Posted on 07/04/2010 9:19:00 PM PDT by citizenredstater9271
The claim is, not allowing Americans to be armed at all times enables our enemies. Especially true when concerning the War against Terrorism. Listen to this video clip of the example of Americans vs. Somali pirates to see why gun laws DONT WORK.
All gun control laws that restrict US citizens is a national security risk. Such laws give an edge to our enemies and weaken our national defensive state.
We are currently about 50 years behind in small arms technology where it relates to small arms appropriate for the use of the military. Why? No incentive for US manufacturers to develop the technology further than it is simply for two laws.
1. The relaxation of the War Powers Act by, yep you guessed it Jimmy Carter.
2. The Hughes Amendment. Why would I as a manufacturer spend any time or money developing a full auto firearm when the only entity I can sell it to would be the US Government? They won’t and simply cannot cover my research and development costs for such weapons.
To prove my point... The United States is the technological leader by far when it comes to sound suppressors and precision rifles. Why? We have a market to develop for that will cover the costs of R&D. The citizens of our nation.
That market empowers advancements in technology. This is true in every field of technology from phones, to weapons, to cars, to computers.
The men and women who defend our freedoms may not have the best weapons for the job. Thanks to mindless anti-gun fanatiscm, rogue out of control Government agencies like the BATFE and short sighted and frankly, just blind politicians have endangered our troops, our law enforcement and the citizens at large.
Our nation needs to kick the “us vs. them” mentallity to the curb and get rid of these laws. Let us develop the guns that our nation needs to support our troops, law enforcement, citzenry, and the defense of this great nation.
Shippers in pirate waters should be able to completely destroy any small craft that comes near them and leave no survivors.
US flagged merchant vessels - to the extent that there are any US flagged merchant vessels left - don't arm themselves, not because of US law, but because of the laws and restrictions of the countries that that host their container ports. IOW, it has NOTHING to do with US law, and EVERYTHING to do with the laws of the countries the ships visit, dropping off, and picking up cargo.
It's that simple. And, next time you post a Ron Paul infomercial, how about a little heads up?
What’s wrong with Ron Paul?
If you have to ask the question, then you're part of the problem.
One thing I’ve noticed on FP is the anti-Paul Freepers can never give real reasons why they hate him and just attack the libertarian party when you ask.
Because this is a conservative website, not a libertarian website. Therein lies your answer.
In the mind of most conservatives, Paul is wrong in his views about projection of force, the Middle East, many social issues, and most of his views on foreign policy, to especially include his hostility to Israel.
I'm hard pressed to believe any of this comes as news to you.
Ron Paul always votes no on appropriations bills because they are chocked full of pork. That doesn't stop him from getting plenty of earmarks put in those same bills, which he knows will get passed without his vote.
I don’t agree with Dr. Paul’s views on the military or Israel, but is that a valid reason to toss out EVERYTHING he says? He makes sense on taxes and the FED and how we’re moving closer and closer to socialism.
What’s “wrong” with Dr. Paul is that his consistency with respect to the Constitution shames these “conservatives” to the point they have to attack him or admit their own big government proclivities... you know, admit they’re those “wide-stance,” light-in-the-loafers pervs they deny being. With respect to Dr. Paul’s positions, I may disagree with some of them, but I always have to admire the fact that he first goes to the Constitution to see if a bill or a desired action is permissible, then, if yes, asks himself if it is NEEDFUL. THEN he asks if we can AFFORD it, financially or in terms of young Americans killed or maimed by a potential enemy, et cetera. To the bloodthirsty armchair generals, no one should ever ask that last question.
My points exactly. Why all the hate against Dr. Paul? He has always voted on the Constitution. Everyone talks about 0bama ripping the Constitution to shreds so why bash on a politician who wants to bring the principles in the Constitution BACK to America?
Lordy have mercy!!!
I talked to my Senator about 922(o), and he said that they are reserving putting a repeal of that for a poison pill for some ominous bill. Colburn got us CCW in National Parks on a budget bill....we may get our MGs back via Cap and Tax.
Last year, I was asked to examine a rifle that was “captured” in a hostile zone. Being a firearms manufacturer, I was asked to fire it, examine it, figure out some of the systems in it.
To be blunt, the rifle scared the crap out of me. The gun was significantly more advanced than anything we are fielding now. The designers of the rifle used ideas that puts us at a HUGE disadvantage should we meet any decent sized armed group that has this rifle or any weapon with some of the concepts used on it.
Please talk to your Senator and tell him that it’s a serious matter of National Security. We are way behind the curve and it’s getting worse every day. Tell him that the repeal needs to be added to EVERY bill until it passes.
Right now, we’re going to have about a decade of work to get caught up.
FR has a strong semi-libertarian streak. They’ll flirt with it, but never go all the way. You’ll find a lot of support for drug legalization but not for constitutional gun rights (no restrictions for anyone who isn’t actively incarcerated). Basically, there are a lot of Fudds here.
Another poster hit the nail on the head. Ron Paul embarasses some members here by pointing out that when the rubber meets the road they side with those who want to restrict freedom. Not everyone, but a very vocal minority here on FR.
Then again, I don’t like his views on Israel and I don’t give a wet fart about narcotics, but I love his views on freedom and military isolationism. I long for a time when all foreign from the US is cut off and directed inwards in the form of tax cuts.
... all foreign aid...
Sorry, missed a word
If I might ask, what were the features/ideas it incorporated?
I would like to know too.
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.