something men, rather than the same old same old. America is breeding idiots as I type this. "Cheeto will get us thru this,too". Maybe, but theyll outvote Republicans, as they always have. It boils down to hen heartedness, I think.

To be honest, cheeto is doing pretty good. If I weren't here to hold the feet to the fire we would be praising the attorney general and that Lady Boy senator from down south. Always lean into freedom.

Yes he is despite an onslaught of obstacles thrown a pathway of obscurity!
Tell me,..Rosenstein , can he flip a coin on end?

Not everyone thinks that selling full auto firearms from a table on the side of the road to any 12 year old who has the asking price is a good thing....some us of believe that there needs to be some regulation.

If you believe that selling full auto firearms to a 12 year old is not a good idea you also believe in some regulations.....

But maybe you think its a good idea?

Not even close Danny. Mutual funds own the vast majority of all bank shares....in other words...the public .

Insiders own less than 0.73% of all shares.

BUT..........don't think that some mutual funds may not be pressuring banks to stop doing business with firearms manufacturers.

If you own funds, you should find out what management's position is on firearms. Remember.....most of them are headquartered in the northeast states

Marty you sound like an old woman.

"Won't somebody please think about the children"?

Still waiting for the bloodbath that constitutional carry was going to bring about. You were against that too if I remember right.

"It is an international embarrassment that we all have to endure, until we get a grip on mental health and guns".

Teacher....Really,were an embarrassment? Better tell ever boarder jumping SOB that same story,as they sure as heck are crawling in every way they can.personally i'm not ashamed of myself or any gun toting individual i call friend.

Teacher, you say you are a gun owner. I think I've asked this question before: Do you honestly think your guns won't be on the ban list if the powers that be get started with banning certain guns? Are you ok with that?

thanks white17. I was unaware of that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnpCqsXE8g

One fact that I am certain of is that Blackrock...which is the largest asset manager in the world.....was the first one to start putting pressure on retailers to not sell AR-15's. If you own BLK, or a mutual fund you own ,owns shares of BLK, then you need to consider whether you want to continue to own that investment..........IMO

Yes, that is some history to think about. Makes me think, "WHY would anyone put their lives and their family's lives in the hands of a government like that?!?" You go right ahead and let them control you. I'll keep ALL my guns ("Assault weapons" and all) and defend my freedoms.

As long as his class of gun owner is still allowed to own guns (reasonable restrictions included) I think the concept won't be fully understood.

I never said anything like 'think about the children'. I said "its probably best not to sell full autos to a 12 year old at a table on the side of the road'.

Which means some regulation is necessary.

As far as cc goes, I believe in training for people carrying guns in public everyday.

You skirted the ?

Should full auto and all other firearms be sold to ANYONE who has the money with no ID being required? Either you do or you do not believe in that.

Please answer that ?

Thanks.

Not to many folks in my 'class'.....maybe would be disarmed before you get to my 'class'.

What is sold between two consenting peoples isn't a concern for the third wheel (Marty and da gubmint)

Ninnies.

so, your for selling any firearm to a 12 year old.

Not me, personally. My 12 year old won't be buying one.
Minding your own business is a lost art. Regaining the ability is hard. Good luck.
There are way way waaay more people who can't seem to mind their own business than there are 12 year Olds with the means and the want to buy a firearm.

I think you're dead wrong there. Most of the wealthy are wealthy because they are good at taking advantage of massive numbers of people. If you are rich because you're good at deceiving and manipulating masses of people, would you want those people to have guns? By wealthy, I'm not talking about your millionaire in a gated community, I'm talking about people who control tens of billions of dollars. Us normal folks can't even really imagine the god-like power that comes with that sort of wealth.

As someone who thinks everyone should mind their own business you sure are critical of what other people think.

If you just thought those gun control thoughts it wouldn't be a problem. But you belong to a Gunn club that supports gun control and vote for a political party that supports gun control.
I mean, we can still be friends and all. I'm friends with a few gun control advocates. I just want to make sure you realize in what you are in, as a gun control advocate.

I think you ought to practice what you preach.

He makes me laugh. He accuses you of voting for the party that supports gun control which isn't true about you or the party. But, constantly ignores and refuses to comment on the real party who not only supports, but demands gun control, the democrats. He is nothing more than a democrat masquerading as a Libertarian.

ShaneT gets it. I've been all over the internet and not many do. Even the NRA doesn't get it, or those numbers would be at the forefront of their campaign, along with educating that the second amendment has absolutely nothing to do with defending your house against a burglar and everything to do with ensuring the balance of power between the governors and the governed is forever tipped in favor of the governed.

The real question is, are we being told the sky is falling, when it isn't, just because it sells and there's good money in it? Or is it because there's a group of people, powerful enough to promote this false narrative, who don't want us to have guns?

If anyone wants to verify the truth behind ShaneT's numbers just go to the CDC website https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr66/nvsr66_06.pdf page 34. There were 12,979 homicides by firearms in the US in 2015. How many of those do you suppose were one drug dealer killing another? Or justifiable police and self defense shootings? How many of those homicides do you think were perpetrated with a big bad AR15? 12,979 is 0.004% of the 321 million in the US in 2015.

To put the 12,979 in perspective, nearly three times as many people die each year from "falling". Do you lie awake each night fearing that you're going to fall to your death? Do you rage at our legislatures that we need safety rails and adequate signage along every edge? Mandate that every home have non-slip surfaces in the tub? Make it law that people can only drink while sitting? No? Why not when its three times more likely to kill you? I'll tell you why, its because that's not the message you are being force-fed on a daily basis. Wake up and smell the conspiracy. I can't tell you for sure who wants your guns, but I can tell you for sure someone does.

Well said MAArcher!

Listening to a guy from the UK on Hannity yesterday talking about all the stabbings there. In London, the mayor wants to ban knives, all knives. One English bloke said, "If they do that, what did they expect me to cut me steak with?"

He said if they ban knives they'll start using clubs to kill people with. The whole world is going crazy!

This is insane. As a youth, guns as far as I remember never made it to schools other than maybe show and tell. <thats my age showing.>
We need common sense and that's not possible with cry rooms at college and snowflakes living off momma till there 50.We cant incarcerate the bad ones and cant give them the death card.Do you think that the common offender, be it nuts or criminal worried about 3-5 years for a kill? Did they get touched as a child or not enough spoil time so they lash out. I have 2 options, shut off Dish network or have a guy mow my lawn this summer. Guess what way i going?

Back to the original question, this is from an email I received some time back. Remember this? Read the whole thing


The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised "Meet The Press".From Sunday's 07 Sept. 2008 11:48:04 EST, Televised "Meet the Press" THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

General Bill Gann' USAF (ret.) asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played. The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171...

During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, "Stand and Face It".

Senator Obama replied :

"As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides." "There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression..." "The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air and all that sort of thing."

Obama continued: "The National Anthem should be 'swapped' for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing'. If that were our anthem, then, I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as 'redesign' our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. [/u]It’s my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren.[u] If we,as a Nation of warring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails, perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments".

"When I Become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts. We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past".


"Of course now, I have found myself about to become The President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country's First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America!"

Yes, you read it right. I'll never forget. They are the scum of the earth

Wow! I'd never seen this before. I went to Truth or Fiction and it's all true. What were people thinking when they voted for him? I can see why the Deep State and others are working so hard to get rid of Trump. He's disrupting everything they got started. Getting rid of guns is just a small part of it.

America is up for grabs.
All of the founding ideas, democratic principles, and self-reliant culture have been purposefully erased from education starting at first grade and ending senior year in college since the 1960s.
Two generations of Americans now think our borders are evil, self defense is immoral, capitalism is selfish, and self-reliance is "white privilege." They believe that government is the great leveler, equalizer, and that coercing money from one person and giving to another person is the primary role of government and the most moral thing anyone can do.
Look at senate leader Mitch McConnell and the new revelations about him and his wife, how they are owned by the Chinese government. The Chinese won't have to invade America with an army, they will own it outright and control it through electronics from afar. Want your power back on? Want food? Etc.
We have so badly spoiled our children that they no longer understand what it takes to create a place like America. They do not understand risk or sacrifice.
My oldest girl graduated from NYU, one of the centerpieces for ultra liberal American colleges. She remains a conservative.
Our middle daughter is at college and within weeks of starting there began spouting off the most ridiculous garbage. At first we all laughed at her because it was so crazy, but now she's really into it. Our boy is like his pop - hunter, trapper, fisherman, as far right wing as possible and still be legit. He's like that for now. I have no idea what future he faces in college. He's a fighter, for now, and I hope he always stays that way.
The biggest thing we can do to combat this is get tenure removed from colleges.

The founders didn't believe in gun control. At all of any firearm. Was perfectly legal to buy a canon, load it with 12 pounds of 50 caliber balls (WMD assault weapon) and leave it pointed down your drive.

Yes Marty, I don't think the government should have the authority to decide who gets to buy what firearm. dangerous people should stay in prison or asylums. something I can agree with teacher on.

When I was 12 I could mail the money to Sears for ANY firearm they sold and the mailman would have brought it to the door. We lost that in 68 because white people were afraid of the blacks who were arming themselves. In a lot of cases arming them selves for good reason. It's time to end that foolishness. Honor our constitution.

450 178 grain lead balls traveling at over 1000 feet per second is not something ineffective I wouldn't imagine

danny, I believe that most don't get that, heck, most probably don't even think about it. If someone is deemed to unstable to own a gun, well they should't be out in the public. Guns are just like knifes, ball bats, crowbars, screwdrivers etc. Backround checks weren't set up imo to keep us safe(lol), they were set up as a registry.

Good Post lol. Thanks for correcting my math.I was distracted and forgot to carry the decimal when I wrote out my answer. My biscuits were literally burning.

The point is still the same.

12,979 of 321,000,000=.004043%. That is a smidgen more that 1/250th of 1%.

Gun violence epidemic my eye...

J MHO I think that the money the libs pump into disarming folks could save a heck of a lot more lives if they spent it on cancer research.

not much control to be gained that way though, Scuba1

Yes, there lies the truth!

I didn't accuse him. I told a fact. Marty doesn't want 12 year Olds to have guns, and wants government to oversee it. That is gun control. The definition of gUn control is having government control who does or doesn't have guns. This is elementary logic.
As far as the Republican party and gun control, read their platform. It states they want reciprocity for CCW permits across states. It doesn't say they disagree with the idea of permits to carry. Permits to carry are gun control. In closing, it may be unconfortable to realize that if you believe government should decide who has guns or what kind of guns-you are a gun control advocate. As I have mentioned before, I do not talk about democrats because everyone already knows they are gun control advocates. Just like the Republicans and the NRA.

never said I did not want 12 year old to own a gun. that's up to the parents.

12 year old should not be able to go to the store and buy whatever full auto or other firearm that he wants to on his own.

If you want all those ineligible to own firearms locked up you do not understand the rest of the constitution as it was written.

Since that is not possible we need to have something that works with the situation we exist in not rules for never never land.

That's gun control, Marty. Will you admit to being a gun control advocate Marty?

You think a 12 year old should be able to go to the corner store and but a full auto m4?

Explain the rest of the constitution part you speak of and your first two sentences contradict one another Marty.

Danny and finn, should inmates be able to own firearms?

If you say no then you favor gun control.

Someone who was found guilty of domestic abuse cannot own a firearm and they think he should be locked up for life. That's not true to the constitution. SSomeone who has a restraining order that does not allow weapons possession ...they want him locked up for life....etc. its an insane idea.

Won't work in our society.

You have no second amendment rights as an inmate, or 1st amendment rights. Or any rights at all, really.

Then you believe the government can take away someone's 2nd rights.which is gun control. Plus you never will answer the question...do you think a 12 year old should be able to go on his own to the corner store and buy an m4 legally?

Please answer yes or no.

So the rest of have to loine up to pass a background check for an inalienable right that isn't supposed to infringed on because of someone who beats their wife or has a restraining order? Hmm, you have an interesting view. What other forms of gun control do you favor Marty? Do you think automatic weapons are ok to have without having to pay a tax, or are they just for the government?

A great number of people who can not legally defend themselves with a firearm should be allowed to. Those who pose a threat should not be released. Why is that never never land? It was the way things were done till fairly recently. School shootings, random shopping center shootings were not happening. Bank robbery was a popular sport. Since 1934 though when we got our first federal gun control legislation bank robbery doesn't happen anymore. So all you non criminals just put up with an intrusive government no longer constrained by our constitution.. No more bank robbery was worth it.

Plus you never will answer the question...do you think a 12 year old should be able to go on his own to the corner store and buy an m4 legally?

Please answer yes or no.

Sorry to say, with the exception of the second amendment, prisoners have MORE rights than the average citizen trying a case against them...This is a terrible situation indeed.

Yes Marty, 12 year Olds should be able to purchase any weapon without government interference. If they can find a seller who is willing,have at it.

Yes

I think most often today domestic battery really isn't.

If a woman really wants to kill her husband for fishing to much why shouldn't she be locked up till she is no longer a threat?

Never has anyone who could pose a threat to society received a mandatory life sentence without any possibility of parole.

Never.

I would like to know who can buy a M4 or and M16 for that matter or perhaps an M60 legally other than a class 3 dealer? A 12 yr old could not buy a gun when I was 12 in 1963!! not an auto but just a plain gun. Also if you are not a class 3 dealer then you cannot posses a full auto firearm unless you get it as a collector.

You said for life. But anyway.... so who decides that this woman is now no longer a threat and she can be released and legally own a firearm?

If your not yet convicted but are incarcerated while you await trial I guess you should be able to have a firearm while in jail.....

Maybe inmates should be able to possess firearms?

It ought to be legal to sell m4's on the street corner in Chicago to 12 year old gang bangers...

Yes they should. When you are released from prison all of your rights that were taken away should be given back to you.

If you are that much of a danger to society you shouldn’t be released from prison.

How about all of the laws we have now be enforced on the criminals, instead of being dropped so they can get a conviction on a smaller crime? The attorney general dismisses most gun and other laws do that they don’t have to do their job. They plea down to smaller offenses.

Why create more laws that only non criminals follow when you don’t enforce the ones you have?

Some folks think a 12 year old should be able to buy an m60 on the street corner legally.

No gun control whatsoever....or your really anti 2nd unless you agree with that.

I want my gay married neighbors to be able to protect their legal pot farm with automatic weapons and no government involvement whatsoever. That maybe never never land, as both Republicans and Democrats could never let that amount of freedom go unmolested.

Inmates actually have not been released yet...that is why they are inmates.

I think marriage is between a man and a woman....and pot should not be legal.

Just sayin...

They get mandatory life sentences all the time here! Any person who has been sentenced to life in Delaware since 1986 (I believe) has absolutely no possibility for parole.

You answered the question yourself. Remember, if the parents deem it ok. You are advocating that the Gov should make the decisions and not the parents, can't have it both ways!

Only someone in lala land could be pro-gun control and tell themselves and others they are pro-second amendment

jeremiah52, in 1963 if it was illegal where you lived to purchase a firearm it was a state law not federal.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-82/pdf/STATUTE-82-Pg1213-2.pdf


"(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer,
licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver—
r~ "(1) any firearm or ammunition to any individual who the
. t,^ I licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe is less than
^ eighteen years of age, and, if the firearm, or ammunition is other
1 than a s h o t ^ n or rifle, or ammunition for a shotgun or rifle,
I to any individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause
[ to believe is less than twenty-one years of age

So advocate for more gun control instead of a 180 with our DOJ, seem's silly...

Yes Marty they are inmates or “15’s” as we called them at the prison I worked at.

They should still be allowed to own any weapons they want. And when they get out, they can do whatever they want with them. Obviously when they are wards of the state they cannot have them. Even the officers can’t have guns in there...

Except for certain riot situations... boy I miss the glock 18 sometimes.

If you make it legal for a 12 year old to go to the gun sale table on the corner and buy an m4 how do you know that his parents say it is OK?

No gun control means gun sales to anyone, anywhere....but anyone, anywhere. Everything is legal.

Drive around the hood in Chicago selling full autos to anyone who has the money...totally legal.

That's what no gun control is.

People demonstrating outside the police station in Ferguson and you go there with 100 full autos and hand em out....totally legal.

Keeping guns from wards of the state is gun control.

Freedom is scary.

Freedom is scary! It isn’t anybodies business what that twelve year olds parents think. If the kid has the money they can buy it.

Just like in Chicago, they can buy full auto now if they have the money and can find them. They don’t care about laws anyway. Most can’t own guns under current law. What is stopping them from buying guns now?

Sounds like you are for confiscation Marty! Because we should be protected from ourselves. Only fema should have guns

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that "cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be] inflicted.".

I do not want more gun control, what we have now on the federal level is working just fine....except suppressors should be legal to anyone without a tax stamp.

No, it's not. It is actually a property rights issue. The state owns the prison, says no guns-that means no guns. Same as if a private person doesn't want guns on his property. That isn't gun control, as we are talking. We are talking about government controlling who can buy own or have a gun.

You are a full on advocate for Gov control. Let them decide, it makes us safer lol. Carry on in your PC world Marty, FREEDOM, real FREEDOM scares a lot of you people. All I have to say is, shame for shame!!

I bet there are 10 times more full auto's "in the hood" of Chicago than in all of Las Vegas where its big business for people to go out to ranges while on vacation to shoot them.

Have an adult read this to you slowly Marty. Maybe you’ll understand property rights also.

If you think I am for confiscation of guns your nuts.

Anyone can buy anything......anyone can commit any crime.....why have any laws at all? Do away with all laws and have total freedom.

I am an adult.

Yes, most gun laws are nonsense. Why have laws if they aren’t enforced. You sound just like the left when you say why don’t we just have no laws at all...
No one is calling for anarchy. I just want everyone treated fairly under laws. And I don’t want laws infringing on mine or anyone else’s constitutional rights



We are a nation of laws.

“A nation of laws” means that laws, not people, rule. Everyone is to be governed by the same laws, regardless of their station; whether it is the most common American or Members of Congress, high-ranking bureaucrats or the President of the United States; all must be held to the just laws of America.

We don’t have that when the police and government have special laws Marty.

People who want to hurt others are not restrained by laws. That is a fact. Making it illegal to hurt others allows those people to be incarcerated and protect the public from them. Having gun restrictions protects no one. Its just feel good nonsense. Till you need a firearm and can not access one. Then its a feel bad tragedy.

Calling out the 8th, fine. So bust the ones who break the law and be done with it, don't punish the ones who tear the crap out of tin cans and harvest a moose. Good grief man, do you hear yourself?

Then read it slowly to yourself.

I hear myself.

I also hear them saying keep everyone who could pose a threat to society locked up for life...forever.

Who determines who that is?

I also hear them saying absolutely no gun control whatsoever....guns sold to anyone on the street corners.

You should be able to legally walk up to the president carrying an m4.

If you do not agree with that your anti 2nd.

I can read fast and comprehend just fine....no problems with my IQ #'s.

If the cops arrest someone on public property and he is not yet convicted of a crime then he should be able to possess a firearm while in custody or its gun control.

Right?

Yes

Accused of murder/assault/domestic violence and you should be ineligible for bail....

Combat vets with severe ptsd should be locked up for life...who cares, anyone who is not locked up can bay any gun they want too.

That's a stupid question. If someone is released by the court to await trial then YES, he or she can own a weapon. Our laws were set up, unlike your believe, innocent until proven guilty. Quit looking for some stupid loophole and except freedom.

If they are that much of a threat to society then yes. But when they are released they should not be punished any longer.

A justice system that follows the constitution and the laws that are passed by the legislature...
I am also against regulations. If it is that important it should be voted on by the house and senate. Not just enforced by individuals.

Any person should be able to purchase a gun. On the street corner, back alley, living room, truck tailgate or car trunk. And my favorite.. the range bag.

Yes you should be able to walk up to the president with an M4. We should also be able to go to the White House and request a meeting. I’ve carried my pistol when I talked to Joe Biden. Absolutely nothing happened.

Yes you are anit 2nd if you want any or are for any infringement on the second amendment

What is stupid is saying that anyone not incarcerated should be able to legally possess a firearm.

Each of those charges have bail. Some might be millions of dollars in cash. But you get bail.

Heald without bail is usually capita offenses or if they can flee the country.

I though that anyone not incarcerated was not a threat in the world with no gun laws?

Those people could very well be dangerous....out on bail and possess a firearm in the world with no gun laws for anyone not incarcerated?

No. That is freedom.

Who said they weren’t a threat? But yeah, they should still be allowed to own their guns.

If they are deemed to not be responsible enough to handle a firearm than yes. But I do have reservations as to who deems that because there are a lot of anti's like you out there! The problem you have, which is understandable is you have a lack of confidence in our DOJ. That's where the problem lies. Not in gun control as you put it.

Someone shoots a cop and gets out on bail and should be legal to possess a firearm?

people I'm scared of don't care if they can legally carry or not. they carry anyway

Better to lock a vet up for life than say he cannot own a firearm.....that's interesting.

marty find a cop shooting where the shooter got out on bail

Yes.

Probably because they don’t care about laws in the first place.

See Marty. Danny gets it.

Your scared?



Obviously anyone can break any law....but we still need laws, right?

Or should we do away with all laws because anyone can break them at any time....what good are they anyway?

Sure we need laws, where there is an actual victim. Victimless crimes and needless regulations are strangling this country. It has been so for so long now, that many people don't even realize it is happening.

Yup. And some of the laws that have victims have too harsh of a punishment so the perpetrator becomes a victim of the justice system.

All gun laws are victimless laws. The act of the person who uses a gun to accost someone or shoot them is already illegal, as it should be. There is then a victim. Where is the victim when a 12 year old want to buy a gun? I mean what a rediculous situation to converse about anyway. So a 12 year old walks into a gun store and demands to buy a weapon. Well, the gun store isn't obligated to sell to a 12 year old, or anyone else. But, no no no. We need government involved in the transaction, to make us safer.

He wants the government to take care of him and control everything he doesn’t agree with

Yes Marty I've been scared a time or two.

I take care of myself just fine.

I do not agree that anyone who is not incarcerated should be able to legally own a firearm and I gave some examples of that.

I also do not think a 12 year old should be able to go to any street corner and buy a firearm legally.

Therefore we need some type of laws to govern those type of things.

Simple.

Its exhilarating.....been there myself.

To make us safer, yes, Marty along with a slew of others believe this, it's a falsehood. My great uncles, grandparents, uncles served in war time. Had one uncle who army crawled in his own cut corn field, naked at 3 in the morning thinking he was in Korea. Didn't hurt anyone and didn't leave his property. Never was a real threat. But had he been, there are laws already in place back then and now. Like I have said, true FREEDOM scares some people. Quit being a bunch of Nancy boys and let freedom ring.

Then you don't believe in innocent until proven guilty, you have a lot of company...

Well, you aren’t incarcerated, I’m sure someone out there doesn’t think you should be able to legally own a firearm, should we accept their opinion?

Then don’t allow your 12 year old to own one, or go to a street corner to buy one. Stay away from what my 12 year old does.

No we don’t need laws to govern those types of things.

Simple!

Yes, very simple!

That's far from the truth.

The truth is that due to the constitution there will always be people who could pose a threat to society that are not incarcerated. Therefore to say that anyone who is not incarcerated should be able to legally possess a firearm is a pipe dream. That's just the way it is.

Some combat vet that has severe ptsd and may pose a threat is better off being free and getting help while unable to legally possess a firearm than being locked up to stew on his ptsd for life. Just one example.

Your never going to get absolute zero gun laws.....its a fantasy.

But some here want to alienate people who think that what we have for federal laws now is workable. And unless someone says the fantasy of absolute zero gun laws is what they are for then then are for gun control and they are bad anti 2nd people.

That's just not true if you accept the real world.

Dreamer lol...

He is a hope and dream kind of guy...

As long as we're crystal clear that you are a gun control advocate, you can make believe in any version of relaity you like.

First of all I never said 'own' a gun. I said go to the store or street corner alone and legally purchase a firearm.

Should your 12 year old be able to go to the store alone and legally buy some weed or a pint?

You really like to blow things out of context and put words in my mouth.

Can we get a vote to change his signature under his name from trapper to gun control advocate?

Yep, and he can't even see it in his own post lol.

Actually I live in reality.

Read it slow and try to understand.

I have removed myself from this topic. Its been real.

I would like to second that, but that is up to Paul. Heck, I'd like a cool nickname too lol, but no. Wha Wha Wha...

If you purchase a gun you legally own it.

Yes my 12 year old should be able to purchase some weed or a pint alone. Although I would rather go along so I can get a pint myself.

I never meant to put words in your mouth, just letting you know what you’re saying.

Be careful Catch22! Paul has a sense of humor and he will give you one, whether you like it or not.

When I was 12 I had a gun with me all the time but the difference is my parents trusted me.
I carried a gun in my truck to school every day all winter to as I learned to drive.
Every American has the right to bear arms.

You guys all need to start a thread that says "let's argue with eachother about the 2nd amendment".

I bet the anti's just eat this bickering up

We were arguing with an anti!

Marty thinks only the government should decide what you or your children should have.

Said well in few words Hal, Kudos!

Says the newb lol.

And this is the crux of every "oughta be a law" argument...

"What I think/believe trumps everyone's right to determine the course of their own fate."

Once you start down the path of using religious beliefs and/or personal convictions to erode one right you have opened the door to erode them all.

We started by outlawing drugs and to keep fighting the war on drugs we have progressed to the point that LE can seize "suspicious" amounts of cash... The law of unintended consequences always comes into play.

Mike

Mike, on the last page he said he removed himself from the topic because he lives in his own personal reality... sorry I added personal, don’t want to put words in his mouth....


He said it’s been real.

When you wake in the morn Marty, take that into consideration, yeah?

I saw it. After I made my post I went back and read the last few pages.

You guys were ganging up on him pretty good.

I like Marty. He's a good guy with a good heart. He lives his life by his own code and I respect that.

When everyone realizes that they should have zero control over things that don't effect them this country will be a better place for everyone.

Mike

When the shiznit hits the fan you will wish you had Marty in your camp !

I agree. I like Marty also, but he has a history of wanting to dictate what others should be able to do based on his personal opinions. Ask him about open carry sometime. If he wants the government to control what he does that is fine. I don’t want that for me or anyone else.

And he will be welcomed! So will my 12 year old with her M4.


Marty is right on some things, just not this thing.

Ya know something Rob. We assume kids can't be responsible anymore...

And the biggest reason for that is because we have absolved them of just about all responsibility.

To protect them and others we have robbed them of the chance to grow.

It's no wonder so many kids these days are a mess.

Mike

First... who is we? Lol. Not me. I’m kidding about the we I know what you meant.

You are very correct Mike. A lot of parents don’t allow children responsibility or a chance to fail.

I believe it was Utah that made a law that children are allowed to play outside and that it isn’t illegal. Because people kept calling the police when children were outside playing or going to the library alone.

As the original question was about who is disarming America, people should look at the facts and not the rhetoric.

The fact is one of the greatest gun selling purchasing eras in America just took place under Barack Hussein Obama. Gun companies stopped making affordable guns, and inflated guns were instead offered to gouge the public, as was the price increase on ammo when Mr. Obama in government contracts monopolized ammunition manufacture.
If you examine this, Obama talked and his European conglomerates who control the majority of America's gun industry, with the remainder hedge fund speculators, with Ruger and Savage taking the remainder.
After Donald Trump was elected, gun sales dropped, but one word from Mr. Trump on gun bans and the guns flew off the shelves again, and the issue was dropped. There seems to be a direct correlation between politics and conglomerates manipulating the public, because there is.
Except for a few enclaves, gun ownership in ease of access is expanding. There were over 250 million firearms sold in America since 2000. Those guns have joined hundreds of millions of others. Statistics indicate that since 1970, the gun households have dropped from 50% to 34%, but the firearms remain.
Legal or illegal, obtaining guns in America or London, Berlin or Paris is simple as the terrorists have proven. The talk of gun banning is a wedge, just as aborticide, Obamacare, homosexuality or drug use. If you examine the background of this, all of these issues are worth billions of dollars.
Do you realize that the oil companies fund environmentalists, for the very purpose of playing the ruse of oil shortages to drive up prices? The same rent a mobs appear as Parker Dohzier exposed almost 40 years ago at all these protests and are paid for by the same corporations.
Did you know that diamonds are not rare, but as common as coal? DeBeers of Africa figured out a marketing strategy after Queen Victoria gave the Afrikaaners freedom, and then killed them after diamonds were discovered there, to use American Hollywood to create the diamond illusion, in this grand monopoly, and in order to keep it, the fiction of the Blood Diamonds was produced, and now all diamonds have serial numbers to control the flow and keep prices inflated.
Americans have not been deprived of guns. They have instead been deprived of quality affordable firearms to compete with the European monopoly which controls American firearms manufacture using Turkish manufacture. What Americans have been deprived of in this monopoly is Russian firearms. The Saiga was built for the American market, but it undercut Ruger and the AR market by 200 to 400 dollars. That is why Saiga was banned by Obama as it was competing with the monopoly.

John Olin, who saved Winchester, which was part of the American Government to promote firearms ownership, built the 94 Winchester for 150 dollars for years. Now that the Europeans own Winchester those firearms are 1200 dollars and that is after historic advances in gun manufacture.
Maybe the questions should be in who is creating a monopoly to drive up gun prices, while the American wildlife services raise predators and drive up license costs, to keep a new generation from experiencing the outdoors. Trapping historically is what poor people did, burning cheap gasoline, driving used 500 dollar cars, using cheap traps made money for the things that dreams were made of from bicycles to first guns. Inflation has ruined that reality and it is by design.

We are told by the NRA talking points that there is gun grabbing and yet all of this occurred with the NRA taking our money, and moving into gun insurance to make more money. No one ever mentions any of the above realities. Perhaps those realities should be the ones discussed.

This "newb" gets tired of having to sift through the same argument by the same few members on every thread concerning our gun rights. The thread started good and once again back to this. It's distracting people from a better dialogue.

Can never beat the Left if we always fight each other. That will be the demise of the Right. We are always fighting amongst ourselves

Great post Star Flakes! I totally agreee. Especially about the NRA going into the insurance business... money grab if I ever seen one... the gun businesses and ammo companies make more money when people are afraid of the government taking away rights. So the price goes up and they make money. And then as things calm down the NRA and others talk of the boogie man and the sell off continues.

Unfortunately, the anti gun people are there to attack us. In my state we stopped numerous gun laws by being aware and fighting. They tried to slip restrictions through with the guise of safety.

So I’ll continue to fight and ignore the knee jerk reactions from both sides.

.....that's better star flakes.

So, I know in my state it is the governor and his cronies who want only the government to have guns. They reluctantly allow bills that say only police can have special permission. But that is only because of the Heller decision from Washington DC. Heller was a security guard who had the backing of the police union and that was fought by the police union, because they wanted to be classified as special citizens. So now, states include police as exemptions so they have a smaller chance of being overturned as unconstitutional.

Yeah yeah yeah Rcates, spew that nonsense, good grief. If your so exhausted than bale. It's what you people do. Stop sifting and move on to your acceptance dialogue. Dang star flakes, nailed it.

Just saying, would you trip your lead blockers because they don't agree on the play call? At this stage in the game I think a little team unity is needed...........and don't refer to me as "you people" again.

California folks: you better get ready for them. CA assault weapons

You people.....

Stupid is forever....

Just sayin....

As you should know lol.....

You people.....

[quote=Catch22As you should know lol..... [/quote]

Yup, been payin attention to your posts for a bit......about as dumb as they come.

Yeah Marty, that's what your side does. You can't bring about reason for your anti American rhetoric so you start name calling, and such. Everyone knows now, it's done.

You started the name callin way before I did. If you cant take the return don't dish it out.





Plus twisting the things said to fit your perspective, you cannot even follow what someone is saying.

I hope everyone knows how I stand on this because I am firm. The federal laws as they exist today are workable and I do not think a child should be able to go unsupervised and purchase a gun.

You think that a vet with ptsd that could be a risk should be locked away for life...

You do realize that there are more suicides by firearm than murders, right?

A depressed 12 year old kid should be able to go and buy a firearm and do with it what he/she wants to.....no parents need to know or be there. That's what no gun control is....even gump knows that is not acceptable.

Absolute zero gun laws is not workable at all. But you think it is what we all should want.

Like I said stupid is forever.

Finn says no gun laws also and prisoners do not count because it is a property ownership issue.....so in prison he is OK with them not having guns because of that.....well, prisoners leave prison a lot while doing time. Transpo to court. medical and other reasons like work details. Maybe they should have guns allowed on them at those times?

If you think that's a bad idea your for gun control.

A few of you don't even know what your pushing and the consequences of it. It really sad.

Plus another member asked you not to refer to him as you people but you did it again a few times just for spite, that's all you had to say.....you people....like an 8 year old.

Shows what you are. Some people are here to exchange ideas not be ridiculed.

A lengthy explanation to arrive at the same place I stated on page two. Gun control advocacy.

Most of your comments insult or demean people you disagree with. Do you ever have anything substantive to add to the discussion?

Jim

Don't even need a calendar.

I am with Marty on this 100%

LOL. No wonder anything substantial ever gets done regarding repealing gun laws. I have a strong feeling most gun owners are o.k. with gun control. If one is o.k. with gun control measures A,B and C it is only logical government will add measures X,Y and Z.
When they do add more gun control(and they will, because you're o.k. with it) gun owners send money to a club that repackages it and sends it so the same creeps in government that took more of your rights away.

On top of that, there are some gun owners who think I shouldn't point out that hypocrisy because it shows a crack in 'our resolve'. Haha.

Yepper finn. The only difference in Hillary's gun view and Trumps gun view is the definition of reasonable.
They both promote the fear of freedom among the people whose ancestors fought so hard to give it to them. Its a real shame a lot of them don't deserve it since they are so happy to give it up. Their great great great great great great grandparents would most likely ask them to use a different surname.

You guys couldn't have really thought out you position on having some laws and a gov't.

There is a good example of a failing one right across our southern border. Once their gov't is completely gone, you will be in one gang or the other or they'll send you down a well in pieces.

I doubt any of ya would live a month right now before you disappeared. If you call defending yourself day in and out, every day of the year "free" you don't know what free is.

no clue what your talking about hippie

are you suggesting that constitutional government is outdated?

I'm suggesting none of ya would live a month in a country that fits your description of "free".

whats my description of free?

Hippie, we are talking about gun control. From 1776 until 1933 there were hardly any federal gun laws. Since I doubt you're 85 years old, you have never lived in a time of less federal gun laws.
I do find it humorous and a bit ironic to be explaining gun control advocacy to people who think they are pro gun, but are advocates for government control in reality.

I, and many others find it humorous you think you'd be better off without any gov't laws.

You've been to crap-hole countries where there is no gov't laws, and where the man with the most guns rules the roost. Were the people there "free"?

Hippo, we went over laws a few pages back, when Marty tried the same approach. I'm not going to re-type that lesson.
We are talking about gun control laws. Do you understand?

I guess "shall not be infringed" has a lot of meanings lol...

That's because you know what i just wrote is correct, and this country would soon be the same as those coutries with your thinking.

Yes hippo, if government didn't do background checks and make us have our papers to keep our pistols under our coats we would be Somalia in 3 months.
Thsee gun control issues are what I am talking about. You're not making much sense this morning Hippo. Have some coffee.

We are a nation of laws, always have been. For those of you that prefer anarchy, or what you refer to as true freedom, there are plenty of countries like Hippie just described where the man with the biggest/most guns wins.

Gun control fellers coming out of the woodwork 'round here.

George Soros news

Here's what the real enemy is doing lately to farther weaken our country.

Anarchy, no. We are a nation of laws and those laws are on the books. No need for gun control laws because it is already covered.

Fixed it for ya Finn!

I'm guessing you calling me an anarchist is because you don't have a real argument? Since when is constitutional government anarchy? Ive tried to be polite but if you cant put down your crack pipe and keep posting stuff you hallucinated I will reply the same way.

Careful are you will offend the little mob that likes to run around with pitchforks and whine.

I would have to believe the owners of the media have to be some what behind gun control. There reporting of the news is always biased . They never give facts about all the guns that are in the U.S. that are owned by responsible citizens. Only the bad things are reported which panics and throws fear into people who know nothing about guns.
Also it brings out copy cat's wanting there names in history who are sick in the head.
I don't know what is going to happen in this country with guns. But I know that what is mine is mine.
I can't see the government coming for our guns all at once. But I do think they are trying to write new laws to disarm us a little at a time.
The young people today do not have a concept of history. They have never been in a war and seen the sacrifice some have had to give.
I hope I am gone before it hits the fan. But it is coming and I think by the time the children that are in school today become adults you will see the guns go by by.
And they will be led by the government like sheep.

Just tried to get the discussion back on point. Who is the real enemy?

I happen to mostly agree with their talking points but I don't believe that this argument with fellow gun lovers gets anyone anywhere.

Good post Hal. I believe they will try to take them in my lifetime. I am thankful to live where I live. 99% of the population in my area are like minded. Curtious, respectful, and we love our God and guns.

I believe that if the time ever comes, our local law enforcement would be on our side. I have actually had discussions with several officers in the surrounding towns.

False. If there is no discussion of gun control amongst people that own guns, there will be no progress made. If you believe in gun control, but only 'reasonable gun control'- that Republicans and the NRA agree with- well, it falls far short of the Constitution. There is no negative about discussing it. If it hurts feelers, or makes people feel sheepish that's ok too.

I agree, i know our sherriff wouldn't take guns. I know many, many folks who have been or are in the military and they wouldn't support taking guns either.

The libs tried it in New York, and i guess they are finding out that making a law, and enforcing it are two different animals. I've been reading anywhere from 4% to 8% did comply with their un-constitutional law.

https://hudsonvalleyone.com/2016/07/07/massive-noncompliance-with-safe-act/

Keep your greezy fingers off my posts. Quit perverting perfection.

Flyinfinn
Our constitution has already been infringed on in several cases over the years.
The question is how do we as gun owners stop what is happening now before it happens again.
I know you are very passionate about your beliefs and that is fine.
The government has always played people they will cry big bad wolf is coming then they say no worries let us fix it for you that is what is happening

I used to think I could vote out the Senators and Reps and put ones in there that shared my views. Boy was I naive lol. I guess the statement, 'good politician' is a oxymoron. Term limits may help.

The first step to stop new gun control is to stop supporting old gun control, and stop electin anyone that does sup port old control.

I agree Rob. I like Marty as well and a matter of fact, whenever I see him make a post I look forward to reading it. No matter what subject matter it is. I do happen to disagree with him on this subject, but hey, that's ok. This thread has brought about some great dialogue which is pretty cool. I, however don't understand why anyone would disagree with me, because I am the true voice of reason.

Lol, i am too.

If ya don't believe me, just ask me and i'll give ya a second opinion!

Danny, the original link you posted to the article was the 1st I had heard of this with Sturm Ruger. Since then, I have not heard zilch about it. Between the news with Dicks and with Yeti, this has taken a back seat. We are talking about Americas last successful arms maker and I would guess a very tiny percent of the population has a clue this is going on.

Marty must live in Lawrence!!

Teacher, please ignore the ankle-biters and put-down artists, and come forth to defend your position. Persuasive points have been made against you. How will you respond?

How will you defend "reasonableness" and "enough is enough"?

I find a lot of your argument vague and subjective. How many guns are "enough"? So far as I'm concerned, it's my business, not the government's, when "enough" has been reached. I'm a free citizen. Where is there a limit placed in the Second Amendment?

Since I can only fire one rifle at a time, why would the government care how many guns I have, anyway? I'm not going to recruit a rival army, I swear!

Yes, the Second Amendment allows for reasonable restrictions, but I don't agree with you that it's reasonable to ban ARs. I think I should be able to buy fully-auto rifles and suppressors ("silencers") without all the tax stamp approval rigamarole. I think we should be able to own the state of the art in firepower that we can bear, that is, carry in our arms.

Jim

You nailed it James! Well said.

RE: the Freedom Absolutists...

there is a real difference between theory and reality. I *WISH* we hadn't lost many of the Freedoms we (as a nation) had at our founding, but the REALITY is we haven't been THAT free since the day England said "No Mas".

You can argue and [complain] all you want about we shouldn't have to do this or that, why can't we...; but the (sad) REALITY is that most of those boats have already sailed.

so, we have to start at where we ARE; not at where we WERE.

Lesson # 1. Stop the bleeding (further erosion of our Rights)
Lesson # 2. only THEN, can we begin the long, slow process of re-gaining that which we've already lost

And if we can't do # 1 right now, at least slow the loss as much as we can.

I have nothing but contempt for those who vilify the most effective 2nd Amendment organization there is...all because they can't (with a mere handful of members) restore all of our FREEDOMS immediately.

Well said

X2

There is no freedom absolutists. There is, however, those that support gun control and those that do not.

Once you agree that GOVERNMENT should put reasonable restrictions on who can own and buy guns, you join the gun control crowd and bicker and fritter away rights while compromising with fellow gun control cohorts on what exactly reasonable means.
I realize that stopping the bleeding or further erosion of our rights seems reasonable. If you support the erosion of our rights that occurred in our past and pass them off as reasonable, well, the bleeding will never stop. The opposition knows that you are open to compromise and that they have to give nothing-just take-in order to get further restrictions.

Your losertarian ideology is useless

How many times does it have to be said?

Wanting a constitutional government does not make me or anyone else an anarchist.

The only difference between the R's and the D's anymore is which morality they choose to legislate.

Some of you guys are as rabidly fanatical about the republican party as any left-wing collectivist is about the democrat party.

Blue kool-aid or red kool-aid... It's still kool-aid.

Keep drinking it up.

Mike

Reality and wishful thinking are not the same .

The ship sailed long ago and any hope for a constitutional gov with pure individual freedom will only come through full collapse , civil war , death and the NEED to rebuild .

Joining a ineffective group on the sidelines and whining about the current atmosphere won't help anything.

You have two choices .....help slow the inevitable down ( to prepare ) or help speed it up

Here is an article showing republican (and I assume your?) idealogy at work here in Minnesota. It fits in nicely with the title of the thread as well. At times it is better to be seen as useless than fornicate like flea bitten rats with a political party who has a history of gun control efforts.

http://m.startribune.com/gop-lawmakers-offer-gun-bills/481520371/#comments

Anti-gov, I truly hope that is not the root of your idealogy. To 'slow it down'. It strikes at the heart of Americanism and is a way bigger issue than gun control. If you believe the best we can do is slow it down, to hopefully get old and die while we still have some freedoms left is not the way to go. To pass our country on to generations to come and as they put you in hospice to say "well, at least we slowed it down a bit for you and I was able to coast on out of here relatively unscathed, good luck in the fight grandson." My goodness.

Fly , you're both , too late and too early

What do you mean?

Fly ,Your ideas of freedom and a party that supports it came to the game way too late and now will have to wait for a new game to start.

While going in one direction the only way to reverse is to slow to a stop first or crash into an immovable object first.

After a crash you will not know for sure which direction things will be going since the result is unpredictable.

Society in general here in the USA has not had to struggle in quite a while so if we are talking about a societal collapse here in the USA then the majority would choose to be taken care of over personal freedom. This dependency is expanding quickly...in all areas...tech is the main area of expansion of dependency. Just remove internet and many would be lost and want it back more than almost anything else.

Generally the dreamers are the ones on the far edges of things....far left or far right. Realists are more toward the center but being a realist takes common sense which is in short supply today.

Personally, I think we are pretty close to the end because Mr. Trump is turning things around very fast and will continue to get good results. As more people see the follies of the democrats/progressives they will turn to the new right. The progressive dreamers include many tech 'elites' who may decide to crash everything if they see that they cannot get their way.

Everything is dependent on tech today and tech can be crashed. The result of an internet, financial, comms and grid crash would result in mass chaos and general anarchy. These tech elites and other elites are arrogant enough to believe they can make their dream world rise out of the ashes.

Lesson #1 Stop the bleeding (further erosion of our rights)

Please tell me how voting the status quo is going to stop the bleeding.

We've entrusted Republicans this far and we are still at the point where we are at.

We're still bleeding to death. Some just can't see it.

Mike

What avenues do you suggest to stop the bleeding ?

Trump is/was the only option to " slow " the bleeding . No stoping it !

When he's gone .............look out !

There is no answer to that Gov.

Time moves on and people way of thinking changes, and our way is going the way of horse and buggies. All we can do is slow them down until we have another war.

It's nothing but wishfull thinking that there is a better way at this point in time.

Won't happen, aint gonna happen so we just do the best we can at this point.

Agree 100%

Well, this discussion took an interesting and,honestly, surprising turn. How can one admit that the foundations of freedom (the Constitution) is on a slide to oblivon yet they best they can do is vote for who they always did and hope to slow it?
Marty admits to being a realist centrist who pins his hope on Don T. to slow the side to a stop, then miraculously when his 8 years are done the party that has been 50% of the problem will find a new found love of freedom and personal liberty and creep back towards Americanism. Ok, I disagree but at least that is a plan. What kind of plan is just admitting that it is lost and trying to slow it? Slow it for who? You?

Sane people.

Fly ,Your plan is a pipe dream and offers Nada , Nothing , Zero , Zilch in realistic solutions

Hows your plan working out?

Where's Johnston at these days?

Allowing and abetting a slow slide to despotism is a realistic plan? I call that cowardly.

No, cowardly is taking your ball and going home, leaving the fight to us.

That feather reminds me of Carlos Hathcock

exactly.

sure, join GOA and JPFO and every other .org that SAYS they won't compromise. with their membership #'s, that's like asking a weinie dog to pull a Budweiser wagon uphill.

wouldn't it be better to join the NRA, get involved in the internal politics and LEAD them to a different philosophy? but, I guess it's easier to sit outside with your little weinie (dog) and complain about it not doing enough.

in all of these public debates, I never saw the Parkland gun control nutz ever vilify GOA. I wonder why...

Gun control people needn't vilify the GOA, or anyone else who doesn't engage in or support gun control. The NRA does engage in gun control, so they know who to play ball with. Those two groups can argue amongst each other the definition of reasonable and milk more donations.

good luck with that. read this. especially the part about not being allowed in for wearing the wrong tshirt.

https://www.npr.org/2018/05/03/608272585...cing-his-rights

LOL!

where's YOUR successes, then?

NPR?

The article does not say anyone was not allowed in for wearing a shirt...

How did you come up with that?

"Word is that they're not gonna allow us in if we're wearing the shirts".

"I mean, we may be escorted out, they may leave us alone; we don't know what to expect".

I guess it sounds good to say the NRA did not let someone in for wearing the wrong shirt but that is not what that article said.

isn't it MUCH more likely that Mr. Hogg is at war with the NRA because the NRA is much more effective than GOA?

seriously, dude.

If the NRA takes a stand for us now and stops giving rights away little by little, I will stay a member. If they keep bucking down like they did with the bump stock, etc. Its not for me. I will not give money and time to an organization that folds little by little to the anti's and call that a fight just to get more money out of me. Then I will double up on my investment for GOA. Lets see what their policy looks like after the dust settles from the Vegas annual meeting. I do think that a couple of heads at the top need to be voted out urgently. But as i said, lets wait and see.

GOA numbers.
Membership&#8206;: &#8206;1,500,000+ Tax ID no.&#8206;: &#8206;52-1256643
Founded&#8206;: &#8206;November 9, 1976; 41 years ago Executive Director&#8206;: &#8206;Erich Pratt

Its nothing to sniff at either.

Beats Flying Fins club by a member or two I would think.
And keeps the NRA on their toes. Because if they get to slack, guess who is going to overtake them in short order.

Please stop quoting Flailing Fin. I can put his sorry (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) on ignore but not your quotes

GOA is probably an excellent organization, but I think some of you are overlooking the Second Amendment Foundation.

AJE
Second Amendment Foundation Life Member
NRA Life Member

You can argue over what club to send you money to. It won't make a difference. Where the rubber meets the road is those elected to congress. The only faction of Republicans that have a prayer to have the backbone to advance a repeal of gun laws would be the Liberty Caucus. Rand Paul, Justin Amash and that other little curly-haired haired feller from KY...Massie and a few other select souls. However, the Republican leadership of Mrs Doubtfire McConnell, Ladyboy from Carolina and that creep from Wisconsin in the house will continue to prevent any meaningful action. It is better for Republicans and Democrats to keep the fire's of 'reasonable gun control' stoked, so as to maximize campaign contributions from individual donors and from gun groups like the NRA and GOA. Money flows while passions are high. Democrats get money too. It's a win-win thigh rubbing good time between the two 'opposing' parties. The real change is when pepole stop supporting either major party and cling fast to the Constitution. Not just for the 2nd amendment, but for every other dam one as well.

You can also use the trampling of the 4th Amendment by both parties to bolster the argument that the 2nd amendment won't be respected as well. The continued spying on American Citizens by the NSA and the attorney general's gusto for using civil asset forteiture. We will see if he follows through on his threats to enforce federal drug laws in states that chose to legalize marajuana as to how the 10th Amendment will be respected. It's plain to see neither party cares about the Constitution or freedom in general. They want power and to keep power.

That article is nothing but a hot, steaming load of bull crap!

“NICS background check system, which has about a 97 percent false positive rate”...? BULLCRAP!

Oh and by the way, Harmsen was there, and he was wearing his T-shirt. And he was using the convention to push his products while bashing the NRA. Nobody ask him to leave. But that doesn’t make a big dramatic (fake) story does it?

So you, Flailing Finn, NPR and Hillary Clinton all have one thing in common. The NRA is the enemy you are most proud of.

Carry on.

the Tenth Amendment has been dead for MANY decades.