United States & Gun Control discussion.

guncontrol.jpg
 
dknob said:
When you explain to me how this is considered "well regulated" as the 2nd Amendment calls for, then I'll take this US Code more seriously.

I don't consider a militia to be well regulated if the people don't know they are in it. Maybe your definition of well regulated is different from mine. Who knows.
Click to expand...

Just because someone is ignorant of something, it doesn't make that thing any less true. God knows there is plenty I'm ignorant of. Until very recently, I was pretty ignorant about a lot of the case law and historical facts around 2A, and it seems a lot of other people are too.

In the context of 2A, "well regulated" could very well mean, "capable of performing the job for which they were constituted." If the militia is by definition "unorganized" (i.e. not a permanent, standing force that drills/practices regularly), then wouldn't it make sense that the people who constitute "the militia" (which as we have already established earlier in this thread is "every male capable of bearing arms") would need to keep and maintain their own arms so that 1) those arms are ready the minute that the militia is called up, and 2) the people who are going to be carrying those arms as part of the militia are familiar enough with them to actually be able to use them in the performance of the job for which they were constituted?
 
It's not like the national guard has to go through a train-up in order to be deployment ready.

Or that when called for back in the day, they did drill instruction so you don't have the first rank asshole stand up when the second rank's firing.
 
Oh goodie. I got an email from Joe Biden this morning. Im invited to a "hang out" to discuss reducing gun violence. Its at 1:45 today. Sadly I will be in the middle of PT at that time and cannot....uh...hang out.
Besides didnt his boss already sign a bunch of "executive orders" regardless of my opinions?
joebidenhangout.jpg
 
CDG said:
I got this in response from GEICO: [snap]
I e-mailed them asking for further clarification on their stance on insuring vehicles used for business purposes by those in the weapons industry. So we'll see.
Click to expand...
Don't hold your breath Brother. Geico and Progressive Insurance companies are known to be big funders and supporters of Liberal causes and this Administration. And like all good Socialists, they're totally intolerant of divergent views. So like the Bank of America, Geico is finding reasons to drop accounts on those often regarded as the "unwashed Americans" holding on to their guns and bibles.

Point in Case: Approximately 5 months ago (late August), R. Lee Ermey ("The Gunney") was fired from Geico and his commercials were pulled because he committed the unforgivable sin of expressing a personal opinion that; "Obama seemed to be attempting to impose Socialism on the American people." (How wild and crazy can one get!? :rolleyes:)
 
Jesus H. Christ.
To redeem my esteemed Commonwealth(I thought the ESOS Boycott would have been worth major brownie points) I give you Pennsylvania House Bill 357(really)
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/billinfo.cfm?syear=2013&sind=0&body=H&type=B&BN=0357

Short Title: An Act providing that any Federal law which attempts to register, restrict or ban a firearm or to limit the size of a magazine of a firearm in this Commonwealth shall be unenforceable in this Commonwealth; and imposing penalties.
Prime Sponsor: Representative METCALFE
Last Action:
Memo: Right to Bear Arms Protection Act
Click to expand...
Pardon me while I go urge my elected officials to support HB 357:thumbsup:
 
Brooklynben said:
Don't hold your breath Brother. Geico and Progressive Insurance companies are known to be big funders and supporters of Liberal causes and this Administration. And like all good Socialists, they're totally intolerant of divergent views. So like the Bank of America, Geico is finding reasons to drop accounts on those often regarded as the "unwashed Americans" holding on to their guns and bibles.

Point in Case: Approximately 5 months ago (late August), R. Lee Ermey ("The Gunney") was fired from Geico and his commercials were pulled because he committed the unforgivable sin of expressing a personal opinion that; "Obama seemed to be attempting to impose Socialism on the American people." (How wild and crazy can one get!? :rolleyes:)
Click to expand...

I hadn't heard that. Thank you for the info. I will be switching insurance companies before the week is over, even if my premium increases.
 
Another historical tidbit for those interested or still reading this thread. In the New World, the Spanish forbid the natives to possess horses or firearms.
 
Geico doesn't insure drivers with radar or laser detectors or cover them in the event of a crash if they're found to have one in the vehicle. Long standing policy from years ago. One reason not because I have one or need one, just the fact they use this discriminating tactic is why I've never even considered them for my insurance. Fuck that damn lizard with the funny accent.....:p
 
Someone asked about this in another thread, and I decided to post a response to it here.

Some random guy made the following post to his Facebook page (I'm not linking to the page because I don't want to give this clown more hits/likes/whatever):

I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new "litmus test" in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. "The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not". Those who will not are being removed.
- Dr. Jim Garrow - January 21, 2013
Click to expand...

Now, this all sounds bad. Very bad. Conspiracy-level bad. So bad that several media outlets, particularly ones that want to fan the flames of alarmism, took this story and ran with it. Here's one example:

http://www.examiner.com/article/sho...who-will-fire-on-u-s-citizens?cid=db_articles

Oh! And the guy with all these high-ranking source? He's a Noble Peace Prize nominee! (put that in your pocket for now, we'll deal with that later).

The problem is, this whole thing doesn't pass the sniff test. Who is this guy, this random person no one has heard of, and who are these mysterious, "high ranking" sources? While it's true I don't know everyone, or even a lot of people, I don't know this guy, this "Peace Prize nominee." And if there were a conspiracy this large, as small as my "network" is, I'm pretty sure I would have heard about this by now though some other source. A source a know. A source who has reported reliably in the past. ANY source other than some unknown guy's Facebook page, making unprovable accusations and citing unnamed sources with unspecified credentials.

As far as this guy's credibility goes, I'm sorry but it's just not that freakin' hard to get nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Who May Nominate Candidates for the Peace Prize?

According to the statutes of the Nobel Foundation, a nomination is considered valid if it is submitted by a person who falls within one of the following categories:
• Members of national assemblies and governments of states

• Members of international courts

• University rectors; professors of social sciences, history, philosophy, law and theology; directors of peace research institutes and foreign policy institutes

• Persons who have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

• Board members of organizations that have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize

• Active and former members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; (proposals by members of the Committee to be submitted no later than at the first meeting of the Committee after February 1)

• Former advisers to the Norwegian Nobel Committee
Click to expand...

So, conceivably, one of my professors here at school could nominate me for the Prize. 241 people were nominated last year alone. You know who else was "nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize?" Bradley f'ing Manning. Yeah, that Bradley Manning. :rolleyes: So while a nomination might be good for your ego or for your resume, it's not a real big credibility booster in my eyes. This guy's claim to fame (and his Nobel nomination) relates to something called the Pink Pagoda Project, a noble endeavor to be sure, but not the kind of hard-hitting, in-depth investigative journalism that I would require in order to believe something like this.

So, put up specifics, names and other details, or STFU, Mr. Pink Pagoda.
 
Got a reply from one of my senators regarding my letter I wrote:

Dear ---,

Thank you for contacting me about the tragic and senseless violence in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and concerns with me.

If there is anything that deeply unites Americans across the country it is our love for our children and grandchildren and our desire to keep them safe. In the wake of the heartbreaking tragedy at Sandy Hook elementary, all of us must come together to determine what steps can be taken to protect our children. That means discussing how we can strengthen our gun laws to help stop attacks like this from happening again, while protecting responsible gun ownership and preserving our hunting heritage. It also means strengthening mental health services, and focusing on the broader culture of violence in the media and our society. These solutions may not be easy, but one thing should be clear – complacency and inaction until the next attack must not be an option.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please continue to keep me informed about issues of concern to you and your family.

Sincerely,

Debbie Stabenow
United States Senator
Click to expand...

Easily the most blatant cut-and-paste reply I've ever received from a politician. At least I got a reply, I guess.
 
Ranger Psych said:
Surprised this didn't get posted yet.

Tax credit for turning in your guns, since the government's got the money to spare.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr226/text
Click to expand...

I don't expect this to pass, & I don't think there will be an "assault" weapons or "high-capacity" mag ban, but the audacity politicians have of even proposing such legislation boggles my mind. It wouldn't bother me if a these politicians could propose a well-informed argument regarding the Constitutionality of such legislation or evidence that such measures would bring about a more peaceful society. Yet the only arguments I have heard are anecdotal at best (UK vs US gun crime) or appeals to emotion.

It's sad to think that Congress is a representation of the citizenry.

"The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling." -Thomas Sowell
 

Similar threads

Ooh-Rah
Anyone familiar with Aphantasia?
Replies
17
Views
374
Topkick
Topkick
Devildoc
House discussing citizen-only voting bill...
Replies
19
Views
465
The Quartermaster
The Quartermaster
Marauder06
1911 Questions--Barrel and Slide Swap
Replies
14
Views
874
Diamondback 2/2
Diamondback 2/2
T
Group 35 Series Training Opportunities
Replies
1
Views
271
Marauder06
Marauder06
Devildoc
Western NC/Hurricane Helene
2 3
Replies
54
Views
1K
DA SWO
DA SWO
Back
Top