PDA

View Full Version : Not sure if you gun owners have seen this



Jeff
04-13-2010, 09:32 AM
This was sent to me yesterday and I voted, not sure if it will make a difference but I figured it can't hurt, I am posting this in case some of you gun owners have not seen it

Obama's new Attorney General, Eric Holder, has already said this is one of his major issues. He does not believe the 2ndAmendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. This takes literally 2 clicks to complete. Please vote on this gun issue question with USA Today. It will only take a few seconds of your time. Then pass the link on to all the pro gun folks you know. Hopefully these results will be published later this month. This upcoming year will become critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court's accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms.
Here's what you need to do:
First - vote on this one.
Second - launch it to other folks and have THEM vote - then we will see if the results get published.
The Question is:

"Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?"

Click on the link below and PLEASE vote
USATODAY.com - Quick Question (if link doesn't work, copy & paste following) http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm

Gaffer
04-13-2010, 09:47 AM
when they are ready they will ignore the 2nd Amendment and start to crack down on gun ownership. All the voting in the world will mean nothing. They will eventually come for the guns.

Jeff
04-13-2010, 09:55 AM
when they are ready they will ignore the 2nd Amendment and start to crack down on gun ownership. All the voting in the world will mean nothing. They will eventually come for the guns.

This is true, it was shown to us with the Health care, but I will try and do it the right way, but right way or my way they wont get my guns

Mr. P
04-13-2010, 10:17 AM
Over 6 million votes and 97% "yes". :thumb:

Little-Acorn
04-13-2010, 10:25 AM
This poll has been around for many months, and is carefully mis-worded. The correct answer is: NO, the 2nd does not GIVE individuals any rights. It merely protects the right to bear arms, that all of us had by virtue of being human beings, and forbids any government from trying to take away or restrict them..

The poll is designed to help persuade people that rights come from government documents. They don't, of course. They come, as Jefferson said, from our Creator.

crin63
04-13-2010, 10:39 AM
This poll has been around for many months, and is carefully mis-worded. The correct answer is: NO, the 2nd does not GIVE individuals any rights. It merely protects the right to bear arms, that all of us had by virtue of being human beings, and forbids any government from trying to take away or restrict them..

The poll is designed to help persuade people that rights come from government documents. They don't, of course. They come, as Jefferson said, from our Creator.

Thats a great point, LA.

Little-Acorn
04-13-2010, 12:53 PM
This upcoming year will become critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court's accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms.

Another one?

DC v. Heller was decided last year, mostly in favor of the gun owner. And the Opinion of the Court states explicitly that the 2nd amendment protects the right of ANY citizen to keep and bear arms, whether he is in a militia or other military group, or not.

For this current session, the Supremes have taken a case from Illinois, I believe over Chicago's virtually-complete ban on handguns. Oral arguments were heard last month. A verdict is expected somewhere around June 2010. Did you mean that one?

The Chicago case is similar to the DC case, except that Chicago is a city in a sovereign state, while DC is a Federally-controlled city, not part of any particular state. But both cities had near-complete bans on any useable handguns, and in both cases the pro-gun-rights side is pointing out that those bans directly violate the 2nd amendment's ban on any government taking away or restricting the right of ordinary people to keep and bear arms.

revelarts
04-13-2010, 12:54 PM
This poll has been around for many months, and is carefully mis-worded. The correct answer is: NO, the 2nd does not GIVE individuals any rights. It merely protects the right to bear arms, that all of us had by virtue of being human beings, and forbids any government from trying to take away or restrict them..

The poll is designed to help persuade people that rights come from government documents. They don't, of course. They come, as Jefferson said, from our Creator.

Exactly.

Little-Acorn
04-13-2010, 01:04 PM
See http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?t=26734 for some details on the Chicago gun ban case and upcoming verdict.

Trigg
04-23-2010, 04:10 PM
when they are ready they will ignore the 2nd Amendment and start to crack down on gun ownership. All the voting in the world will mean nothing. They will eventually come for the guns.

Only if they're registered :coffee:

CAPTDASH
12-21-2010, 10:13 AM
And they will get them too, one bullet at a time. We have a strong movement going on in GA. I think this 2011 State legislative session, we are going to introduce a Constitutional Carry Bill. This will basically repeal all state gun control laws that affect law abiding citizens, and let us carry freely. I open carry an XDM 40 everywhere I go. I never leave home without it. I love schooling the dumbass cops when one approaches me and tells me I can't carry a weapon. I have a series of questions I ask him, and one slip, and I will be filing a civil suit against him and his department. I guess you can say I love using the law against the law enforcers. I usaully just walk off from them if they try to act stupid. I haven't been tazed or detained yet, but I am awaiting.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii96/CAPTDASH/Ruger9.jpg

I hope they come for me. They will get a Ruger Awaiting. :2up:

NightTrain
01-02-2011, 11:58 PM
And they will get them too, one bullet at a time. We have a strong movement going on in GA. I think this 2011 State legislative session, we are going to introduce a Constitutional Carry Bill. This will basically repeal all state gun control laws that affect law abiding citizens, and let us carry freely. I open carry an XDM 40 everywhere I go. I never leave home without it. I love schooling the dumbass cops when one approaches me and tells me I can't carry a weapon. I have a series of questions I ask him, and one slip, and I will be filing a civil suit against him and his department. I guess you can say I love using the law against the law enforcers. I usaully just walk off from them if they try to act stupid. I haven't been tazed or detained yet, but I am awaiting.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii96/CAPTDASH/Ruger9.jpg

I hope they come for me. They will get a Ruger Awaiting. :2up:

What is your series of questions you ask the cop, Capt?

CAPTDASH
01-03-2011, 09:36 AM
"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)



Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst.

The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.



By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)



So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.

CAPTDASH
01-03-2011, 10:03 AM
What is your series of questions you ask the cop, Capt?

For some good info go to www.georgiapacking.org . When approached the first thing out of your mouth should be," AM I being detained?" If they respond "NO" then move along and don't say anything else. If they persist, ask" Am I free to go". If NO, then you are being detained and for no reason other than exercising your 2nd A right. I see you are in Alaska. I don't know your state laws, but the LEO's still have to walk a fine line whether they want to admit it or not. I usually just ignore them. I have had people call the cops on me for walking around walmart with my pistol on my hip. The cops come and tell them they can't do anything, its my right. These cops have been schooled already, don't you know? LOL. Check out the website I mentioned. There is some good info and links to even gun laws in AK.

NightTrain
01-03-2011, 01:09 PM
For some good info go to www.georgiapacking.org . When approached the first thing out of your mouth should be," AM I being detained?" If they respond "NO" then move along and don't say anything else. If they persist, ask" Am I free to go". If NO, then you are being detained and for no reason other than exercising your 2nd A right. I see you are in Alaska. I don't know your state laws, but the LEO's still have to walk a fine line whether they want to admit it or not. I usually just ignore them. I have had people call the cops on me for walking around walmart with my pistol on my hip. The cops come and tell them they can't do anything, its my right. These cops have been schooled already, don't you know? LOL. Check out the website I mentioned. There is some good info and links to even gun laws in AK.

Citizens here in AK generally aren't harassed, but we're not really a normal state - generally speaking, if you're doing anything fun (out in the boonies), you're in a well-armed party and odds are that the vehicle that just got pulled over has at least one firearm on board.

I don't carry in town, not many people do. Not because I can't, but because it's inconvenient to lug around the .44. In the Summer, there's bears. In the winter, there's Moose that like to stomp the holy hell out of you and your snowmachine for disturbing them on THEIR snowmachine trail, lol.

I was curious how you deal with it down in the Lower 48, and shutting down a cop that's already begun on an intercept course could get sticky.

Missileman
01-03-2011, 04:42 PM
The poll is designed to help persuade people that rights come from government documents. They don't, of course. They come, as Jefferson said, from our Creator.

And where do they come from when it turns out that there actually is no Creator?

Little-Acorn
01-03-2011, 05:41 PM
And where do they come from when it turns out that there actually is no Creator?

A hundred years ago, you weren't here. Now you are. Something (or someone) created you. Whether it was God, or random chance, or evolution, or etc. you have a Creator - someone or something that determined how every atom in your body would be, and then made it that way. Each of us was "created", by whatever method you'd like to imagine.

Jefferson's point was that our rights were not given us by government. We have them simply by existing as humans... however we got that way. Whether governmentt likes it or not.

Little-Acorn
01-03-2011, 05:50 PM
Citizens here in AK generally aren't harassed, but we're not really a normal state - generally speaking, if you're doing anything fun (out in the boonies), you're in a well-armed party and odds are that the vehicle that just got pulled over has at least one firearm on board.

I don't carry in town, not many people do. Not because I can't, but because it's inconvenient to lug around the .44.

Why do you say AK is "not a normal state"? From this description, it sounds to me like Alaska is one of the few states that IS normal, with normal citizens living normal lives, and with their rights protected by their government (as govt should, that is the primary purpose of government, is it not?) instead of being repressed.

It's the rest of the states that are abnormal, with their citizens cowering in fear behind locked doors from criminals that roam freely, and with governments that forbid the CITIZENS from doing anything about it instead of effectively capturing and punishing those criminals.

Just because well-run states like Alaska are rare, doesn't mean they're wrong.

logroller
01-03-2011, 05:54 PM
And where do they come from when it turns out that there actually is no Creator?

Well, when you find this out, you're likely dead; so I don't think rights to gun possession musters any concern.

Missileman
01-03-2011, 05:56 PM
A hundred years ago, you weren't here. Now you are. Something (or someone) created you. Whether it was God, or random chance, or evolution, or etc. you have a Creator - someone or something that determined how every atom in your body would be, and then made it that way. Each of us was "created", by whatever method you'd like to imagine.

Jefferson's point was that our rights were not given us by government. We have them simply by existing as humans... however we got that way. Whether governmentt likes it or not.

Not all rights are derived simply by existing. There are rights obtained by way of a contract for example.

logroller
01-03-2011, 05:59 PM
"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)



Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst.

The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.



By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)



So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.

"God created man, Sam Colt made them equal.":clap:

CAPTDASH
01-05-2011, 01:01 AM
Citizens here in AK generally aren't harassed, but we're not really a normal state - generally speaking, if you're doing anything fun (out in the boonies), you're in a well-armed party and odds are that the vehicle that just got pulled over has at least one firearm on board.

I don't carry in town, not many people do. Not because I can't, but because it's inconvenient to lug around the .44. In the Summer, there's bears. In the winter, there's Moose that like to stomp the holy hell out of you and your snowmachine for disturbing them on THEIR snowmachine trail, lol.

I was curious how you deal with it down in the Lower 48, and shutting down a cop that's already begun on an intercept course could get sticky.

Dealing with cops on anything is sticky, but especially with guns. First and foremost you must have balls, and bigguns like mine. Almost equally, you have to know the laws to a "T". I do. I actually have a special exemption in GA by being in the Military, I can carry anywhere just like a cop. In fact tomorrow, I am going to push my luck just for the sake of doing it and go int eh local courthouse where I know at least 2 deputies are going to try and disarm me. I have the law on my side. In addition I will be in Army ACU's. I do have business there but I am going to prove a point to them. I carry a piece of paper in my wallet that has OCGA 16-11-130 on it. I bet they don't even know the law, but tomorrow they will. I walked in and spoke with a Sheriff in his office a couple weeks ago with my pistol on my hip. He never acted out of the ordinary at all.

I recently got stopped on the VA Med Ctr property and my pistol was seized and I was issued a Citation. When I finally got to go to court, the prosecutor could not wait to dismiss the case and order the VA Cops to give me my pistol back. I hit him with 2nd A, 4th A, & 10th A.I was in uniform on duty, and there is a little clause in the federal code for that. I wanted a forum , but I never got one. The prosecutor basically told me to get the fuck out, he wasn't letting me set a precedent at his expense. I went to the VA and got my pistol. The cop said don't load it until you get of the premises. I don't have to tell you, that I chambered one and locked the mag in right in front of him and walked out , do I? Those VA clowns try to act like the damn FBI and none of them could run 20 yards without passing out, just a bunch of fat dumbass wannabe's.

It really is sad that we are not allowed to exercise our rights granted to us by the US Constitution. I don't know about the creator and all that nonsense. I do know several men wrote the Constitution with a lot of Baptist, Presbyterian, and Methodist influence, not Muslims, or Atheists, or FAGS. So with that said, my mom created me, but the 2nd A was here long before her.

Mr. P
01-07-2011, 12:24 AM
So, CAPTDASH hasn't posted since his armed in yer face trip to the courthouse...Hummm

NightTrain
01-07-2011, 01:16 AM
Why do you say AK is "not a normal state"? From this description, it sounds to me like Alaska is one of the few states that IS normal, with normal citizens living normal lives, and with their rights protected by their government (as govt should, that is the primary purpose of government, is it not?) instead of being repressed.

It's the rest of the states that are abnormal, with their citizens cowering in fear behind locked doors from criminals that roam freely, and with governments that forbid the CITIZENS from doing anything about it instead of effectively capturing and punishing those criminals.

Just because well-run states like Alaska are rare, doesn't mean they're wrong.


I worded that poorly - I should have said that AK is how a State should be with regard to firearms. We don't get hassled.

I read story after story about gun control laws down in the Lower 48 and it galls me.

SassyLady
01-07-2011, 03:45 AM
Someone broke into my stepson's house yesterday while he was at work and stole over $12,000 worth of guns and bows. He was going on a hunting trip today and had laid out what he needed and didn't relock the gun safe. We theorize that it was someone who knows him and knew he was going hunting. The bows were mounted on the wall. They also took all his wife's jewelry and tried to take the TV but must have been scared off.

He is sick....one of those guns was the one we gave him when he was 16 ... over 24 years ago. He is absolutely sick.....and the insurance had a $5,000 cap on the guns.

Looked at a place (online) in Arizona today that has a bunker built into the side of the hill behind the house. Planning on going down there in a couple of weeks to look for a place to buy. Guess I'm going to sell this place ... nothing to keep me in CA anymore.

Gaffer
01-07-2011, 11:08 AM
So, CAPTDASH hasn't posted since his armed in yer face trip to the courthouse...Hummm

If he was carrying a weapon into a courthouse where weapons are not allowed he would have to leave it in a weapons locker when he went in. That's the policy pretty much everywhere. Even police officers do that. The only ones armed in a court room will be the deputies providing security and moving prisoners.

Of course individual states and counties can have different policies.

CAPTDASH
01-15-2011, 12:07 AM
If he was carrying a weapon into a courthouse where weapons are not allowed he would have to leave it in a weapons locker when he went in. That's the policy pretty much everywhere. Even police officers do that. The only ones armed in a court room will be the deputies providing security and moving prisoners.

Of course individual states and counties can have different policies.

You are correct sir for the most part. I walk into some of the small town court houses and they don't even blink. The young deputy about shit on himself when I walked in that day, but I was in Army Uni, so it was not a total shock. I was not disarmed, because primarily I told him I did not have to do anything but pay a seatbelt ticket and be on my way. In addition I provided him a copy of the OCGA governing my exemption and was allowed to pass on along. I explained to him no local ordinance could exceed the laws of the state.

red state
06-28-2012, 02:36 AM
Great thread...so much to comment on but firstly, I'd like to say that one should treat an officer of the law with respect. I was brought up to respect the law BUT I rarely, if ever, find anything to respect. They seem to be either thrill seekers or those that may have had their lunch money taken from them in school. Don't get me wrong, I have a nephew who serves as Memphis Police but, sadly, he falls into the "thrill seeking catagory". Of course, that is no big surprise as he volunteered for every touchy mission up for grabs in Iraq. I am grateful that he's not like a guy I knew in school who is a few years younger than I....he falls into the lunch money group. HA! Still, we need to address our "peace officers" with respect and we could/should invite them (and our military) to a site called Oathkeepers. They have sworn an oath...only you wouldn't know this after what happened during Katrina under the command of a liberal New Orleans mayor.

This may be a tad off topic but the reason for the ticket and for being at the courthouse has always riled me. That seat belt law is no more constitutional than their trying to take away our rights to protect our family....why don't they require school buses to have seat belts?! It isn't any more a safety issue than the "Protect and Serve" is on MOST cop cars. How many times have the cops pulled over to help when you have a flat or something potentially dangerous on the side of a hwy? Not many times I'll assure you. They may have once been called PEACE OFFICERS but they are now called, and rightly so, Law EnFORCEment Officers. Their cars should read: PROTECT (maybe) after-the-fact and SERVE you a ticket". Still, this is something that one must overlook. It is always best to speak respectfully...just don't take any bull.

Again, great thread...can't believe it isn't any more popular than this. Of course, if it was any more popular, you'd get more of the egg-heads like the one who made an issue about the existence of God (in a Christian Nation for pete's sake).