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.

 

Gun Control and the Bible

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:29 PM
link   
Just found an interesting philosophical article on
gun control and its interpretation contained in the Bible.


www.keepandbeararms.com...

I try to live in a black/white world, meaning that any issue I come
across is either right or wrong and I do not see any "grey area" when
it comes to making decisions in my day - day life.
Politics and law is so open to debate and personal opinions
in a modern society that grey areas are the norm and
in a majority of issues are artificially created to further a
politicians personal agenda.
The reality actually is that their oath of office they took when
being sworn into office, placing their right hand on the Bible
(which clearly states the word of God, that all men are created equal
in the eyes of God and do have the right to defend themselves and
their loved ones) is not open to debate or their personal agendas.
By taking this action said politcian is not only ignoring the will
of the American people but also the will of God they swore to
honor when taking their oath of office.
Why do we continue to try and reason and debate our Constitiutional
freedoms when there should be NO DEBATE AT ALL ?




posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Now this thread...

www.belowtopsecret.com...

Makes so much more sense.

Oh, that darn Second Amendment... It was a mistake you know... The "Founding Fathers" really didn't mean it... The "Framers" really didn't write that, some drunk redneck snuck in and crayola'd that in when no one was looking... Just ask any ACLU lawyer... They'll tell you.

Bill Of Rights Monkeys, not just for Amendments 1, 3-10 anymore...



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   
They knew someday like today this would come. Protect yourself and your family was the message. Guns don't kill..........unless we pull the trigger.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   
I am a supporter of the 2nd, as well as anything else in the constitution. But I can't say I live my life in a black and white world, I find that to be quite difficult.



posted on Jul, 10 2007 @ 10:39 PM
link   
When men (and women?) wrote the bible I don't think guns were high on their agenda. This is complete stupidity - Religious American gun nuts, why am I not surprised. And I bet very few of them are circumcised or go about killing practicing homosexuals in the name of some god; the bible being selectively referenced for political means


[edit on 10-7-2007 by planeman]



posted on Jul, 30 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   
The danger with constitutionalists is that they are ridiculously faith-based in their beliefs. You have no real understanding of the progression of society or the need for change. It is a dangerous society when we constantly re-affirm an ancient text to be a moral absolute we cannot stray from - what I mean to say is, what might have been good in the 1700's mighn't be too good now, and vice versa.



posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 01:30 AM
link   
The 2nd amendment should still stand indeffinatly. Regardless of religious references.



posted on Aug, 6 2007 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by planeman
When men (and women?) wrote the bible I don't think guns were high on their agenda. This is complete stupidity - Religious American gun nuts, why am I not surprised. And I bet very few of them are circumcised or go about killing practicing homosexuals in the name of some god; the bible being selectively referenced for political means


[edit on 10-7-2007 by planeman]


I agree with you stance on the Bible and guns. However when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were they knew exactly what guns were and intended to protect our rights to own them.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Patriot36
 


Nothing like combining a poor understanding of the Bible with a poor understanding of the constitution, huh?


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.


This is the text - capitalization included - ratified by the states. we see "well-regulated militia" and "the People." Not "persons" but "The People". Through a strictly constitutional approach, we should have defensive state militias that hold a communally owned cache of weaponry to be used by that militia. This is, after all, exactly the system that was used during and after the Revolutionary war.

And might I note, it was the system used with muzzle-loaders equipped with bayonets, not fully automatic rifles with laser sights, nor SAM's and plastic explosives...

[edit on 26-8-2007 by The Walking Fox]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   
By that logic using people to mean cummunal rights you are going to lose quite a few rights under the constitution. Namely 1,4,9, and 10.

Bill of Rights



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by DarkStormCrow
 


1st amendment: A person cannot assemble. You need two or more people to accomplish an assembly. Much as how a single cow is not a herd. However, this right has been steadily eroded in the last decade, I will grant. Yet for all the bumper stickers proclaiming "the 1st is protected by the 2nd" or what have you, I have yet to see any of the gun-pumpers make much of a fuss.

4th amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons," - see how it includes 'in their persons' and not simply "the right of the people to be secure"?

9th and 10th amendments: Again very clearly using "the people" in the sense of a community as a whole.

So hey, this popped into my head soon after my previous post... There are these ten rights in the bill of rights, correct?
I don't have to pay a fee to speak where I wish
I don't have to pay to guarantee a warrant has been issued
I don't have to pay in order to not be randomly arrested
I don't have to pay to receive a trial if I am arrested
I don't have to pay for there to be a jury of my peers at this trial
I don't have to pay in order to not be tortured while being held

I do have to pay a private industry to maintain my 2nd amendment rights, however. Out of all of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, this happens to be the only one exclusively controlled by private interest for profit.

So... Why is that? Or alternately, since I'm sure there will be some drivel about a capitalist society, why aren't there any companies that allow you to hire your own juries? I imagine it would net a nice profit.

[edit on 26-8-2007 by The Walking Fox]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Walking Fox
reply to post by DarkStormCrow
 


1st amendment: A person cannot assemble. You need two or more people to accomplish an assembly. Much as how a single cow is not a herd. However, this right has been steadily eroded in the last decade, I will grant. Yet for all the bumper stickers proclaiming "the 1st is protected by the 2nd" or what have you, I have yet to see any of the gun-pumpers make much of a fuss.



I can most certainly assembly my singular self outside the White House and scream "Jorge Boosh is a poopie head" and I dont need any help, or is it your contention that my individual assembly isnt protected?




4th amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons," - see how it includes 'in their persons' and not simply "the right of the people to be secure"?


Lets look at the whole amendment
Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Persons in this case would refer to physical searches.




9th and 10th amendments: Again very clearly using "the people" in the sense of a community as a whole.


All rights are individual rights the founders understood this. We dont have militias anymore they have been coopted by the national guard and are in truth federal forces no matter how much the government claims to the contrary. The 9th and 10th amendments specifically protect individual and state right that are not enumerated in previous amendments.



So hey, this popped into my head soon after my previous post... There are these ten rights in the bill of rights, correct?
I don't have to pay a fee to speak where I wish

Unless your in a city that requires permits.


I don't have to pay to guarantee a warrant has been issued.
I don't have to pay in order to not be randomly arrested
I don't have to pay to receive a trial if I am arrested
I don't have to pay for there to be a jury of my peers at this trial
I don't have to pay in order to not be tortured while being held


You pay its called taxes.


I do have to pay a private industry to maintain my 2nd amendment rights, however. Out of all of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, this happens to be the only one exclusively controlled by private interest for profit.


The only reason I have to pay for my 2nd amendment rights is because the Federal Government had made it illegal and cost prohibitive for individuals to manufacture firearms. I shouldnt have to pay and I shouldnt have to pay for a background check either. For me arms means anything from sticks and stones to the same small arms used by the armed forces.
So arms can be as cheap or as expensive as you want to get.



So... Why is that? Or alternately, since I'm sure there will be some drivel about a capitalist society, why aren't there any companies that allow you to hire your own juries? I imagine it would net a nice profit.


If folks are rich enough they do in a way with thier lawyers and jury experts "hire" or pick thier own juries. Its not right but it does happen.

I personally am unwilling to surrender any rights as communal. Nor should any american citizen be willing to do so either. Protect them all or loose them all.



As for me personally
My right of self defense is just as important to me as any other rights listed in the Bill of Rights, it is the right that preserves all other rights.



The above firearm is mine I legally purchased it, and legally obtained a license to carry said firearm. The government took 122 days to issue me a carry permit. So for 122 days I was denied my right to carry for the puposes of self defense. If it took 122 days to get a drivers license or you had to get a permit to speak publicly and it took 122 days what would you reaction be.

My permit is only good in a certain number of states. Why? The background check is more strenuous than for a drivers license and my drivers license is good throughout the country. Why does my right to self defense end when I enter California or Colorado?

The Police can not be everywhere at once, I cannot sue the police for failure to stop a crime taking place against my person. The Supreme Court has decided this the law of the land. In the end the responsibilty for my protection of me and my family is mine.

I carry the above firearm everyday, if you pass me on the street you will not see it, you wont know that it is there. The only way you will see that firearm is if my life is in jeopardy or I am at risk of serious permanent bodily injury. So how does my carrying affect you? It doesnt at all, taking away the firearms of law abiding citizens only punishes the law abiding for the crimes of criminals.

Is society safer if I am defenseless and I am injured or killed as opposed to being able to defend myself? Keep in mind that in this day and age you can fully cooperate with a criminals demands and still end up dead, this is the case more often than not.

I find it strange that while I am more than willing to protect my rights and any other citizens rights as enumerated in the Bill of Rights, when it comes to my right of self defense all of the rights folks seem to disappear.



[edit on 8/26/2007 by DarkStormCrow]



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Don't waste your time bragging about your gun to me, please. I could honestly give a crap less about whether you have one or if you don't. It's the same as owning a television, or a car. You don't have the right to own a gun. You have the privilege of owning it. That piece of machinery is not guaranteed to you any more than a microwave oven or a pair of roller skates.

You do have the right, however, to be protected through the means of an armed and regulated militia beholden to the state in which you live, and you also have the right to be part of said militia.

Don't misunderstand me - I'm not one of the gun-grabbing liberals. I have a couple of my own, two for hunting, and one for bear protection while hunting (I hate store meat, how about you?). I just don't regard my ownership of them to be an inherent right. I have to pay insurance for my car and be licensed - same with guns. It's a piece of machinery that could be extremely dangerous in the hands of an idiot like the Vice President.

Now regarding your gun being used for defense... I'm sure you think that. Have you ever been in a firefight before? Ever been shot? How many times?

If someone pulls a gun on you, you will be at a sizable disadvantage. First off, they will have their gun out and ready while yours is still holstered. Odds are fair to god they have some practice using the weapon for exactly what they are doing at the moment, experience you lack. In other words, they have the drop on you, and that chunk of steel you keep at the small of your back under your shirt might as well be a flatware set for as much as it's going to protect you. If you reach for it, you are going to get shot, 100% guaranteed. You are not the hero of a Tom Clancy novel. You are not Patrick Swayze in Red Dawn. What you are is some dude who wasted money and time buying a gun and still getting jacked up by someone who you bought that gun to protect yourself from. You are not going to grit your teeth with your macho jaw-stubble bristling out and keep reaching for your gun if you get shot, you're probably going to fall back in shock, bleeding, and start screaming, babbling, and generally acting extremely confused. This is how cops and soldiers tend to react when they get hit, I doubt you will fare a lot better. In fact this reaction is why cops and soldiers shoot people reaching for their weapon, Stops them in their tracks more often than not.

In a face-to-face confrontation with someone who has a gun on you, your hands and feet are going to be a better defense than that pistol. You should have invested that money in some decent karate classes or something.

Perhaps you're one of those guys who thinks they're gonna fight off the gub'mint? Not gonna happen, I don't care how much firepower you think you're packing, you'll lose that fight so badly that it won't even register a blip. Again, you are not a superhero, even if your chunk of cast steel makes you feel like you'll never need viagra again


[edit on 27-8-2007 by The Walking Fox]



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Walking Fox
Don't waste your time bragging about your gun to me, please. I could honestly give a crap less about whether you have one or if you don't. It's the same as owning a television, or a car. You don't have the right to own a gun. You have the privilege of owning it. That piece of machinery is not guaranteed to you any more than a microwave oven or a pair of roller skates.


I have the right of self defense whatever form that takes wether arms or other means. I dont need to brag it is what it is.



You do have the right, however, to be protected through the means of an armed and regulated militia beholden to the state in which you live, and you also have the right to be part of said militia.


Sure I will call up the militia when some criminal is breaking into my home and murdering my family. The police cant even protect us and now I am supposed to call the minutemen thats great provided they can get off the couch and turn off the TV long enough to help a fellow citizen.



Don't misunderstand me - I'm not one of the gun-grabbing liberals. I have a couple of my own, two for hunting, and one for bear protection while hunting (I hate store meat, how about you?). I just don't regard my ownership of them to be an inherent right. I have to pay insurance for my car and be licensed - same with guns. It's a piece of machinery that could be extremely dangerous in the hands of an idiot like the Vice President.


Ah so having a gun for your purposes is permissable but my right of self defense is not. Maybe you should just use bows and knives while hunting and not use guns. I dont eat meat.



Now regarding your gun being used for defense... I'm sure you think that. Have you ever been in a firefight before? Ever been shot? How many times?


Yes I have been in firefights before. Yes I have been shot before. Gulf War 1 Ak 47 round shattered my pelvis took 2 years to learn how to walk again I still have to use a cane most of the time.




If someone pulls a gun on you, you will be at a sizable disadvantage. First off, they will have their gun out and ready while yours is still holstered. Odds are fair to god they have some practice using the weapon for exactly what they are doing at the moment, experience you lack. In other words, they have the drop on you, and that chunk of steel you keep at the small of your back under your shirt might as well be a flatware set for as much as it's going to protect you. If you reach for it, you are going to get shot, 100% guaranteed. You are not the hero of a Tom Clancy novel. You are not Patrick Swayze in Red Dawn. What you are is some dude who wasted money and time buying a gun and still getting jacked up by someone who you bought that gun to protect yourself from. You are not going to grit your teeth with your macho jaw-stubble bristling out and keep reaching for your gun if you get shot, you're probably going to fall back in shock, bleeding, and start screaming, babbling, and generally acting extremely confused. This is how cops and soldiers tend to react when they get hit, I doubt you will fare a lot better. In fact this reaction is why cops and soldiers shoot people reaching for their weapon, Stops them in their tracks more often than not.

In a face-to-face confrontation with someone who has a gun on you, your hands and feet are going to be a better defense than that pistol. You should have invested that money in some decent karate classes or something.

Perhaps you're one of those guys who thinks they're gonna fight off the gub'mint? Not gonna happen, I don't care how much firepower you think you're packing, you'll lose that fight so badly that it won't even register a blip. Again, you are not a superhero, even if your chunk of cast steel makes you feel like you'll never need viagra again



I dont carry a firearm to be a hero so you proceed from the false assumption that if someone carries for the purposes of self defense they are out there to be hero. You also make the assumption that I just carry the thing around and never practice with it you are very far from the truth. I watch my surroundings, I avoid trouble areas I have no desire to shoot anyone and as I have had to shoot another human being before I know the effect that has on the human psyche. My weakened physical condition has made it nearly impossible to run for more than 30 yards or so, so for me running away is not an option, in a physical fight any weight greater than my body weight on my legs will most likely cause a collapse.

Back in 1994 in I was jumped by some wonderful inner city thugs while waiting for a bus. I was an easy target frail walking with a cane and alone.
I was beaten nearly to death, fractured skull, 7 broken ribs, broken wrist, broken pelvis again and 20 bones in my fingers and hands were broken. I dont plan to let that happen again. I have maintained a carry permit since that time.

Fight the government, not likely that will be for younger and healthier persons than me. I got 4 kids and 4 grandkids so I really dont need any viagra.



[edit on 8/27/2007 by DarkStormCrow]



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by DarkStormCrow
 



Ah so having a gun for your purposes is permissable but my right of self defense is not. Maybe you should just use bows and knives while hunting and not use guns. I dont eat meat.



Where did I say this? I said gun ownership is not a right. Own all the damn firearms you want, but don't try to tell me that it's a right. Saying your right to self-defense is a right to firearms is like saying having a right to use the highway system is the same as a right to own a Mercedes.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Well I will stick with what the Constitution says. It is an individual right. The Supreme Court says it is an individual right. The founding fathers said it is an individual right.

There has been no Militia in the US since 1903.

The right of the citizenry to bear arms was not even a question until the prohibition era.

The only reason it is an issue now is because of JFK, MLK, and RFK being assassinated.

Arms can be anything from sticks and stones to infantry small arms, I am not advocating that people be able to posses a rocket launcher or a nuke.

I will agree to disagree with you on this issue, this is a debate that will be fought out for years. I do think however that once the individual right to bear arms is removed the other rights will not be far behind.

The religious aspect of this topic means nothing to me as I am not a christian.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Not terribly perceptive are you?

Our first amendment rights are nearly nonexistant. "Free speech zones", the corporate and complicit press, and religion and government becoming one and the same.

Increased police power and pseudo-police power in the name of "fighting terrorism" meaning that you can be jailed indefinitely for a thought crime, tortured, and never see a trial of your peers with legal council.

Federal overrides of state laws such as control of the National Guard and legalized marijuana, resulting in enormous waste and needless incarcerations and killings.

But hey so long as the Supreme Court tells you you can own a gun (while at the same time telling you you have no right to have a home, and that you can be arrested for speaking unpopular thoughts and be held without trial...) I guess you don't mind, right? None of the other gun-pumpers do.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   
I pretty much think I have put my thoughts on rights in my previous posts.

DSC
I personally am unwilling to surrender any rights as communal. Nor should any american citizen be willing to do so either. Protect them all or loose them all.



Not terribly perceptive are you?

Well I am perceptive enought to want to protect all rights not just a chosen few.


Our first amendment rights are nearly nonexistant. "Free speech zones", the corporate and complicit press, and religion and government becoming one and the same.

Our first amendment rights have gone away because we as a people dont use them, when was the last time any major demostration took place by the general citizenry. The only folks that demostrate these days are special interest groups Gun rights, Abortion rights, Illegal Immigrant rights, Union rights etcs. I am not saying that they shouldnt demonstrate they should and so should the general citizenry. I think that the religious people have a right to vote for whichever candidate that suits thier moral compass and if not enough people vote the other direction then government is going to reflect thier view. Sometimes this is good, slavery, civil rights in the 60s, and sometimes it is bad gay marraige, civil unions, various blue laws and too many liberty university lawyers in the justice department. The press is no longer our watchdog they cant be trusted anymore than government to serve the needs of the people unless it serves thier interest. Being a non Christian and an extreme religious minority, religion in government is not an issue that is lost on me.


Increased police power and pseudo-police power in the name of "fighting terrorism" meaning that you can be jailed indefinitely for a thought crime, tortured, and never see a trial of your peers with legal council.

I dont like the expansion of governmental powers anymore than you do, And people should be protesting, its easy to arrest a few hundred, it is much more difficult to arrest a million folks sitting on the capitol lawn. I personally have never has a problem with my police departments in the locales I have lived in other than the occasional traffic ticket. What I am really concerned about is the development of some of the Private Security Companies, and the para-militarization of the police departments.


Federal overrides of state laws such as control of the National Guard and legalized marijuana, resulting in enormous waste and needless incarcerations and killings.

I dont disagree with you here I am states and individual rights person. If I could use medical marijuana I would, I would much prefer it to the pharmaceutical pain killers I have to use now.I have no use for a national army I think we should have a Navy and a Marine Corps as provided for in the Constitution and that the Army and Air Forces should be state controlled and that no troops should be stationed on non US territory without a formal declaration of war.


But hey so long as the Supreme Court tells you you can own a gun (while at the same time telling you you have no right to have a home, and that you can be arrested for speaking unpopular thoughts and be held without trial...) I guess you don't mind, right? None of the other gun-pumpers do.

I dont feel I have a right to a home, I have a right to what I can work for and provide for myself, I have no problem paying taxes and having that money go to someone that can not provide for themselves in the way of shelter, food, medical care, etc. What I dont have a right to is to sit on my backside not contribute anything to society and expect the government or society to provide shelter, food, and medical care, etc.

Anyway I thought this was a debate about 2nd Amendment rights. I was debating second amendment rights only as far as this thread goes. Back to your original post with the capitalization situation, while you dont give the scource I will and folks can read about the discrepancy of the the amendment with regards to what was passed by the congress and what was sent to the states for ratification. Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
I would very much like the idea of having local militias with a communally held cache of weapons for use in emergencies and defense. I also consider it an individual right remember I am state and individual rights person the federal government should small as possible and most power should be held at the state level.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Continues from previous post


Unfortunately when we get to your third post instead of continuing to debate the issue, Your posts turned to attacks turned to vilification of me personally.



Now regarding your gun being used for defense... I'm sure you think that. Have you ever been in a firefight before? Ever been shot? How many times?


I answered this question in a previous post before even though I feel it is intended to belittle and demean me as an opponent in a debate.



If someone pulls a gun on you, you will be at a sizable disadvantage. First off, they will have their gun out and ready while yours is still holstered. Odds are fair to god they have some practice using the weapon for exactly what they are doing at the moment, experience you lack. In other words, they have the drop on you, and that chunk of steel you keep at the small of your back under your shirt might as well be a flatware set for as much as it's going to protect you. If you reach for it, you are going to get shot, 100% guaranteed. You are not the hero of a Tom Clancy novel. You are not Patrick Swayze in Red Dawn. What you are is some dude who wasted money and time buying a gun and still getting jacked up by someone who you bought that gun to protect yourself from. You are not going to grit your teeth with your macho jaw-stubble bristling out and keep reaching for your gun if you get shot, you're probably going to fall back in shock, bleeding, and start screaming, babbling, and generally acting extremely confused. This is how cops and soldiers tend to react when they get hit, I doubt you will fare a lot better. In fact this reaction is why cops and soldiers shoot people reaching for their weapon, Stops them in their tracks more often than not.


I have answered this question also, even though I consider it attack on my person and competency to own and carry a firearm my experience with a firearm and how I would handle any specific situation. I actually carry a money clip with a 20 and 10-15 ones in it, if someone has managed to get the drop on me as it were that is what I will hand them I am not looking for a firefight I am not looking to shoot anyone and I dont want to get shot myself I have been there and done that.Now if the situation looks like it is going to threaten my life or limb further I will most likely reach for my firearm, most gunfights happen at 4 yards or less and most of the time both parties miss with thier initial shots, heck even the police have a poor shooting record when it comes to a gunfight.



In a face-to-face confrontation with someone who has a gun on you, your hands and feet are going to be a better defense than that pistol. You should have invested that money in some decent karate classes or something.

Perhaps you're one of those guys who thinks they're gonna fight off the gub'mint? Not gonna happen, I don't care how much firepower you think you're packing, you'll lose that fight so badly that it won't even register a blip. Again, you are not a superhero, even if your chunk of cast steel makes you feel like you'll never need viagra again


I answered this above even though I considered it attack on my mental capability and and my manhood again instead of debating the issue at hand you turned to a personal attack instead of addressing the issue of wether the 2nd amendment represents a communal or an individual right.

[edit on 8/27/2007 by DarkStormCrow]



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 02:18 AM
link   
You admit that the many other rights you have are going down the tubes, and that the "gun rights" crowd have pretty much just sat at home claiming that they are the force that stops those rights from being eroded.

I apologize if I come across as personally insulting you. I just find people who thump their chests about how greatly and crucially important it is for them to own a gun to be the largest merry band of idiots I have ever seen.

Second-biggest, my mistake. The "pro-lifer" bunch are the biggest.

You believe your pistol is going to save you in a time of need. You're more likely to shoot yourself with it.
You think that an armed populace is what keeps all our other rights secure. Obviously not.
Probably the most use you get out of your gun is wasting money on ammo down at the range, and making yourself feel macho online. Honestly, any real reason to show a picture of your gun besides self-aggrandizement?

The "gun culture" stuff is just amazingly goofy. It's great you guys have a hobby and a sense of security (deserved or not), but really. Listening to you guys, one gets the impression that you consider yourself the spiritual heirs of the wild west - at least the wild west as portrayed by dumb movies made in the 50's and 60's, since most towns in the old west DID confiscate your guns...

[edit on 28-8-2007 by The Walking Fox]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join