"He who knows how will always work for he who knows why." DLR
“The bottom line is, the people want the truth. They want to know how and why four innocent Americans were killed last September in Libya.
They want to know how the IRS became a political arm of the White House during a heated re-election campaign and they want to know their first amendment rights to freedom of the press are still intact.” - Rep Doug Collins
Those aren't real rednecks then. Just housed bums that live near you. Real rednecks respect guns, shoot better than navy seals, and are actually very intellectual and also not racist. If you look into it though Obama is a real piece of work. (Coming from Idaho) And elephant rifles are dope.
I've read 7%, but I imagine there's multiple percents out there.
The stat I read was that at any given time, around 3% of the population was actively engaged in fighting. Not everybody re-enlisted when their time was up, so by the end of the war 7% of the population probably had fought the British at one time or another.
__________________
“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks."
-Thomas Jefferson
He just keeps providing proof for his biggotedness and racist attitudes.
My boss and best friend are both black. I'm not a redneck either. just have learned a lot from them. I have respect for all people until a single person doesn't deserve it. Obama doesn't deserve any respect at all. He deserves a airmailed bullet via elephant rifle delivery service. no He took a oath to protect the constitution as president and he chose to do the opposite.
On topic there will be nobody arresting anyone in public sight. It would be some privatized military group. Nobody really has to worry no regular citizen will be arrested. That would cause some issues. And Ron Paul will be president (hopefully).
no. if you carry a concealed pistol to protect yourself, i have no problem at all. the people who buy 30+ high powered sniper rifles and uzis and talk about revolution just annoy me.
People can buy whatever they want to buy. Why, you ask? Well, because we live in America and luckily, we're are allowed to own firearms in certain states that aren't havens for liberals such as yourself. If you think the founding fathers didn't hypothesize about technological advancements at the time the 2nd amendment was written, you're a ****ing idiot. High powered sniper rifles? Can you name me some? Do know anything about firearms? From that sentence I'd wager that you don't. People can buy whatever they want with their own money and the government has no right to get involved. Realize your bias before you respond, because people who spend $1000 dollars on a device that shoots balls of paint annoy me as well.
Your idealistic outlook on this country in general is disgusting. Just because you'd be the 1st one to get taken out if a revolution did indeed break out, doesn't mean you have to get on a high horse and talk down to anyone who has their fears, because whether you want to believe it or not, we're much closer than you think.
Last edited by LOL Renegade : 02-20-2012 at 07:02 PM.
so why not allow people to purchase nuclear weapons?
because the intent of the second amendment is quite clear that we are allowed to defend ourselves from threats foreign and domestic. The amendment is short but the writings behind it, specifically of Jefferson, insist that the citizens be allowed to keep and bear arms for personal defense purposes from others as well as government tyranny.
To answer your question, it is impractical to defend your person with a nuke, where as a personal rifle or pistol actually is a reasonable use of defense. For real, though is that supposed to be a legitimate argument against the 2nd amendment you implied? A nuclear weapon would endanger the person acting in defense as well as the assailant. Where as a gun has a clear path of predictable stopping power.
Its laughable that it is even brought up in a gun rights debate.
__________________
"Originally posted by pokenose: We quit doing that secret Santa thing after the black guy got a bucket of fried chicken, watermelon jolly ranchers, a bottle of colt 45 and a cotton scented candle then someone else got a ball of that free twine you tie down your items with at ikea and a vibrator so you can go **** yourself if you didn't like the twine."
"Originally posted by AlphaNeo36:
Election fraud is perfectly acceptable when it intends to keep Ron Paul out of the White House."
I didn't obscure his meaning, you should go and read the first sentence again. But regardless of his meaning, the point still stands that there are things which should be kept off limits. Some of them are easy to come to agreement on, like nuclear weapons, while some are not. But the 2nd ammendment is not as clear cut as you think it is.
__________________ SAN DIEGO CHARGERS
"Most Ron Paul supporters are domestic terrorists and racist liberal nazis." - John Elway
Nuclear weapons have no place in a 2nd amendment discussion regarding what should, and what should not be allowed.
In the 2nd amendment the word "arms" is used, and as far as my research on the subject is concerned, the definition of the word at the time the constitution was written would be synonymous with "small arms" meaning we are NOT granted the right to own things like tanks, warships, artillery, or bombs.
__________________ "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."
I didn't obscure his meaning, you should go and read the first sentence again. But regardless of his meaning, the point still stands that there are things which should be kept off limits. Some of them are easy to come to agreement on, like nuclear weapons, while some are not. But the 2nd ammendment is not as clear cut as you think it is.
What do you think it means?
custar
__________________
Are the Geisterjagers over the top?
Well, let's just say "The Top" is barely a speck in our rear view mirror.
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
Samuel Adams
Ave Caesar Obama! Tributituri ad moritus te salutant.
Nuclear weapons have no place in a 2nd amendment discussion regarding what should, and what should not be allowed.
In the 2nd amendment the word "arms" is used, and as far as my research on the subject is concerned, the definition of the word at the time the constitution was written would be synonymous with "small arms" meaning we are NOT granted the right to own things like tanks, warships, artillery, or bombs.
What about militia's?
"A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed;"
__________________ Hell is real..... Got Jesus? Trade Feedback CHRIST KREW
Thank you sponsors of the GUNFIGHTERS: Kingdom Paintball, ChristKrew Apparel,Planet Eclipse Paintball, http://www.chrono300.com/, www.apxgear.com
GUNFIGHTERS for life baby!
I didn't obscure his meaning, you should go and read the first sentence again. But regardless of his meaning, the point still stands that there are things which should be kept off limits. Some of them are easy to come to agreement on, like nuclear weapons, while some are not. But the 2nd ammendment is not as clear cut as you think it is.
You know what he meant. He was referring to your comment about being annoyed of people buying 30+ high powered rifles. He even quoted it.
People can buy whatever they want to buy. Why, you ask? Well, because we live in America and luckily, we're are allowed to own firearms in certain states that aren't havens for liberals such as yourself. If you think the founding fathers didn't hypothesize about technological advancements at the time the 2nd amendment was written, you're a ****ing idiot. High powered sniper rifles? Can you name me some? Do know anything about firearms? From that sentence I'd wager that you don't. People can buy whatever they want with their own money and the government has no right to get involved. Realize your bias before you respond, because people who spend $1000 dollars on a device that shoots balls of paint annoy me as well.
Your idealistic outlook on this country in general is disgusting. Just because you'd be the 1st one to get taken out if a revolution did indeed break out, doesn't mean you have to get on a high horse and talk down to anyone who has their fears, because whether you want to believe it or not, we're much closer than you think.
(the video + picture) This is why we need rules and regulations. It's not the thousands or even millions of people that follow the rules, it's for the few that do not. Citizens dont need ak47s and .50cal weapons. You can defend yourself just fine with a .45 usp, glock 19 etc and hunt with smaller caliber weapons as well.
and as far as revolutions go, i believe the mid to second half of the 20th century has shown us that you can change the world without a single shot being fired.
Yes at times it is necessary to take up arms if human rights violations are taking place which usually is during a tyranical government. if you think we have one of those, then your view on politics is terribly skewed or you need to move to syria to have your eyes opened.
(the video + picture) This is why we need rules and regulations. It's not the thousands or even millions of people that follow the rules, it's for the few that do not. Citizens dont need ak47s and .50cal weapons. You can defend yourself just fine with a .45 usp, glock 19 etc and hunt with smaller caliber weapons as well.
Yep, if we just had more rules and regulations those guys would surely have followed them.
custar
__________________
Are the Geisterjagers over the top?
Well, let's just say "The Top" is barely a speck in our rear view mirror.
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."
Samuel Adams
Ave Caesar Obama! Tributituri ad moritus te salutant.
1. i never made any comment about "high powered rifles"
2. should high powered sniper rifles, if we use drex's interpretation, be allowed?
And to #2 yes, small arms are .50 cal and under, excluding muzzle loaders and shotguns. And must be semi-automatic. I have seen some .50 cal rifles being fired, although big and pretty cool, can usually be out shot by 30-06 rifles when being shot by regular citizens. And handguns would be outlawed before rifles would be.
