Posted on 10/05/2007 3:39:13 PM PDT by processing please hold
This report hopes to assist in protecting the right of the people to keep and bare arms, individually and collectively, for the safety of the individual, and for the safety of the nation. There are certain fundamental laws and principles over which public officials have no authority to alter or to deny--not even if they profess to have acquired the 'consent of the governed'. In this case, prohibiting possession and use of arms is not possible, because those rights which have been endowed upon man by the Creator are unalienable, and nor revocable by mankind. The purpose of this report is to show how 'consent of the governed' has become abused, and how government officials in the lead state with the help of change agents had set out to destroy the essential and unalienable right of the people to keep and bare arms, by setting into motion unauthorized and unlawful procedures and then pretend that they operated under the 'consent of the governed'.
(Excerpt) Read more at libertygunrights.com ...
All throughout American history, the rifleman has been defined as a marksman capable of hitting a man-sized target from 500 yards away — no ifs, ands or buts about it. This 500-yard range is traditionally known as "the rifleman's quarter-mile;" a rifleman can hit just about any target he can see. This skill was particulary evident in the birth of our country, and was the difference in winning the Revolutionary War.
I know that but I'm starting to wonder if the citizens of California knows it.
Now, whether or not the people of your state protect that right is up to them. Most states write the protection into their state constitution. Most states protect concealed carry. Some states don't. It's all up to the citizens of each state.
Clear as a bell, thank you.
If the RKBA is not protected in the California State Constitution, it's obvious the citizens didn't consider it to be a high priority.
More's the pity.
Were you looking for language to protect the right to keep and bear arms or to keep and bear handguns? You keep moving the target.
"Do you agree or not with DC's stance?"
Your right to self defense doesn't include ANY gun. If a state wishes to protect your right to keep and bear some category of weapon for personal self defense, either concealed, carried on your hip, in your car, or left at home, that's a completely separate issue.
>processing please hold said: “Is our civilian police allowed to work together, train, or hold joint exercises with our military?”<
The one thing that gives me hope when I think about this kind of thing is that city police forces generally number out to one officer per 1000 of the general population.
Should our police forces ever get too *rowdy*, they don’t have very good odds, do they? When the officer stops for lunch, if four armed men walked up and politely asked for his radio and cell phone, I’m confident that he would hand them over and continue eating.
Now ask, “What does it take to disable a police car?” One pair of wire cutters and all the radios are dead.
I don’t think that we need to be concerned about city police force revolutions against the people. M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tanks are not normal police equipment.
In a situtation like this, I always remember the saying on my beer squeegy, 'never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.' You might find post #82 interesting.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1907203/posts?q=82;page=51
M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tanks are not normal police equipment.
Don't they have armor plated battering ram vehicles?
outership, robert, well, we'll just have to disagree on this one i guess. i just don't think a background check is too much to ask. at least there is some record of who buys a gun if it is eventually used in a crime.
the whole speech about every law becoming a felony and everyone being mentally ill is too much right now. i have a hangover.
Eat something, take a couple of aspirins then lay down and take a nap. When you wake up your hangover will be gone. :)
take a nap? i didn’t wake up until 2:30! i have to do some reading before i go to work tonight. not fun. i will eat and take aspirin though.
Next time remember if you’re nine sheets to the wind, before you go to sleep, eat a little something and take the aspirins, you’ll wake up without a hangover. That’s what I used to do in my wilder days and it never failed. *hiccup*
I would call that a "reasonable restriction" on a natural right to keep and bear arms.
My point was that an inalienable right (such as the right to life or the right to liberty) has no restrictions. Pass the background check or you die? Register your name and address or we'll lock you up?
Only by individual due process (ie., a trial) may we take someones life or liberty. Not true of a weapon.
Calling the RKBA an inalienable right, therefore, is a misnomer.
“This defensive posture is referred as Deutschtümelei, or sticking up for everything German. It’s an us-against-them attitude, us-against-the-Russians, the Turks, the Albanians. Young Germans no longer know how to differentiate between foreign thugs and peaceful foreign-born German citizens. And they are convinced that their generation should no longer be held responsible for Hitler’s crimes.”
http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/2005/052305wing.html
This is a site just more or less discussing the issue..
What is clear is the German Youth have had enough of being kicked around.
Keep in mind the only people who had the logistical and war fighting capacity to stop the German Onslaught of WWII was a country comprised or roughly 50% German ancestry.. The USA
That does not bode well for the Muslims who have been trying to pick a fight in Germany.
I am pleased to say.
W
I think it's this one: something along the lines of "If we can get 51 votes, then it's Mr. and Mrs. American, turn them in!"
Yep, that sounds like it. I’m looking for that article and can not find it!
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it."
-Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, discussing the 1994 "crime bill"
Bitch!
Check out these quotes: http://home.pacbell.net/dragon13/bradyquotes.html
Title 10 sheds a new light on gun control for me.
How many people would have decided that they should expend ALL their ammunition before turning in the firearms? I think she’s damn lucky that she didn’t have 51 votes!
You support an inalienable right ... with restrictions?
Well, you are not alone here. -- Fiat prohibitions/restrictions on 'dangerous' items and behaviors are supported by many FReepers, -- under the theory that 'majority will' can be used to trump our rights to life, liberty, or property, -- due process be hanged.
tpaine, you are a known disruptor. i have already told you i won't respond to you since all you do is...disrupt
You can't respond, -- because you can't dispute that our Constitution forbids the prohibitions and restrictions you support.
Your support for a short waiting period for handguns and a quick background check is disruptive, not my opposition to those infringements.
Unbelievable! Makes me want to spit. Thanks for the link. I fixin’ to use one of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.