CIVIL WAR: Senate To Go For Handguns

page: 29
81
<< 26  27  28    30  31 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 04:35 AM
link   
So basically you want to fight for your right to own automatic weapons so when the NWO army come to take you away to their FEMA camps (for no economically valid reason at all) you will fight them off with machine gun bullets.

Im assuming the stand off wont last too long though unless you own a SAM or tank, I suppose we should fight for the right for the people to own these too.

Let's face it the 2nd amendment is out of date and has been exploited to the fullest by the Military Industrial Complex, it is time to make an effort to evolve. Part of that is by not living in fear and assuming that some non-whitey is going to come kill us in our sleep.




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 05:10 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


I prefer the bigger, heavier loads for a pistol due to increasing trauma on the intended target. Here's a link to some excellent ammo testing if anybody is interested. www.youtube.com...
This guy also has the best video I've seen yet on this future AWB.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sublevel6


Part of that is by not living in fear and assuming that some non-whitey is going to come kill us in our sleep.


Wow...what a devious and unfounded statement to make just to attempt to trivialize other people's rights. I haven't seen a single post in this thread referring to race and yet you can't seem to present your illogical position without accusing someone who disagrees with you of being scared of "non-whiteys".

Disgusting.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by Sublevel6


Part of that is by not living in fear and assuming that some non-whitey is going to come kill us in our sleep.


Wow...what a devious and unfounded statement to make just to attempt to trivialize other people's rights. I haven't seen a single post in this thread referring to race and yet you can't seem to present your illogical position without accusing someone who disagrees with you of being scared of "non-whiteys".

Disgusting.


Yep...The vast majority, of African-Americans, (or whatever is the PC term, now) that live in my town, are as decent as anyone. Respectful, polite, and concerned. It's the white-trash crack and meth-heads that you have to worry about, here.

They steal, prowl, blow up houses, and get flipped out of the system as fast as they pick them up! It seems like some sort of racket, they turn them in and out so fast...Maybe the local magistrate has stock in cold medicine?...



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Valhall
 


Learn to read the subtext. Shall i break it down for you? The west was won by use of firearms against the indigenous people of the land, then to oppress the black man, you cannot say race is not an issue in gun ownership. It is the root cause of America's gun obsession.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sublevel6
reply to post by Valhall
 


Learn to read the subtext. Shall i break it down for you? The west was won by use of firearms against the indigenous people of the land, then to oppress the black man, you cannot say race is not an issue in gun ownership. It is the root cause of America's gun obsession.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Sunwolf
 




No,the beginnings of gun control was imposed on the Native Americans and Blacks.You should really listen to the speeches of Russel Means.Enlightening.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Sublevel6
 




Von Clausewitz"Guerilla war cannot be won,only tolerated"



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Sublevel6
 


These are the powers and duties of Congress as spelled out by Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution:



The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


This has been deferred to the IRS after it was rewritten by the 16th Amendment in 1913. And Congress has been pretty lax about paying debts since then. See also NAFTA and ICE (which part of the Executive Branch).


To borrow money on the credit of the United States;


Still doing this but have done this so much that the credit rating has been lowered and we hit the debt ceiling yet again with this session of the House.


To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;


The claim of Obamacare failing under this part was partially overruled by the Supreme Court, instead they decided it was a tax for failing to purchase a product which is many other provisions of the Constitution but mainly the 5th and 9th Amendments.


To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;


Nothing uniform about "too big to fail" or various amnesty programs over the years.


To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;


Power deferred to Federal Reserve. Although we still use SAE measurements instead of the Metric System due to the will of the people---might want to take notes when it comes to messing with the 2nd Amendment with this gun ban.


To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;


They might still do this, been awhile since a major counterfeiting case has happened.


To establish post offices and post roads;


Deferred to the USPS (a private company with federal protections that violate anti-trust laws) and the States with partial money loaned or thrown in.---See the current state of certain bridges like the Brent Spence bridge crossing the Ohio River on I-75 which will only receive loans provided they make it a toll bridge.


To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;


Copyrights and pattens still exist, but it is up to the holders to prosecute or companies that they hire like RIAA.


To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;


Still do this one, Benghazi investigation being one. But politics tend to hold more sway than justice so that is a bit disconcerting.


To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;


Provided the President involves the troops. Or the Coast Guard catches them in the act and actually captures them rather than just driving them off. Then again, look at gun and drug trafficking facilitated by other parts of the government and Congress has been pretty lax about holding this power.


To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;


Does Xe (formally Blackwater) have a letter of marque? Better question is will they be exempt from the proposed gun ban?


To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;


Defunding the standing army is such a political football that it isn't going to happen despite it being unconstitutional. Besides the Pentagon is such a neatly shaped building and all.

(cont)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
(continued)


To provide and maintain a navy;


Still doing that.


To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;


Uniform Code of Military Justice is still there, although I don't think Congress writes much of it.


To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;


This Congress is terrified of the militias that exist today and considers them domestic enemies for the most part. Hence the rational behind this gun ban.


To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;


Nope, the state level National Guards are not the militia. Best that Congress does is allow the FBI to infiltrate the groups out there for intel gather out of fear. Of course the FBI and ATF have not been wholly upright in quite a number of their dealings: terrorist plots, Ruby Ridge, Waco...which isn't in keeping with this power.


To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And


DC gun ban was overturned by SCOTUS. Doing a bang up job there...see Fast and Furious Afghanistan: More Illegal Weapons in The Hands of The Enemy?


To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.


They do make some laws. Many of them to shirk their duties.

If any part of the Constitution and become antiquated, it isn't the 2nd Amendment so much as Article 1. Given the technology in place today, the 50 Governors can meet with the president daily for conference calls (Skype) and present proposed legislation to the State Legislatures to vote on with a 2/3 majority required to be passed into law. This would eliminate ego trips by Congressional and Senate members like Feinstein that have the power to foster their wants and desires over the entire nation without the people of the several states having a say in keeping them from office.

Being a resident of Ohio, I have no voting power to have Feinstein recalled or censored for the remainder of her term. Best I can do is petition my representatives to do so. What is my vote to my particular representative John Boehner when he ran unopposed in his last election or Senator Brown who directly panders to those living in Section 8 housing and receiving gov't assistance by setting up commissions in Ohio?

Keep the guns, ban Congress...it might be our only hope.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Sublevel6
 


Yes I can! I can say it and mean it. Because my desire to retain a protected right has nothing to do with me wanting to oppress or murder anyone.

Ships were used to carry all the slaves over here in the first place, but if I want to own a boat it won't be because I'm all up in the oppressing of "the non-whities"!

Good gawd what contorted thinking you have.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Ahabstar
 
Great list!

No, we have nothing to fear.... They are all about protecting the Constitution!




posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sublevel6
Learn to read the subtext. Shall i break it down for you? The west was won by use of firearms against the indigenous people of the land, then to oppress the black man, you cannot say race is not an issue in gun ownership. It is the root cause of America's gun obsession.


I gave you a star for "the most creative use of the race card on ATS".

Really, race is now the reason people in America love their guns?

I see the Kool-Aid is flowing liberally (pun not intended but funny nonetheless) on New Year’s Eve.

The only guns that were used to oppress the "black-man" as you put it were those that were traded to other "black-men" in exchange for them capturing their friends, family and neighbors for trade.

In the cycle of the ancient slave trade the white-men or Europeans in most cases never left the shore line or in some cases their ships. They didn't have to there was already an abundance of slaves for sale from the internal tribal conflicts in the interior of the continent. We didn't need to catch or oppress anyone - their utter subjugation was already in most cases complete by the time they arrived. Having suffered horrible conditions at the hands of < gasp > other black men...

White people did not invent the concept of slavery, they simply capitalized on the practice that had been (and still is btw) thriving inside of the African continent.

The African's had been killing, enslaving, buying and selling one another way before the Europeans showed up.

We simply had items and technologies they wanted but lacked the facilities and knowledge to make so they took the one thing they had plenty of - slaves and offered them in exchange. In the context of the times it was just a business arrangement that was ideally arranged for both parties.

Had the same conditions existed in France or Germany (or elsewhere in Europe) the slaves brought to America would have been white men.

Oh and just for clarity - a good number of men and women (white and otherwise) were sent to America as indentured servants, or basically slaves. Some were self indentured that is true but most were criminals "sold" to people for freedom to be earned in exchange for room and board and work in the new world. It was not uncommon in the time for poor families to indenture their own children - white children to wealthy people in hopes they could learn a trade and have a better life.

I wonder why the Africans wanted the guns (and other items of war) from us? Was it so they could subjugate themselves?
edit on 31/12/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   
For the love of all that is the perview of our Lord Azazel please explain to me the double post thing...


How the hell does it happen?
edit on 31/12/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublevel6
 


Actually, having "tanks" hasn't helped the US much in Afganistan, Iraq, Vietnam, has it. Light weapons have raised hell against the best armed army in the world...nice try.

The need for self-defense, AR's being my limit, has been around a lot longer than any vested interest group. Name me a group that hasn't taken advantage of the constitution, rules and circumstances??

Somehow you equate that with the removal of MY choice??? Forget it, not happening...again nice try



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66

Originally posted by Sublevel6
Learn to read the subtext. Shall i break it down for you? The west was won by use of firearms against the indigenous people of the land, then to oppress the black man, you cannot say race is not an issue in gun ownership. It is the root cause of America's gun obsession.


I gave you a star for "the most creative use of the race card on ATS".

Really, race is now the reason people in America love their guns?

I see the Kool-Aid is flowing liberally (pun not intended but funny nonetheless) on New Year’s Eve.

The only guns that were used to oppress the "black-man" as you put it were those that were traded to other "black-men" in exchange for them capturing their friends, family and neighbors for trade.

In the cycle of the ancient slave trade the white-men or Europeans in most cases never left the shore line or in some cases their ships. They didn't have to there was already an abundance of slaves for sale from the internal tribal conflicts in the interior of the continent. We didn't need to catch or oppress anyone - their utter subjugation was already in most cases complete by the time they arrived. Having suffered horrible conditions at the hands of < gasp > other black men...

White people did not invent the concept of slavery, they simply capitalized on the practice that had been (and still is btw) thriving inside of the African continent.

The African's had been killing, enslaving, buying and selling one another way before the Europeans showed up.

We simply had items and technologies they wanted but lacked the facilities and knowledge to make so they took the one thing they had plenty of - slaves and offered them in exchange. In the context of the times it was just a business arrangement that was ideally arranged for both parties.

Had the same conditions existed in France or Germany (or elsewhere in Europe) the slaves brought to America would have been white men.

Oh and just for clarity - a good number of men and women (white and otherwise) were sent to America as indentured servants, or basically slaves. Some were self indentured that is true but most were criminals "sold" to people for freedom to be earned in exchange for room and board and work in the new world. It was not uncommon in the time for poor families to indenture their own children - white children to wealthy people in hopes they could learn a trade and have a better life.

I wonder why the Africans wanted the guns (and other items of war) from us? Was it so they could subjugate themselves?
edit on 31/12/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)


In addition, I would remind everyone that many of the first gun control laws in the US were part of the Jim Crow system and designed to prevent newly freed blacks from arming themselves. It is a heck of a lot easier to put on a white sheet and intimidate a man if he cannot defend himself. Gun control laws were racist on the outset.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
For those of you who propose that guns are required for the populace to revolt against a tyrannical gov't, let's think for a minute how much times have changed since that 2nd amendment was written (and let's take a difference approach this time, not just the normal approach on how weaponry has changed, cause i doubt it would even come to that)…

As soon as a percentage of the populace attempts to revolt (on our own soil)… all communication gets shut down. No cell phones, no TV, no internet, no cable, no satellite phones, no nothing. Communication blackout. So for one, you wouldn't even know what is happening, when it was coming, and from where. At the time the law was written, there was a communication system in place that didn't rely on electronics. Not any more. And the government has control over it. That leads to my next point, all electricity gets cut immediately. So, you instantly lose most of what you need to live. No heat, no light, no refrigerated food, no nothing. Next, all pipelines are shut down. No more gas or oil (gas pumps wouldn't work already anyway because they are all electric now). No driving beyond your current tank of gas (highways would be shut anyway). And as a final blow, all water is cut. You kinda need that to live. So good luck there.

At the time this law was written, no one needed any of this stuff from the outside, now our populace needs modern tech and utilities like we need oxygen. We don't grow our own food, own horses, have a well, have much food beyond a few days/week survival etc. So when they come for you quietly in the middle of the night with infrared, nerve gas, sonic weaponry, tear gas, fully automatic weapons, you aren't gonna do a thing with your friends and your petty semi-automatics… so please, cut out this waste of an argument. You've. Got. Nothing. Except what is causing the deaths of many civilians. On your hands. Deal with it.

In addition to all that, you would be instantly demonized and labeled by all media (and more than likely, rightly so) as a domestic terrorist. So everyone that you thought would be on your side would see you as a crazy sect of society that is pro-violence, anti peaceful negotiation, and well, just crazy. And there would be no counterpoint in the media, or it would be yanked off the air.

And this should also answer any false comparison that is being made to military failures in Afghanistan also. This is on our own soil, where there is gov't control over everything, as noted above.



posted on Dec, 31 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
if they take our gun rights away now it will be easier for them 10-20-30 years in the future to use it to their advantage.



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by L8RT8RZ
 


Just keep on drinking that cool aid. Nothing needs to be setup. Everything is already in place. We will just keep on laughing, while you keep on talking. Do not decisive your self that no one has just "saw" this just happening now.



posted on Jan, 1 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by okrian
As soon as a percentage of the populace attempts to revolt (on our own soil)… all communication gets shut down. No cell phones, no TV, no internet, no cable, no satellite phones, no nothing. Communication blackout. So for one, you wouldn't even know what is happening, when it was coming, and from where. At the time the law was written, there was a communication system in place that didn't rely on electronics. Not any more. And the government has control over it. That leads to my next point, all electricity gets cut immediately. So, you instantly lose most of what you need to live. No heat, no light, no refrigerated food, no nothing. Next, all pipelines are shut down. No more gas or oil (gas pumps wouldn't work already anyway because they are all electric now). No driving beyond your current tank of gas (highways would be shut anyway). And as a final blow, all water is cut. You kinda need that to live. So good luck there.


So they are going to cut all that off from their very own families living in the civilian population, too? And cut Johnny cop's power to his house as well? Now how's that gonna work? I just don't see it. :shk:

Their own families would starve, stink, and be put in jeopardy.





new topics
 
81
<< 26  27  28    30  31 >>

log in

join