pink Posted March 12, 2009 Posted March 12, 2009 http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/10/rgr-scs-deck-personal-finance-investing-ideas-guru-picks.html this is one industry that does not need a bailout.... Quote
Dechristo Posted March 12, 2009 Posted March 12, 2009 from an email I received today Subject:The Gun Ban list is out. Here it is folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did. Please send this to everyone you can. It will come up for a vote, and it might even be a secret vote if Madame Pelosi has her way, and then it will be a done deal. ...thanks to Colonel Rus...Hal. Right to own a gun Remember, The first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens. Subject: Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list. Forward or send to every gun owner you know...Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America. Jan. 5, 2008. Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress) It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady's plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady's current plans and targets of opportunity, It's horrific. They're going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They've made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states' rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal ( the final list will be worse ) Rifles (or copies or duplicates): * M1 Carbine, * Sturm Ruger Mini-14, * AR-15, * Bushmaster XM15, * Armalite M15, * AR-10, * Thompson 1927, * Thompson M1; * AK, * AKM, * AKS, * AK-47, * AK-74, * ARM, * MAK90, * NHM 90, * NHM 91, * SA 85, * SA 93, * VEPR; * Olympic Arms PCR; * AR70, * Calico Liberty , * Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, * Fabrique National FN/FAL, * FN/LAR, or FNC, * Hi-Point20Carbine, * HK-91, * HK-93, * HK-94, * HK-PSG-1, * Thompson 1927 Commando, * Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; * Saiga, * SAR-8, * SAR-4800, * SKS with detachable magazine, * SLG 95, * SLR 95 or 96, * Steyr AU, * Tavor, * Uzi, * Galil and Uzi Sporter, * Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ). Pistols (or copies or duplicates): * Calico M-110, * MAC-10, * MAC-11, or MPA3, * Olympic Arms OA, * TEC-9, * TEC-DC9, * TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, * Uzi. Shotguns (or copies or duplicates): * Armscor 30 BG, * SPAS 12 or LAW 12, * Striker 12, * Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs): A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below), (iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud. Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles). A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has: (i) a second pistol grip, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a barrel shroud or (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds. A semiautomatic shotgun with: (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below), (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and (iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder. Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits. Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any "semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General." Note that Obama's pick for this office (Eric Holder) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, "there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event." In plain English this means that ANY ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public. The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn't have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is that devious or what? And of course, "sporting purpose" is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent. Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America http://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there will be a gun ban. BO 2009 "When the government fears the people, there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson Quote
olyclimber Posted March 12, 2009 Posted March 12, 2009 BUT WHO BEARS THE COST????LOVED ONES DO NOT WANT TO SEE YOU LEAVING THE HOUSE JUST TO DIE IN A MEANINGLESS SPORT OF ELEVATION GAIN AND LOSS. MAKE YOUR LIFE MORE MEANINGFUL WITH THOUGHT AND PRAYERS TO THOSE UNFORTUNATES THAT RISK LIFE AND LIMB TO TRAIN AND PREPARE AND WHY DO WE SUPPORT THESE RISK TAKERS WHO MAKE AVERAGE PEOPEL WHO NEVER LEAVE THE HOUSE BEAR THE COST OF WHO THE MOUNTAIN IS STOIC AND HER PLEASURE ALMIGHTY Quote
billcoe Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 " The U.S. Constitution recognizes the fundamental right of the people to keep and bear arms. That right is even more important to Europeans, whose countries suffered from tyranny and genocide in ways unknown to Americans. A hypothetical postulation by Alexander Solzhenitsyn illustrates the best reasons for civilian arms ownership in this footnote to The GULAG Archipelago:(Russian Text not transferred here - translation) And how we burned in the camps later, wondering: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive, and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during the periods of sweeps, as for example in Leningrad, when they imprisoned a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their burrows, swooning with terror at every slam of the front door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up ambush in the hallway, of several people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were up to no good going out at night—and you would do no wrong cracking the skull of a cutthroat. Or what about the Black Maria sitting out in the street with one lonely chauffeur—what if it had been driven off or its tires spiked? The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of manpower and transport and, despite all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If only… if only… We didn’t love freedom enough. And above all—we had no awareness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit, submitting with pleasure! […] We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterwards. In our country, Judge Alex Kozinski, a Jewish refugee from Eastern Europe, epitomized this argument in his dissent in Silveira v. Lockyer: The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once." From http://larvatus.livejournal.com/ Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) There is another form of tyranny at work here that seems to have been missed in this thread; tyranny over legal behavior and attitude. Assault weapons bans don't really address gun crime; they seek to criminalize attitude and behavior; people who like assault rifles, for whatever reason. Perhaps assault weapons ignite commando fantasies in some, or perhaps the owners just think they're cool. None of these attitudes and behaviors are the government's business. It seems that a bankrupt nation paying for 2.2 million people to sit in prison; the highest incarceration rate in the world, migth consider that idea of making fewer things illegal, rather than more. Having said that, there are posters (not you, Bill) here who celebrate the loss of habeus corpus and the use of torture, yet rail against any form of gun control because it leaves citizens helpless in the face of tyranny. To those posers: you're willing to fight an imaginary tyranny that will probably never happen, but support tyranny that's happening right now. Guess what? That's exactly what happened in Nazi Germany, the gun proponents favorite pet historical example. In short, you're not part of the solution, you're the problem. Edited March 13, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote
Dechristo Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 from another email making the rounds 'A little Gun History Lesson' ........ In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.. ------------------------------ In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. --------------------------- Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ---------------------------- Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------ Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ----------------------------- Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. ------------------------------ It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)! In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns! It will never happen here? I bet the Aussies said that too! While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it. You won't see this data on the U.S. evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late! The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind him of this history lesson.. With Guns...........We Are 'Citizens'. Without Them........We Are 'Subjects'. During W.W.II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED! Note: Admiral Yamamoto who crafted the attack on Pearl Harbor had attended Harvard U 1919-1921 & was Naval Attaché to the U. S. 1925-28. Most of our Navy was destroyed at Pearl Harbor & our Army had been deprived of funding & was ill prepared to defend the country. It was reported that when asked why Japan did not follow up the Pearl Harbor attack with an invasion of the U. S. Mainland, his reply was that he had lived in the U. S. & knew that almost all households had guns. Quote
KaskadskyjKozak Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 Happiness is a warm gun. bang bang shoot shoot Quote
kevbone Posted March 13, 2009 Posted March 13, 2009 KKK have you picked the latest version of "natural harvest"? Quote
Fairweather Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 The Ruger Mini-14 is the greatest rifle ever made, and any attempt ban it would be downright un american. Hell, I'll bet there are ten million copies of that rifle in this country alone. Good luck with that, Pelosi. This is probably one of the few issues--maybe the only issue-- that the Dems can effectively shoot themselves to death with before 2012. A lot of good, loyal, union Democrats wouldn't take too kindly to this kind of nonsense. Quote
StevenSeagal Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Gun control doesn't kill people. People kill people. Quote
Fairweather Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 People kill people. Always have, always will. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 (edited) This 'hysterical example' post is pure drivel. Credibility: Zero. It calls into the question the credibility of the first post, of course. Personally, I'd bet that the gun list, populated with some of the most popular weapons, was pulled out of the originator's ass. Without citing the text of the proposed legislation, and a realistic assessment of just how serious the proposal is in congress, I'd say both posts are probably steaming piles in the veracity department. But hey, if you believe this kind of crap, I've got 50 penis enlargement techniques sitting in my indbox I can forward to ya...this thread being one of them. Edited March 14, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote
DirtyHarry Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 People kill people. Always have, always will. Nope. Bullets kill people. On that note, I like Chris Rock's proposed answer to gun control. He says we shouldn't prohibit any particular type of firearm, we should just make bullets cost $1000 each. That way noone can afford to shoot anyone unless they really need too. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Then only the rich could afford to kill people. Quote
DirtyHarry Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 And Bill Gates will straight pop a fuckin cap in your ass like that. Quote
pink Posted March 14, 2009 Author Posted March 14, 2009 People kill people. Always have, always will. Nope. Bullets kill people. On that note, I like Chris Rock's proposed answer to gun control. He says we shouldn't prohibit any particular type of firearm, we should just make bullets cost $1000 each. That way noone can afford to shoot anyone unless they really need too. that just means some brotha just has to sell a few extra crack balls to shoot someone....no biggie. more stupid liberal bullshit...... Quote
DirtyHarry Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Don't get too worked up dude. Of course is stupid, it's a joke. Chris Rock is a comedian not a Senator. And crack comes in rocks not balls. Quote
pink Posted March 14, 2009 Author Posted March 14, 2009 yeah, i know. i used to smoke plenty of it in high school. used to buy it at the car wash down in e. st. louis. if your antenna was missing off your car in that area during '86/'87 i might be the one who ripped it off. Quote
pink Posted March 14, 2009 Author Posted March 14, 2009 People kill people. Always have, always will. Nope. Bullets kill people. On that note, I like Chris Rock's proposed answer to gun control. He says we shouldn't prohibit any particular type of firearm, we should just make bullets cost $1000 each. That way noone can afford to shoot anyone unless they really need too. http://www.chicagoreporter.com/index.php/c/Spin_Offs/d/More_Gun_Violence_Afflicts_Black_Communities OBAMA is proly sick of seeing african americans kill each other.... Quote
pink Posted March 14, 2009 Author Posted March 14, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/the_hidden_victims.stm and not only in this country..... Quote
akhalteke Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Good luck enforcing this. Not gonna happen. Quote
Dechristo Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 [today's mass-forward email] To my gun owning friends, All the things you are about to read below are not B.S. They are 100% true. Immediately following and in the attachment is a link to the actual HR bill. For those who do not have Internet access I have copied the bill into a Word document. Lost in the Word document are hyper links, within the bill, that provide definitions and explanations. So, if you have access, go to the actual Bill at the link immediately following my comments. This is the biggest grab at our gun owning rights in the history of our nation and it's all being done under the clock of darkness. None of the News Networks are covering it. If we fail to rise up and let Washington know about our unapproval of the Bill, it will become law. Read it for yourself. In a nutshell: own a firearm, and not have a license to do so; you're paying a fine and going to prison for 2 years own a firearm with a kid in the house, and not have the gun or ammo in a place where the kid can't get access to it; you're paying a fine and going to prison for 10 years (There is no definition of - safe place.) buy or sell a firearm, without a license: you're paying a fine and going to prison for 5 years. Here's how they define a firearm, so don't even think "your gun doesn't meet the definition," because it's so broad - it does: (3) The term "firearm" means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; © any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm. Our US Constitution is very clear on the issue: Amendment II 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. If this isn't "infringement" what is? And the comments about them coming to your house and inspecting are right on. See sections 402 and 403. You might say; "Well I'm not manufacturing." Read all of it. You are "storing." You are "holding." The right wing has being touting for sometime; "A well regulated militia," means - an Army, and therefore the citizens don't have the right to keep and bear." You can bet they stretch the rubber band on this as well. The time is now - to write, call or go see your elected Congressmen and Senators. Tomorrow may be too late. And, the most important thing you can do is spread the word and send this to every gun owner you know. At the top of the attachment, just before the House Bill, I've included a section of the US code - which clearly spells out our government's plan to disarm the people. The entire wording is in the hyper link; at the bottom of the link immediately following. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-45 Below is the info that was sent to me, which I have verified . What else can we possibly expect from those trusted elected officials in Washington ? http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2009/02/hr-45-.html READ THIS Forward Subject: Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act Another persons thoughts: Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House. This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009. We just learned yesterday about this on the Peter Boyles radio program. Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because it is flying under the radar. To find out about this - go to any government Website and type in HR 45 or Google HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information. Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless: .It is registered .You are fingerprinted .You supply a current Driver's License .You supply your Social Security # .You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing .Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25 - Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail. .There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18. They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison. If you think this is a joke - go to the Website and take your pick of many options to read this.. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family - pass this along. Peter Boyles is on this and having guests. Listen to him on KHOW 630 a.m. in the morning. He suggests the best way to fight this is to tell all your friends about it and "spring into action". Also he suggests we all join a pro-gun group like the Colorado Rifle Association, hunting associations, gun clubs and especially the NRA. This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it. This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not. If you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. After working with convicts for 26 years I know this bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.45 : http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45 Quote
akhalteke Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 NRA just got at least one more lifetime member today. Quote
DirtyHarry Posted March 14, 2009 Posted March 14, 2009 Can anyone tell me why there's no news of this in the mainstream media, even Fox News? A google search of this bill pulls up mostly right ring propaganda web sites. Maybe because there's no chance of this bill being passed? For the record, I'm not a gun control advocate. I hunt and own a couple firearms. I'm no gun nut either though. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.