Posted on 09/30/2012 11:35:07 AM PDT by Brandonmark
Hhhmm... That appears to firmly establish that we are both speaking English.
Happy day.
A key question: Is this event precisely what the kenyan pig is seeking?
I am more inclined to think we will see state secession... especially as the Dems try to extort money from the more frugal states to bail out the profligate states [which are all Dem-run.]
I would look for Texas to lead the way. The 'old' Southern states might join in, perhaps Alaska. Then the Dem-controlled states can hurry their evolution into a Utopian Marxism, and good riddance!
Some say that such an action as secession would bring on a civil war. First off, the Dem leadership are cowards and hate the military so I doubt they would try to start a war, and I wonder how much of the military would go along with them and how many with the secessionists.
Secondly, the war in 1860 was not a civil war. A civil war is over who will control the government. Since the South wanted nothing to do with the Union government, it was a war between the states, not a civil war.
Also take note that after the War Between the States how much states' rights have been eroded.
I suspect the bulk of those numbers represent new-manufacture firearms moving “into the inventory”.
Private sales all represent existing firearms; they do not increase the overall inventory.
No, this is based off of background check data for gun purchases, and reasonable assumptions on how many of those checks resulted in an actual purchase. Private party sales are an unknown addition to these figures.
And despite not all purchased guns being of an "assault" nature, the average deer/hunting rifle has an effective range out to 300~500+ yards depending on the user. Ammo that drops a deer will easily penetrate body armor - and there are millions of active deer hunters across the US based on annual deer permit issuances. Hence, the oft referred to term here of "a million man deer rifle army."
Why would Alaska swap one far-away government for another? Or why would another part of the country go on subsidizing them?
If the country splits up, they'll go their own way -- assuming they can defend themselves against foreign powers.
Of course, a split would encourage those powers, so maybe it's not in Alaska's interest or America's to divide.
If the US does split up, the changes that will bring will make all our petty political squabbles look pretty small indeed.
Ghandi never held government authority, he held moral authority. That is what you want in a leader. It is the followers that do the heavy lifting while the leader stands on a hill and says look here, strive for what I represent!
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.