WEAPON RAP FOR SELF-DEFENSE PAIR

NY Post ^ | April 16, 2006 | PHILIP MESSING

[Pharmboy]

Two brothers who were shot defending their Brooklyn shop from a pair of stick-up men were busted for returning fire with an illegal handgun, police sources said. The gunfight erupted at 7:40 p.m. Friday when the two bandits, entered Vinnie's Style, a clothing boutique on Flatbush Avenue.

One of the pair allegedly fired a .45-caliber pistol when the brothers, Paul and Jacob Parris, refused to get down.

Both were charged with weapons possession when cops learned the Parris' used an unlicensed 9mm pistol in the shootout, sources said.

[sgtbono2002]

You wont be standing there feeling like the Lone ranger.

A lot of us wil be.

[robowombat]

I have a friend from Texas. A lawyer and her comment is, and I agree, 'As long as I am not a felon if I want to park a 155 on my front lawn it's my business and my right and no **** body else's." Government wishes to restrict civilains from obtaining weapons not out of any concern for socalled public safety but to insure for itself the monopoly on violence. The real goal is not public safety or suppressing crime but to make sure the state will never have citizens be able to trump its powers of coercion by armed civil disobedience. Every bureaucrat and politician I have ever known or confronted on the issue irrespective of weather they are liberal demoncrats, right wing Republicans or even Libertarians line up on this issue firmly in the corner of the governments inherent 'right' 'to protect itself' from citizens who are defending their lives and liberties against governmental coercion. In fact among the most obnoxious defenders of the states inherent right to tyranny are 'law and order conservatives'. Government by its very nature seeks the continual expansion of its powers. Tyranny is the logical end of government unless restrained. The protection of speech is a hollow and meaningless protection unless backed up by the ironclad guarantee of citizen possession of the instruments which can forcibly defy the state. Guns are the teeth of liberty and the more the better and the bigger and more potent in the hands of the citizenry the better our liberties are guarded.

[Almondjoy]

Ok.. apparently you think you know it all.. but that's cool.. good for you.

What I know of constitutional law and what the courts decide is that I don't always agree with their decision. However, what I do know is that my opinion doesn't make it constitutional or unconstitutional. Since there is absoultely no way to prove or disprove what the founders wanted(we can only rely on the text of what they wrote) often times that has to be interrupted.

And don't act like since I don't have the same view as you on the 2nd amendment that I don't believe in gun ownership or am not a Conservative.

Stuck up people like you is exactly why the government needs to control people like you.

[Almondjoy]

And of course you are entitled to your opinion.

But do you really feel your freedom is in jepordy by an oppressive government? Do you see the next Stalin on the rise?

What I see in an armed citizery. The government can't move against the people.. and if they did they better have 100% of the miltary on their side to kill us all.. which I doubt would ever happen.

This isn't the old west.. or a group of framers having to worry about the Army raiding them. Today with the information superhighway, technology is far more powerful then anything the goverment can send after us.

[IGOTMINE]

It will be a cold day before I set foot in NYC.

[robowombat]

A government that perpetrates atrocities such as Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the Elian Gonzales affair and that can become run by the likes of Bill Clinton is a far greater menace to life and liberty than what individual citizens (not bands of illegals) may possess.

[Almondjoy]

I'm not sure why people defend WACO.. many many right wingers defend WACO but think child molestors should be killed instantly.

WACO ended in tragedy on a mistake yes.. but they had all the reason in the world to be there.

Ruby Ridge... yeah that didn't go so well for the government.

Elian Gonzales.. another hypocritical issue for many. They are against illegal immigration but when the father wanted his son back nobody thought he should go.. that family had no right to him. If they hadn't of acted like idiots it wouldn't of gone now that way.

So you got 1 out of 3.

[robowombat]

I am sure I don't why anyone not on the federal tit every defends BATF at any time or place. They are exhibit 1 in the indictment of any government as having the potential to be lethal towards its citizens. BATF crated Waco out of a typical fascist mentality high viz public relations op that went sour. The FBI compounded the event by deciding they were going to leave the para out of para-military operations. The man in charge of the operation, Larry Potts, ought forever be execrated in the same category with Benedict Arnold and Simon Girty. Potts proves that socalled normal Americans after spending a career in the amoral power worshiping atmosphere of an federal police agency can display the same morally and ethically calloused behavior that is the normal hallmark of secret police apparatchiks. Indeed for watching Potts I am sure he would have fit in quite nicely serving in either the Soviet or Nazi police agencies.

In passing no one should ever be returned to a communist state period. Only the American Nero could come up with that one and once more find willing and slavishly complaisant drones within a federal police agency to engage in the armed kidnapping of a refuge from a communist state to make a present of him to the Caribbean Nero.

Power corrupts and government at its root is about power. It corrupts some much more than others and those it corrupts the most are those who make their way up the tree in the police and so-called justice agencies. They and their ilk will turn their guns on normal Americans at the first indication that their political masters desire it.

[tpaine]

Where are these constitutional 'laws'? -- The ones that support you by saying: "-- the RIGHT to bear arms is not infringed by keeping lunatics like you away from certain weapons --"?
Can you give us a link?

The laws have already been established and supported by the Supreme Court. That's where I find my authority to claim that it's already been established in law.

Can you admit that the USSC supports a LOT of unconstitutional laws? Are you claiming that every law they support, -- you support?

Are you aware that one of the goals of this site is to restore support for the 2nd Amendment, as written, -- not as it is erroneously "supported" by the court ?

What I know of constitutional law and what the courts decide is that I don't always agree with their decision. However, what I do know is that my opinion doesn't make it constitutional or unconstitutional.

Since there is absoultely no way to prove or disprove what the founders wanted (we can only rely on the text of what they wrote) often times that has to be interrupted.

The plain words of the 2nd do not need to be 'interpreted', Joy.

And don't act like since I don't have the same view as you on the 2nd amendment that I don't believe in gun ownership or am not a Conservative.

Sorry kid, but you leave no choice. Gun prohibitionists are not conservatives.

Stuck up people like you is exactly why the government needs to control people like you.

There you go, admitting you want government to control those you imagine are "stuck up". This is conservatism?

[rahbert]

Do you attend the Hootenanny on second Saturdays at the
Community Center in M-S?

Billy Bob turned us on to it.

[chesty_puller]

No, I work Saturdays but Billy is a hoot all by himself. Just don't get him talking!

[CDHart]

"Better to shoot back with an unregistered weapon than to not have one and be killed by the outlaws with guns. "

As the old saying goes, "I'd rather be judged by 12 than buried by 6."

Carolyn

[Melas]

Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.

Well better to be judged by 12 providing you win your case. In the event that you lose, it becomes: Better to be carried by 6 than to be repeatedly anally raped by dozens in prison.

[Leatherneck_MT]

Where in the constitution does it require registration?

[JoeSixPack1]

Better to be carried by 6 than to be repeatedly anally raped by dozens in prison.

A statement of that magnitude makes even the toughest guys stop and think! :-)

But look on the bright side, no one will ever again hear you fart.