It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Remind me again of your gun laws.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   
In Wisconsin where I live everyone owns guns and several of them.We do not have a lot of gun crime other than in the inner city and nation wide gun crimes have gone down in the last 20 years due to laws that make sense like background checks. If people are going to kill people they will find a way no matter what the weapon and that has been from the start of time.




posted on May, 11 2006 @ 07:52 PM
link   
The RIGHT to bear arms in the US does not mean that firearms are not regulated or that people are not required to take safety training courses.

State law varies allot in the US. In my state in order to obtain hunting tags...(permits) one must have completed a 12 hour firearm / hunting safety coarse. At the end of which the person must pass the test in order to be able to purchase game tags (permits).

One can buy rifles over the counter at many stores however before the store can sell you the rifle they must run a background check to make sure you have do not have a criminal record and are at least 18 years old. Then they record the make model and serial number under your name and social security number.

For the purchase of handguns (pistols) once must go to your county sheriff ( the leader of the county law enforcement department) and apply for a permit to buy the handgun. After they run a background check and make sure you are at least 21 years old , next they log the handgun make model and serial number under your name and social security number then you can purchase it.

In order for one can carry a concealed firearm you must get a permit to do so. To get the permit one must be at least 23 years old and have no criminal record. Then you must take a training coarse at the local police station.

I would also like to point out that most firearms are purchased for sport and hunting. In rural areas firearms. (mostly rifles) are used to protect livestock from predators and are also used by hunters to moderate deer and other wild game populations. These wild game populations are monitored and controlled by the Conservation Department. The Conservation Department issue all of the tags (permits) to allow people to hunt wild game. It is illegal to hunt wild game without the proper Conservation hunting license's.

I also agree that EVERYONE that will come into contact with a firearm should have proper safety training. In my state many public schools have a firearms safety coarse. ALWAYS KEEP THE GUN POINTED IN A SAFE DIRECTION!!!!



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander

There are laws that equal using equal force. If someone threatens your life with a gun, knife, or other weapon in your home...you could perhaps use deadly force, but you would want to be sure.

If some kid broke in and you shot him as he was running out with your TV, that is still murder. Many states have various other rules, but this is a pretty common one.


True but many states are now considering changing those law such as Florida did.


The measure frees Floridians facing attack in a public space of the duty to try to escape before resorting to lethal force. "A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be," the bill says. Instead, they can fend off a knife attack by shooting an assailant because the law gives the right "to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so, to prevent death or great bodily harm".
Florida backs Right to shoot Law

.Another good article

It used to be if you were attacked with a stocking you could only attack with another stocking, but those laws are changing fast. Now as I understand it in some states all you have to do is perceive the fear that you will be injured and you are justified in shooting the attacker. I am sure the laws vary by state but I recall reading that several are in the process or considering them.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 09:20 PM
link   
In my state it is legal open fire if you are being attacked and you perceive that your life is in grave danger or you are facing serious injury / bodily harm. That doesn't mean that just because your scared you can shoot someone .


Now as I understand it in some states all you have to do is perceive the fear that you will be injured and you are justified in shooting the attacker

What "perceive" means is that the attacker IS making the appearance of using deadly / serious injury force against the person defending themself. Such as a person threatening your life with a fake firearm that looks real. They are not really making a deadly threat because they have a fake firearm however you will "perceive" it to be a deadly threat because the fake firearm looks real!!!


[edit on 11-5-2006 by Heckman]



posted on May, 14 2006 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Firstly, handguns are not illegal to own in the UK, only centrefire and rimfire handguns are, i.e. blackpowder revolvers are still legal to own - but only if you are able to jump through all the hoops required to get a permit. Shotguns and rifles are also legal, but not semi automatic or pump action versions.

Now this is all from memory and may doubtless contain some inaccuracies, but for the US, the first common misperception is that the laws are the same all over the country, this is very much not the case. 36 states have lawful concealed carry of handguns, 35 requiring permits for this and one that allows it without a permit (Vermont), a couple allow external carry (think cowboy style carry), while some do not allow any form of handgun carry. Then it starts to get complicated, New Jersey does not allow the ownership of hollowpoint ammunition, Maryland bans high capacity magazines and requires ballistic fingerprinting for all new handgun sales (which has thus far failed to nab a single criminal), California (which is no longer really a part of the USA - sorry, bad joke) has banned the .50 BMG cartridge, and has also enacted many other restrictive firearms laws, Massachusetts requires guns to have an external safety and so on and so forth.

Machine guns are legal to own if you have a Class III license, roughly equivalent to obtaining a shotgun permit in the UK, suppressors (or silencers to give them their inaccurate, but commonly used name) are legal provided you pay for a $200 tax stamp, bullet resistant vests are also legal to purchase, at least for now. Armour piercing ammunition is legal for rifles, but illegal for pistols - if a particular caliber becomes available in a pistol, the ban comes into effect for rifles in the same caliber - Thomson Contender has a lot to answer for


As for why the US allows the ownership of firearms, there is that little thing called the Constitution, for which they have the defeat of the British to thank. Scholars continue to argue over what the Second Amendment actually means - some say that it was written in a historical context to deal with the possible invasion of what was a fledgling country with a small ineffective military that relied on the assistance of the regular citizen with his musket to fight off potential invaders. Others argue that the document was far more insightful, and recognised that the people needed to have the ability to overthrow a tyrannical government, both then and now.

Either way, I sleep very well with a .40 caliber Beretta in the bedside drawer, and take my morning jog secure in the knowledge that any ill intentioned mugger would have to deal with a .38 J Frame before slitting my throat. On top of all that, shooting competitively or recreationally is just plain fun, and to stroll out into the desert (I'm in Arizona) and crank out 30 rapid fire rounds from an M-16 clone, is nothing short of transcendental and the best stress buster I know.

If all this sounds just plain bonkers, and you prefer to live in a society where only the criminals have guns, then all I can say is that I hope it works out for you, I really do.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Very good reply Winchester Ranger T


Its seems to be a common misconception that in the US we all have the same laws concerning firearms. As you explained thats far from the truth and laws can vary wildly from area to area.

Heck it can even get confusing for Americans that know a decent amount about gun laws. IMO the contradictions in the laws in some state is moronic. For example in my state (CT) Connecticut we have a rather large and growing "ban list" of firearms. Many of which are banned for no other reason then the guns name has a bad reputation or looks scary.

For example a Colt AR-15 a Semi-auto civilian version of the M-16 which was made in CT is banned. But any other AR-15 variant is legal to buy a "Bushmaster" for example is perfectly OK for some strange reason even though they are really only different in name only.

Then we have the fact that my state has the second most legal Full-auto guns in the US second to only Texas I believe. But since you need a Class 3 permit and lets face it pretty much be rich (since tranfer legal full-auto can easily cost 15k +)

So thats OK



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 10:34 AM
link   
Shadow - thanks


As long as shooting remains popular in the US and we have organizations like the NRA looking out for our interests we should never end up like the defenceless populations of other more "enlightened" nations.

The UN and a certain sack of poop called Kofi Annan is currently trying VERY hard to disarm us though.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 11:11 AM
link   
But That Is Not Altogether True.

History 101
The Thirteen Colonies First Constitution.
The Articles of Confederation, Article I, The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America" hence our country was named. 1777.

As relates to guns.
Article VI. “ . . nor shall any body of forces be kept up by any State in time of peace . . but every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.” (47 words)

Article XIII. Agreed to by Congress 15 November 1777
END of Articles of Confederation.

Note 1: the first shots in the American War of Independence were fired on April 19, 1775, at Lexington and then at Concord, Mass. Note 2. I have stopped calling the War of 1775-1783 the Revolutionary War. There was nothing “revolutionary” about it. It more nearly resembled a coup d’etat with one oligarchy replacing another oligarchy. And with more land than even God could imagine ripe for the taking!

America’s Second Constitution. Written in 1787 and adopted in 1789.
Articles of Amendment II - Right to keep and bear arms “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” (27 words.)

Pro gun lobbying groups have attempted to convince the public the 2nd Amendment is an unlimited and not subject to limitations, grant of right to own, possess and carry firearms. The oldest and most prominent group is the National Rifle Association. The NRA.

I dislike the NRA because of its deep involvement in American congressional elections beginning in the 1950s. NRA leaders discovered that a number of our 435 House seats were contestable seats. That usually meant the last election was decided by 5% or fewer votes. Seats where the incumbent’s margin was more than 5% are regarded as “safe” seats. (Note: For “safe” I mean 55-45 as the “5%” and not 47.5-52.5 which I’d call “contestable.”)

The NRA targeted only contestable seats. It would support the incumbent with cash donations (legal) if he would agree to or was known to agree with the pro gun philosophy. The NRA would send mailings to its members in that district, urging them to vote for their designated candidate. The NRA would send in paid “volunteers” to man phone banks and to drive NRA members to the polls.

If the incumbent was regarded by the NRA as an anti type, the NRA would look for a pro candidate to run against him with their cash support. I hate that practice of the NRA as an abuse of civil prerogative and privilege. It is counter-democratic. I regard it as also being anti democratic.

The number of restrictive gun laws in America must number in the 100s. The Supreme Court has never accepted the NRA view of an unlimited sweep of the 2nd Amendment. NY’s Sullivan Act is the oldest and one of the most restrictive. Recently a Texas DVO case - domestic violence orders - upheld the restriction on possession or access to firearms. Altering the length of the barrel or stock of rifles or shotguns is unlawful. Silencers are unlawful. Defacing a firearm to obscure the serial number is unlawful. Possession by a felon is unlawful. And etc.


[edit on 5/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by El Tiante
Criminals will always have guns, their profession requires it.


Spot on man, thats why you shouldnt take guns away from your law abiding citizens. You can take away law abiding citizens guns, but that just gives criminals a leg up on their victims and it shouldnt be allowed. A gun is the equalizer and often an advantage for the citizen to have against criminals, it shouldnt be the other way around. Taking away guns takes away a citizens ability to adequately defend themselves, their families and others, and property from those who would use guns to take those things from them. Someone comes into your home armed with a gun trying to take your property or your familiy should have to hear only one sound, and thats either the sound of a pistol being charged or a shotgun being racked, thats enough to send most common criminals running without a shot being fired.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
Altering the length of the barrel or stock of rifles or shotguns is unlawful. Silencers are unlawful.


It is perfectly legal to reduce the barrel legth of a rifle to a minimum of 16 inches or 18 inches for a shotgun, stock reductions are almost universal (and legal) for competition shotgun shooters, and there are many companies offering such services. Silencers are legal to own if the owner pays for a $200 tax stamp.

The Texas laws are representative of BATF requirements:

www.capitol.state.tx.us...

PENAL CODE
TITLE 10. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC HEALTH,SAFETY, AND MORALS
CHAPTER 46. WEAPONS

(10) "Short-barrel firearm" means a rifle with a barrel length of less than 16 inches or a shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18 inches, or any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle if, as altered, it has an overall length of less than 26 inches.

And the "how to" guide for obtaining a legally owned silencer (suppressor):

1) Find out if your police chief, sheriff or district attorney will sign off on NFA forms.
2) Find a dealer that carries the model you want.
3) Purchase it and pay for it. If the dealer is out of state you will have to have it transferred to an in-state dealer to handle the transfer to you, just like any firearm.
4) After your local dealer gets it, he will help you fill out the Form 4. There are things on there that only he would know like his FFL number and etc...
5) Bring the forms to get it signed by the police chief, get photos and fingerprints at the same time. Do it in duplicate and remember to print out the form on BOTH sides of the paper, don't use 2 sheets and staple it.
6) Write a $200 check to BATFE and fill out the citizenship form.
7) Send it all off to the feds and wait, wait, and wait some more.
8) Your dealer will receive one of the Form 4s back, when he does it means you can go and pick up the suppressor.

[edit on 17-5-2006 by Winchester Ranger T]



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 06:29 PM
link   
I hear ya.

I moved to the UK about 6 months ago with my husband. I miss Saturdays at the shooting range and my .38.

I am amused at the perceptions people have over here of guns in America. Some are quite hilarious, like people assuming that Americans shoot anyone who walks on their lawns. Or that everyone in America walks around with a six shooter on their hip.



posted on May, 17 2006 @ 07:08 PM
link   

posted by Winchester Ranger T


posted by donwhite
Altering the length of the barrel or stock of rifles or shotguns is unlawful. Silencers are unlawful.


It is legal to reduce the barrel length of rifles to 16 inches or 18 inches for shotguns . . stock reductions are legal for competition shotgun shooters. Silencers are legal to own if the owner pays for a $200 tax stamp.


Randy Weaver got into a lot of trouble over this, when he apparently measured the shotgun barrel at the wrong place. I heard the barrel had a 3 inch chamber. He thought it was 2.75 inches. He lost his wife, his child and a dog. (The US settled his case for $3 m. I believe.) Maybe I should say, “Shorten at your own peril?”



PENAL CODE, TITLE 10. OFFENSES, CHAPTER 46. WEAPONS (10) "Short-barrel firearm" means a rifle with a barrel length of less than 16 inches or a shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18 inches, or any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle if, as altered, it has an overall length of less than 26 inches.
[Edited by Don W]


Thanks for the update on modifying weapons. I repeat, it is a risky business. If you blunder, you are committing a crime. There is no debate and good ole boy measuring. If you’re short, you will wish you weren’t. It will spoil an otherwise bright future.

Maybe I'm too cautious? Once, a person brought an illegal silencer into a room where several of us were gathered. I immediately left the room. I did not want to be in the same room with a unlicensed silencer. An abundance of caution.


[edit on 5/17/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 18 2006 @ 05:56 PM
link   
irregardless or whether Randi Weaver measured his barrel length to long or short..it does not warrent killing his wife, son, and dog. This is textbook of what happens when a government runs amok like the cowboys they are wont to claim the gun owning public is. These government cowboys were looking for any excuse to try this out . It backfired on them and spin control took over. This is a clear lack of leadership on someones part on the Government side..the very same lack of leadership that put a Heckler and Koch machine gun toting government agent into that home where Ellian Gonzolez was residing in Florida. Talk about overkill in both cases. This is the fault and doing of a goverenment run amok. In both cases they could have waited awhile and picked these people up at a more relaxed time..but politics ..ie..whoredom ruled the day. The ultimate fiasco..of this lack of leadership took place at Waco, Texas. ONce again they could have waited till a more relaxed time and broken it up. 80 some odd people killed. Nothing they did in any of these cases warrented the loss of life or the panic they caused. All three cases..lack of leadership and the politics/whoredom of the day ruling and forcing the decisions and the timing.
I have no such confidence in any administration who does this three times to the
American public while they claim to "feel our pain." Republican/Democratic or any other. I vote no confidence. This is a classic example of a government or a political party exercising what it considers power and authority in its fiefdom and over its subjects. The public be damned.
Sorry Donwhite..I dont buy that spin about Randi Weaver or any others...the Government messed up..big time. Ive watched Government people..local state and federal long enought to see some dirty fingerprints..for political purposes.
And some people are worried about the public with guns..once again..as I was saying in the case of auto deaths...many are looking the wrong way.
But it is politically expedient ..for votes..

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Randy Weaver was approached by the FBI to spy on the Arian Nations, and he refused since having visited their compound, he wanted no part of what they, or the FBI, were up to. The FBI, not taking kindly to people telling them to take a hike, went after Weaver.

He was found to be selling shotguns that were under length, 3 inch and 2 3/4 inch chambers are perfectly legal, they sell cartridges for both sizes after all. Weaver was just chopping barrels too short (less than 18 inches).

This hardly seems like suitable justification for the killing of his son, and the blatant murder of his wife by an FBI sniper (rot in hell Lon Horiuchi), who later participated in Waco, a little known fact. The FBI likes to feed its dogs a steady diet of red meat.

Ruby Ridge was interesting since it showed both how guns can be used as an excuse to victimize civilians, and a reminder for the rest of the population as to the reason the Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 02:24 AM
link   
I'm currently in an area with a large hunting populace.

You can buy all sorts of knives and other sharp weapons at local convience stores.

And yeah - guns galore in the area. There are shootings on the news every night, but mostly within ghetto areas.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Get a shotgun, CX. Make sure it fires slugs as well as shot, and is 12 gauge magnum (minimum requirement.) If you can have a semi-auto, then get a semi-auto.

Can you own a rifle? semi-auto? Then get a semi auto rifle instead, in .308 WIN. and cherish it.

Civilians don't have more firepower, remember a soldier has heavy backup, civilians don't. And civilians only get semi auto, not full auto. Full auto has a couple of uses despite its inherent unusefulness. Trigger finger doesn't tire out, armor can be breached, pinning down enemy, cover fire, etc.



posted on May, 21 2006 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Christian IX
Full auto has a couple of uses. Trigger finger doesn't tire out, armor can be breached


You owe me a new keyboard I just sprayed Coke all over it


So Hiram Maxim developed the machine gun to save tired fingers, and a semi auto version of the same weapon cannot breach armor where full auto can. Please tell me that your reasoning is not that you can hit the same spot multiple times to achieve the penetration


Sorry, I don't mean to be flippant but that's some funny stuff.



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Orangeman posted:" . . regardless whether Randi Weaver measured his barrel length to long or short . . it does not warrent killing his wife, son, and dog. This is textbook of what happens . . "[Edited by Don W]


Randy instigated the confrontation that ended in tragedy. I do not fault the authorities.


machine gun toting government agent into that home where Ellian Gonzolez was residing in Florida. Talk about overkill in both cases.


This case degraded into a rich Cuban's anti-Castro "Shake" the US dog's tail to further its own agenda. The child was a puppet. The puppet masters got off easy.


The ultimate fiasco..of this lack of leadership took place at Waco, Texas. ONce again they could have waited till a more relaxed time and broken it up. 80 some odd people killed. Nothing they did in any of these cases warrented the loss of life or the panic they caused. Sorry Donwhite..I dont buy that spin about Randi Weaver or any others...the Government messed up..big time.


The only person to blame in Waco was named David Karesh. At some point in time, the authroity of the courts have to be recognized.



posted by Winchester Ranger T.. Randy Weaver was found to be selling shotguns that were under length, 3 inch and 2 3/4 inch chambers are perfectly legal, they sell cartridges for both sizes after all. Weaver was just chopping barrels too short (less than 18 inches). [Edited by Don W]


Randy apparently thought he had a barrel with a 2.75 inch chamber when in reality he had a barrel with a 3 inch chamber. That made Randy's sawed off barrel 1/4 inch too short. It is very hard to tell where a chamber ends in a shotgun barrel. Randy muffed it. I don't know about the Aryan Naions spying.


Ruby Ridge was interesting since it showed both how guns can be used as an excuse to victimize civilians, and a reminder for the rest of the population as to the reason the Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment.


Well, David Karesh was not above the law, as this Amend 2 argument implies. it is not up to the ordianry citizen to tell the Government of 300 million people what the law is or is not. That is the functnion of the Courts. Karesh was crazy and so were his followers. It is hard to deal rationally with crazies. But at some point in time, the authorities have to prevail.

[edit on 5/22/2006 by donwhite]



posted on May, 22 2006 @ 10:08 PM
link   
I live in Midland, Texas (Hometown of George and Laura B.) but I grew up in East Africa (parents are missionaries). The first AK-47 I saw was when I was 7 years old and a Zambian soldier had opened up our car door and was pointing the muzzle about a foot from my stomach. I guess I looked dangerous!
That had a small degree of influence on my decision to own firearms when I was adult and back in the States. I have legally owned bolt-action rifles (I love military mausers), semi-auto shotguns, black powder pistols and rifled-muskets, and diverse caliber revolvers from .22 to .44 mag (I loved my .41mag).
When I got married I obtained a 5 year old stepson that loved to play policeman/soldier/cowboy. After discussing the dangers of him getting into my gun collection (kept in gun cabinet/locker) with my wife I decided on the following strategy. I told him that ANYTIME he wanted to look/handle my firearms, I would allow him to do it. I stipulated that I had to be there though. That took the curiousity factor out somewhat. I then took him outside and shot a watermelon with a 20-gauge (cut down but still legal) and explained that it would have that same effect on the human body so NEVER play with real guns and don't pretend to point his play guns at real people.
It worked too well. He put his toy guns up and he never played with them again. He also never asked to handle the real thing either! I didn't want that but have just left it alone.
Human life is precious! I would never shoot somebody in my house stealing something. I would only shoot if my family was in danger. Things can be replaced. Of course, somebody is in your house, you might not know if you are in danger or not. We have a procedure in our house. If we think we have an intruder, we shut our bedroom door, lock it, break out the shootin' arn and kneel down on the other side of the bed. She calls the cops, I cover the door while yellin' out that we are awake and have guns ready. we feel OK about that. Lighting your property and having a dog cuts down on intruders alot too.
Reports of the National Guard confiscating guns during Katrina did alarm me. I have thought hard about what I would do I such a situation and it's not easy. I can still see that AK-47 pointed at me. I think I would try to get ID numbers from the applicable troops and some form of receipt. I'm certainly NOT going to break any law by resisting or heaven forbid, firing on US troops/law-enforcement. If I can ID who took my guns, I will make THEM accountable later. They will only get an 1888 bolt action persian mauser and a single-shot 20 gauge. They won't find the others, I promise that! Having served in the military, I think that being calm, respectful and cooperative would work in many situations.
If you want a pretty decent "assault weapon" (what a term!"), try a lever action .30-.30. Holds ten rounds that can be fired pretty quick. Accurate at short range, powerful enough at short range, light and quick to handle, ammo cheap and available and it doesn't trip anybodys "assault gun" radar. Besides, it USED to be an assault weapon in it's day.
Firearm education should be taught. So should better driving! How many are killed by firearms verses how many are killed by automobiles each year. Even one is too many on both accounts. People just need to learn to be RESPONSIBLE and to teach their kids to be the same. That would go a long way.
I enjoy sport shooting and I appreciate the right to own firearms for self-defense in this country. I do sleep more secure knowing that my safety is in my hands and not just to wait on the police.


Just had to get that off my chest. Good topic.



posted on May, 23 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Jungle Mike,
I too like the Mauser Action. I particularly like my 1903 Springfield Rifle. I have considered getting one of these Yugoslavian 98 Mausers you see advertised in 8x57 mm. It seems like a very well made rifle with a common and potent all round caliber just like the 30.06 The 8x57mm also having a wide selection of bullet weights for reloading...very flexable in this.
For some years now I have been getting away from fast handling semi autos to bolt actions ..some single shots and even black powder...sort of going backwards from most of the crowd so to speak.

Don White,

I am going to say this again..about Randi Weaver. cutting a shotgun barrel to the wrong length does not warrant killing Randi Weaver..his wife, son or Dog. Was not Randy Weavers wife holding a child when she was shot?? I seem to recal this.
Here we have "highly trained and equipped experts here" and this is the best that they can do??? Think it through. I do fault the authoritys. Very poor leadership..on all levels.

As to Ellian Gonzolez...do not ever try to put on class warfare or politics on me...in the manner you do....Rich Vs Poor..is the ultimate cheap politics to me..and very overdone..in the last two elections. It is the ultimate cop out to me. It is like bottom feeding. IT is cheap politics.

I have no doupt that this boy was caught up in politics ..both on the Castro side and the US side..I dont agree with this either. Once again very poor leadership..on the Government side. All the Governments involved.

As to Waco, Texas..once again...we have "expertly trained and equipped specialists here" and this is the best they can do...80 some odd people killed. This is not specialists at work..this is poor leadership...on all levels..from the top down.
No matter what David Koresh did ..it does not warrant killing some 80 people.

YOu do not make 80 people expendable/disposable to suit the courts or politics. This is whoredom at its finest..or perhapsed more accurately poorest.
Once again ..poor leadership from the top down.

I do not know what you could possibly be thinking by statements like this Don White.
You have tried to make a point to me about guns and people killed with them and how prescious life is...death by guns..et al..but then you make a statement like "at some point the authority of the courts has to be recognized....telling me that at this point life is no longer prescious...when the authority of the courts is at stake..this is politics..Don White..not the presciousness of life. You need to think this through alot more...before you shoot your self in the foot..heavily on this board.

God forbid that the average voter should ever be able to think this far. Collectivist thinking...Wow!!!!

People with thinking like yours in government ..and there are many of them..particularly in the Democratic party..though the republicans have them too..and I will never trust Government.

At no point did I ever say that Randy Weaver or anyone else was above the law..I said that they nor thier familys deserved what happened. I said that the "expertly equipped?trained Government people and their leadership could have done much better.
Now that I think about it ..I dont believe anyone else said or implied that Randy Weaver or anyone else was above the law. They do quote the second amendment ..and not under your interpretation...

"at some point the authority of the courts has to be recognized"

With the next administration of this type under these incidents you are going to see more of this type of thing..government going after its own people for political expedience...and coverup. Get ready...its coming. It is the very best this type of politic can do.

Orangetom



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join