Interesting.... Did a search and didnt see this posted yet
1 posted on
06/16/2003 7:57:34 AM PDT by
ezo4
To: ezoeni; *bang_list; Joe Brower
indexing
2 posted on
06/16/2003 8:01:09 AM PDT by
harpseal
(Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown)
To: AAABEST; wku man; SLB; Travis McGee; Squantos; harpseal; Shooter 2.5; The Old Hoosier; xrp; ...
3 posted on
06/16/2003 8:06:31 AM PDT by
Joe Brower
(What is past is prologue.)
To: Vic3O3; cavtrooper21
Interesting read....
TTFTH yet?
Semper Fi
5 posted on
06/16/2003 8:08:23 AM PDT by
dd5339
(Lookout Texas, here we come!)
To: ezoeni
Thanks.
6 posted on
06/16/2003 8:08:53 AM PDT by
TomSmedley
((technical writer grateful for work!))
To: ezoeni
"THINGS ARE BETTER FOR US NOW..."
Right.
Truly, this is the best of all possible worlds.
(/irony)
To: ezoeni
Thanks for this great post.
Dr John Lott has and will continue to shred the anti gun ownership lies/non stats about guns and responsible gun owners.
Everytime the Terrorist Alert goes higher, more new people line up to buy a gun for the first time. Eventually most of these new gun owners will be pro 2 nd amendment voters.
These new gun owners are like the massive amounts of new SUV owners. There is a virtual explosion of SUV ownership in California. I see each new SUV owner as a future ally against the Watermelon Green Jihadists who try to use SUVs and their main thrust against auto ownership.
We know of several females who have bought SUV's to safely carry their children around, and who have bought a gun to protect their families and themselves. They will not tolerate a rat politician, who tries to take away their new guns and SUVs. They were the moderates before becoming gun owners and SUV owners.
Welcome to the new gun owners and the new SUV owners. You are on the right trail to become conservatives.
8 posted on
06/16/2003 8:25:34 AM PDT by
Grampa Dave
(Support The Brave Iranians as they bring about a needed regime change!)
To: ezoeni
I'm sorry, but I have doubts about this without a verifiable source. Except for the particular technical knowledge, this does not sound like John Ross. (The error confusing John Ross and John Lott is suspicious.)
What is written is true, but it sounds like ATF/Bushbot spin, and not like John Ross.
To crow about how 100,000 civilian machine guns were created before the 1986 act is silly, when you consider that this still leaves less than one per thousand citizens (and many being obsolete.) And every year that goes by leaves civilians with increasingly obsolete arms.
There is no indication that as our arms have gotten better over the years, the arms of the military and militarized police have gotten vastly better at a far greater rate, creating a rapidly-widening "arms gap."
Conspicuously absent is any mention of the assault weapons ban, and magazine capacity ban.
This is pure spin, and I think it stinks. It might be Ross, but he seems to be shilling. I do know that the ATF has been after him, looking for a chance to ruin him. (They pestered his ex-wife following an amicable divorce, trolling for dirt they could use against him!)
To: ezoeni
Interesting pattern there. Regulations passed into law... result: more firearms. More regulations passed into law... result: even more firearms. Nearly exponential growth.
More anti-gun laws proposed? Oh, puhleeze don' throw us in the briar patch.
To: ezoeni
Good post, but I don't think this is Ross (or he sold out).
15 posted on
06/16/2003 8:44:13 AM PDT by
jjm2111
(I'm a psychopatriot!)
To: ezoeni
Declassifying noise reducers, repeal of the 1934 NFA and 1986 MG ban would be really good starts.
16 posted on
06/16/2003 8:44:39 AM PDT by
Blood of Tyrants
(Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn’t be, in its eyes, a slave.)
To: ezoeni
BTTT
20 posted on
06/16/2003 9:29:55 AM PDT by
hattend
To: ezoeni
This article, though making a good point that there are more choices now than then, but it neglects an important point: the gap between what law enforcement officers and other Lords can have and what we and other peasants can have, has been growing nonstop since 1934. They now have 50 round, select fire, armor piercing .223-class handguns (sorry, "sawed-off rifles") whose individual rounds are felonies for us peasants to possess. The march of technology brings us into the future, but we are being left behind compared to where our "protectors" are going.
To: ezoeni
One thing not mentioned is the Death Penalty meted out to Smith and Wesson over their traitorous sellout to the Clinton administration. THAT was a good thing.
22 posted on
06/16/2003 9:39:11 AM PDT by
ikka
To: ezoeni
The people in Canada, England, and Australia have socialized medicine. We practically boiled in oil the politicians who tried to inflict socialized medicine on America.Until the GOP embraced it.
23 posted on
06/16/2003 10:32:57 AM PDT by
Sir Gawain
(Mongo only pawn in game of life)
To: ezoeni
GENERAL 1982 CLIMATE: The U.S. military with its nearly limitless supply of state-of-the-art aircraft, bombs, and other weaponry, has just suffered a humiliating defeat on the other side of the world; at the hands of a scraggly bunch of individual soldiers armed primarily with captured weapons and fighting on their home turf. 1982 is six years after our Bicentennial, and Vietnam is a replay of what went 200 years before, when Americans were the individually armed citizens facing a world-class army. John Ross should (and may) know better. The Viet Cong and Viet Minh may have been armed with capture weapons early on, but by the 1960s they had new production AK-47s, Katuska (sic) rockets, motors, and so forth. The NVA had everything mother Russia and China could ship them. Up to and including Mig-21 fighters, tanks, and of course the heaviest air defense system outside of Moscow, with radars, heavy AAA and SAMs. Even with all that, they didn't win on the battle field but rather on the campuses of the United States and in the halls of Congress. The end, for South Vietnam, came with the second of two conventional all arms invasions, with armored divisions that would have made Patton or Rommel envious. The first was stopped with the help of US airpower by the ARVN, when the second came, US airpower was either gone or forbidden from interviening, while the ARVN was starved for supplies.
24 posted on
06/16/2003 10:44:26 AM PDT by
El Gato
To: ezoeni
The Federal Collectors license lets holders buy any Title 1 guns at least 50 years old through the mail. The Brady law is in effect, but likely to be thrown out as unconstitutional. The federal gun-free schools law has been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The 1986 MG ban is legally identical and may be next. Lloyd Bentsen has decreed that three shotguns (USAS-12, Striker, and Streetsweeper) are destructive devices and must be registered as such; the public responds with less than 1% compliance despite draconian penalties. Hmm, this sounds as if it were written in about 1993, post Brady, but before the assault weapons ban, since the latter is probably the single largest violation of arms rights since the NFA, yet it's not even mentioned in the speech. I would observe that Braday has not been declared unconstitutionial and such is not even on the horizon, AFAIK.
27 posted on
06/16/2003 10:54:52 AM PDT by
El Gato
To: ezoeni; technochick99; joanie-f
Things are looking up. The more they tighten their grip, the more we slip through their fingers.
To: ezoeni
Tagged.
It's Not Just A Gun...
It's My "HOMELAND DEFENSE RIFLE"!!
67 posted on
05/24/2011 2:29:59 PM PDT by
RandallFlagg
(Let this chant follow BHO everywhere he goes: "You lie. You lie. You lie.")
68 posted on
07/22/2013 2:55:34 AM PDT by
RandallFlagg
(IRS = Internal Revenge Service)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson