Gentlemen, I'm afraid the time is near. We all have a decision to make...

[kikkup]

You make good points..I can only speak for myself..I think we would be well armed without semi-auto weapons and with much,much less hassles from the .Govt if people would calm down and realize we will NOT be losing our "right to keep and bear"..

Me personally?..i have no problem with law abiding citizens owning whatever they choose including full auto weapons..fine with me.
after all passing more laws is NOT the answer..it was already illegal to murder 6year old school kids and it didnt stop it from happening..more laws are not the answer...i understand that.

But my several posts were only made to point out that people need to calm down..and realize that we can still today purchase what we could yesterday(nothing has been done yet)






I would also like to add that if these same people had gotten this emotional and spent THIS much $$$$money on our last/most recent Presidential election we would quite possibly NOT be in this situation.

If we wait till they take our rights ...It will be too late.....I understand that some people just don't have what it takes to be a patriot, But luckily for you there are still some that will fight to keep you free.....But if you can't run with the big dogs ...go hide under the porch, but stay out of the way ....
\

 

[Absotack911]

Drink the Kool-Aide. Follow me

 

[tv_racin_fan]

I think you have been watching to much Fox news....calm down.
There is no comparison,and its foolish to even pretend there is any,but there is no comparisons to the tyranny of living under the rule of a king and/or what the freedoms we now enjoy.

And if you are going to quote the 2nd Amendment go back and at least REAd it all..You left out a very important part.

"In order to maintain a well regulated militia"..."The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

The first part of that just may be the most important part as some/many people believe that a State national gaurd fills the intent of a local peoples militia.

I would agree that "a well regulated militia, being neccessary to the security of a free state" is the most important part as it spells out why the second part must be so. The people MUST be able to keep and bear the very arms needed by a militia in order to form such militia thus "the right of the people to keep and bear, shall not be infringed" else there will be no free state.

Im not a liberal?..
Go back and read,i said "many people beleive the founding fathers intent was a well regulated local militia"..i never said it was my belief.
I was simply pointing out the fact that to quote the amendmant only halfway was not stating the whole truth..

Can you define what the founding fathers meant by a "well regulated militia"?

regulated: Adjusted by rule, method or forms; put in good order; subjected to rules or restrictions. From 1828 Websters which should be the definition the founding fathers understood. An earlier dictionary does not contain the "to put in good order" definition... One could even argue the subjected to rules and regulations as correct wherein the milita were expected to abide by the same rules and regulations of the standing army and should one fail to muster when called one was subject to military justice under courts martial. What one can not show proof of in my opinion is the very notion that they intended to restrict the weaponry such that the very weaponry the standing army was using was not protected by the "shall not be infringed" clause.

I believe the words of the founding fathers show that they intended the "adjusted by rule, method or forms" definition but there is some correctness in using the "put in good order" definition as well as most would understand that "adjusted by rule, method or forms" would result in a militia "put in good order"

I believe the militia acts spell it out pretty clearly. The second one spells out what sort of weapon a militia man was expected to keep and it spelled out what number of "cartridges" or ball and powder one was to have on hand and be expected to muster out with when called. They were expected to meet on a regular basis for training, and they were expected to train in the same fashion as the standing army. Such that when they stood with other militias or the standing army they could function together as a unit. The later act of a different name which gave birth to the National Guard did nothing to dissolve the individual right to keep and bear as that was a different sort of militia which was paid during training unlike the regular militia which was only paid during actual duty.

What rights are under fire?...you think your right to own and keep and bear a gun is under fire?...Seriously STOP watching FOX news they make aliving out of inflaming anger and people fall for it.

Washington has no intention and they realize they have NO chance of taking the citizens guns....calm down everybody.

I dunno where exactly you get this. Have to you read articles about the proposals the have been offered?

I appreciate your reply is not angry but more in the mindframe of a discussion..in that mindset..i ask..if all we had was a 6shooter revolver on your hip and a lever action rifle on your saddle..would you/us..would we all be SO underarmed?
If it was enough for John Wayne and the old west and it was enough for the hunters to hunt and for homeowners to defend their homes and ranchers to patrol...Would it be so unbearable?................i mean.In my mind or opinion,i could live with it,i just encourage everyone to calm down(and turn off the Fox news.LOL

UUMM in the afforementioned proposals is one to ban lever action and revolving action firearms. Another proposes a gun buy back program to "buy back" every firearm that has been banned. One proposal has them classifying near every type of firearm as an NFA item requiring a tax stamp to keep them, registration and declaring them non transferable, meaning you can not sell it and when you pass it is to be turned in to the govt for disposal. One mentions confiscation of the firearms banned and there to be no grandfathering of firearms currently owned.

You make good points..I can only speak for myself..I think we would be well armed without semi-auto weapons and with much,much less hassles from the .Govt if people would calm down and realize we will NOT be losing our "right to keep and bear"..

Me personally?..i have no problem with law abiding citizens owning whatever they choose including full auto weapons..fine with me.
after all passing more laws is NOT the answer..it was already illegal to murder 6year old school kids and it didnt stop it from happening..more laws are not the answer...i understand that.

But my several posts were only made to point out that people need to calm down..and realize that we can still today purchase what we could yesterday(nothing has been done yet)

I would also like to add that if these same people had gotten this emotional and spent THIS much $$$$money on our last/most recent Presidential election we would quite possibly NOT be in this situation.

The time to stand up and have your voice heard is NOW not after the bill has been passed and or signed into law.

UUMM, of the two leading candidates only one had ever signed an assault weapons ban into law. HINT HINT it was not the current president.

I do not know what your intent is but I do believe I will march on Washington. I believe I will go there and contact every senator and representatives office and let them know my feeling on the matter. Then when I have contacted all of them I will start at the begining and contact them again. I do not intend to go alone but if need be I will. I intend to stage a sort of moving sit in where I can attract millions to go to Washington and let congress know how WE feel on this issue. A peaceful revolution of a sort. I'll make myself a breadboard and march up and down Penn ave.

The second amendment was not about hunting or self defence as the founding fathers believed that the need of firearms for hunting and self defence was self evident. It specifically mentions the security of a free state, that being the very society they were building. Wherein the citizens would have the means to over throw the govt should it grow tyrannical.

Some would point to the firearms of the time and say the founding fathers had no clue as to the weaponry of today. I say hogwash. They knew very well the progresssion of firerm technology to that point and as such they allowed for some to own older weaponry tech and some to own the newfangled weaponry tech that the standing army had not yet gotton a handle on. Thus they mention nothing about type of firearm in the amendment. They did as, I pointed out earlier, know that some milita men would have smoothbore musket and as that was the prevailing arm of the worlds armies it was the "assault weapon" of choice for many. Thus in the militia act to follow they specified the caliber of the musket the milita man was expected to keep and as for the rifle mentioned they specified that the milita man have a certain amount of ball and powder.

 

[trckdrvr]

If we wait till they take our rights ...It will be too late.....I understand that some people just don't have what it takes to be a patriot, But luckily for you there are still some that will fight to keep you free.....But if you can't run with the big dogs ...go hide under the porch, but stay out of the way ....
\

This post is completely out of line...you have basically implied that i need you to be the patriot and its lucky for me that i have you..Thats more than likely a joke.Its my experience those who talk the most DO the least!!

And that you are a "Big dog"...HaHa!..I havent look at your profile but my guess you are a young kid.

My advice?..talk less and think more..
No where and have not implied anywhere that i needed you to fight for me(thanx anyway)

Some of histories most reluctant(including AlvinYork)have been the most fierce fighters...

 

[Xcaliber]

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -Thomas Jefferson

 

[kikkup]

This post is completely out of line...you have basically implied that i need you to be the patriot and its lucky for me that i have you..Thats more than likely a joke.Its my experience those who talk the most DO the least!!

And that you are a "Big dog"...HaHa!..I havent look at your profile but my guess you are a young kid.

My advice?..talk less and think more..
No where and have not implied anywhere that i needed you to fight for me(thanx anyway)

Some of histories most reluctant(including AlvinYork)have been the most fierce fighters...

Sir, I'm not asking you to do anything, Yes I am a patriot, and I fought for the right for you to be Free, and I would do it again.
And no I'm not a Big Dog, I'm just someone who can see what's going on, and will fight till my Last breath to keep you're blind ass free, As I can see your like most people, You don't appreciate or respect the people who are willing to fight for your right to be free, and you are too blind or busy to see what's going on around you, And true You may not need me to fight for you, Thats great but I may need some of these guy's on here with ball's to help fight for me, So if you don't have anything to say to help... Then Please stay out of the conversation.....Because the adult's who are trying to figure out what to do are having a conversation, READ THE TITLE, Nay sayer's don't help the conversation....I'm not trying to be rude.... But we could be at war in a few day's to week's, From what I'm gathering, Yobama is sending a whole bunch of our troop's to different places in africa, What I think he's doing is getting rid of the guy's that would potentially help the revolution.... So we got to be watching to know what's going on, And chances are when he get;s ready to strike to take our gun's we are not going to be able to communicate by phone or internet, so We kinda got to get it worked out now....We may can use our ham radio's and CB's but thats not a guarantee... so let's all get on the same page and stick together, because we need each other whether you think we do or not.......

 

[Bear44]

This post is completely out of line...you have basically implied that i need you to be the patriot and its lucky for me that i have you..Thats more than likely a joke.Its my experience those who talk the most DO the least!!

And that you are a "Big dog"...HaHa!..I havent look at your profile but my guess you are a young kid.

My advice?..talk less and think more..
No where and have not implied anywhere that i needed you to fight for me(thanx anyway)

Some of histories most reluctant(including AlvinYork)have been the most fierce fighters...

It does not matter how brave or skilled someone is if they don't recognize the need to fight for something until it's to late to make a difference. You have already clearly said you are willing to accept major restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. You have already stated that you do not believe the 2nd guarantees that right. The impression I get is that you are completely willing to accept whatever restrictions on gun ownership the government chooses because we don't actually have any rights concerning weapons. Why would we expect you to fight for the right to keep and bear arms if you do not believe it is a right in the first place?

The antis just love a "reasonable" gun owner because they know you will not fight their progressive plan to eliminate gun ownership. They will take advantage of your "reasonable" attitude to get restrictions in place and then demand more "reasonableness" from you as they put more and more restrictions in place.

Do you not realize that these people that only want "reasonable" restrictions have clearly said their goal is complete elimination of private gun ownership in America? A good example is Hilary Clinton. She is not even considered to be on the front lines of gun control, but has said in public that if it was up to her every privately owned gun would be confiscated.

 

[mountainmoped]

I have made my decision! I bought a 6 inch diameter PVC pipe 48 inches long and two end caps and some PVC glue. If the EBRs are banned and confiscated I would guess that possession would a serious crime. My SOB next door neighbor, who is disliked by the whole neighborhood, never mows his huge yard or rakes leaves. I will bury my untracable EBR in his backyard on a dark night. If the EBR is discovered by the authorities my despicable neighbor would become not only a patriot, but also a martyr. People would then respect him as everyone loves a patriot and a martyr.

 

[Xcaliber]

I like that plan! gotta find me a libtard to do the same to

I have made my decision! I bought a 6 inch diameter PVC pipe 48 inches long and two end caps and some PVC glue. If the EBRs are banned and confiscated I would guess that possession would a serious crime. My SOB next door neighbor, who is disliked by the whole neighborhood, never mows his huge yard or rakes leaves. I will bury my untracable EBR in his backyard on a dark night. If the EBR is discovered by the authorities my despicable neighbor would become not only a patriot, but also a martyr. People would then respect him as everyone loves a patriot and a martyr.

 

[Patronus]

It does not matter how brave or skilled someone is if they don't recognize the need to fight for something until it's to late to make a difference. You have already clearly said you are willing to accept major restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. You have already stated that you do not believe the 2nd guarantees that right. The impression I get is that you are completely willing to accept whatever restrictions on gun ownership the government chooses because we don't actually have any rights concerning weapons. Why would we expect you to fight for the right to keep and bear arms if you do not believe it is a right in the first place?

The antis just love a "reasonable" gun owner because they know you will not fight their progressive plan to eliminate gun ownership. They will take advantage of your "reasonable" attitude to get restrictions in place and then demand more "reasonableness" from you as they put more and more restrictions in place.

Do you not realize that these people that only want "reasonable" restrictions have clearly said their goal is complete elimination of private gun ownership in America? A good example is Hilary Clinton. She is not even considered to be on the front lines of gun control, but has said in public that if it was up to her every privately owned gun would be confiscated.

Well said.

See, people just can NOT understand that the left never stops. When you "compromise" today, you only make them hungry for the next compromise.

If I tell you I want 100% of what you have, you say NO! But then we end up "compromising" where I only get 20%. So you feel like you won by keeping 80%. Next week, my friend comes to you demanding 100% of what you have. You say NO! And end up compromising on hit taking 10%. You celebrate keeping 90% as a victory. A month from now someone shoots up a school and my other friend demands 100%. You feel bad for the kids and compromise on giving him 30%. So you still feel good about keeping 70%. You have already given up 50% of your original rights. (do the math. It looks like 60 but it's really 50%). And they will NEVER Stop working to take 100%, even if they have to take it 1% at a time. We WILL lose if we ever compromise. And all politicians do is compromise.