1911Forum banner

81 - 100 of 275 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,583 Posts
I used "higher power" so as not to offend the booger eaters.
I know.... however, why are you worried about offending the "booger eaters" as you so eloquently put it?
Of ALL the rights articulated or suggested in our founding documents, nowhere, not once, is there even the hint the "right" to be free from being "offended".
Its about time to quit accommodating and coddling the "booger eaters". Life isn't "fair"; get over it.
Generations of accommodation has led us to where we are today...
I momentarily lost my mind.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,270 Posts
Discussion Starter #82
The machines taking over like in the Terminator would have seemed more plausible.
And that's one of the changes Combat Auto may have been referring to, the more I find out about high-tech meganationals like google and several others the more I have to fight the fear of their power, most or all are connected to china and we all knbow china doesn't believe in our Constitution, they have the ability already to listen and even see into our homes because we ignorantly let them into them. We may want to tell seri to take her half breed b**tard child out into the desert.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,589 Posts
I don't give much credence to the endless amount of chest-pounding on gun forum's as far as who is brave and who is not. It is just pointless talk if the bravery isn't paired with team work, consolidation of forces, and a plan to resist.
I myself do not claim to be exceedingly brave but actually I am more afraid of living as a slave to Godless leftist than I am of dying. We are all going to die unless the rapture happens in our lifetime. I pray the leftist movement is hurt badly if not destroyed in this next election. I don’t want to go to war or be killed for not complying with unconstitutional laws but I may not have much choice. If I am forced into a situation that I absolutely don’t want to be in dying on my feet seems much better to me than dying on my knees unarmed and at the mercy of those who are so fueled with vicious hatred for anyone they see as the enemy.

I do whole heartedly agree with you on the teamwork, plans and consolidation of forces.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,327 Posts
Just made another donation to Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) our state pro gun organization.

It started around when we pushed through 'Shall Issue' Concealed Handgun
Permits and has remained a strong lobbying group in the State Capital.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,927 Posts
It is known as the amendment process. Anything else is unlawful and therefore invalid.
Exactly. So an amendment is passed that repeals the second amendment of the bill of rights. Now there would be no constitutional right to bear arms. Gun confiscation would no longer be anti-constitutional. So the police and military could pursue gun owners with a clear conscience.

Who would have believed that they could have amended the constitution to ban production of alcohol. That took little more than a year to be ratified.

You get enough liberals in congress and the state houses and . . . .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,589 Posts
Exactly. So an amendment is passed that repeals the second amendment of the bill of rights. Now there would be no constitutional right to bear arms. Gun confiscation would no longer be anti-constitutional. So the police and military could pursue gun owners with a clear conscience.

Who would have believed that they could have amended the constitution to ban production of alcohol. That took little more than a year to be ratified.

You get enough liberals in congress and the state houses and . . . .
The 2nd Amendment was put in place for 1 reason and if we allow corrupt leftist to remove it without even putting it to use then I guess only outlaws will have guns and I will no longer be a law abiding citizen.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
14,223 Posts
Exactly. So an amendment is passed that repeals the second amendment of the bill of rights. Now there would be no constitutional right to bear arms. Gun confiscation would no longer be anti-constitutional. So the police and military could pursue gun owners with a clear conscience.

Who would have believed that they could have amended the constitution to ban production of alcohol. That took little more than a year to be ratified.

You get enough liberals in congress and the state houses and . . . .
Perhaps taking a closer look at paragraph 2 of post 65 would help answer your question. At some point you have two options: yield to the rules of evil, or stand against it. If we are going to reduce this to either-or choice of two alternatives, that's what it boils down to. Most of us here realize that there are steps to take to avert "the last option" to that choice by being proactive and standing up for right earlier in the process where there are more alternative ways to get the right outcome. The struggle between Good and Evil will not end until Jesus Christ comes again, but what matters is that we all stand together for what is right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,029 Posts
So when exactly do you see?

Exactly. So an amendment is passed that repeals the second amendment of the bill of rights. Now there would be no constitutional right to bear arms. Gun confiscation would no longer be anti-constitutional. So the police and military could pursue gun owners with a clear conscience.

Who would have believed that they could have amended the constitution to ban production of alcohol. That took little more than a year to be ratified.

You get enough liberals in congress and the state houses and . . . .
An amendment to the constitution that will nullify the second amendment becoming law? Are you even aware of the process required to amend the constitution?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,583 Posts
It is known as the amendment process. Anything else is unlawful and therefore invalid.
Exactly. So an amendment is passed that repeals the second amendment of the bill of rights. Now there would be no constitutional right to bear arms. Gun confiscation would no longer be anti-constitutional. So the police and military could pursue gun owners with a clear conscience.

Who would have believed that they could have amended the constitution to ban production of alcohol. That took little more than a year to be ratified.

You get enough liberals in congress and the state houses and . . . .
You are either poorly edumacated or a communist plant. The BOR and the DOI speak to a much higher power than a document signed by men. Regardless, there is another tyranny called tyranny of the majority. Did you miss that in school or were you asleep?

Understand this: NO MAN OR WOMAN ON THIS PLANET CAN TAKE AWAY MY RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. How much plainer can it be said? What is so hard to understand about that?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,927 Posts
You are either poorly edumacated or a communist plant. The BOR and the DOI speak to a much higher power than a document signed by men.
Meh. Neither the Flying Spaghetti Monster nor Yahweh gives you any right. Rights are decided on by society and, ultimately, the ruling class.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,927 Posts
An amendment to the constitution that will nullify the second amendment becoming law? Are you even aware of the process required to amend the constitution?
Yeah, congress proposes an amendment and two thirds of the several states need to ratify that amendment. As I said earlier, it took just over one year from proposal in congress to adoption for a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol production or importation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,029 Posts
Just as I thought.

Yeah, congress proposes an amendment and two thirds of the several states need to ratify that amendment. As I said earlier, it took just over one year from proposal in congress to adoption for a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol production or importation.
You are pretty clueless about the whole process. It takes a two thirds vote of Both houses, the congress and the Senate to get a bill passed which must then be ratified by three quarters of all of the states, not just the "several". Only then can it be passed into law. If of course the president signs off on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,029 Posts
And the "ruling class", that would be who exactly?

Meh. Neither the Flying Spaghetti Monster nor Yahweh gives you any right. Rights are decided on by society and, ultimately, the ruling class.
And I am talking about the United States here. Not the kingdom of the magic mushroom fairy's
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,583 Posts
You are either poorly edumacated or a communist plant. The BOR and the DOI speak to a much higher power than a document signed by men.
Meh. Neither the Flying Spaghetti Monster nor Yahweh gives you any right. Rights are decided on by society and, ultimately, the ruling class.
It is as I suspected then.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,583 Posts
An amendment to the constitution that will nullify the second amendment becoming law? Are you even aware of the process required to amend the constitution?
Yeah, congress proposes an amendment and two thirds of the several states need to ratify that amendment. As I said earlier, it took just over one year from proposal in congress to adoption for a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol production or importation.
Yo Hoss, drinking alcohol was not part of the BOR. Savvy?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,313 Posts
M Yaworski, if you are NOT a government plant, here to spread dissent or "locate future resistors" you are not a very good student of your Country's History, and do not understand what the Bill of Rights, the Declaration and the Constitution all mean.

The Founders were directly subject to a LEGALLY FORMED Tyranny - the Crown of England. And, until forced, they were Loyal, law abiding subjects of King George III, who did plead for their "Rights as Englishmen" - under existing English Law.

They appealed to the Crown to end Slavery in the Colonies in the 1760's - and were reminded that they were mere Subjects of the Crown (NOT Citizens), and Colonials at that, and to sit down and shut up. A few years pass and the taxes start being laid on - the Crown wanted their money back for the French and Indian War, and all governments like to tax more - particularly a minority, far away. This - the tax on Tea, the Stamp Act, the Quartering of Soldiers - well, at a certain point it became too much.

Remember that the Revolutionaries were not "Wild Eyed Pirates" or "The Criminal Class" - they were the Leadership of the Colonies - who were well read (much better read than you or I) on philosophy, Government and Religion. The existing Colleges we know so well today as Liberal Bastions were DIVINITY Schools - Teaching people to be Ministers, and centers of open thought and discussion - about as far from our current worthless colleges as possible.

They understood that their First Duty was to God, their Creator. Their second was to their Families (because God held them accountable for the results of the household they headed up) and then to their Government. But they also could think and reason for themselves - and they combined their Christian Worldview with Reason to create what became the United States - and to write the Laws that created her.

You are quite wrong about where Rights come from - unless they come from our Creator, they are only as good as the next Election, the next Vote in the Legislature. Because Rights are from God, as was already stated - NO ONE has the right to silence and prevent another from speaking, just as no one has the right to disarm and make helpless another human being (you and your opinion - or mine - are no better and of no more value than his) - particularly for the Evil purposes the Left wants to do it for today. You were right to point out the Bonus Marchers - but you missed something - if the Bonus Marchers, skilled and bloodied American WWI Veterans - had been armed - the outcome would have been different - and more well known. THAT Tyranny, bu our own Government, in Washington D.C., would have been punished immediately - and the President would have been impeached for sending the Army after peaceful protesters.

The difference in a Republic and a Democracy is that in a Democracy, you have "rule of the Majority" (mob rule, in effect). In a Democracy, if it is voted on to kill all the left handed Albinos, it is done! In a Republic, everyone is subject to The Law - ("La Publica, The Common Thing") and so murder - even when popular and agreed to by a majority of voters - is NOT allowed. Thus the importance of an enumerated Bill of Rights - these are things that the Government MAY NOT DO - Period, EVER. Thus any law that prevents my Freedom of Speech, or Religious Expression - is null and void, even if passed by a majority in Congress. Likewise, any (and there are already many) law that prevents me from owning and carrying (it says "Keep and BEAR Arms" ) is unconstitutional. Why then, do States and localities violate our Rights and why do these laws exist? Because, until now, the violations were not serious enough, or worth it, to any individual, the time and money and effort was too great to fight it out in the Courts. That is why organizations like the NRA exist - to fight for Rights which should be self evident, but Evil Men ignore the plain meaning of the law, and through clever speeches to the uninformed, get support for unconstitutional actions.

By the original meaning of the Second Amendment, local members of the Militia (and that is pretty much EVERYBODY, now that age and sex restrictions are not allowed) should be allowed (and Required or Encouraged) to have in their possession the same kind of arms "in Common Use at the time" as the Military and Police.

Colonial Militias had PRIVATELY OWNED Field Pieces - their own Artillery - and trained with them. The Brown Bess Musket of the 1770's is the equivalent of the current (yes, full auto) M4 Carbine of today - and by the intent and meaning of the Constitution, we should ALL have one. Indeed, all the original Colonies/States had a REQUIREMENT that every male head of household have, in their possession "a firelock, and twenty charges of powder and ball" to provide for "The Common Defense" or they were fined every month until they got one. Standing Armys lead to Tyranny, so everyone was a member of the Militia, and trained together on the Village Green after Church on Sundays.

The very idea that "Just Pass a Law" gives said law legal standing is False. The law must comport to the Constitutions of both the United States and the State involved - almost all of which ALSO spell out a Right to Arms for "the defense of self and the Common Defense" for all Citizens. Thomas Jefferson perhaps said it best - "You have a Right, and a Duty, to be at all Times, Armed.

For those of you who don't know the Law, or the Constitution - or where it all came from - the Judao-Christian Bible, the English Common Law, and the Great Thinkers of Western Civilization, this may all come as a shock. Because of our failed Educational System, run by little Tyrants in the Making, you were Kept Ignorant. Time to catch up on the education the State denied you - and become a Full Citizen - who is as good as any man, and whose Rights are just as Valid, as the Presidents.

More later, if needed. Much of this is no longer taught - but it is all there, in the Law and History books, if you just look. CC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
I lost all my firearms in a boating accident except for my over/under. Biden said that’s all we need to defend ourselves. :biglaugh:
 
81 - 100 of 275 Posts
Top