Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Is Government Readying For A Shooting War Against Gun Owners?

March 18, 2013 by  

Is Government Readying For A Shooting War Against Gun Owners?
PHOTOS.COM

Gun grabbing lawmakers at both the State and Federal level continue to push forward with their anti-American, anti-2nd Amendment, anti-gun agendas, even as more individuals, State legislatures and manufacturers of weapons, weapons accessories and ammunition push back. It almost seems as if the elected class is itching for a fight.

And when one considers that the Department of Homeland Security has contracted for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition — much of it hollow points or for use in sniper rifles — for its 55,000 armed agents, plus 2,717 armored personnel carriers and 7,000 select fire “personal defense weapons,” it seems even more apparent that’s the goal. For perspective, 1.6 billion rounds is enough to fight the Iraq war for 20 years. It’s enough to shoot every American five times. It’s 28,000 tons, or the equivalent of three guided missile destroyers. It’s almost 30,000 target practice rounds per armed agent — but of course, because they are more expensive, hollow points are not used for target practice.

These purchases have long concerned many of those who pay attention. But only the alternative media talked about it — to derision and catcalls — until Feb. 15. That’s when The Denver Post ran an article by The Associated Press about the purchases. That prompted a column by Ralph Benko at Forbes.com in which he said it’s time for a national conversation about the purchases.

More than that, it’s time for a national conversation on the link between the purchases and the ongoing push by the elected class to collapse the economy and pass legislation against the will of the people.

Recall that Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), speaking for the state, informed us that, “One of the definitions of a nation state is that the state has a monopoly on legitimate violence. And the state ought to have a monopoly on legitimate violence.”

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban bill passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday on a partisan 10-8 vote. The bill’s primary sponsor, Senator Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) — who has said she’d like to see all guns removed from the hands of Americans — knows “the road is uphill” for the legislation’s passage. If that’s the case, then why pass it if not just to poke in the eye a significant portion of the American population already upset over the anti-gun rhetoric and attacks on lawful gun owners by the gun grabbers?

But while the ban on so-called “assault weapons”  is more than likely to fail, it’s not unlikely that Republicans who want to go along to get along will glom on to legislation requiring universal background checks, which passed out of the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. Universal background checks are the camel’s nose under the tent. As former Attorney General Janet Reno said in 1993 during discussions of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (AWB): “Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.” Remember that the elites are content with incremental steps that I call gradualism.

Remember also that gun control is not a partisan issue, although it appears so now and conventional wisdom says so. Prominent Republicans (including much of the field for the last GOP Presidential nomination), in a bid to appear “reasonable” to the establishment crowd, have supported various measures that restricted gun ownership. The last GOP standard-bearer, Mitt Romney, said he would have signed the 1994 AWB if it came to his desk. If he were President today, a gun bill would be more than likely to pass because he would provide cover for statist Republicans to go along with a gun ban — as George W. Bush provided cover for Republicans to support anti-liberty measures like expanding Medicare and passing No Child Left Behind and other government-growing legislation.

President Richard Nixon, in a taped conversation with aides, said: “I don’t know why any individual should have a right to have a revolver in his house. The kids usually kill themselves with it and so forth.” He asked why “can’t we go after handguns, period? I know the rifle association will be against it, the gun makers will be against it.” But “people should not have handguns.”

Even more insidious — and likely more harmful to gun rights — are the States that are passing anti-gun measures against the will of the people. New York rammed through legislation banning weapons and large-capacity magazines, violating its own procedures in the process. Since then, 52 of New York’s 62 counties have introduced legislation calling for the repeal of the New York State Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act. The legislation has passed in 40 of them. Colorado has passed bans on magazine capacity, and a bill that would require background checks is close to passage. Governor John Hickenlooper has said he will sign the bills despite threats by gun supply manufacturers to pull out of the State if he does.

Sheriffs, other law enforcement agents, some groups and many individuals are vowing to resist gun-confiscation efforts. Twenty-eight States have introduced or passed bills to preserve the 2nd Amendment. Fourteen have introduced or passed Firearms Freedom Acts.

Manufacturers of guns, gun accessories and ammunition have put their financial health on the line by refusing to sell to State and local governments that pass restrictions on gun ownership by individuals. That list is at 136 and growing.

And the Outdoor Channel, a popular cable channel for outdoors enthusiasts, hunters, fishermen and shooters, has told Colorado it will pull its production out of Colorado if gun control measures are signed into law.

If gun grabbers thought the Sandy Hook shooting would cause Americans to stand passively by and allow their 2nd Amendment rights to be snatched away, they have learned differently. The question now is: How far is government willing to go now that it’s getting push-back?

President John F. Kennedy once said, “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life.”

It appears those people are stepping up.

Bob Livingston

is an ultra-conservative American and author of The Bob Livingston Letter™, founded in 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Is Government Readying For A Shooting War Against Gun Owners?”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Mike in MI

    Ok, here it’s almost two in the morning. PLD has 15 views and no comments, until mine.
    Looks like the government spy brigade is out now gearing up for how they are going to land on their feet tomorrow, break their legs and crawl to the aid station.
    Well, fine, let them crawl, bleedin’ and cryin’ for ‘Doc” to kiss their owee and stick ‘em with an ampule.
    I’ll bet every one of the trolls and butt-bumpers who sign in every morning to scratch away at an impossible task (like telling free men and women that what they have isn’t worth defending and everybody should quit being so paranoid). I’ll bet every one of those scum are carrying because they are afraid of muggers as they go to their cubes to attack the free world. They’re afraid of muggers because of the world Obumster is building and they’re ASSisting him make things more miserable for themselves. Guess that’s liberal smarts.
    “Smarts” don’t it?
    I’ve said it before and now again. If the Obumblatterer were a sincere and honest would-be leader he would look at what he’s brought to pass and come to the realization that, “it jus’ ain’t workin’, boss”.
    Then resign, And, were he sincere, he’d say “I thought I had answers, like I said back in ’08. But it just ain’t working, folks. I have done nothing of what I said I could. Sorry to leave you but I have to quit for the good of the people that I sought to help. G’ bye”.

    Is he SINcere? Not yet. Lots o’ SIN, very little “cere”. That’s what makes me feel if we who are Christian believers will do what God asks on the authority of I Timothy 2:1-4 and pray for kings and those who are in authority, things will change – one way or the other. Either he changes or takes the consequences – nothing he trys to do will work for him. Might even come back on him. Once he sends something somewhere to do something, if it can’t work it comes back at him. It’s a spiritual law.
    Whatever, … can we lose by doing what Father asks? Do ya think?

    • wizzardous

      But then America’s vilest man would be replaced by America’s dumbest man in the WH. Biden is the best life insurance policy a prez could hope for.

      • hipshotpercusion

        At least that Jackass Biden is an American citizen. O-homo isn’t!

  • Harold Olsen

    I don’t believe the idiots in government plan on using the ammo they are hoarding just against gun owners. There are a lot of us who do not own guns, myself included, who are critical of Obama’s Nazi policies. I believe we will also be targets of the Obama regime. Anyone who opposes Obama is his enemy. Also he may plan on using the ammo to help him stay in office once his second term is over. He has the power and I do not believe he is willing to give it up. President—or should I say dictator— for life.

    • FreedomFighter

      History says:

      they plan on using every last bullet to enforce the agenda – its called culling the resistance.

      Provoke the loyal Americans to the point where they cant take it anymore, as the most brave begin to resist — call them extremist in the media, a danger, a threat, then wipe them out to the very last person, man woman or child — set an example to keep the less brave in line with the agenda. Rinse and repeat until all the sheeple submit.

      Slow cooker takedown, all the while plastering the media calling them “The New Terrorists”

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

      • hipshotpercusion

        I will see you in the trenches. I will not be going quietly into the camp, or the long dark night of tyranny!

      • FreedomFighter

        Never let them provoke you into stupidity, work for freedom and liberty on your own terms, at times of your own choosing, never let them goad you into useless acts.

        To provoke loyal Americans into useless acts is what they want, to justify killing and more security and to use in media propaganda messages…dont give it to them.

        Make them use false flag methods and get exposed for being what they are.

        Laus Deo
        Semper FI

      • BrotherPatriot

        I believe you know me as the fierce, out spoken Truth speaker, ex Navy SEAL who continually talks about ROOT level thinking in order to deal with the worlds threat of the New World Order (NWO). (Trust me…I’m keenly aware of how that all sounds but the truth is the truth is the truth & that’s just the way that it is.) FF, understand that many of us veterans & awake citizens do take your warning to heart. Even as focused as I am on the threat that I sense America has been-is facing, I still strive to be the calming voice to my fellow concerned patriots.

        I would like to add here that a lot of my knowledge & pieces of the puzzle that I have collected are due to what I’ve learned from other Truth speakers on this and other sites like it. Alternative news is the only choice for an awake citizen once you understand that the public media is a propaganda machine for the ruling Oligarchy. On these alternative sites, the articles themselves plus posted comments can lead as a spring board into all kinds of other items of knowledge during an individuals research which helps to shed light upon the various problems as you become fully aware of them.

        I still have some strange sense of hope that if enough humans on this planet become aware & fully understand what the NWO equation is and just what exactly they have been up to now for 100′s of years…that we could change this world into what we as a species are supposed to have, a Utopia where we as a species are in harmony with mother nature, the Universe & God.

        But because the people who control much of the human experience are evil, Luciferians who believe that the light bringer is the good God…the force & influence that they represent helps to create discord, war and generally influence the world to strife.

        I’m tired of a lifetime of lies & I don’t want to pass the buck to my children. If there must be trouble let it come during my time. I want to address this ROOT level thinking publicly for my Oath to the Constitution demands me to stand up to this threat that I & others perceive. So yes, FF…some of us are aware & I personally stand within the body of the Republic as a vigilant, watching American Patriot who is becoming more & more vocal about what I think is and has been happening to us all.

        God Bless & FF, I have enjoyed your responses through the years.

    • Don 2

      You may recall the story broke by Joseph Farah, regarding Barack Obama’s announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a “civilian national security force” as big, as strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department.

      Then, at a campaign stop in Colorado July 2, 2008, Barack Obama said, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

      And then there was the passing of the defense reauthorization bill, killing the concept of habeas corpus, and authorizing Obama to use the military to arrest and indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial. The legislation empowers this lame-duck president to use all of the power of the federal government, both constitutional and unconstitutional, to target his political enemies.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Don 2 says, “You may recall the story broke by Joseph Farah, regarding Barack Obama’s announcement that, if elected in 2008, he wanted to create a “civilian national security force” as big, as strong and as well-funded as the Defense Department”. Yes Don, Joseph Farah, of the notoriously wingnutty site WND, did greatly distort what O’Bama said, and the circular firing squad has endlessly repeated it ever since, along with the newer paranoia about the defense reauthorization bill..

        Obama was not talking about a “security force” with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.

        Here is the relevant portion of what Obama actually said,

        Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO:

        “[As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

        “People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

        “We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.

        “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

        “This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up”.

        Have you even read these actual words that O’Bama spoke, Don? Does that sound like a force that could kick down your door in the middle of the night and haul you off to a Gulag or concentration camp?

        Since what Farah cherry picked and Don 2 parroted is only these two sentences, I thought that we all might benefit from a bit of truth here. “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded”. It’s sad that those on the paranoid right can’t find any real issues to argue about and must keep making things up so that they will have straw men to attack

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

        Wow, that’s some speech from the “pretender” in office, RBT. But it is a well known fact amongst dictators, that a private army is necessary to control the great unwashed masses over which they force their rule…the “impostor”, the “puppet” of the oligarchs and the plutocracy, Obama, has clearly assumed dictatorial powers over “apathetic” Americans. He has all but silenced the people’s voice in government, and the US Congress, by simply by-passing them and ruling by “executive order”…just like any other “two-bit” dictator.

        Even the US Supreme Court has lost the steel from its collective spine under the constant pressure and intimidation from our domestic dictator. If one didn’t know any better, one would think there is a move afoot to institute a complete Marxist insurgency in America with “Joker-Tut” at the top, and at the leading edge…and you following behind like a drooling-lemming! You know what you can do with your propaganda, don’t you?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Yes, JAY, that IS really some speech from the POTUS —-it helped him get elected in 2008 and that philosophy helped again for the WIN in 2012.

        You are the “pretender”, JAY, with all your slimy propagandizing and outright lying about the state of affairs in the country—-Goebbels would be proud! .

        I know what I can do with my TRUTH—-use it to expose you for what you are—-a slimy propagandizer and liar—-or did I say that already?

      • Kevin

        I can find no evidence that President Obama has any other use for this “Army” Than to waste Taxpayer money. It was bundled into his Health care Program and he has said little if anything about it since. I watched a video of the first 231 recruits Graduating and one of them actually said…”we don’t really know what our job description is but we’re willing to help out.”
        There is no “Brown shirt” Army here….. just Pork.

      • Don 2

        Right Brain Thinker,

        Normally, I do not bother reading your posts. They are usually nothing more than a long winded personal attack, and leftist ranting, hell-bent on getting in the last word, no matter what. However, in this case, I will make an exception.

        Obama’s exact words were, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national “security” objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national “security force” that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

        Let the reader hear for themselves:

        http://hotair.com/archieves/2008/07/17/are-the-media-airbrushing-obamas-speeches/

        Now, in FY 2008, the DOD budget was about $482 billion. That’s a lot of money to equip a national “security force”. So, Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda. It’s Orwellian-like, with a novices social activist’s mentality at the helm.

        To diminish the danger that ideology will deteriorate into dogma, and to protect the free, open, questing and creative mind of man, as well as to allow for change, no ideology should be more specific than that of America’s founding fathers: “For the general welfare.” ~ Saul Alinsky (Rules For Radicals)

        A Marxist begins with “his” prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order or the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage – the political paradise of communism. ~ Saul Alinsky (Rules For Radicals)

        Let us not forget that Barack Obama was an admitted revolutionary Marxist when he entered Occidental College.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Don 2 says, he does not bother reading my posts. That’s quite obvious. He apparently doesn’t even read the ones he replies to, if this comment is any indication. I love the “sniffing down his nose” condescension of his “making an exception” and reading this one. If you can’t show superiority in your arguments and comments, just TAKE it as if you had earned it, and go “sniff-sniff”. And that’s NOT a “personal attack”, Don. Most of the things that I say that you and others interpret that way are just statements of truth that you don’t want to hear because they don’t suit your narrow-minded approach to the world and inflated self-images. Too bad for you—-suck it up.

        Obama’s exact words were made over FOUR years ago and were part of a campaign speech—-just rhetoric. They were not referring to a “national security force” that was designed to meet the same “national security needs” that the military does, but a “force” of do-gooders that would meet the goals of making the nation stronger by building at the community level—stronger communities that support people contribute to “national security” of a different kind than the military. I too went “yeah yeah” when I heard him say it—-fine sounding campaign talk.

        Yes , Obama’s exact words were, “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national “security” objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national “security force” that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” As I said, taking them out of context and misinterpreting their meaning so badly is just a cheap political trick. And why have you put those quotation marks in there around “security” and “security force”? Is it because you recognize that Obama was NOT using the terms in the way that Farah and WND and you would like us to believe?

        I don’t believe the DOD budget includes any of the programs Obama was talking about—-why do you bring it up?

        “Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda. It’s Orwellian-like, with a novices social activist’s mentality at the helm”.
        WOW—such flaming rhetoric! Did you make this up yourself—-sounds copied from somewhere—-WND maybe?

        And yet more meaningless Alinsky references. Too bad Don can’t come up with something in his own words rather than just give us “clips” of someone else’s thinking. I’ve addressed this particular one elsewhere, and it was addressed to Don, but Don doesn’t read replies, so here it is again:

        Don 2 asks, “What public figure comes to mind when you read this?”

        My response, “I immediately think of all those conservatives who have used Alinsky’s methods for the last 40 years—-the Armeys and the the “right think” tanks supported by the Koch Brothers. They have done a masterful job of confusing a large portion of the population about who is really trying to subjugate them. Alinsky’s ideas are old and referred to Marxists, but the plutocracy and the corporate oligarchs have turned them to their advantage—-by trying to get the proletariat to turn against the government (their only hope for survival) as we head for the last stage—-corporate feudalism. (And when are the righties going to acknowledge that they owe much to Alinsky? Do they think everyone is so dumb that they won’t figure out that they are talking out of both sides of their mouths?)”

        And “Let us not forget that Barack Obama was an admitted revolutionary Marxist when he entered Occidental College”. Really? Were you there with him? Have you got some source for that horsepucky? Tell us more!

      • Don 2

        Right Brain Thinker,

        C’mon, you must be kidding? I thought everyone knew about Obama and Marxism? Here’s is a 1980 account from John C. Drew, Ph.D. Also, you might want to follow-up on Obama’s course of radical studies at Columbia in order to get a better understanding. Hope this helps?

        http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/02/meeting_young_obama.html

        P.S. – If you do reply, please leave out the “wingnutty” and “horsepucky” stuff. It’s really boring old repetition, and is almost as irritating as when Obama opens his mouth on television. I have to turn the channel on him, and go past your posts w/o reading them.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Don 2 just can’t give up with the wing nuttery—-a 1980 account?—-32+ years ago? Course of studies at Columbia way back then? I care more about what is going on right now in this country and what O’Bama has done since his election in 2008. And what he has done doesn’t include even 5% of the horsepucky that you and your wing nut buddies have mindlessly and endlessly repeated as truth. The old “say it enough times and a lie becomes truth” game is all you know—-THAT’S what’s boring. And you are a total idiot if you really do have to “turn the channel” when he speaks—-I only muted Romney when he appeared to tell his lies.

        And I wish you WOULD go totally past my posts. You say you don’t read them but you somehow feel that you are qualified to reply to them w/o reading them? Great logic there. Yeah, go on by and save me the time wasted in dealing with you..

      • Don 2

        Right Brain Thinker,

        According to you, Obama’s history as a revolutionary Marxist, and his activities at Occidental in 1980, as well as his radical studies at Columbia, are of no importance today. To this I say:

        “The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them” ~ Maya Angelou

        I turn the channel when Obama comes on for a good reason. He is a first class liar, and one cannot believe anything that he says; not to mention that the very sight of this piece of Marxist crap makes me want to puke.

        • pissed of & liberal

          A lot of people who claimed to follow marx in the 60′s,70′s,and 80′s have abandend his teachings to become mainstream democrats who are just as capitilist as republicans.

      • Don 2

        pissed off & liberal,

        Regarding Obama, you point is???

        • pissed of & liberal

          My point is that Obama like so many others was on the right path but sold out for a chace at politcal power. if he kept Marx’s ideas things would be better then they are now.

          • Patriot

            Marx’s ideas DO accomplish fairness. EVERYONE is equally broke and EQUALLY working at the whim of the government. Oh – I misspoke – not everyone is broke under Marxism. The ‘leaders and officials’ somehow become seriously wealthy….How is that possible? Again, failed in every country it has ever been tried. I have demonstrated this time and again, and you ignore it and press on.

          • pissed of & liberal

            One problem with your theory leaders under Marxism are paid a WORKERS wage and hours will be assigned according to examples set forth by the likes of MR Robert Owen of NEW LANDARK and others.

          • Patriot

            Yeah, but show me a socialist country where the leaders are paid a workers wage.
            Just one. Show me ONE where the leaders aren’t wealthy.
            Stagnated economies is the result. It has never worked. And it cannot work.
            Seriously, pick a socialist country that you admire.
            I will consider you my next charitable project and pay your expenses for relocating there. It is my gift to you.
            If you want to, I will provide you with my office number. You can call my assistant and we will make the arrangements.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Here’s my counteroffer how about after the people’s revolution overthrows this corrupt system i pay for your ticket because the new America will have no need for exploiters like you.

      • Kevin

        It seems that you can find pure stupidity at both ends of the spectrum.

      • http://yahoo don

        OweBunhole is expanding his power. what he wants to do is create a modern gestapo or a kgb. i don’t understand where the money is coming from. this country is broke and it probly would cost upwards of a trillion dollars to implement something so huge. where would it come from. all he’d have to do is declare a national emergency and the constitution would be thrown out..

  • hipshotpercusion

    “Those who would make peaceful revolution impossible, will make violent revolution inevitable.” John f. Kennedy
    To all you gun grabbers. do you think it is wise to P*ss off an estimated 130 million gun owners? Molon Abbe!

    • Mr Diesel

      It’s Molon Labe, not abbe.

      • Gary

        The big problem is that Obama has the fed, the drones and the tanks!

      • STEVE E.

        Gary, that’s when the freedom lovers gather up the liberals and gun grabbers and use them as human (subhuman) shields.

      • Mike in MI

        Mr. Diesel –
        Why worry about it? In every war, at every period in history where righteous people who both respect and revere God were fighting for right things that He states He underwrites, THE RIGHTEOUS experienced (WHEN THEY BELIEVED ACTIVELY FOR WHAT THEY FACED TO BE ERASED) victory – because they relied on God’s ability and help.
        The Word of GOD says in Isaiah 54:17 “No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; … This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and ‘their righteousness is of me’, saith the Lord”.
        It has always been true that unGodly tyrants build up imposingly mighty forces, weapons, tools, terrorizing displays and vicious troops before they go against their enemy(ies). They make ostentatious display of weapons as technologically advanced and overwhelming imaginable.

        Doesn’t matter. . . God controls the energy that makes the stuff go.

        When Jesus Christ waylaid (the to become Apostle) Paul on the road to Damascus in Acts 9 the lord told Paul, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”. In hurting the lord’s people Paul was hurting the Lord and interrupting His concerns.

        Not wise, IF somebody among God’s people gets upset enough to take the problem to the Throne Room of God. The more who get involved in making the requests and demands known the better. God will not impose Himself on people. He is a gentleman. If you want and need something that His Word says He is willing and able to do, ask for it and you get it. If you don’t ask you go without. But you’ve got to ask on appropriate grounds: 1.) Gotta be a party to God’s covenant; 2.) Cite where your requests are clauses in the contract – specifically as possible.
        Regarding prayers, some people couldn’t hit the broadside of a cubic barn from the inside with a shotgun – then wonder why God doesn’t respond to them. . . a fool’s gambit.

    • Alex

      Ummm….are you trying to write ‘molon labe’?

    • FreedomFighter

      Hipshot! Looks like you setoff the word analysis scanner in Colorado, got milk?

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

        Yes, an effective strategy to side-track from the meat of a debate. Rather predictable…!

  • Burke

    Nice piece Bob. I am fleeing California with my wife and 4 children. We are heading to Alaska in hopes that it truly is the last frontier. I feel most honorable Americans will do the same and uproot to states that support the freedom and liberty our constitution provides…2 Americas are being born and most likely will wage war with each other. This may be why JFK is no longer with us…he was a patriot!

    • jopa

      Burke: I think you are running in the wrong direction for your families safety.They have the highest murder, rape, death by firearms,and alcoholism rates of all fifty states.Not only that they just want you to visit not stay.

      • Kevin

        Actually that dubious honor goes to Louisiana then Tennessee with Navada coming in third.

      • Kevin

        Sorry “Nevada”

    • Charlie

      Burke,,,
      Don’t go to Alaska,,,UNLESS you have some Technical skills , such as Aircraft Pilot or Mechanic on aircraft or heavy equipment or Cars, trucks etc,,,Political skills will pay off IF,,,you look like a Native… BUT ,,.to go with out skills , means you may get very cold and hungry and / or the flying bugs will suck your blood out in the summer… Give it a try , it’s a beautiful place even at 40 below the young and tuff can take it,,,brains and brawn always helps……………………………….

  • Bryster

    Ask not what your country can do to you, but what you can do if it does.

    The Bryster!

  • BrotherPatriot

    I like your spunk, Mr. Livingston. Revealing the truth takes courage at times…

    God Bless us all.

  • michael

    All this talk about guns this guns that an the real issue is the gov spending an then they say web that’s cut this an that do to we want afford it BUT DON’T EVER ONCE SAY CUT GOV PAY TO HELP THEY SPEND THEY CAN TAKE A PAY CUT NAMESAKE HIS PEOPLE NEED TO PAY MORE IN TAXES WELL TAKE A SMALLER PAY CHECK

  • Mitch Freeman

    Never think it can’t happen! We need only to look back to Germany in the 1930′s and especially 1938 when Adolf Hitler passed a gun registration law for “public safety” and proceeded to attack not only the citizen’s of Germany, but the rest of the world as well!!
    Diane Fienstien stated this weekend that she’d gone to the scene’s of shootings and saw gunshot victims thus making her want to remove firearms from all citizens. Did she ever go to the accident scenes where drunk drivers or speeding idiots killed multiple victims with their vehicles? If she had, would she be trying to ban automobiles?? Would she give up her’s?? What about airplanes? They usually kill a hundred or more each time. I can guarantee that in the almost 20 years I served as a volunteer fireman and ambulance EMT. I saw more death and injuries from motorvehicle accidents than gun violence!

  • Andrew G.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ! Molon labe (mo-lone lah-veh) Two little words. With these two words, two concepts were verbalized that have lived for nearly two and a half Millennia. They signify and characterize both the heart of the Warrior, and the indomitable spirit of mankind. From the ancient Greek, they are the reply of the Spartan General-King Leonidas to Xerxes, the Persian Emperor who came with 600,000 of the fiercest fighting troops in the world to conquer and invade little Greece, then the center and birthplace of civilization as we know it. When Xerxes offered to spare the lives of Leonidas, his 300 personal bodyguards and a handful of Thebans and others who volunteered to defend their country, if they would lay down their arms, Leonidas shouted these two words back. Molon Labe! (mo-lone lah-veh) They mean, “Come and get them!” They live on today as the most notable quote in military history. And so began the classic example of courage and valor in its dismissal of overwhelming superiority of numbers, wherein the heart and spirit of brave men overcame insuperable odds. Today, there lies a plaque dedicated to these heroes all at the site. It reads: “Go tell the Spartans, travelers passing by, that here, obedient to their laws we lie.” We have adopted this defiant utterance as a battle cry in our war against oppression because it says so clearly and simply towards those who would take our arms. It signifies our determination to not strike the first blow, but also to not stand mute and allow our loved ones, and all that we believe in and stand for, to be trampled by men who would deprive us of our God-given – or natural, if you will –rights to suit their own ends.

    • Mike in MI

      Andrew –
      I’ll stick with, “Nuts!!!”, as being just as expressive at The Bulge.

  • David

    I have never really been one of those who sees that everyone is out to get me. I want to believe that there is good in all or most of us. But, the evidence is getting stacked up in favor of this administration (and maybe it has been a plan for a long time), wants to disarm all of the citizens. You really only do that for one reason and that is to setup a dictatorship or Communist state. Where the government is in control and we the people now work for them. There will be resistance and defiance and riots all which play into their hands. This will usher in marshal law, they already have in place laws to snatch people off the streets without due process (these were suppose to be used against terrorist and others that were interested in doing harm to the U.S. now they will use them for their plan. The drone strikes on U.S. soil was a test to see if anyone was paying attention. If it comes to marshal law the normal people in the military and on police forces will have to do their jobs and arrest those that are breaking the law. We have to make allot of noise and be heard, what was that movie line…”I am made as hell and I am not going to take it anymore “. Stop blogging and start calling and emailing your leadership people, not just the D.C. crowd but your own states government people. Here in Texas we have people working to take our guns away very hard too. I haven’t found any ammo in academy in months, none not even 22 cal.. The government has enough ammo to double tap all who disapprove, but the one thing their formula did not account for was there are more of us than there are of them.

    • ibcamn

      davey,actually it’s only half of the people who voted!!
      not all of America,get it right!!that want gun control!!and 3/4 of America don’t mind if there is a new “form” of background checks(law abiding citizens)to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill people!!…a little differant than the way you tell it!

      • Mike in MI

        ibbie – “…mentally ill people…”?!!! Well,
        there’s the answer to the entire problem. If they pass that one no liberal/prog-frog will ever again have a right to carry firearms.
        Then people like Gabby Giffords will never have to fear anymore. AND, the world will be safe from the devil spirits – - – except muslims.

  • Alex

    Mister Livingston writes; “…anti-American, anti-2nd Amendment….agendas…”

    Wrong on both counts, Mr Livingston!

    As a clear majority of Americans now favor sensible firearms legislation—in a striking change to the tired and dangerous stranglehold on gun-consciousness manufactured by the NRA for years— these ‘agendas’ cannot be considered anti-American. Not at all.
    This just means that you and the other gun-toters are out of step with current American thinking. In other words, it is you that have now be come ‘anti-American’….sorry!

    And, as the Second Amendment in its conciseness MOST CLEARLY includes the term “well-regulated”, adapting to changing times and advanced weaponry by adopting such sensible regulation as deemed fit by those CURRENTLY able to do so is absolutely in line with the spirit of the Constitution.

    Thank God today’s younger generation and those to come will dispose of this harmful relic from the days of the Slaveowners, Land Grabbers, and Ethnic Cleansers who wrote the damned amendment in the first place. We may not all live to see it happen, but the more Enlightened people to come will flush the Second Amendment down the sewie hole of failed ideas where it belongs.

    Not anti-American. Not anti-Second Amendment. You are well-read and intelligent,
    Mr Livingston, but you are oh-for two this morning…

    • chocopot

      Like most left-wingers who think our Constitutional rights are negotiable or subject to the fad of the day, you have not done your research. In the language of the day when the Constitution was written, the term “well regulated” meant “well trained.” In point of fact, at that time, there were no regulations of any sort restricting what weapons any citizen could own. If you could afford it, you could possess and maintain your own battery of cannon. A significant argument can be made that ALL gun control laws violate the Second Amendment since it does not provide any room for restrictions – and that is how the Framers intended it. The incremental push by the Left for more than a century now has led us to the current situation, with more than 22,000 federal, state, and local gun control laws, the vast majority of which do nothing to make anyone safer, but do infringe on the God-given rights of a great many law-abiding and innocent citizens who just want to be left alone to exercise those God-given rights. People like you need to understand those simple facts. Implementing more laws which will not disarm a single crimnal or evildoer, but which will disarm the honest citizen, will not accomplish anything except take us one step closer to the Left’s ultimate goal of disarming the entire population. And history has taught us where that leads (i.e., Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Mao’s China, Castro’s Cuba, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, the Kim’s North Korea, and so forth; the body count from that during the 20th Century was in excess of 100 million). And plenty of our home-grown gun-grabbers have made statements, during moments of careless honesty, making it very clear that total confiscation, one nasty step at a time, is the ultimate goal. And there is only one possible reason for that (and it is not public safety): creating a dictatorship with complete control over the population. And there are 80-90 million gun owners who will not sit quietly for that.

    • Adolf Schmidt

      I see you and the 89% you talk about being out of touch with reality! We have been fortunate as a Country to not have to fight a war on our own ground from invaders! I admit there are things that need to take place with guns to increase the safety of the public, but the people dictating the changes are clueless when it comes to topic! Biden endorses shooting a shotgun off the porch of your house! Feistein talks about imploding bullets and how it is legal to shoot humans! Common sense should tell us to look to people with knowledge on the matter! If your happy being led around by politicians that have no experience in these matters great! Don’t complain when they make more uneducated decisions that affect you! It is not to much to ask that our officials be knowledgeable about the topic that concerns so many!

    • HARLEY HOPP/GLENNIE 48737

      Alex, i am a CAPITALISTIC PATRIOTIC CONSTITUTIONALIST. THE LIBERALS HAVE BEEN ATTACKING THE CONSTITUTION FOR OVER 200 YRS. they have not been able to destroy it yet. you can keep trying but you will not win. When we can get a 28th ammendment passed that imposes the same sanctions on congress as they place on We The People, then we will have Liberty and Justice for All. Beware of the new world order, the tri-lateral commission and the federal reserve. they want to divide us, tax us into oblivion, destroy the US financially, disarm us , and replace our CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC with a democratic dictatorship. I FOR ONE WILL NOT LET THAT HAPPEN.

    • Patriot

      As usual, you have no understanding of the 2nd Amendment.
      Well regulated refers to the FIRST part of the 2nd Amendment, which is in fact, two separate parts. One part refers to the militia, and the second part refers to the right of the People to keep and bear arms.
      This harmful relic was also created by the same ethnic cleansers, racists, and land grabbers that wrote the First Amendment, and the Fourth, and the Third. Does that negate those too? Should we now be arguing to censor free speech, a free press, and the right to due process of law? I mean, since one is obviously antiquated, the others must be as well. And obviously since it was written by heathens and slave owners, the entire Bill of Rights should be suspect.
      There is a process for changing the Constitution. And if the vast majority of Americans believe they need to change it, then passing an amendment won’t be so tough, now will it?

    • Kevin
    • Frank Kahn

      Alex says:
      March 18, 2013 at 7:57 am

      “Mister Livingston writes; “…anti-American, anti-2nd Amendment….agendas…”

      Wrong on both counts, Mr Livingston!”

      We, the People do not care what your opinion of American is.

      “As a clear majority of Americans now favor sensible firearms legislation—in a striking change to the tired and dangerous stranglehold on gun-consciousness manufactured by the NRA for years— these ‘agendas’ cannot be considered anti-American. Not at all.
      This just means that you and the other gun-toters are out of step with current American thinking. In other words, it is you that have now be come ‘anti-American’….sorry!”

      Yes, you are sorry, a very sorry individual with misguided allegiances. You say, without giving any proof or definition of what a clear majority of Americans is, that they favor SENSIBLE (unconstitutional) firearms legislation. You also make a false claim that somehow the NRA is responsible for our defending our rights. American is defined by the Constitution of the United States, not by some whiney paranoid children. Tired, yes, we are very tired of your type of nonsense. Dangerous, yes, your advocating for restrictions to our rights is very dangerous. We will fight to keep America what it has always been, that is being an American. The people who want to ignore America, and its constitution are anti-American.

      “And, as the Second Amendment in its conciseness MOST CLEARLY includes the term “well-regulated”, adapting to changing times and advanced weaponry by adopting such sensible regulation as deemed fit by those CURRENTLY able to do so is absolutely in line with the spirit of the Constitution.”

      Here you simply show a problem with word definition and / or reading comprehension. The term “well-regulated” is an adjective modifying the word militia not the phrase “the right to keep and bear arms”. Since it is not referencing arms, the rest of your comment is null and void.

      “Thank God today’s younger generation and those to come will dispose of this harmful relic from the days of the Slaveowners, Land Grabbers, and Ethnic Cleansers who wrote the damned amendment in the first place. We may not all live to see it happen, but the more Enlightened people to come will flush the Second Amendment down the sewie hole of failed ideas where it belongs.”

      Again with your hatred of the United States of America? You should not involve God in your hatred of our rights, given by him. First of all, the second amendment is only a relic in the sense that it is a part of our past, being such does not, in any way, make it less valid or important to today’s society. It is sad, that the younger generation is incapable of seeing the needs that require our keeping of our second amendment rights. This lack of proper education must be overcome by the thoughtful teaching of honest and reasonable Americans. Slavery has been legal and condoned by most societies since long before we became a nation. To attempt to claim that our founding fathers were less honorable for that is wrong. Land grabbing has been a human trait, probably since the beginning of time, so how does that single them out as unworthy? The second amendment was written by intelligent men, who had our best interest in mind. They gave us that protection so that we would not be slaves.

      “Not anti-American. Not anti-Second Amendment. You are well-read and intelligent,
      Mr Livingston, but you are oh-for two this morning…”

      Not keeping score here, but since he is correct in both statements he is not 0 for 2. You however made several statements that are patently false so what is your score now?

  • L. Eleurterio

    I believe a major point was missed here and by other press so far on this topic. You underestimate the largest body of people in the US population, who happen to support banning all guns. This group was the biggest reason Obama was elected. They are the same group who supports Agenda 21 and the UN. They are the majority in the US. They are the biggest contributors to health care costs. They make up 89% of the US teacher’s unions. They’ve been the second largest reason why jobs are scarce in the US. Everyone fears them and are afraid to identify them. Politicians will never go up against them. Thousands of laws have been effected by them. No one is interested in addressing them or taking them on. This group are US women. They’ve displaced men 30 to 1 in US jobs over the last 5 years. They hold 89% of all non-military government jobs. They want guns abolished. The number one reason women give for wanting guns taken away, is because they fear men with guns. Men commit most gun shootings. Many women are physically abused by men every day. Most women believe guns add to the power men have over women. The truth is that women have become the strongest, most powerful, group of people in the US. The women abuse laws violate men’s rights. Most cities and towns violate men’s rights every day when a 911 call is placed from any home, but many times the man is the abuser. The average age of a women giving birth has risen sharply. A very large number of women now wait until age 35-45. The likelihood of psychological impairment in children has reached epidemic proportions because of this, but no one does anything about it. A small number of those psychologically impaired children are the ones killing people with guns. Do the research. Check the facts. You’ll be amazed. NOTE: I am a huge proponent of women and women’s rights and I am not a pro gun person. Just throwing out facts we all need to deal with.

    • http://yahoo Rocco

      Yes L it is all because of women. I can’t believe we let them vote. I want some of what you are smoking. And I love the NOTE. That takes away all the sexist ideology. Why don’t you grow up and do what adult do, take responsibility and stop blaming others for your shortcomings.

  • http://www.booksbyoliver.com OhioRiver

    What is it? “Is the government here for our convenience……or are we here for the government’s convenience?” We created the government…..it’s not the government who created us.

    The RINO’s are alreayd selling us down the river of tyranny (A TIME TO STAND by Oliver) so it’s time to take a stand. Need to read this provocative book & understand what the near future is going to bring.

    Bob, are we going to be ready for the USG to snatch our life savings as we just saw in Cyprus? They are now calling it a ‘bank tax’ of 10%.

    • Jeanette

      I’m glad to see someone else has heard about the people in Cyprus being robbed by their government. There has been an eerie silence about it almost everywhere – at least in this country.

      • Bill Henry

        I have seen that the government is eyeing the retirement funds of the people of this country. They can find no way to raise taxes so they have to get the funds from somewhere to support their agenda.

  • Jim Crawford

    This has been obummer’s plan, divide the nation over a very controversial topic thereby creating a combative atmosphere so he can declare martial law and use his Homeland Security Army to take over the country.

    • ibcamn

      obama has his henchmen picking the fight towards the American people,it’s what he wants!

  • ibcamn

    obama is not a leader in any way shape or form.and as for the lengths the progressive liberals would go to to get their way(fofill their agenda)is that even a question?!look at how many times obama has lied to the American people!just now with his sequester lie!and for the ammo and gun grab,everyone now knows that sandy hook was staged.in fact so much debunked information has come out that the gov’t has now put out info saying this supposed gunman had a huge hit list!huge as in size,literally the size!they said that they had went through everything in his house and only found a computer that he wiped so well that the FBI,CIA coulcnt get a thing,but now they found a new list!!we know that the person who lived their didn’t sit in his basement for years playing games and crap like that,but now that all this new info against this supposed mass murder,they now have a weird sized list!i think the liberal freaks will go to any lengths to get their way!even murder!(oh wait,they have!)

  • Dr Richard Wright Hogeland

    Dear Reader – from – the Freedom and Liberty Independent Refector – Keep up the fright – in each jurisdiction – the fight is never ending againt the power of the State – all of the actions of the State against the gun grabbers are unconstitutional — the States approachnis as one writer has called it – the “Fabian” approach named after the Roman General Fabian Camctator or Fabian the Delayer who was successful in defeating Hannibal – by small attackes until Hnnibal’s Army was weaken enough to engage him in a direct frontal attack – - do what can be done – logical – reasonable sounding things – and then all out total victory – - this exactly what happejn in Britain – a little bit at a time –
    We the people have an absolute right to “keep and Bear” Artms – under our Natural Rights the Constitution – the Declaration of Independence – under the later we have a absolutely right to revolt against an opressive government –
    Our first line of defence – ignore whatever laws and regulations are passed in any state – the sdecond line of defense is in the Courts – the Supreme Court – the present Court – demands “tailored” regulations – it must be a very “common sense” restriction – assualt weapeons should be considered constitutional – since the Court has found in the past – and refered to military weapons as a category – when discussing restrictions – you constitutionally can not change a “right” into a license – all but basic restriction on the right to “kerep and Bear” arms should fall if lli9tigated – The Helller and the McDonald Cases – Always keep in mind the Gun Grabbers have even a greater goal in mind – erasing the “M” word itself Manhood!

    R

  • FreedomFighter

    “TO CONQUER A NATION FIRST DISARM ITS CITIZENS” —ADOLF HITLER

    You wonder why DHS or Department of Human Sacrifice buys 2 billion bullets, why all the machine guns, why all the light armored tanks, why all the guard dogs, why are they activating FEMA camps, why are they buying up all the civilian ammo supplies, why drones on American soil, why!? There is no outside enemy, no invasion force threatening the United States, no current sign of open rebellion in the streets just Americans going about daily business as usual.

    Only one reason can be deduced from current actions:

    It is preparation for the Collapse of the monetary system and then Socialist/Communist/fascist cabal takeover of the United States by force of arms.

    The cabal is already trying to remove term limits for Obama. The house has not defunded Obama Care, the TSA, DHS, yet have defunded our military, firefighters, police and released thousands of Latino gang members (was a chaos deal struck to help bring about Martial Law with drug lords?)

    What about the drone program for US Soil?

    In an essay published by the United States Army Combined Arms Center, Pryer laments how the use of unmanned drones – which kill 50 innocent civilian for every suspected terrorist – are perpetuating wars and endangering America’s global reputation. He then makes a stark warning that the drone strike program is merely a pre-cursor to the kind of nightmare technocracy depicted in the Terminator movies.

    “It seems heart-breakingly obvious that future generations will someday look back upon the last decade as the start of the rise of the machines,” writes Pryer, adding that the US government is developing, “robots so advanced that they make today’s Predators and Reapers look positively impotent and antique. These killer robots, though, will share one thing in common with their primitive progenitors: with remorseless purpose, they will stalk and kill any human deemed “a legitimate target” by their controllers and programmers.”

    http://www.infowars.com/us-army-colonel-issues-warning-about-remorseless-killer-robots/

    Special Note:

    drone strike program is merely a pre-cursor to the kind of nightmare technocracy depicted in the Terminator movies.

    That’s why they want them – power and control. Much easier to send a robotic war machine to do the dirty work, they have no soul, no remorse, no morals, unlike human beings whom will eventually stop the slaughter.

    Remember the plan is population reduction — Order out of Chaos

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

  • Hedgehog

    I am a Canadian. I admire your collective decision to resist Obama Augustus and his sycophants. Words to the wise: emulate the Russians (suspect everybody) until proven otherwise. Don’t form large combat groups, they (Obama et al) have weapons of mass destruction and will use them. An APC full of gov’t agents is “spam in a can”; the same in a pool of burning gasoline is “fried spam in a can”. “Take no prisoners, leave no live enemies to your rear!” Why am I saying this? Because as a Canadian, I know that if Obama wins, we’re next!

    • Right Brain Thinker

      I hope you don’t plan on coming down here anytime soon, hog. I’m sure “we” have you on a watch list and will grab and send your butt to Guantanamo once you step over the border. In fact, you should probably not stray too close to the border either, because there is probably a drone up there looking for you.

      If you keep talking like a terrorist, you can expect to be treated like one. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating—-mind your own Canadian business and find something other to do than post insanities on PLD.

      • FreedomFighter

        RBT is a commi ignore him Hog.

        If America goes down, so goes the world.

        Laus Deo
        Semper FI

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

        Spoken like a true “dictator-wanna-be”, or are you the “dictator’s-mini-me”? You give all Americans a bad name, RBT!

      • Right Brain Thinker

        FrenchFriedBrain makes the ever ignorant “commie” rejoinder! Such brilliance!

        And “If America goes down, so goes the world”? Not true, “the world” will feel much pain if America goes down, but it will survive. Too bad FFB and friends can’t see that they are bringing the country down.

        I’m really getting confused by this constant use of “Semper Fi” also. What does it mean, FF? Wgy do you post it when you don’t seem to live it? Do you not see that you are NOT living up to the USMC values and “code” with what you post?

        And hello to WTS/JAY. Why does he waste our time with such nothing-of-value-statements? Dictator? I’m being a friend to idiothog and offering him some good and friendly advice. He apparently doesn’t understand that his rash statements about doing harm to Americans are distinctly UN-American and UN-Canadian and generally UN-Common Sense. Neither does JAY, apparently.

      • momo

        “Semper Fi(delis)” Always Faithful, but to what the constitution you took an oath to defend, or the government?

      • Hedgehog

        Well Right Brain Thinker, I guess you have outed yourself as a government agent provocateur! Since you have taken it upon yourself to call me a terrorist, refuse me entry to the US and threaten me with being sent to Guantanamo, you must be a government agent, yes? To add sauce to the mix, you deny me the right of free speech, another government agent type trick. As far as being on a government list, I have no doubt I am. However, that gives your government the right to turn me back at the border, not to seize me and send me to a concentration camp without trial. Wouldn’t that be a juicy international incident? Your boss should kick your butt for that one! In fact, what you posted sounds more like a terrorist posting than what I said. As for minding my own Canadian business, watching your government is one of my hobbies. After all, your government has invaded my country several times. I trust the american PEOPLE, I don’t trust the AMERICAN GOVERNMENT!

      • Don 2

        What public figure comes to mind when you read this?

        A Marxist begins with ‘his’ prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order or the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage – the political paradise of communism. ~ Saul Alinsky(Rules For Radicals)

      • JeffH

        Hedgehog, just ignore the progressive troll HalfWitThinker.
        He obviously doesn’t believe in free speech and he’s probably one of those internet snitchs too…dialing DHS 800 report a terrorist.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Go away, JeffyH—-go play with the voodoo girls. You sound just like DaveH with that comment. At least you didn’t bore us with a von mises link—for that I thank you..

        And Hog takes issue with my chastising him for making imprudent remarks. I will be more than glad to volunteer to be “the government agent” that greets you on the day you cross the border to do harm to those good Americans that you want to “fry like Spam” in their APC. Give us a time and a date and a crossing place and I will be there with a selection of my guns (I haven’t yet fired the Remington Model 870 Tactical that I purchased last week, I’ll bring that along). “We” will park the APC there for you and see what happens when you try to torch it. I will be only one of many “government agents” in attendance. In fact, we may be able to sell tickets and help reduce the debt.

        You step over the bounds when you make comments like that, Hog. Remember the old dictum that “the right to free speech does not extend to shouting FIRE in a crowded movie theater”? Suppose the next wacko incident we see down here IS someone incinerating a bunch of policemen in a SWAT vehicle? We sure as heck have a lot of sovereign and militia wackos shooting them. Do you understand how crazy some of us are down here? Reading PLD (where the very craziest do NOT live) should give you a small clue. In my job as a “government agent”, I DO keep tabs on certain of these folk, and they just might say “Yeah—the guy from Canada has the right idea—let’s do it”.

        And seizing you and sending you to a concentration camp without trial wouldn’t be a juicy international incident at all—-you’re a terrorist if you incinerate Americans, remember? Lots of people down here would say “waterboard him good and throw away the key”.

        You say “watching your government is one of my hobbies”, and talk about us invading your country several times?. It wasn’t “your country” when we invaded. I will again suggest that you need a new hobby—-one that keeps you out of our hair. Let me suggest that you spend time studying the corruption in your government, particularly as it relates to Trans Canada, the Alberta Tar Sands, the various port and pipeline proposals, and the influence of the Koch brothers and the other fossil fuel interests—-that will keep you busy for a while. When you tire of that, you might look into the contribution the Canadian fisheries interests have made to the situation wioth fish stocks in the north Atlantic. Look into Polar Bear hunts too—-lots of money to be made killing them for “sport”.

        Don 2 asks, “What public figure comes to mind when you read this?”

        I immediately think of all those conservatives who have used Alinsky’s methods for the last 40 years—-the Armeys and the the “right think” tanks supported by the Koch Brothers. They have done a masterful job of confusing a large portion of the population about who is really trying to subjugate them. Alinsky’s ideas are old and referred to Marxists, but the plutocracy and the corporate oligarchs have turned them to their advantage—-by trying to get the proletariat to turn against the government (their only hope for survival) as we head for the last stage—-corporate feudalism. (And when are the righties going to acknowledge that they owe much to Alinsky? Do they think everyone is so dumb that they won’t figure out that they are talking out of both sides of their mouths?)

      • JeffH

        HalfWitTroll’s bulb is a bit dim.

        Our entire Constitution and Bill of Rights are essential measures of gun control — this time, gun control directed against the government. For example, the First Amendment prohibits the government from using its guns to abridge the freedoms of speech or press. The Second Amendment prohibits the government from using its guns to abridge the freedom of the citizen to keep and bear arms. Indirectly, the Second Amendment also operates to limit the government’s use of its guns to abridge freedom in general. This is because, in our system of checks and balances, an armed citizenry constitutes a check on the possibility of the government becoming tyrannical and attempting to use its power to threaten the citizens’ lives and property. It should be understood as protecting a balance between the power remaining in the hands of the people and the power they have delegated to their government. Indeed, the language of the Second Amendment — “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” — should be understood in this way.
        http://mises.org/daily/6172/Gun-Control-on-the-Governments-Guns

        Don’t forget that ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM.

        ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T SHOOT anyone AT ALL. Not even by accident.

        Join us in telling them to STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Lord love a duck! JeffyH gives us a mises.org link! Is he channeling DaveH?

        And it’s a rather poorly reasoned statement at that—waste of time. Of course, Jeffy can’t do as well in his own words, so copying is the only thing left to him (he could remain silent and not look foolish, but that won’t occur to him).

        And ~300 MILLION AMERICANS again? (GAG—GAG—-UPCHUCK)

        STOP CHANTING MINDLESS SLOGANS

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • JeffH

        As HalfWitThinker continues on with his jealousy driven parroting he must be reminded that ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM.

        ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T SHOOT anyone AT ALL. Not even by accident.

        Join us the NRA, GOA, SAF and Rand Paul in telling them to STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

        POLLY WANT A CRACKER? baaarrraaaccckkkkk!

      • Vicki

        ” the political paradise of communism. ~ Saul Alinsky(Rules For Radicals)”

        What he (Saul) conveniently left out was the little detail in the famous communist soundbyte.

        “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

        People don’t need cars, cell phones, Ipads, movies.

        Welcome to paradise.

      • Vicki

        Right Brain Thinker doesn’t and says:
        ” (GAG—GAG—-UPCHUCK)

        STOP CHANTING MINDLESS SLOGANS”

        So then why do you?

      • Right Brain Thinker

        JeffyH, Vicki, and the mob are working overtime—-must be all that NRA “spread the lies” grant money—-the paranoid right wing “stimulus plan”.

        “jealousy driven parroting” says Jeffy? and then he goes right to parroting “~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM” LOL And the thought that I would be “jealous” of anyone here is a LMAO—-wake up and grow up, Jeffy.

        Vicki fishes for a cracker with a tired old Alinsky reference, and then asks a dumb question.

        “Right Brain Thinker says: STOP CHANTING MINDLESS SLOGANS”
        So then why do you?”

        Isn’t it obvious, Vicki? I do it to point out to everyone how mindless and downright insulting your chanting has become. Unlike you, I do not mindlessly spray it everywhere on the thread, but only use it in reply to you and your JV partners when you start with ~300 AMERICANS

        (GAG-GAG-UPCHUCK-SPIT-WIPE MOUTH) You’ve done it again, Vicki! I can afford to lose a few pounds but it would be nice if you let me keep my breakfast down—it IS the most important meal of the day, you know.

      • Vicki

        Right Brain Thinker demonstrates the importance of using more than half a brain by saying:
        “JeffyH, Vicki, and the mob are working overtime—-must be all that NRA “spread the lies” grant money—-the paranoid right wing “stimulus plan”.

        Ad hominem attack.

        - RBT: “STOP CHANTING MINDLESS SLOGANS”
        - Vicki: “So then why do you?”

        - RBT: “Isn’t it obvious, Vicki? I do it to point out to everyone how mindless and downright insulting your chanting has become.”

        Chanting? I see no chanting here. Are you sure your reading the right thread?

        - RBT: “Unlike you, I do not mindlessly spray it everywhere on the thread, but only use it in reply to you and your JV partners when you start with ~300 AMERICANS”

        Hardly mindless. I took a self evident truth and apply it anywhere liberal/progressive/anti-defense people spread their propaganda. Though it is a useful response for every excuse the anti-gun people have for taking away the rights of a free people, I use it most often to counter the statistical nonsense offered as one of the excuses.

        - RBT: “(GAG-GAG-UPCHUCK-SPIT-WIPE MOUTH) You’ve done it again, Vicki! I can afford to lose a few pounds but it would be nice if you let me keep my breakfast down—it IS the most important meal of the day, you know.”

        It’s all within your power RBT. Don’t read PLD till after lunch.

        Btw I notice that you still haven’t answered my question. You said:
        “Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations.”

        I asked how many is a lot. You still have not answered. How did you put it? Ah.
        - RBT: Stop denying!
        - RBT: Stop evading!
        - RBT: Stop deflecting!
        - RBT: Stop obfuscating!

        So when were you going to stop and just answer that very simple question? You do know right? Or were you just making it up?

    • Charlie

      Hedgehog,,,
      Guerrilla warfare is the way to go IF? the shooting continues ,,, BUT,,,go for Peace with Prayer and Paperwork first,,,BUT,,,NEVER give up any “””weapons”””or Rights from King Jesus or The Constitution….

      Charlie Freedom

      • Hedgehog

        Charlie, I agree with you 100%. Always try for peace within the bounds of prudence. But don’t sell out to tyrants, ever! However, when all else fails, guerrilla warfare is definitely the answer.

  • Michael G Marriam

    I’ve been writing this on every blog: I was in a presentation given by a pro-gun freshman NYS legislator. He said the down state coalition is obsessed with outlawing private ownership of firearms and confiscating all privately owned guns.

    His exact words were “Its worse than you think. If anybody tells you they don’t want to take your guns away they are a liar.”

    I expect its the same in all the other states.

  • nc

    Please, Mr. Livingston, don’t let your vivid imagination push your followers into the streets to face the government in a needless showdown. Individuals and small groups have tried to shoot It out with the government in the past! Those individuals and small groups are dead!

    • FreedomFighter

      “God and Country”
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whqQQ1PUrgc

      “The enemies of freedom ram socialism down our throats, time to ram “God and Country” down theirs!”

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

    • StarvinLarry

      NC-
      Ever hear of Al-Queda? Taliban? Viet Cong?The Mujahadeen in the Afghan war with the Russians?
      Small groups CAN,DO,and HAVE defeated large military forces.

      • nc

        StarvinLarry, make sure your small groups have caves to hide in, If you care to live in a cave or underground bunker for the rest of your life because the government MIGHT take all of your guns go for it! Make sure you take your kids with you! They will be DELIGHTED(?) to sacrifice their teens years because their fathers and mothers are paranoid!
        Remember the right wing guide to good parenting! “I MADE YOU AND I CAN KILL YOU AND MAKE ANOTHER ONE JUST LIKE YOU BECAUSE THAT’S HOW GOD TOLD ME TO DO IT! ???

      • STEVE E.

        What nc is saying is that fighting for your freedom will cause much inconvenience which is what cowards realize. Cowards never want to inconvenience themselves. That’s why they are cowards in the first place.

      • cawmun cents

        “I cannot speak for StarvinLarry nc,

        But as for me give me liberty or give them death!”
        I would rather live in a tent with a free group of people than live in a mansion with slaves.
        You can keep your land of the fee,home of the slave,if you like.
        But I dont fancy living that way.
        Normally I dont often wax religious on this thread,but here is where you should learn from what my Christianity tells me.”Death has lost it’s sting”(paraphrasing)
        What Paul is saying is that as Christians we no longer need fear death.
        We have a good thing coming to us.
        Better than this world has to offer.
        I find no place in the Bible that says I cannot defend myself if I am about to be killed.
        It may say to love my enemies,it may say to turn the other cheek,it may say that to live by the sword is to die by the sword.But this is how I understand these things.
        If my own government becomes my enemy,and they are working because I gave them taxes,then I am feeding clothing and sheltering them already.These are the requirements I have been given to be a “Good Samaritan”.
        When they make unjust laws and foment discord,and I do not bum rush them to take back what I feel is mine then I am already doing as commanded in the Word.Especially when they have asked me to carry their burden and I have done so willingly.(Taxes)
        I do not live by using my personal firearms to enrich my life in any way,they are for defense only,therefore I am keeping in accord of His law again.(I do not live by my sword,but rather I possess on that I may defend what is rightfully mine,being my God given rights,my health,and welfare,and my pursuit of happiness.)
        So you see it would seem to you that I am weak because of my beliefs,but meek does not make weak.I am meek,but my strength lies in God,and not with man.
        The very charge that gives my government power over my real enemies is the same one that I use to levy against them,should they choose to make enmity with me,seeing as I have done nothing to personally give them reason to assume that I am their enemy.
        Do you get that?
        Yet if they have their own plans to charm me like a snake into giving them what is rightfully mine,by stealth and subversion, then it would seem to me as if they wanted to take those rights away from me personally.
        Does this fact give me cause to doubt their sincerity when it comes to whether they are attempting to have enmity with me?Of course the answer is that I do not know.
        I do however understand the subtle nuances of mind control techniques.
        Do I see them using these on me personally?
        For this I have no common answer,but I can only relay the signals I am receiving.
        It seems from looking at the thing from straight away,that there are really no shennanigans that I should be patently aware of.
        But when I adopt a more rounded view of the matter my sixth sense,my intuition,my gut feeling is that I have something to become aware of.
        The fact that you do not share my feeling,is not a mystery to me.
        I know that you have a differing view than me.
        Whether you arent seeing from the same angle or you just refuse to believe that things are very scary right now,is of no concern to me.
        I have to go with my innards every time.
        It may bethat they are privy to information which I cannot see or know at this time.
        Perhaps we are in danger of invasion?
        Perhaps unwittingly we have already been invaded and the real war is about to start?
        These questions beg answering before I let assumption take leave of my better senses.
        But it seems as if they are gearing up for something.
        What that is I do not perceive nor care about at this time.
        It is a waiting game right now.
        But soon the wait may be over.
        Semper Paratus nc…….
        -CC.

      • Mike in MI

        c.c. – great writing and responses.
        Your discussion of “meekness” is right on the money. Meekness is not weakness or some sort of simpering, fawning, making yourself to be a doormat for the world.
        In Numbers 12:3 the Word says that Moses was the meekest man on the earth at the time. That dude was no pushover about anything. He fought against Pharaoh, the children of Israel at times, led the people in battle against their enemies, personally fought and killed people who were doing wrong. He was tough and resolute about everything that mattered to God.
        Jesus Christ is supposed to be our prime example. If people would go read the Gospels instead of take the blatterings of fairy pastors and priests as gospel people would see a Jesus who was tough and uncompromising against the High Priests and Pharisees leaders, Sadducees and people who stood against God, the people of God and himself. He made satire of them, called them names showed the people what hypocrites they were (are) and didn’t care that they hated him to death.
        He’s the prime example for us. Believe me, God’s feelings don’t get hurt when we stand up for Him against people who stick their middle fingers in the air at Him and think it’s cool.

      • Vicki

        “it may say that to live by the sword is to die by the sword”

        The proper understanding is live by the sword as in being a soldier or royal guard or somesuch.

        Living by the sword as in defending your life where tool=sword is not the same as being a paid bodyguard, bounty hunter or hit man.

    • Walt

      Wow! Somebody must have skipped their history classes in high school! You said:

      “Please, Mr. Livingston, don’t let your vivid imagination push your followers into the streets to face the government in a needless showdown. Individuals and small groups have tried to shoot It out with the government in the past! Those individuals and small groups are dead!”

      A few folks would disagree with you on that particular statement:

      Fidel Castro against Batista in Cuba.
      Lenin & Trotsky against Czar Nicholas.
      George Washington against King George III and the mighty British Empire.
      The Romanians against President Nicolae Ceausescu.
      The Arabs who revolted against the Ottoman Empire.
      The French citizens who revolted against King Louis XVI.
      The Poles who escorted the Russians out of Poland.
      The Hungarians who escorted the Russians out of Hungary.
      The Afghans who wore out the Russians in Afghanistan.
      The Viet Cong who wore out the American military in a 10 year war.
      The Chinese Communist who forced the Nationalist government to retreat to Taiwan.

      Not to mention the score of other revolts in Africa, Latin America and Asia. Some by good folks and others by some nasty pieces of work.

      I certainly am not advocating on behalf of any particular side on this issue….just pointing out historical facts that disprove your claim.

      • nc

        Walt. based you list of “historical” battles by smaller forces IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES IN OTHER TIMES ,do you really and truly believe that those who are truly prepared in THIS COUNTRY AT THIS TIME SHOULD EVEN CONSDIER FACING down the government in an armed conflict?????? I believe that 90% of the bravado for taking their guns to the streets comes from dudes and dudetts in their mother’s basement who AIN’T GOING ANYWHERE FARTHER THAN THE FIRST FLOOR BATHROOM!

        • Frank Kahn

          NO, nc, we are not all chickens like you. If push comes to shove, we will respond with suitable force.

      • Uknowho

        And you are just rarin’ to go aren’t you Frank? You are absolutely ready for the attack by the gov that is not coming… In fact you watch “A Riflemen’s Journal” just to help you become a better shooter… Its just too bad there will be no new episiodes because the host of the show was shot and killed by a jealous man in Montana.

        So much for the idea of an armed society being a polite one eh?

        Conservatives are the most scared and paranoid people on the planet. The record there proves it to be true… From using the bible to justify slavery and racism, subjugation of women… To not wanting homosexuals to have the same rights as others.

        Not understanding something leads to fear…Conservatives do not understand much unfortunately.

        • Frank Kahn

          At some point, you tipped over the edge of reason here.

          “And you are just rarin’ to go aren’t you Frank? You are absolutely ready for the attack by the gov that is not coming… In fact you watch “A Riflemen’s Journal” just to help you become a better shooter… Its just too bad there will be no new episiodes because the host of the show was shot and killed by a jealous man in Montana.”

          This might come as a shock to you but, I have never heard of “A Rifleman’s Journal”. So, I cannot respond to whatever motivational ideas were put forth therein. I am, also, unsure what you mean by “become a better shooter”. A lifetime of practice, hunting and military service has helped me to make my shooting skills quite good. I will admit that my aim was never quite as accurate as my fathers, but he was just really good. “rarin to go” seems to imply a desire for the conflict to start, I am not in such a state of mind, nor will I be happy if it comes to that. Being ready for the possibility of needing to defend yourself, from whatever direction, is neither paranoid nor nonsensical. I probably won’t be attacked by 10 men in a home invasion, but being able to repel the attack is wise to prepare for.

          “So much for the idea of an armed society being a polite one eh?”

          ridicule ad absurdity. Made that one up, you should appreciate it since you make things up too. The concept of an armed society being a polite one is based on normal human interactions and will never apply to those who have some abnormal mental view that clouds their judgement. If you intend to physically assault me, you will at least hesitate and consider the consequences of your actions if you know I am armed. If you are rational, you will not proceed with your assault, making our interaction more civil and polite.

          “Conservatives are the most scared and paranoid people on the planet. The record there proves it to be true… From using the bible to justify slavery and racism, subjugation of women… To not wanting homosexuals to have the same rights as others.”

          First of all, you are lumping all conservatives into a radical group. Not all conservatives support any of those three ideas. I doubt that conservatism actually supports any. I would suggest that you provide the record, you mention, that proves the truth that all conservatives are paranoid (scared and paranoid is redundant). I have encountered a few people that claim there is racism in the Bible, but I see it more as bigotry. Slavery needs to be defined better for comparison to the Bible. It is said that, what you do for the least of his children you do for him. In this aspect, if you have slaves, that you treat badly, you are going against God. I would ask you to explain which RIGHTS we are preventing homosexuals from having. They have all the same RIGHTS as everyone else does already. Do you really mean PRIVILEGES? If you are talking about marriage, you might want to look into the Biblical meaning of marriage. This is a RIGHT given by God, it does not happen by getting a government license and being pronounced married by some civil servant. Getting to have a license and be recognized, BY MAN, as married is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT. Being allowed all the benefits of marriage is a PRIVILEGE, not a RIGHT. Who is advocating the subjugation of women? Is this a reference to abortion and birth control? We don’t want to control women, we want them to control their base urges and take responsibility for their actions. We also don’t want to be forced to pay for their indiscretions. If a man and woman don’t want a baby, they should use the most effective form of birth control available, abstinence. If that is not something they are willing to do, then they should consider either temporary preventative measures like condoms and BC contraceptives or, if they are really against procreation, sterilization. It is their choice.

          “Not understanding something leads to fear…Conservatives do not understand much unfortunately.”

          Fear of the unknown is a primitive survival instinct. Everyone has this instinct, even you. You have shown evidence of this fear when you claim that gun owners are irresponsible. You don’t know their training, abilities or intentions, so you fear what might happen if they are not controlled. Your statement about conservatives not understanding much is both a logical fallacy, proof by bald assertion, and it is a lie. Just because we disagree with much of your ideas and / or opinions, does not make us ignorant. The fact that you disagree with my ideas, does not mean you are ignorant, it simply means that you have had some personal problems, that are unique to you, which I don’t share. Because of that, I do not understand why you feel the need to arbitrarily restrict the RIGHTS of honest, law abiding citizens.

      • Charlie

        Uknowho,,,
        You must be a VERY fearful person ,,,because you certainly DO NOT understand The Holy Bible… Have you ever fired “Expert” with a M-14…M-16 at 500 or a thousand yards??? as We said before , you may be as useless as teats on a Bore Hog,,,even in a shooting battle………….
        Meanwhile… Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation…

        Charlie Freedom

    • Texas Ride

      nc, just because you don’t like the facts, doesn’t make them meaningless. This regime does nothing without a reason and it is obvious that this regime is itching for a conflict. They have been since the beginning. ohomo has been jabbing a stick in the eye of Americans to see how much they are willing to take. I think he has finally found a big enough “stick” that he is going to get a reaction.

      It is time that we have a National discussion about the treason being committed by the international criminals and conspirators in Washington.

      • Kevin

        I agree with your sentiment. Our Nation is far from perfect and quite frankly has never even come close to it. But at least there used to be some Limitation to its Insatiable desire for expansion and Invasive maneuverings Into American Liberties and freedoms. I do not know the answer or else I would not be here looking. But I will say that if someone comes to my town and attempts acts of aggression upon my Rights under the second amendment. they will at the least find one person willing to Give them a permanent limp for their trouble.

  • Tommy cunningham

    To those who propose “sensible” infringement of my right to keep and bare arms, not gonna give up that right for any reason, you’ll need a gun to take that right, I’m born with that right and its protected by the constitution! There is NO compromise!!!

    • Don 2

      BENEFITS OF GUN CONTROL:

      CONCENTRATION CAMPS
      KILLING FIELDS
      GULAGS

      Real Men Own Guns ~ Slaves Don’t

  • harold

    I did not vote for obama I dont support socialism marxism communism or leningrad Stalingrad or Obama grad this trynnical assault on or liberty will cause the next civil war those who forget history are destined to repeat it you reap what u sow the quote , I fear we have awaked a sleeping giant and filled it with remorse.by admiral yamamoto.still holds true.

  • Jerry Mullen

    I am not normally prone to conspiracy theories, but I noticed a strange trend in an article posted online by Mother Jones Magazine. They claimed to list all mass shootings from 1982 to 2012. It may have some copyright protection, as it locked up my computer when I tried to save it, which was fortunate. I copied down the highlights rather than the lurid details and found that:

    President Numberof mass shootings Average per year comments
    Reagan 4 in eight years 0.5 Reagan supported 2nd amnd
    Bush I 8 in four years 2.0 Bush supported gun control
    Clinton 18 in eight years 2.25 Strong supporter of ”
    Bush II 15 in eight years 1.75 ?

    Now all of these together, 45 events in 28 years comes to 1.6 per year. Since President Obama has taken over, the rate is 3.75 per year! It has more than doubled!

    This doesn’t have to be a government conspiracy. But now that we know that some Muslim groups will fly airpanes into buildings and blow themselves up to achieve a political goal, it makes one wonder if some group, with a “higher goal” wouldn’t target psychotic people to cause such events to acheive that goal. The rate seems to increase whenever we have administrations that are perceived as being in favor of gun control.

    • Texas Ride

      Jerry, do you mean something like the government’s study on “mind control.” The shooter with the orange hair actually worked with the “mind-control freaks.”

      • STEVE E.

        Texas, here is something that will verify what you are stating to those that can comprehend.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGtQOhcltn8

      • independant thinker

        I read somewhere that the uni-bomber was an active participant in CIA mind control experiments. Unfortunately I did not save the article.

      • Mike in MI

        I. T. –
        “Mind control” eh? Kind’a backfired on him didn’t it.

        “Mind control” by outsiders is nothing but devil spirit infestation. Neither does God advise His people to have an “open mind” about things. Instead He advises us to learn His attitudes and outlooks on things and steadfastly hang tight to them like they were a surpassing treasure.
        “Control of one’s own mind” is a virtue every son of God is supposed to nurture and develop as one of the fruits of the spirit of God created in you after one becomes a child of God – a Christian believer,

  • Stupid People

    You say … If gun grabbers thought the Sandy Hook shooting would cause Americans to stand passively by and allow their 2nd Amendment rights to be snatched away, they have learned differently. The question now is: How far is government willing to go now that it’s getting push-back?

    Whatddya mean, “they have learned differently”. In my opinion they are just as dumb now as they were dumb then. And, they have NOT learned ANYTHING. Stupid people.

    • JeffH

      SP, there is more truth to what you say that even they realize.

  • Ron

    They have been looking for a fight from day one. Now they have found it , there are 80,000,000 gun owners in America . Good luck with that you stupid liberals !

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      But are they organized or are they sitting in their basements planning on them coming at “their” pleasure. Sure there’s enough guns, Sure there’s enough people, but they have to organize and they are not.

      • Charlie

        T C A,,,
        AND,,,You are NOT giving enough Scriptures for The DAA’s to get organized under King Jesus Christ!………..Gun Rights,,,Luke 22:36,,,Salvation,,,Acts 2:38,,,daily food and shelter Matthew 6:9—13…. ALL needs Matthew 6:33… These Scriptures Spoken by King Jesus and / or His ranking Men… Does it get any better or more powerful?????????????

        Charlie Freedom

      • Kevin

        Using Guns as a rally cry or common ground to start a resistance movement is truly Ill conceived. It would be exactly what Our corrupt government would need as an excuse for labeling it as a terrorist group and wipe your Ass off the face of the earth.

      • Charlie

        Kevin,,,
        You being a Judeo- Christian , We can understand your fears,,,but,,,as David took out the giant ,,,so,,, will America be taken back under The Command of King Jesus Christ….
        Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation…

        Charlie Freedom

      • Kevin
        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          When will they be organized? The swat team is already organized!

  • http://www.cindynel.co.za peter

    You can fool some folks some of the time but you can’t fool everyone all the time. The governments of this planet are playing dangerous games and whilst there is no doubt that they have the necessary manpower, equipment and will to sort out their populace very quickly, it remains a frightening thought that they would entertain the idea of wiping out and destroying everything in order to satisfy their own wilful greed, idiocy and stupidity.When one picks a fight, it is wise to remember that there are casualties and winning is sometimes losing anyway. War is ugly, costly and unnecessary but declaring war is reserved for idiots.

  • Chris

    Yes……..stand up for your 2nd amendment rights. Stand up for your freedoms. And while you’re all at it, fight everything “else” they’re trying to cram down your throats………like GMO foods, flouridated water (illegal in many countries) and other poisons. There is power in numbers, but ONLY if people take a stand by picking up the pen and not just blow off hot air complaining. Complain to the right people……….starting with your mayor on up.

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

    All this “gun-control-talk” is but a ruse. Since all the Obama’s “gun-control” rhetoric and proposed legislation, gun shops are reaping rich rewards, calling the Obama’s new gun-control legislation; the “Obama gun stimulus.” Way to go Obama, you kept your promise to stimulate the economy! And some claimed you didn’t have it in you…you sly whore, you. LOL!!!

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      Yup! The love of money is the root of all evil.

  • anthony

    I say that every one of our millions of gun owners that have multiple guns should sell one of them cheaply to someone who wants one and is legally allowed to purchase one at a very cheap price. Then every one of the millions could meet, and organize somewhere to prepare, categorize, stockpile, and count their arms. Then wait until the [expletive deleted] hits the fan, and defend our constitution to the death. I am certain of who would come out on top. The real problem in our country is that we are divided.

    • Charlie

      anthony ,,,
      Who said “”no King but King Jesus!”””??? can We get together behind King Jesus???
      Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Gun Rights,,,Acts 2:38,,, Luke 22:36…

  • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

    Is history repeating itself. “The only thing that is new is the history you haven’t read yet”. In Russia it was the Reds against the Whites in their shooting was. You might call our war the blue collars against white collars or the producers against the predators. I think we should plan on a shooting war so that we’re ready if one starts. How does that go? Forewarned is to be forearmed. Right now they’re testing us with that guy in
    NY that was baited into breaking emperor Cuomom’s decree. If we leave him out to dry it will only give Cuomo’s legions courage to continue. In their natural state they are back biting cowards. We rely on their reasoning and our Constitution while they spit on both. To, hopefully, avoid the comfronation that’s coming we must get enlghtened and unite. Quit this bickering thinking our arguments are better that the next guys.

    When sheep feel endangered they form a circle, the one’s on the inside feeling safe. They are to stupid to realize that as the one’s on the outside wll be eaten making that circle smaller and smaller. Right now that’s us, if we don’t unite and fast. Their working as fast as they can to impose tyranncal Communism on us. We report their actions and then sit back like an audience and watch them. Krushchev in 1953 said: When it comes time to hang you, you will line up to see who can sell us the rope. They have our bellies full somewhat now to keep us pacified so we’re grumbling but not doing something about it. We’re running on their timetable, and we proved that at this last election. The man they hate the most is now Rand Paul. Back him and anyone he choose as general material.

    I’ve said this before but it’s worth repeating. Read and believe John 3:16. You never know when krystal nicht might come down upon us.

    • FreedomFighter

      Yes TCA, organization is a key element.

      Organize politically NOW and attack at all levels:

      Goto your schools and see what teachers are teaching and get the liberals fired if teaching your children how to be a good little commi/socialist, make a stink, call the local Talk radio station, national radio stations and expose them.

      Put up signs everywhere you can exposing the agenda, reference this site, and others like infowar or your favorite or all.

      Got the money? Rent billboards making a freedom statement.

      Take out radio adds

      Expose city, county and state officials that are socialist/communist and vote your rights away — spread the word — hand out flyer, stand on the side of road with signs — PROTEST loudly and peacefully.

      Let others know they are now alone.

      American gun owners are 80-100 million strong adult voting block, that is 1/3 of the country and bigger than any other voting block in America — write letters telling liberals just that, and let them know there political careers are over if they violate your rights under the constitution.

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

      • FreedomFighter

        Let others know they are now alone.

        correction Let others know they are not alone.

    • Charlie

      T C A,,,
      IF,,,??? John 3:16 is complete Salvation ,,,? then why did Peter say Acts 2:38??? and why did Peter say 1 Peter 3:21,,, and why did King Jesus say Matthew 16:19???
      Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Gun Rights,,,see Acts 2:38, and Luke 22:36…………

      Charlie Freedom

  • Uknowho

    Once again, Bob throws our incomplete and false assumptions as red meat to the willing.

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/ssabullets.asp

    http://metabunk.org/threads/599-Debunked-DHS-orders-450-million-40-caliber-bullets-for-use-in-America

    Sylvia Longmire.

    “First of all, have you looked at the sources for these ‘stories’? The link you sent is from Examiner.com, a ‘citizen journalism’ site where contributors have no training as reporters or writers, and their stories are completely unveiled. The source for this story in particular was a ‘report’ – essentially a blog post – on Infowars.com, a website for radio show host Alex Jones who is described as ‘a giant in America’s conspiracy subculture’ by Rolling Stone magazine.

    The author of that post, Paul Watson, only used a solicitation by the Social Security Administration on the FedBizOpps.com website for the ammunition, which was needed in 41 different locations within 60 days of purchase. Those were the only facts available, and it was Watson who speculated, ‘It’s not outlandish to suggest that the Social Security Administration is purchasing the bullets as part of preparations for civil unrest.

    So the story made the rounds to The Huffington Post, to Glenn Beck’s site The Blaze, and finally (and thankfully) to urban myth-debunkingSnopes.com. Well, it turns out the bullets were for cops, folks. The Social Security Administration employs law enforcement agents, and the agency actually had the time and patience to let us know the bullets were for ‘duty carry’ purposes for 300 of its officers. And those bullets for NOAA? Guess what … their Fisheries and Marine division has cops who need bullets for work and training, too.

    Read the full info on Snopes.com, please: http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/ssabullets.asp

    This discussion will hopefully end here.”

    But the discussion doesn’t end there because it serves Bob L’s purposes to get the right all crazy over this non-story because Bob L’s MO is to serve up the incomplete info and then let his loyal band of conspiracy co-conspirators run with it and take the story to new places.

    Bob L loves his NRA and the NRA are now the offical lobbying arm of gun manufacturers. Anything that can be done to get more people buying guns and ammo, Bob is all for, even he has to peddle irrational fear to do it.

    That is all this story is.

    • cawmun cents

      If “Snopes” is your source,then you are already lost.
      Many is the time I have debunked their stories to my liberal friends’ chagrins.
      I remember one where the biggest catfish ever in China was being dragged down the street,Only a moron would have believed it was true,seeing that a catfish in no way resemble the juvenile whale shark that it actually turned out to be.They lack the five gill slits that can clearly be seen in the photo,whick indicate it is a species of shark.Since the fish in question was said (and appeared photographically) to be fifteen feet in length,it didnt take a rocket scientist to debunk their story.It was very amusing.

      -CC.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Lord love a catfish, CC!

        Snopes isn’t always right, but they do try to ferret out truth and do succeed most of the time. There are other sites out there that do the same—-politifact and factcheck—-and they are all a good place to start. They certainly offer more “truth” than the biased propaganda sites of the right wing circular firing squad that keep citing EACH OTHER as sources.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        PS I was a bit stunned by the complete irrelevance of the catfish-whale shark story, so I neglected to ask a real question.

        You say, “Many is the time I have debunked their stories to my liberal friends’ chagrins”. I for one would love to hear of all this “debunking” you have done—-how about some examples?—-”many” would imply more than a handful—-how about just three?

      • Uknowho

        Cawmun,

        Actually I gave you 3 sources. Now what sources do you believe? The Heritage Foundation? The Washington Times/Examiner? CBN? Which biased source do you believe?

        It just sounds so appealing to you that Obama and his liberal horde is gearing up fro war along with his muslim brotherhood against the good Christian, white male protectors of freedom doesn’t it? You want to believe…It fits in with the narrative that people like Bob want you to believe and the leaps the other right wingers take with the info Bob spoon feeds you.

        You just can’t help it can you?

      • cawmun cents

        First of all Unw,I never said I thought Omamba was gearing up with the Muslim Brotherhood.
        And secondly,I know and have stated many times before that Omamba is a figurehead for the Democratic Socialists,who are his czars and advisers that actually run this nation as we speak.
        They are in league with the “progressives”,which is just a codeword for Democratic Socialism,which lays at the core of all moderate government activity today.
        These folk recognize no political boundaries and have taken powerful positions in our halls of government for quite some time now.
        This is my opinion and I know all about opinions,so spare me the grisly detail.
        Omamba’s first executve order was to seal his records.
        I have many other examples…too many to list.
        But I digress.
        -CC.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Please DO “digress”, CC. Maybe if you list out enough of the paranoid parroting talking points of the deluded, maybe you will finally get to one that is true and worth worrying about. Line them up for us. Just like those examples of “debunking” of Snopes—-where are they?

        You obviously don’t know about “opinions” or you would take a little more care when stating yours as if they were facts brought down from the mount with the commandments. As you did at least half a dozen times in this comment.

        “I have many other examples…too many to list, you say. Try us out—-how about a handful? If we can find the energy listen to Frank Kahn, we can certainly manage to hear what you have to say..

        And I will say it again—-anyone who must make up childish and disrespectful names for the duly elected (TWICE) POTUS is not worthy of any respect themselves. Grow up.

        • Frank Kahn

          Hey, don’t point the finger at me, they put up with a hell of a lot more from you than me. Now you are not only a great scientist, High school teacher, administrator but you are also a mighty government agent. Gee, where do you find the time to be a human being? OOPS, forgot, you decided to leave that one out.

      • cawmun cents

        Hey there……
        Just a friendly answer to Toilet Train Thinker…are you aware of the significance of Chicago (where the current POTUS hails from) in leftist political circles?
        I am.
        Cheers!
        -CC.

      • Kevin

        When Cawmun jumps into the fray you can bet all is lost for whichever side Cawmun tries to represent. Please stop trying to Help…. anyone….. with……. anything…. your either working for the other side or you really are too simple minded to be sharing.

    • Don 2

      Even The LEFT Finds DHS Ammo Buy ‘Very Troubling’

      http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/even-left-finds-dhs-ammo-buy-very-troubling/

    • Michael J.

      Dave67,
      Snopes receives funding through a chain of entities that leads back to George Soros. Nuff said.

      • BrotherPatriot

        Yep.

    • Kevin

      By Leatherneck Blogger…………
      The last few months have seen troubling news of massive government purchases of ammunition. Agencies from the Social Security Administration to the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Homeland Security have purchased millions of rounds. But is the whole thing more hype than substance?

      Ever since Barack Obama was first elected in 2008, he has been selling guns and ammunition at a faster clip than any gun salesman could hope for. And since his re-election, citizens have been faced with severe shortages of both. This can only be exacerbated by large government purchases. The Social Security Administration (SSA), for example, purchased 174,000 rounds and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) bought 320,000 rounds. More understandable in purpose but also perhaps more staggering in scale, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) put in a request for 450 million rounds, while the FBI intends to purchase 100 million.

      The headlines are ominous, but some of the hype can be put in perspective by doing a little math. National Review’s Charles C. W. Cooke does just that. The SSA’s request for 174,000 rounds amounts to just 590 rounds for each of its 295 inspector general agents “who investigate Social Security fraud and other crimes.” Some of us might go through 590 rounds in an afternoon at the range. As for the USDA, 320,000 is enough to provide the same number of rounds for 542 agents, and, through the Forest Service, those agents have an area the size of Pakistan to cover.

      When it comes to the bigger orders, Cooke writes, “The FBI and DHS’s apparently vast orders are deceptively presented by the conspiracy theorists. It is true that in 2011, the FBI ordered up to 100 million bullets for its 13,913 special agents (which works out to 7,187 per agent). And, yes, the Department of Homeland Security — a composite department that oversees USCIS, Customs and Border Protection, FEMA, ICE, the TSA, the Coast Guard, the Secret Service, and the National Protection Directorate — placed a request for up to 450 million rounds for its 65,000 armed personnel (which works out to 6,923 per agent). But in the real world, ammunition is not divided up and handed out on such a basis. What is bought is stockpiled and then allocated on the basis of need. The DHS’s order is expected to last for at least five years, and it was placed up front primarily as a cost-saving measure.” Indeed, DHS is not even bound to buy that much; they merely have a tab on which to order more rounds as needed.

      That certainly doesn’t mean there aren’t questions or that we should simply shrug and look the other way. For starters, the Department of Education recently placed an order for “27 Remington Brand Model 870 police 12-gauge shotguns.” This might lead any reasonable person to ask, as Cooke does, “Whether it is in possession of one bullet or 1 million bullets, should the federal Department of Education be armed in the first place? If so, why?” We would add, should there even be a Department of Education? But that’s a topic for another day. The DoE has been known to botch raids when it was the wrong enforcement vehicle from the start.

      The same questions could be asked of any number of bureaucracies. Does the Social Security Administration really need an armed enforcement division? We’ve known some unruly seniors in our day, but that seems to be overkill.

      Then there’s the information that’s just plain false. Reports have been circulating that DHS has procured 2,717 Mine Resistant Armor Protected (MRAP) vehicles. The truth is, DHS has had retrofitted MRAPs since 2008, and now has 16 of them for serving “high-risk warrants.” The figure of 2,717 comes from a delivery to the Marine Corps, not DHS. None of that, however, takes away from the problem that these are more properly military vehicles for war zones, not law enforcement tools. The militarization of law enforcement is undeniably troublesome. Furthermore, DHS is the same bureaucracy that claims right-wing extremists pose a threat, and it’s run by an administration that thinks that “weapons of war” shouldn’t be on our streets. Unless they’re the ones driving them, apparently.

      There are certainly troubling trends here and very real threats to our Liberty, but we must be careful not to exaggerate. While readers know that we never minimize the outrageous growth of government beyond its constitutional bounds, it also doesn’t seem to us that the government is, as some have put it, “stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.” Questions about procurements and functions? Absolutely. Apocalypse? Not yet.

      Hope this puts a better perspective on the ammo shortages. But what does need to be questioned is why the basically bureaucratic departments ( SSA, DoE, etc.) need a law enforcement arm.

  • Flashy

    Find an issue that’s not an issue. Make it an issue by hyping outlandish claims. tell people they have to fear it. feed the fear by more outlandish stories and predictions. create an anger…create a “we” versus ‘them” … tell them you have a way to save them…and use it for support and money. Emphasize the negative, tell no positive. offer no solutions. fan the flame of discontent, create divides. feed the coffers and feed the flames.

    Hmmmm….

    • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

      I see you are very familiar with Obama’s “play-book”, Flashy. You summed it up, beautifully! Thank you…

      • Flashy

        WTS…i was speaking of todays article, along with the TP and the American taliban mode of operations.

      • OneGuess

        Still delusional, oh flushed one.

      • Flashy

        Oneguess…who’s delusional?

        Reince Preibus, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, Donald Trump, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, Michelle Bachmann, Wayne LaPierre, etc. all look like the spokespeople of the future of the right wing conservatism and that is the case the Republican party is in deep trouble…..you couldn’t find a bigger and more diverse carnival sideshow of circus freaks in this country even if you ran full page ads in newspapers across the country.

        This party disturbing collection of an almost psychotic mindset of what they think is real patriotism are pandering to the nutjobs, gun nuts, survivalist, militia types, doomdayers, deadenders, hate groups , white supremest, bigots, racists, fringe psychotic people, misogynist, religious bigots, anything but what is considered patriotic and decent American values.

        If this is the future of conservatism or even the Republican party, then the majority of the this country needs to pay attention, because this is as destructive and threatening to democracy in this country as the Taliban and Al Qaida are to a peaceful life in the middle east. These nutjobs at CPAC sound and look more like a revival meeting of a reunion of Jonestown unification church members………this is scary. This is one scary bunce of misfits and crazies that are as ignorant to what real America is, as middle eastern terrorist group…..losers!

        Think about that. And you support them. Who’s delusional?

      • AK907

        Funny how Flashy can recognize propaganda so well, yet be completely oblivious to what his/her own “lord and savior” King Obama. As for calling us American Taliban, thanks for the early morning laugh.

      • Flashy

        AK…I recognize propaganda. I don’t need to talk about government spin…I recognize it. Unlike you however, I see how the extremists, the TP, the American Taliban go beyond spin…they tell you you are on another world and you swallow it like the whale swallowing jonah.

        I’m not writing to you..you’re off in some lala land believing anything as long as it tears down this nation. I’m writing to those reading these thread…assuring them that the crazies on this board are just that…borderline candidates for the looney bin.

        Reality to you guys is a lie. it clashes with your need to fear, to hate, to create an enemy of your fellow Americans.

      • momo

        Flashy says: “AK…I recognize propaganda.”

        You should flashman, that’s all you spew on this board…propaganda.

      • Vicki

        Flashy writes:
        “Reality to you guys is a lie. it clashes with your need to fear, to hate, to create an enemy of your fellow Americans.”

        We are not the ones who fear our fellow Americans and thus demand that they give up their right to keep and bear arms.

      • Kevin

        (Flashy)…. There are “Nut Jobs” on both ends of the Ideological spectrum. I would think that somewhere in the middle would represent the vast Majority of Americans. if you cannot recognize this then you at the far end of one of these extremes. (in my opinion)

    • Bill Henry

      To paraphrase an old saw. “It is not the act of impropriety but the appearance of an act of impropriety” that triggers the crap detector.

    • STEVE E.

      In other words, avoid the facts.

    • Don 2

      Even The LEFT Finds DHS Ammo Buy ‘Very Troubling’

      http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/even-left-finds-dhs-ammo-buy-very-troubling/

    • Charlie

      Flashy,,,
      Offer us a solution to The American CEG,,,that will beat The Bible as a problem fixer…
      Meanwhile… Praise King Jesus for Gun Right and Salvation… see Luke 22:36 , Acts 2:38..

      Charlie Freedom

    • Mike in MI

      You got it right, Flash-flush -
      Find a non-issue and prove it to be truly something of great and evident concern . . . just like Ben Franklin, Thos. Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, Geo. Washington, John Hancock and a few other people who are hateful, disgusting people by your way of thinking.
      Or, maybe you don’t even recognize the names with the education you’ve probably had. Sad.

  • Al’Stand

    A ” well-armed and ready Militia” says it all. We either collectively join together to stop the tyranny now; or forever live like serfs!

    • Uknowho

      Please tell me what tyranny you are subject to right now please in America. Go ahead and be very clear about it.

      Thanks!

      • FreedomFighter

        “Please tell me what tyranny you are subject to right now please in America”

        Obama and the liberal progressives (communists) – see NY, Calif and Chicago, like cancer it is spreading.

        Laus Deo
        Semper FI

      • Uknowho

        Give me specifics FF… Can you? What specific tyranny are you subject to?

      • Charlie

        Uknowho?,,,
        IF?,,,you can’t see the “Outlaws” and their Lawlessness by now,,,you are NOT looking for Truth, apple pie ,and The American Way…… SO,,,,you would not recognize “Truth” ,if, it kicked your butt and said hello… Meanwhile………………………………
        Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing, and Gun Rights,,,see Luke 22:36…………

        Charlie Freedom

      • larry ryan

        One of many: The fourth ammendment is now a bad joke. I refuse to let the police search my car or house without a warrant or probable cause. My refusal IS now regarded as probable cause. The more aggresive cops will go ahead and search without a warrant citing my refusal as probable cause. Others will use my refusal as reason for a warrant. Which will be granted. It is still your right to not have ID or refuse to identify yourself just because a cop demads it without cause. How many cops are even aware of that and won’t use your refusal as cause to arrest you? And ID laws are coming. That’s only one of the Bill Of Rights that no longer has any meaning. The others are being eroded bit by bit. Tyranny seldom happens all at once. It creeps in slowly. They don’t take all your rights at one time. They violate them bit by bit.

      • Uknowho

        Well, FF has none and Charlie goes off on a religious rant… Larry at least gives us something.

        The 4th Amendment states:

        “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

        Larry, I agree that there are some on the police force that misuse their power and that has been with us for over a century, its nothing new. We need stay vigilant on all that but it gets up to a paranoid level here.

      • Mike in MI

        Uknowwho – “Specific tyranny”
        1.) Refusal of obama and hairy reed to pass the required budget even once in four years, or even let it come to the floor for discussion. Ooops, once they did … to resounding defeat and embarrassment.
        Do you understand that if there is no budget there is no accountability nor responsibility?
        No legitimate government can stand for long without a budget being submitted. Only tyrants take the people’s money and spend it without the thought that they should tell people where it is going and what it is being spent to buy and how much on every item.

        No legitimate government . . . On the other hand these…???..?? whatever who hold themselves above the law.
        Ha!!! Law… there is no law only fishyal decrees and orders. We are no longer a nation of laws.
        In that situation whenever the government wants they knock on the door some night, bounce you off the walls and your family, kick you in the balls, cuff you and carry you off – for as long as they want for what ever charge (or none) they deem worthy and carry out whatever sentence they like – since they are in the position to make up the laws as they go.
        Other than that, who needs tyranny?

      • Uknowho

        Mike,

        Let me help you out.

        tyr·an·ny

        /ˈtirənē/

        Noun
        1.Cruel and oppressive government or rule.
        2.A nation under such cruel and oppressive government.

        So you are misuing the term. That is #1. # 2, Obama’s budget recieved zero votes due to the changes the GOP House made to it. (Look it up)

        Reid is a massive tool as are the GOP in the Senate. Noby is interested in doing the right thing on spending and taxes because they are worried about their own hides.

      • Kevin

        Whenever gun control advocates have gone on the offensive, gun owners find themselves in the position of having to explain why they need their firearms. They find themselves in this position especially frequently in the debate over so-called assault weapons. In the minds of gun-control proponents, “acceptable” uses of firearms (hunting, self-defense, target shooting) rarely justify 100 round drum magazines and collapsible stocks; ergo there’s no good reason to have them. When confronted with this question, conservatives and libertarians will commonly reply with the argument that an armed citizenry is the most effective defense against tyranny.

        Not surprisingly, the appeal to future tyranny rarely wins over the anti-gun crowd. For many of them, the image of the state has been thoroughly scrubbed, sterilized, and disinfected. The image appears to be so pristine that they find the idea that the state could pose an existential threat to its own people to be laughable on its face. Therefore, even considering the idea that the U.S. government could become tyrannical must be a sign of paranoia, or a childish fantasy.

        Take Jon Stewart. In a recent tirade against gun control opponents Stewart referred to the idea of American tyranny as the fear of “imaginary Hitler”. His comment might have been good for a cheap laugh from his audience, but in reality it goes to the heart of a serious question: do most Americans even know what a tyranny is?

        The tyrants of the 20th century produced such a vast ocean of blood that it should be unthinkable that anyone –even a cheap clown like Stewart– could insist that a government that is a threat to its own people is “imaginary”. But somehow, less than a century after the fall of the real Hitler, we’ve managed to achieve the unthinkable.

        The reason for our nation’s quick turnaround from witnessing unimaginable horror to blissful ignorance is surprisingly simple: the men and governments we most often associate with tyranny have become caricatures in our collective consciousness. In absence of their exaggerated features most people can’t even imagine what tyranny looks like.

        There’s tyranny afoot you say? Where are the jackboots? Where are the book burnings? Where are the grandiose parades and foreboding pep-rallies?

        Every American from the ages of 8-80 can identify a Nazi symbol or draw a squiggle under the nose of a portrait of a politician they don’t like. But ask even an educated person about the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service (the Nazi law which dismissed all non-Aryans from the civil service) and they’re likely to draw a blank.

        The association of these accoutrements with tyranny is so powerful that many Americans have come to confuse them with tyranny itself. It has lulled us into the belief that tyranny is something obvious and immediately recognizable. In other words, we think we’ll be alarmed by the synchronized footfalls of jackboots, the lights from the bonfires, and the rants of some charismatic speaker. In this respect, Jon Stewart was right: it’s a complete fantasy.

        What many have lost sight of is the fact that jackboots, book burnings, and emotionally charged rallies were just one particular way in which tyranny was manifested. These were the specific means by which it was maintained. By the time these things appeared on the scene, it was arguably too late for Germany. Its nascent republic was doomed.

        But if these things will not portend the coming of tyrannical government, what does? What is the first ingredient a budding tyranny, be it German, Russian, or American needs to facilitate its aims? A society that is utterly willing to acquiesce.

        Governments start down the road of tyranny aided by the willful acquiescence of many of those they come to rule. Rarely does it push its way in by brute force. Rather, it comes to the party with an invitation in its hand. It shows up at the doorstep as your benefactor, not as a lawless thug.

        This brings us to why conservatives and libertarians are wrong about an armed citizenry.

        If we are to truly understand the nature of tyranny, we must acknowledge that the first and most effective defense against it is to not acquiesce to it in the first place. The only time that an armed citizenry becomes necessary is if that first defense should fail; which history shows it all too often does.

        That’s the reality.

        • Patriot

          Here is the ONLY answer that EVER needs to be giving to the ridiculous question of why I need ANYTHING:

          NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.

          Do I come into your house and make decisions for YOU about what I feel that YOU need or don’t need?

          END OF STORY

      • Vicki

        Uknowho says:
        “Give me specifics FF… Can you? What specific tyranny are you subject to?”

        Does the word “drone” have any meaning to you?

        How about NDAA 2012?

        Patriot act?

        NFA 1934?

        So many specifics, so little time.

      • Mike in MI

        Uknowho -
        No thanks for any help from you or the camel you rode in on.
        I realize that anyone who stands with, for or by the thieves in this administration have no concept of the wrong done when a person takes money, or anything of value to its owner, under no agreement that it is acceptable or an exchange is agreed beforehand. When the taker gives no account of it, has no intent to return what was taken and uses it for his own ends and purposes that taking is called theft.
        When government does it with coercion behind them it is theft, thievery, stealing, confiscation, in any real sense of ethics it is the act of tyrants.

      • Uknowho

        Vicki says:

        March 18, 2013 at 5:44 pm

        Uknowho says:
        “Give me specifics FF… Can you? What specific tyranny are you subject to?”

        Does the word “drone” have any meaning to you?

        How about NDAA 2012?

        Patriot act?

        NFA 1934?
        ————————–

        Vicki,

        Tell me about the last drone attack on you by the gov please….

        NDAA 2012… when were you detained? I don’t agree with it either but it has yet to affect my life because oh… I don’t know… I am not planning a terrorist act

        The Patriot Act-That conservative piece of crap should be scrapped but again, I am not involved in terrorism do it doesn’t affect me at all. I still do all the things I did in 1980.

        The NFA was originally enacted in 1934. Similar to the current NFA, the original Act imposed a tax on the making and transfer of firearms defined by the Act, as well as a special (occupational) tax on persons and entities engaged in the business of importing, manufacturing, and dealing in NFA firearms. The law also required the registration of all NFA firearms with the Secretary of the Treasury. Firearms subject to the 1934 Act included shotguns and rifles having barrels less than 18 inches in length, certain firearms described as “any other weapons,” machineguns, and firearm mufflers and silencers.

        While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms. Congress found these firearms to pose a significant crime problem because of their frequent use in crime, particularly the gangland crimes of that era such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre. The $200 making and transfer taxes on most NFA firearms were considered quite severe and adequate to carry out Congress’ purpose to discourage or eliminate transactions in these firearms. The $200 tax has not changed since 1934.

        See Vicki and Mike and most of the right wingers here,

        You have an issue with using big words like tyranny, communism, socialism, marxism because you have NO CLUE about their meaning. It just sounds alarming to get other like minded people’s attention.

        You are free to use the term “tyranny” in any context you wish but to use it in this country is absolutely false.

      • Charlie

        Uknowho,,,
        Have you accomplished Acts 2:38??? What is a religious rant ??? Who is The Almighty God???
        From your comments it reads you don’t know Gun Rights come from King Jesus Christ………..
        It also appears from your comments, you may be as useless as teats on a Bore Hog……………….
        Meanwhile,,, Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation…

        Charlie Freedom

      • Vicki

        Uknowho writes:
        “Vicki,

        Tell me about the last drone attack on you by the gov please….”

        That is not what you asked. You asked FF (not me)
        “Give me specifics FF… Can you? What specific tyranny are you subject to?”

        You did not ask what specific tyrannical behavior FF had experienced. You asked what tyrannical behavior he was subject to.

        - Uknowho: “NDAA 2012… when were you detained? I don’t agree with it either but it has yet to affect my life because oh… I don’t know… I am not planning a terrorist act”

        Same response as above. You didn’t ask if FF had experienced. You asked what tyrannical behavior he was subject to.

        - Uknowho: “While the NFA was enacted by Congress as an exercise of its authority to tax, the NFA had an underlying purpose unrelated to revenue collection. As the legislative history of the law discloses, its underlying purpose was to curtail, if not prohibit, transactions in NFA firearms.”

        Thus confirming that the intent was to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms.

        - Uknowho: “Congress found these firearms to pose a significant crime problem because of their frequent use in crime, particularly the gangland crimes of that era such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.”

        Thus demonstrating the ancient technique of demonizing to excuse infringing upon a right.

        - Uknowho: “The $200 making and transfer taxes on most NFA firearms were considered quite severe and adequate to carry out Congress’ purpose to discourage or eliminate transactions in these firearms. The $200 tax has not changed since 1934.”

        Nothing like being able to tax something so a people can’t afford it to infringe. Even the Supreme court in US vs Miller understood this.

        - Uknowho: “See Vicki and Mike and most of the right wingers here,”

        Ad hominem.

        - Uknowho: “You have an issue with using big words like tyranny, communism, socialism, marxism because you have NO CLUE about their meaning.”

        Ad hominem. All the words are clearly understood by us and are available to you should you wish to open a dictionary.

        - Uknowho: “It just sounds alarming to get other like minded people’s attention.”

        Argument to ridicule.

      • Uknowho

        Vicki,

        Nice try to avoid… You gave me examples of “tyranny” and I shot them all down.

        You have failed to provide any proof of cruel or oppressive laws that prevent you from living your life, instead, you play the victim by saying I engaged in ad hominem attacks against you and your fellow rightists… weak, very weak.

        Please go to the dictionary and look up the word “tyanny” because you simply do not understand the meaning if those are the examples you give… just like you do not understand the meaning of socialism, communism or Marxism if you apply those terms ot Obama or the Democrats. There is only one socialist in the Senate and that is Bernie Sanders.

        Maybe instead of calling people names you and your fellow rightists might want to look up a few things now and then. Education will set you free.

        In our society the only thing that prevents you from doing much is money. Reagan and his like have seen to it that the corporatists make all the money while middle class people and the poor’s wages have stagnated. If you want to call that tyranny, ok but its not the correct use of the term.

        • Patriot

          Alright. I have watched people attempt to explain this to you. I think I shall do what they were incapable of doing.

          The Constitution of the United States had one main goal: The preservation of liberty and individual sovereignty. That is liberty. Liberty from oppressive government, from the confiscation of private property, from unfair taxation, from cruel and unusual punishment, from incarceration without due process of law, etc. I am sure you can agree with this. From here is where you get your history lesson. Ready?

          Let us start with the NDAA. It was so poorly explained to you that you were able to argue even with your massively limited understanding of our form of government, it’s history, and the implications of this law.

          This law gives unilateral power to the president and his administration to arrest and indefinitely detain US citizens on our own soil that may be suspected in ‘terrorist activities’. Our Fourth Amendment expressly prohibits this. I am quite certain you have no idea what it says, so i will reiterate it here for you:

          ‘The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized’

          Have you got it yet? I doubt it. You are so steeped in your ideology that I am sure you will fight the correlation here, but that’s ok. The rest of us know. THIS is TYRANNY. You MAY WANT TO LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY SO YOU UNDERSTAND IT. But maybe it is best described this way: Liberty is protected by the Fourth Amendment. It was created to keep an oppressive government from arresting you, detaining you, or seizing your PRIVATE PROPERTY without DUE PROCESS OF LAW. THIS IS LIBERTY. THE NDAA IS TYRANNY. You have it?? I doubt it, but I shall press on.

          To summarize the NDAA for you MAY POSSIBLY be a ‘terrorist’ – which by the governments current definition has been completely revised through the Patriot Act:

          http://www.aclu.org/national-security/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

          If you decide to become a member of PITA and you protest outside of Kentucky Fried Chicken, you are considered a domestic terrorist and under the NDAA you can be arrested and detained WITHOUT RIGHTS TO ATTORNEYS, CHARGES, A TRIAL, OR BAIL. ie Habius Corpus. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS YET? Doubtful. I am sure you don’t, But I will move on anyway.

          The Fifth Amendment not only protects you from self incrimination, but from having your private property seized without just compensation. It ALSO protects YOU from ‘depravation of life, liberty, or property without due process of law’. Here, again I am quite sure you have no idea what it says or means, so I will repost this one for you too:

          No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation’

          So not only does this ALSO apply to the Patriot Act and the NDAA, but to those delightful cases where the EPA decides you have to give your home and property to the goverment because your garage is on a 10X4 section of land considered ‘Wetlands’. Or because the guitars you build out of…wait for it…WOOD they have decided to be damaging to the environment, even though YOU own the FOREST. Don’t believe me?

          http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904787404576530520471223268.html

          Hmmm….Wow…could it be tyranny?? Well, let’s examine: Liberty – Protection from Illegal Search and Seizure, Due Process of Law, Compensation for Property confiscated, Private Property Laws….Sounds good. What do we actually have? An unelected government bureaucracy confiscating property without due process and without compensation, a government that can arrest you and make you disappear if they want to, Now, that doesn’t sound like Liberty to me…Sounds like….wait for it…..TYRANNY! YES! It SURE IS!

          Ok. ready? here is some more Tyranny in YOUR life in this country.
          The First Amendment says:

          ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.’

          Hmmm…Sounds like a guarantee of personal LIBERTY and FREEDOM from TYRANNY, doesn’t it?
          OH!!! WELL! What about The bill—H.R. 347, or the “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act?
          Don’t know what that is?? Obviously you don’t. That is a lovely bill that prevents you from ‘peaceably assembling and petitioning the government for a redress of greivances’ if you are within a certain distance of one of our members of government, or on ‘restricted grounds’ you can be arrested and jailed on FELONY charges. Here, take a look:

          The standard punishment under the “restricted buildings and grounds” law is a fine and up to one year in prison. If a weapon or serious physical injury is involved, the penalty may be increased to up to ten years.
          Also criminalized is conduct “that impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions” and “obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds.” These provisions, even more so than the provisions creating “restricted areas,” threaten to criminalize a broad range of protest activities.
          In order to appreciate the broad sweep of the “restricted buildings or grounds” law, it is necessary to consider a few possibilities:
          A wide area around the next G-8 meeting or other global summit could be designated “restricted” by the Secret Service, such that any person who “enters” that area can be subject to a fine and a year in jail under Section 1752(a)(1) (making it a felony to enter any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so).
          Senator Rick Santorum, the ultra-right Republican presidential candidate, enjoys the protection of the Secret Service. Accordingly, a person who shouts “boo!” during a speech by Santorum could be subject to arrest and a year of imprisonment under Section 1752(a)(2) (making it a felony to “engag[e] in disorderly or disruptive conduct in” a restricted area).
          Striking government workers who form a picket line near any event of “national significance” can be locked up under Section 1752(a)(3) (making it a crime to “imped[e] ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds”).

          Sounds like Liberty to you? I’m guessing Tyranny is the answer here.

          Now, I can go on and on and on and on. The list is HUGE. But I will choose another example that is closer to home.
          The State of California has decided to RETROACTIVELY tax businesses going back 2 years.
          Hmmm….Taxation without representation? Let us examine this a bit.
          We have a business that we sold 18 months ago to another entity for a substantial profit ( I know profit is an evil, vile thing, but that isn’t relevant to our story here ). We paid taxes on the sale of the business at the time the papers were signed.
          Now we are enjoying the fruits of the creation and sale of a business of our own creation ( again, I understand the EVIL CAPITALISM that is taking place, truly horrible, I know ) and we get a letter from the state saying that we have to pay taxes AGAIN on the money we earned from the sale of our private property. Double taxation. Sound like Liberty, or Tyranny to you? I’m sure you just love it, actually.

          These are just a couple of small examples. What about the Executive Orders signed by Obama in his first year giving INTERPOL the power to operate on US soil? Liberty? Or Tyranny?
          How about the EO signed last March that allows the President to seize all means of production, food, water, and the labor of the people WITHOUT COMPENSATION in PEACE TIME OR WARTIME?:Liberty?? Tyranny?

          So! Liberty?? or Tyranny?

          If you chose LIBERTY you are even less informed than I thought you were.
          These aren’t nutty conspiracy theories, these things are THE LAW OF THE LAND. LAW, dude, LAW, not partisan B.S. or whacko ideas from those you disagree with. They are WHACKO ideas from the WHACKOS that run the country. ON BOTH SIDES. They are ALL nuts and you defend them stealing your liberty because you are so mired in your emotional attachment to your ideology and your heroes in Washington that you refuse to acknowledge what is being done to YOUR liberty.

          I am SICK TO DEATH of people claiming to have some knowledge or respect for our Constitution that have zero clue as to it’s intent, it’s history, or it’s meaning. I have truly listened to 5th graders that understand it better than the majority of the ‘adults’ that argue for it on this message board.

          I am sure you are familiar with the term ‘We are a Nation of Laws’. Well, what does that mean? It means that our leaders are moored, are bound to a set of rules that prevent them from infringing our rights. They are bound to a set of laws that strictly regulate their behavior and keeps them from deciding on their own what is good for the people outside of the law. Our Constitution was written with the intent on the preservation of the individual liberty and personal sovereignty of the People, not the whim of the government. Government was NOT intended to decide for us. We get to decide for GOVERNMENT. And if you don’t like the 2nd Amendment, then there is a provision in the Supreme Law of the Land and a process for CHANGING it that does NOT include allowing ANYONE to decide it FOR us.

          if you LOVE socialism and want to force it upon the rest of us, GREAT! There is a process under the Constitution for AMENDING it to make us socialists. If you HATE guns and want to deny us all the right to own them, WONDERFUL! There is an AMENDMENT PROCESS that provides you the ability to do JUST that.
          But if you aren’t going to follow that law, that simple rule, then you have no right to deny the rights of the rest of us.

          If you want to argue our laws and our Constitution and our History anymore, I will be HAPPY to oblige you. EVERYONE needs a good walloping around here, and I am JUST educated and ARROGANT enough to HAND IT to you.

      • Uknowho

        Patriot,

        I appreciate the lengths you went to in your post and you actually hit on something that is tyrannical.

        For those of you playing at home:

        tyr·an·ny

        /ˈtirənē/

        Noun
        1.Cruel and oppressive government or rule.
        2.A nation under such cruel and oppressive government.

        So under that definition, we should have the right to peacibly assemble to protest what our gov does where we want to do it. That has been here for decades now.

        So you actually should something that falls under that definition.

        Now as far as the first Amendment goes. There are limits to free speech just like there are limits to the 2nd Amendment. they are NOT absolutes.You live with limits on the 1st Amendments and it actually serves society well. Taking away military grade weapons does not tyranny make as much as you wish it to be, sorry.

        I hope you get a chance to visit Saudi Arabia, Cuba or similar, you will change your wrongheaded definition of what “tyranny” is.

        Now as far as socialsim goes, I do not want to live in a 100% socialist country no more than I would a 100% capitalist country because they both will fail for the same reason, the human conditions of greed, jealousy, laziness etc. The best system seems to be a mix of both and how much of each you can debate. That mixture is what we have had ever since we entered the industrial age and is what made our country what it is.

        • Patriot

          And I am Underestimated, yet again.
          I have been to Saudi Arabia. I have been to 23 countries around the world. Ours has a Constitution that specifies our individual liberties and the limited powers of our government. Those rights and liberties being oppressed by anyone at all is called TYRANNY, even by the definition you posted here.
          Your response was what I expected – ‘Gee whiz, they have already broken those rules, so it’s not really being oppressive.’
          THAT, ladies and gentlemen, is exactly what is wrong with the country and why it will continue it’s decline as it is before our very eyes.
          You didn’t answer any of my charges here at all,as I expected you couldn’t. There are no limits on our free speech. There are no limits specified in regards to the peaceful assembly. You do not understand the ‘cannot yell fire in a crowded theater’ precedent as it is not a matter of free speech,. The illegality of child porn is also not a matter of limiting free speech. Both of those examples relate to the infringement of the rights of individuals’ to personal liberty.
          I also have yet to see any ‘military grade weapons’ on any of the ban lists that have been so recklessly bandied about by the idiots we let destroy our freedoms. I have hunting rifles that are FAR more powerful than the lame .22′s that look so scary to you. But I digress. You are clearly ok with tyranny as long as it doesn’t resemble Sharia Law. The destruction of your personal sovereignty is ok with you as long as it isn’t SO severe.
          Well, it isn’t ok with me.
          The kinds of rights that once were protected so fiercely by the people of this country come with grave responsibility. Over the years the people have become lazy and complacent, and no longer want that responsibility so they trade not having to deal with it for their freedoms. And that laziness and lack of care for our individual. The acceptance of massive government expansion in the form of socialism is ok with you for the same reason. Capitalism in a free market means personal responsibility, which has declined in this nation to the point where we are no longer Capitalists by and large, this is Corporatism which is quite different. The Free Market has morphed into Corporatism because we have become lazy and would rather allow it than protect our free market. So now you want socialism as a fix. The byproduct of selfish capitalists is jobs and wealth. The byproduct of a socialist government is the usurpation of the personal freedom of the People.
          But I do not expect you to understand any of this, and your answer clearly denotes that you don’t.
          This country is in decline and it is not going to rebound to the land of the free, the land of opportunity, or the home of the brave. It is now the land of the slave, the land of few opportunities, and the home of the entitled.And it will likely never return to the booming powerhouse it once was.
          Enjoy the ashes in the form of your delightful government run programs ( have you ever seen public housing? Have fun with it). Myself, I am a free market capitalist enjoying unlimited personal power in the form of…*shudder*… wealth. And as much as you may want to punish me for success by spreading my personal property around – ie my money – I will ALWAYS be wealthy as I understand that it is my own responsibility to get rich, not someone else’s to provide for me.
          Enjoy your day.

          • pissed of & liberal

            ” You want to punish me for success ” typical 1% hoopla we’re not mad at your success we’re mad because you and others like you achieve that success by being a exploitive self-centered narccisstic psychopath who only cares about YOUR success YOUR prosparity YOUR rights. tell me this if your such a good person how much to you give to orphaniges? how often to you buying a empty biulding and turning it into a homeless shelter? i’m guessing never because that would directly benifiet everyone EXEPT YOU. go ahead tell me i’m wrong.

          • Patriot

            Again, you say something STUPID based on your anger.
            I have already iterated this to you on another thread.
            I donate time and money to the Foster Children’s organization.
            I have helped a man that needed a hip replacement pay all his bills for 6 months while he couldn’t work.
            I donate to the California Wheelchair Veteran’s association.
            I have employed more than 30 people and provided them with excellent pay and benefits. EVERYONE that has ever worked for me loved their job, their environment, and were always taken care of. My employees get lunch every single day.
            I donate to the Humane Society and am launching a project to rescue animals and nurse them back to health using my land and my facilities.
            I warned you before not to underestimate me or those that have success.
            Every day that I have focused on my prosperity I have kept in mind that I do this for myself and my family, AND TO GIVE BACK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. You will be SHOCKED to find that most people in my position DO just that.
            You are SO angry at people that have, that you automatically assume that they HAVE by ripping someone off.
            I asked you before how much of my own wealth that I have created I would be allowed to keep.
            Now I ask you, I have created businesses out of thin air, put people to work, created wealth and security for others based on my unique knowledge and skill and resources – would you have me compensated the SAME way as those that work for me? If so, I would not have bothered to create any of that. And neither would anyone else.
            So in your mind – fairness would be to take what I have earned and give it to those that have not. Yeah, sounds fair to me.

          • pissed of & liberal

            90% percent of people who HAVE have because they ripped others off that is not a assumptiion made out of anger it is a fact of life under capitilism. you give to charity wonderfull but is the amount you give truely a sacrifice or is it just enough that you can say to yourself ” good job “? have you ever had to pass up something you want because of your charity? and in responce to your comment about ” fairness ” the wealth expropriated from capitilist like you will not simpley be ” given to those who have not earned it ” it will be invested in improving infrastructure,reforming education,providing quality universal healthcare, and housing for the poor and i belive that unce we can implament our policies the majority of citizens will rally around them where as people like you will be pouting because you won’t be able to profit from any of it.

          • Patriot

            No, it is NOT a fact, it is a STUPID assumption. I, like most people that have found success EARNED it. We CREATE something and in the process OTHER success and wealth is created.
            Back it up with facts and numbers, or you are just as you say you are; a pissed off kid.
            Thankfully, your dream of Marxism in the United States will never come to fruition, so such stupidity is hardly worth discussing.
            I am proud of my achievements in both what I provide for myself, my family and my community through jobs and security for others, but in the tireless donation of my time and money for things that I find to be important to me. I got to CHOOSE what I wanted to do with my resources.
            You will find in every model that takes from the producers and redistributes the wealth to others and ‘infrastructure and improvements for all’ that there are fewer people interested in creating and producing. That scenario is playing itself out all over Europe and the people here in this country are noticing it. In England they raised taxes on the wealthy for redistribution of their wealth and the number of millionaires depleted from 16,000 to 2000. They left the country, or sold their companies, or stashed their money elsewhere. Small business creation hit an all time low. In France the new Socialist Party president had to REPEAL his 75% percent tax on the millionaires because they were leaving the country. It doesn’t work.
            And much as you hate people that can create and maintain wealth, they are responsible for the quality of living for millions of people. As soon as you take away their ability to produce wealth for themselves, they stop producing wealth for their communities, their state, their country.
            I bet you have an iPhone. I know you have a computer. I bet if you have a job you drive to work. All of those devices created by corporations that you despise. Which makes you a complete and utter hypocrite.
            Try creating something and sharing it with people rather than insisting that you take away what someone else creates. You may find that you can do a lot of good with what you are able to accomplish.
            I am done with you. Fortunately, so is the rest of the country.

          • pissed of & liberal

            YOU don’t ” create ” anything you PAY others to and take most of the profits and that IS a fact. and if ” my dream of Marxism in the United States will never come to fruition ” then perhaps you can explain why the Party for Socialism and Liberation is seeing an upsurge of requests for membership? well?

          • Frank Kahn

            Just going to jump in here because your statements are blatantly untrue and unsupportable.

            “90% percent of people who HAVE have because they ripped others off that is not a assumptiion made out of anger it is a fact of life under capitilism.”

            This sounds like a made up statistic and is a form of proof by bald assertion. First you need to define what is meant by “people who HAVE”, what is the criteria for HAVING? What do they have that you don’t? Is it money, possessions, power or something else? Do you have proof that they all “ripped others off” to get what they have? If you are referring to acquisition motivated by greed, is there some way that you know it is magically caused by capitalism? Greed, one of the sins mentioned in the Bible, is a rather universal human trait. You will find that the same happens in every economic system. True communism cannot work for the same reason that true capitalism cant work, greedy people corrupt the process. They always get rich off the efforts of others.

            “you give to charity wonderfull but is the amount you give truely a sacrifice or is it just enough that you can say to yourself ” good job “?”

            True charity is given from the heart, there is no desire to have self gratification. Deciding if, what is given is a true sacrifice is not for you to decide. If I give what is needed, that is enough. I dont have to give my last dollar just to satisfy someone elses idea of true sacrifice.

            “have you ever had to pass up something you want because of your charity?”

            Kind of a strange concept to agree with or deny. I give $1,000 to a worthy charity, is that money that I could have used for something I WANTED? YES, it probably is, a better question would be “did you ever have to go without something you NEEDED” because of your charity. Even that question might be hard to qualify, what do you truly need? Can you walk to work instead of driving every day? Can you eat spaghetti instead of steak?

            “and in responce to your comment about ” fairness ”

            Fair is a very standard thing, what is fair for me is fair for you. I dont think it is fair for you to take my money to use for YOUR PET CHARITY, it is not charity from me when you do. It is also not charity from you. My money is mine, you have no right to take it and use it for helping someone you think needs it more than me. If I know someone that has no bed to sleep on, would you consider it fair if I come to your home and take your bed for them?

            “the wealth expropriated from capitilist like you”

            Because of the meaning of the word expropriate you can rewrite that sentence as
            “the wealth stolen from capitalists like you”. It is somewhat disturbing that you seem to think that expropriation (theft) is okay if it is done to capitalists.

            “will not simpley be ” given to those who have not earned it ”

            Two different distribution methods follow this statement.

            “it will be invested in improving infrastructure,

            Is it your contention that only rich capitalists are responsible for paying for infrastructure?

            “reforming education,”

            While I agree that education needs improvement, I don’t consider people like you to be qualified to determine the direction of the improvements. Therefor, I don’t see giving you my money to perform your type of reformation as a good investment.

            These next two items might be classed as “giving it to those who have not earned it”.

            “providing quality universal healthcare,”

            This one sounds good on paper, but implementation of the idea is not likely to accomplish the desired results. Quality healthcare depends on the healthcare provider, modern medical institutions are not necessarily qualified for dispensing healthcare. The best healthcare begins at home with a healthy lifestyle, not medicine and surgical procedures.

            “and housing for the poor”

            Now, we have heard your idea of helping the poor. Would you believe that your ideas are wrong? There is a saying in the Bible that is appropriate here. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he eats for the rest of his life. GIVING FOOD AND HOUSING to the poor is not a solution. When you do that you still have poor people, they just have somewhere to sleep and food to eat. For the price of a single 4 bedroom house, I can provide a decent wage job for 4 people for a year. By doing this I have given 4 families a place to live, food to eat, health care and self reliance and esteem. Which do you think is better, the one poor family in a nice home with some food, or 4 happy families who have the same but are no longer poor?

            “and i belive that unce we can implament our policies the majority of citizens will rally around them where as people like you will be pouting because you won’t be able to profit from any of it.”

            I will point out that your spelling is indicative of an educational deficiency. But, besides that, this is another proof by bald assertion. I am going to assume that your statement “our policies” is meaning liberal stealing from the rich to give to the poor policies. Once again you need to define what is meant by a majority of citizens. Do you mean the majority of liberals? Do you think that more than 50% of the citizens of this country believe what you are spouting? If Romney was correct and there is 47% of the people that are addicted to entitlements, even that would not make it a majority. Do you think it is only the extremely wealthy that would object to this type of redistribution of wealth? Do you, honestly, believe that the government is better qualified to decide how to spend my money on the poor? AND, JUST HOW DO YOU IMAGINE THAT WE CAN PROFIT FROM CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS?

            What I give to the poor, is none of your business, it is also unacceptable for a Christian to brag about his charity. To give alms to the poor is to give without expectation of praise for your actions.

          • pissed of & liberal

            By people who HAVE i mean anyone with more who makes six figures and you can’t tell me they didn’t gey there by never exploiting anybody.

            You can whine about expropration meaning theft all you want. but the fact is the elites have been stealing from the working class since the founding of this countrey and that’s who i mean by the majority the working class.

            And we won’t just expropriate the wealth of wealthey individuals but of mega-corperations like walmart including the money they hide in off-shore accounts.

            Using this money we will be able to fund research in medicene,energy, and other fields without worring about things like copy rights or pattends we will be able to give the results directley to the people.

            You may like my ideas you may not but the fact is even if i have to die in the streets of Washington D.C i will make sure my comrades can bring this to pass.

          • Patriot

            Yet another RIDICULOUS claim
            So because someone makes six figures, someone else had to suffer.
            Back that statement up with evidence, please.
            Providing people with jobs and resources is not even remotely ‘exploitation’. That is just plain stupid.Wealth makes you angry. People of means make you seethe. This is not a problem of economics, this is a problem of emotional health.
            Your sweeping generalizations about people with money make you look REALLY stupid. If you wish to advance your cause, try presenting an intelligent argument without all of the childhood angst and anger you still haven’t let go of. It may help make your case.
            As far as you dying in the street in DC on your crusade to convert the US into a Marxist state, don’t worry, the State will pay for your cremation, but that is about as close to getting what you want as you will get.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Let me tell you a story. a elderly women walks in to a bank she immergrated to this countrey as a little girl because she bought in the story of ‘ the american dream ” she became a citizen and worked like a dog for the next forty-five years before finally retiring. unfortunatly she lost everything in the crash of 08 while the very bank she is entering was bailed out using taxpayer dollers overwhelmingly provided by working class families like hers but i diegress. she is there to get a loan to pay her bills so she can stay in the house she’s lived in for fifty years. the person she talks to is young enough to be her grandchild and is up for a promotion. the lady tells her story and the person is touched and is unsure what to do so they ask ther superior. ther superior informs them that the bank stands to gain money if the women loses her home and that she should be denied. the person is unsure that they can do this to a sweet old lady but the superior spouts of a lineabout tough choices and that this is one wher the person can aid the old lady or the bank and that the wrong choice could deny them the promotion they’re after. so after thinking for a minute or two the person goes back and tells they women no. the women starts crying and asking if there’s any other way the person has a chance to change ther mind and help the old lady but they insist that ther isn’t the old lady still crying tells the person that she doesn’t blame them and leaves. the person goes back to ther superior and tell them ther decision ther superior thells them they made the right desicion and within a month the person gets the promotion allowing them to move to a better apartment within another month haveing long forgatten the old lady they made leave crying. within that same time that same old lady will have lost ther home moved in with her oldest childs family stretching ther already tight budget and started the long journey to social security but the process is so slow that she dies in her sleep before it ends.

            Now can you HONESTLY tell me that the person did NOT benifet from the old ladys suffering?

          • Patriot

            Weak. Pathetic. I asked you to support your inane claim that 90% of people that make 6 figures did it by ‘exploiting’ people. Instead you tell me a story where in the nice little old lady is somehow not responsible for the choices she made in life and that someone else is evil for her own actions. That woman signed a contract for her mortgage that gave her terms that she agreed to. End of story. Holding her accountable is EVIL?
            What about the tens of millions of immigrants that came to this country and worked hard, saved their money, sent their kids to better schools than they could, created better lives for themselves, their families and their communities?
            Again, you wish to make everyone poor so that things are ‘fair’ for the 16% of the people in the country that are poor. You want to make everyone in the nation poor for the %17 of people that don’t have health care.
            Try again. Again you cannot justify your ridiculous claims.
            I HAVE created something. I have created jobs and opportunity and wealth and security for myself, my family, my community, the people that work for me now and have in the past. I have dedicated my life to improving my community and my country. And I have to listen to some idiot that DARES tell me that because I have managed to carve out a success due to hard work, diligence, commitment, fortitude, and GUTS that I am a selfish, vile person that has ripped people off to get where I am?
            Again, you don’t deserve to clean the dog Sh** in my backyard much less tell me that I have ‘exploited people in my selfish pursuits,
            If everyone that is pushing your stupid ideas is as uneducated and incapable as you are, then NONE of us have anything to worry about in terms of your success.
            Again, I am done with you.

          • pissed of & liberal

            It’s truely amazing how you can read a story with so clear a message and still come away with the exact opposite. and i have nothing but respect and love for the immergrent community the fact that they can put up with the exploitation and bigotrey they encounter and still hold ther heads high is one of the most inspirationalstories to ever occur. THEY are the ones who work hard THEY are the ones who belive in dilligence,commitment,and fortitude THEY are the ones with GUTS NOT YOU. to you dilligence,commitment,fortitude, and hard work are words to throw around to impress others and to enflate your own ego. the immergrents who come to this countrey LIVE by those words and if this system was as just as you claim then YOU would be working for THEM.

      • Kevin

        I have read some truly stupid comments before but I think we have a winner.

      • Kevin

        Nice delay on my Posts thanks. somthing on your Mind?

  • Bill Henry

    Any encroachment on our rights as written into the Bill of Right is wrong. What don’t you get about the Second Amendment? “SHALL-Expresses obligation in legalese., NOT-Negation of a word or group of words., BE-To remain unmolested, undisturbed, or uninterrupted — used only in infinitive form., INFRINGED-Go against, as of rules and laws.” Source: The Sage’s English Dictionary and Thesaurus.
    Therefor any attempt to outlaw, remove, confiscate, or in anyway to take away the right of citizens to keep and bear arms is prohibited by the Second Amendment. The right to keep and bear arms is written into the Constitution of 42 states in these here United States of America. It does not mention hunting or plinking or target shooting. If you look into what the founders who framed the Constitution were thinking when they wrote into it the Bill of Rights, you will find that It was their opinions that the people needed a way to protect their rights and freedoms from tyrannical or despotic government. The Second Amendment was only second to your rights to free speech, freedom to gather peacefully, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. It was illegal to impose the gun ban the last time, and it will be illegal if it is tried for the second time. The present brouhaha over gun control is nothing more than trying to eventually confiscate our arms. If you need evidence of this read the reports on the UN Arms Control Treaty, which if it is ratified will include, and aid the administration of the United States in its bid to confiscate our arms. That will lead to citizens not having a means to protect themselves from the onslaught of the World Government crowd. If you think that legal upstanding citizens will give up their arms willingly then you haven’t been paying attention to what is being said on the internet. Effectively what these changes will do is to make criminals of every gun owner in the country, and it will do nothing to avert criminals and crazies from their intended goals. It is wrong, and I for one will oppose it to the day that I die or the day that I am killed for defending my rights, just as I spent 20+ in the Armed Forces defending your rights with my life on the line. It baffles me how little a price people can sell their rights for. I guess I and all my comrades spent our time in vain. Your express your gratitude for our sacrifice, but you spit on the graves of all who died in the defense of our rights from July 4, 1776 to the present day. You rattle off supposed facts without any evidence that they are facts. Educate yourself in the History of this great country of ours and see what the sacrifices were for. I didn’t serve to hear someone pay lip service to me or my service. I did it because I felt duty bound to do it. My oath is as sacred to me today as it was when I took it on 01 June, 1962, and I will continue to defend the Constitution of the United States of America “against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I am too old and beaten up for combat, but I will do the service if called upon to do it. So Help Me God.

    • http://www.OlGreyGhost.Blogspot.com Ol’ Grey Ghost

      “Therefor any attempt to outlaw, remove, confiscate, or in anyway to take away the right of citizens to keep and bear arms is prohibited by the Second Amendment.”

      You miss the point that the Gun Control-Freaks think the Constitution allows for “reasonable restrictions.” Of course, it doesn’t…

      http://olgreyghost.blogspot.com/2013/03/make-it-big-enough-and-tell-it-often.html

      …but the delusion runs rampant…

      • larry ryan

        Who decides what a “reasonable restriction” is? What would BHO or Feinstein define as a “reasonable restriction”? Remember the sedition acts? Will criticism of the government again become a “reasonable restriction” of the 1st ammendment? You can bet there are many in government who’d like to see that.

      • Vicki

        Ol’ Grey Ghost says:
        “You miss the point that the Gun Control-Freaks think the Constitution allows for “reasonable restrictions.” Of course, it doesn’t…”

        The Constitution is pretty clear that there shall be NO restrictions on the keeping and bearing of arms.

        However should a person misuse their arms (knives, swords, guns whatever) there is a process by which STATES may bring the person to justice. (See amendments 4-6).

    • Live free or die

      God bless you Bill Henry.

    • http://www.facebook.com/gerald.hopkins.9 Gerald Hopkins

      I, too, took an oath in May 1965. That oath never expired. And like you, I’m old and beaten up, but I would be proud to die in defense of our Constitution. MOLON LABE.

      • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.sherman.589 tgsherman

        10-4 & Thanks for your service!!

    • Kevin

      Taken from the Web……..
      A. Armenia
      After the government of the Ottoman Empire quickly crushed an Armenian revolt in 1893, tens of thousands of Armenians were murdered by mobs armed and encouraged by the government. As anti-Armenian mobs were being armed, the government attempted to convince Armenians to surrender their guns. [4] A 1903 law banned the manufacture or import of gunpowder without government permission. [5] In 1910, manufacturing or importing weapons without government permission, as well as carrying weapons or ammunition without permission was forbidden. [6]

      During World War I, in February 1915, local officials in each Armenian district were ordered to surrender quotas of firearms. When officials surrendered the required number, they were executed for conspiracy against the government. When officials could not surrender enough weapons from their community, the officials were executed for stockpiling weapons. Armenian homes were also searched, and firearms confiscated. Many of these mountain dwellers had kept arms despite prior government efforts to disarm them. [7]

      The genocide against Armenians began with the April 24, 1915 announcement that Armenians would be deported to the interior. The announcement came while the Ottoman government was desperately afraid of an Allied attack that would turn Turkey’s war against Russia into a two-front war. In fact, British troops landed at Gallipoli in western Turkey the next day. Although the Anglo-Russian offensives failed miserably, the Armenian genocide continued for the next two years. [8] Some of the genocide was accomplished by shooting or cutting down Armenian men. The bulk of the 1 to 1.5 million Armenian deaths, however, occurred during the forced marches to the interior. Although the marches were ostensibly for the purpose of protecting the Armenians through relocation, the actual purpose was to make the marches so difficult (for example, by not providing any food) that survival was impossible. [9]

      The Armenian genocide differs from the six other genocides detailed in Lethal Laws in one important respect. Although many Armenians apparently complied with the gun control laws and the deportation orders, some did not. For example, in southern Syria (then part of the Ottoman Empire), “the Armenians refused to submit to the deportation order . . . . Retreating into the hills, they took up a strategic position and organized an impregnable defense. The Turks attacked and were repulsed with huge losses. They proceeded to lay siege.” [10] Eventually 4,000 survivors of the siege were rescued by the British and French. [11] These Armenians who grabbed their guns and headed for the hills are the converse to the vast numbers of Armenian and other genocide victims in Lethal Laws who submitted quietly; although many of the Armenian fighters doubtless died from lack of medical care, starvation, or gunfire, so did many of the Armenians who submitted. As was the case of the Jewish resistance during World War II, armed resistance was enormously risky, but the resisters had a far higher survival rate than the submitters.

      B. Soviet Union

      As the authors note, the Bolsheviks were a minority of Communists in a vast and disparate nation where Communists themselves were a tiny minority. It should not be surprising that the Bolsheviks worked hard to ensure that any person potentially hostile to them did not possess arms. [12]

      The first Soviet gun controls were imposed during the Russian Civil War, as Czarists, Western troops, and national independence movements battled the central Red regime. Firearm registration was introduced on April 1, 1918. [13] On August 30, Fanny Kaplan supposedly wounded Lenin during an assassination attempt; the attempted assassination spurred a nationwide reign of terror. [14] In October 1918, the Council of People’s Commissars (the government) ordered the surrender of all firearms, ammunition, and sabres. [15] As has been the case in almost every nation where firearms registration has been introduced, registration proved a prelude to confiscation. Exempt from the confiscation order, however, were members of the Communist Party. [16] A 1920 decree imposed a mandatory minimum penalty of six months in prison for (non-Communist) possession of a firearm, even where there was no criminal intent. [17]

      After the Red victory in the Civil War, the firearms laws were consolidated in a Criminal Code, which provided that unauthorized possession of a firearm would be punishable by hard labor. [18] A 1925 law made unauthorized possession of a firearm punishable by three months of hard labor, plus a fine of 300 rubles (equal to about four months’ wages for a highly-paid construction worker). [19]

      Stalin apparently found little need to change the weapons control structure he had inherited. His only contributions were a 1935 law making illegal carrying of a knife punishable by five years in prison and a decree of that same year extending “all penalties, including death, down to twelve-year-old children.” [20]

      This chapter of Lethal Laws summarizes the genocide perpetrated by Stalin from 1929 to 1953, starting with his efforts to collectivize farming by destroying the class of property-owning farmers. Altogether, about twenty million people were murdered, worked to death in slave labor camps, or deliberately starved to death by Stalin’s government. From 1929 to 1939, Stalin killed about ten million people, more than all the people who died during the entirety of World War I. Stalin’s successful campaign of genocide against the Kulaks and against dissident Communists served as a model for similar campaigns in China and Cambodia. [21]

      C. Germany

      German gun control laws are the authors’ area of expertise. Mr. Simkin and Mr. Zelman have previously written a book analyzing the Weimar and Nazi gun laws in great detail. [22] The German chapter in Lethal Laws contains the most relevant statutes and regulations, but does not include gun registration forms and similar materials found in the previous book. Because Lethal Laws does contain more analysis of the German gun laws in their social context, Lethal Laws is the more valuable book to anyone except a specialist in German law.

      After Germany’s defeat in World War I, the democratic Weimar government, fearing (with good cause) efforts by Communists or the militaristic right to overthrow the government, ordered the surrender of all firearms. Governmental efforts to disarm the civilian population–in part to comply with the Versailles Treaty–apparently ended in 1921. [23]

      The major German gun control law (which was not replaced by the Nazis until 1938) was enacted by a center-right government in 1928. [24] The law required a permit to acquire a gun or ammunition and a permit to carry a firearm. Firearm and ammunition dealers were required to obtain permits to sell and to keep a register of their sales. Also, persons who owned guns that did not have a serial number were ordered to have the dealer or manufacturer stamp a serial number on them. Permits to acquire guns and ammunition were to be granted only to persons of “undoubted reliability,” [25] and carry permits were to be given “only if a demonstration of need is set forth.” [26] Apparently police discretion cut very heavily against permit applicants. For example, in the town of Northeim, only nine hunting permits were issued to a population of 10,000 people. [27]

      In 1931, amidst rising gang violence (the gangs being Nazi and Communist youths), carrying knives or truncheons in public was made illegal, except for persons who had firearm carry permits under the 1928 law. Acquisition of firearms and ammunition permits was made subject to proof of “need.” [28]

      When the Nazis took power in 1933, they apparently found that the 1928 gun control laws served their purposes; not until 1938 did the Nazis bother to replace the 1928 law. The leaving of the Weimar law in place cannot be attributed to lethargy on the Nazis’ part; unlike some other totalitarian governments (such as the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia), the Nazis paid great attention to legal draftsmanship and issued a huge volume of laws and regulations. [29] The only immediate change the Nazis made to the gun laws was to bar the import of handguns. [30]

      Shortly after the Nazis took power, they began house-to-house searches to discover firearms in the homes of suspected opponents. They claimed to find large numbers of weapons in the hands of subversives. [31] How many weapons the Nazis actually recovered may never be known. But as historian William Sheridan Allen pointed out in his study of the Nazi rise to power in one town: “Whether or not all the weapon discoveries reported in the local press were authentic is unimportant. The newspapers reported whatever they were told by the police, and what people believed was what was more important than what was true.” [32]

      Four days after Hitler’s triumphant Anschluss of Austria in March 1938, the Nazis finally enacted their own firearms laws. Additional controls were layered on the 1928 Weimar law: Persons under eighteen were forbidden to buy firearms or ammunition; a special permit was introduced for handguns; Jews were barred from businesses involving firearms; Nazi officials were exempted from the firearms permit system; silencers were outlawed; twenty-two caliber cartridges with hollow points were banned; and firearms which could fold or break down “beyond the common limits of hunting and sporting activities” became illegal. [33]

      On November 9, 1938 and into the next morning, the Nazis unleashed a nationwide race riot. Mobs inspired by the government attacked Jews in their homes, looted Jewish businesses, and burned synagogues, with no interference from the police. [34] The riot became known as “Kristallnacht” (“night of broken glass”). [35] On November 11, Hitler issued a decree forbidding Jews to possess firearms, knives, or truncheons under any circumstances, and to surrender them immediately. [36]

      Nazi mass murders of Jews began after the invasion of the Soviet Union. Extermination camps were not set up until late 1941, so mass murder was at first accomplished by special S.S. units, Einsatzgruppen, on June 22, 1941. Working closely with regular army units, the Einsatzgruppen would move swiftly into newly-conquered areas, to prevent Jews from fleeing. In some cases, Jews were ordered to register with the authorities, an act which made them easy to locate for murder shortly thereafter. As noted above, most of the Soviet population had been disarmed by Lenin and Stalin or had never possessed arms in the first place. [37] Raul Hilberg, a leading scholar of the Nazi military, summarizes that

      The killers were well armed, they knew what to do, and they worked swiftly. The victims were unarmed, bewildered, and followed orders. . . . It is significant that the Jews allowed themselves to be shot without resistance. In all reports of the Einsatzgruppen there were few references to “incidents.” The killing units never lost a man during a shooting operation. . . . [T]he Jews remained paralyzed after their first brush with death and in spite of advance knowledge of their fate. [38]

      How could Jews with “advance knowledge of their fate” allow themselves to be murdered? The authors suggest that

      These Jews’ passivity doubtless was the result of centuries of victimization in Russia. They had come to believe that being victimized was normal. In most cases in Jewish experience, the victimizers were satisfied after the first few victims. In such situations, resisting was likely to prolong the victimization, and thus to increase the number of victims. Most Jews did not realize that the Nazis were different. Most Jews did not realize the Nazis had no use for living Jews.

      On top of this tendency to accept being victimized, twenty years of Communist rule–of which Stalin’s terror had occupied ten years–had shown Jews that failure to obey orders was a fatal mistake. [39]

      Although many Jews remained passive throughout the Holocaust, some did not. In 1943, the Nazis attempted to commence the liquidation of the Warsaw ghetto. [40] But as the Nazis moved in, members of the Jewish Fighting Organization opened fire. “[T]he shock of encountering resistance evidently forced the Germans to discontinue their work in order to make more thorough preparations.” [41] The revolt continued, leading Goebbels to note in his diary: “This just shows what you can expect from Jews if they lay hands on weapons.” [42] Although the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto were eventually defeated, the Warsaw battle was perhaps the most significant ever for the Jews, according to Raul Hilberg: “In Jewish history, the battle is literally a revolution, for after two thousand years of a policy of submission the wheel had been turned and once again Jews were using force.” [43]

      There were other Jewish uprisings; even in the death camps of Sobibor and Treblinka, Jews seized arms from the Nazi guards and attempted to escape. A few succeeded, and more significantly, the camps were closed prematurely. [44] The authors do not attempt to tell the complete story of Jewish guerilla resistance during World War II. [45]

      The German chapter is the most successful in the book. The perpetrators and the victims of Naziism both left extensive written records, allowing Simkin, Zelman, and Rice to integrate their always-strong textual analysis of the gun laws with a discussion of the actual impact of the laws on the lives of victims. [46]

      D. China

      The China chapter is much less enlightening, mostly because the victims of Mao’s genocide, unlike Hitler’s, left much less of a record for Western historians to uncover. While many scholars agree that about one million people were murdered during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), the number of people who were starved to death by Mao’s communization of the economy from 1957 to 1960 (“the Great Leap Forward”) might be as low as one million, or as high as thirty million. [47]

      Mao, like Hitler, inherited gun control from his predecessor’s regime. [48] A 1912 Chinese law made it illegal to import or possess rifles, cannons, or explosives without a permit. [49] The law was apparently aimed at the warlords who were contesting the central government’s authority; Chinese peasants were far too poor to afford guns. [50] Communist gun control was not enacted until 1957, when the National People’s Congress outlawed the manufacture, repair, purchase, or possession of any firearm or ammunition “in contravention of safety provisions.” [51]

      E. Guatemala

      Perhaps the most overlooked genocide of the twentieth century has been the Guatemalan government’s campaign against its Indian population. One reason that the genocide has attracted little attention may be that the Guatemalan government has been friendly to the United States.

      Gun control in Guatemala has always been intimately tied to the military’s determination to maintain itself as the dominant institution in society. [52] After taking power with a revolutionary army of just forty-five men, the Guatemalan government of 1871 speedily decreed the registration of all “new model” firearms. [53] Registered guns were subject to impoundment whenever the government thought necessary. [54] In 1873, firearms sales were prohibited, and firearms owners were required to turn their guns over to the government. [55]

      Apparently, the enforcement of the 1873 law began to wane. In 1923, General Jose Orellana, who had taken power in a coup a few years before, put into force a comprehensive gun control decree. [56] The law barred most firearms imports, outlawed the carrying of guns in towns (except by government officials), required a license for carrying guns “on the public roads and railways,” set the fee for a carry license high enough so as to be beyond the reach of poor people, and prohibited ownership of any gun that could fire a military caliber cartridge. [57]

      In 1944, two officers led a revolt against the military government. [58] “Distributing arms to students and civilian supporters, they soon gained control of the city [Guatemala City, the capital], and two days later Ponce [the dictator] resigned, though not before nearly a hundred people had died in the sporadic fighting.” [59] The first free elections in half a century were held. [60] The new government did not eliminate the gun control laws, but it did regularize the issuance of carry permits by specifying that the permits would be issued to an applicant who could “prove his good character by means of testimonials from two persons of known honesty.” [61]

      In 1952, the democratically-elected government of Jacobo Arbenz began an agrarian reform plan that expropriated large uncultivated estates. [62] Compensation was based on the taxable value of the land. The United Fruit Company was angry at the seizure of 386,000 acres of the company’s reserve land in exchange for what the company considered inadequate compensation. [63] In June 1954, a force of Guatemalan exiles, trained by the CIA, invaded Guatemala from Honduras. [64] “Unable accurately to assess the situation in the capital, Arbenz resolved to do as he had done in 1944 and distribute weapons to the workers for the defense of the government. The army refused to obey, and on 27 June, Arbenz resigned . . . .” [65]

      Contrary to the assertion of the authors, [66] it is unclear whether total repeal of the gun controls a decade before would have saved the democratic government. Firearms at a free-market price might still have been beyond the financial reach of the peasants and students in a very poor country. What might have made a difference, however, is the actual distribution of surplus military arms for free to the citizens of Guatemala while the democratic regime was in power. [67] But such a policy was not implemented, and for all practical purposes, the military retained a monopoly of force. As the authors note, the monopoly “made Arbenz, a duly elected President, serve at the Military’s pleasure. When they wanted him to go, he went.” [68]

      In November 1960, reformist military officers attempted a coup and garnered the support of about half the army. [69] Peasants, wanting to fight for their own land, asked the rebels for guns so that the peasants could join the battle; the rebels refused. [70] The coup was finally crushed by loyalist forces who were supported by the United States. [71] From the 1960s to the 1980s, the Guatemalan government found itself engaged in perpetual counterinsurgency campaigns. As part of these campaigns, right-wing terror squads were unleashed to murder suspected subversives, although regular army units also participated extensively. [72] Approximately 100,000 Mayan Indians were murdered by the government during this period. [73]

      Amnesty International has waged a long and courageous campaign against human rights abuses in Guatemala. [74] The authors reviewing Amnesty International’s proposals for restoring human rights to Guatemala, note that the group nowhere advocates recognition of a strong legal right to arms or the arming of the victim populations. [75] Instead, Amnesty argues that the government should control itself better:

      The government should also thoroughly review the present method of reporting and certifying violent deaths, particularly those resulting from actions taken by any person in an official capacity. The aim of such an inquiry should be to create procedures which will ensure that such deaths are reported to the authorities, who then impartially investigate the circumstances and causes of the deaths. All efforts should be made to identify the unidentified bodies that are found in the country and frequently buried only as “xx”, in order to determine time, place and manner of death and whether a criminal act has been committed. [76]

      Is the Amnesty proposal realistic? “It seems absurd,” write Simkin, Zelman, and Rice, “to appeal to so blood-drenched a government to ‘impartially investigate’ atrocities its officials have committed.” [77]

      The failure of the Guatemalan government to prosecute its agents for perpetrating government-sponsored genocide suggests that hopes for domestic legal reform may be of little use in actually stopping genocide. As the next two chapters illustrate, international law may be of little greater practical efficacy.

      F. Uganda

      If international organizations such as the United Nations were ever going to intervene to stop a genocide in progress, Uganda in the 1970s would have been the ideal spot. Ugandan dictator Idi Amin was a world pariah with no powerful allies. He was generally regarded as insane (perhaps from advanced venereal disease) and his army was, by world power standards, pitiful. [78] From 1990 to 1991, the United States assembled and led a worldwide coalition which easily drove Iraqi conquerors out of Kuwait. [79] A multinational coalition conquest of Uganda would have been all the easier, since Idi Amin’s army was tiny compared to Saddam Hussein’s war machine. [80] Kuwait, however, was a strategic oil resource, [81] while Uganda had few resources other than the Ugandan people who were being slaughtered by their government. Although the existence of the Ugandan genocide was well-established as it was being perpetrated, the possibility of a multinational campaign to oust Idi Amin was never even a topic for serious discussion, whereas discussion about the reconquest of Kuwait began days after Iraqi tanks entered Kuwait. [82]

      Not once in this century has one nation or a coalition of nations launched a military action to stop a genocide in progress. It is true that wars have sometimes led to a genocidal regime being deposed; Tanzania ousted Amin, and the Allies defeated Hitler. But Tanzania and the Allies acted only because their territory had been invaded, not because they were moved to action by reports of the murders within Uganda or within Nazi Germany.

      Notably, even when the Allies were engaged in all-out war against Hitler, they refused to take military action against the extermination camps, such as by bombing the rail lines that led to them. [83] As historian Raul Hilberg writes, “The Allied nations who were at war with Germany did not come to the aid of Germany’s victims. The Jews of Europe had no allies. In its gravest hour Jewry stood alone, and the realization of that desertion came as a shock to Jewish leaders all over the world.” [84] The people of Uganda likewise stood alone from 1971 to 1979, when Idi Amin’s dictatorship killed about 300,000 people, roughly 2.3% of the total population. [85]

      The authors began their study of Ugandan gun laws with a 1955 statute promulgated by the British imperial government, although this gun control law may not have been Uganda’s first. [86] Although the British/Ugandan law had the length and complexity typical of modern statutes, the essence was a provision requiring that a person could only possess a firearm if he had a permit, and the permit would be granted by the police only upon a discretionary finding regarding the applicant’s “fitness” to possess a firearm. [87]

      Uganda achieved independence in 1962, [88] keeping the structure of the Colonial gun laws intact. In 1966, Milton Obote assumed dictatorial powers. In 1969, Obote tightened the gun laws, imposing a nationwide ban on firearms and ammunition possession, making exceptions only for government officials and for persons granted an exemption by the government. [89] In 1970, the 1955 British gun law was recodified, with some minor changes. [90]

      Idi Amin took power in 1971, and the mass murders began shortly thereafter. The nation’s large Asian population was expelled (not murdered), and in the process the Ugandan government seized approximately a billion dollars’ worth of the Asians’ property. [91] The main targets of the Ugandan government’s mass murders were members of tribes whom Amin perceived as a threat to his power. [92] Because Uganda had far less of an infrastructure than Nazi Germany, the murders were perpetrated mostly by bands of soldiers who shot their victims, rather than through extermination camps. [93]

      Amin’s army numbered about 25,000 and his secret police–the “State Research Bureau”–only 3,000. [94] The army was ill-disciplined and incompetent, and collapsed not long after Amin began his ill-advised war against Tanzania in late 1978. [95] How could such a small and pathetic army get away with mass murder against a nation of thirteen million people? Is it possible that a disarmed Ugandan population was easier to murder than an armed one?

      Idi Amin, by the way, now lives in Saudi Arabia. [96] As far as I know, there has been no effort to extradite him and put him on trial for murder. With the exceptions of the rulers of the nations that lost World War II, none of the perpetrators of genocide in the 20th century have been prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

      G. Cambodia

      Also enjoying a comfortable post-genocide life is Pol Pot, the perpetrator of the best known mass-murders of the post-World War II era.

      Cambodian gun control was a legacy of French colonialism. [97] A series of Royal Ordinances, decreed by a monarchy subservient to the French, appears to have been enacted out of fear of the Communist and anti-colonial insurgencies that were taking place in the 1920s and 1930s throughout Southeast Asia, although not in Cambodia. [98] The first law, in 1920, dealt with the carrying of guns, while the last law in the series, in 1938, imposed a strict licensing system. [99] Only hunters could have guns, and they were allowed to own only a single firearm. [100] These colonial laws appear to have stayed in place after Cambodia was granted independence. The Khmer Rouge enacted no new gun control laws, for they enacted no laws at all other than a Constitution. [101]

      Cambodia was a poor country, and few people could afford guns. [102] On the other hand, the chaos that accompanies any war might have given some Cambodians the opportunity to acquire firearms from corrupt or dead soldiers. There is no solid evidence about how many Cambodians, with no cultural history of firearms ownership, attempted to do so. [103]

      As soon as the Khmer Rouge took power, they immediately set out to disarm the populace. One Cambodian recalls that

      Eang [a woman] watched soldiers stride onto the porches of the houses and knock on the doors and ask the people who answered if they had any weapons. “We are here now to protect you,” the soldiers said, “and no one has a need for a weapon any more.” People who said that they kept no weapons were forced to stand aside and allow the soldiers to look for themselves. . . . The round-up of weapons took nine or ten days, and once the soldiers had concluded the villagers were no longer armed, they dropped their pretense of friendliness. . . . The soldiers said everyone would have to leave the village for a while, so that the troops could search for weapons; when the search was finished, they could return. [104]

      People being forced out of villages and cities were searched thoroughly, and weapons and foreign currency were confiscated. [105] To the limited extent that Cambodians owned guns through the government licensing system, the names of registered gun owners were of course available to the new government. [106]

      The Cambodian genocide was unique in the twentieth century, in that its target was not a single ethnic, religious, or political group, but rather the entire educated populace. Lacking infrastructure for sophisticated Nazi-style extermination camps, the Khmer Rouge used the genocide methods which had been used by the Turkish government (internal deportations with forced marches designed to kill), the Soviet government (hard labor under conditions likely to kill), and the Guatemalan government (murders of targeted victims). [107]

      Like other victims of genocide, the Cambodians forced into slave labor were kept so desperately hungry that revolt became difficult to contemplate, as every thought focused on food. One slave laborer explained that

      There was no possibility of an uprising. . . . Contact between many people was made impossible by the chlops [informers] . . . . Besides, we had no arms and no food. Even if we’d been able to produce arms and kill the fifty Khmer Rouge in the village, what would happen to us? We didn’t have enough food to build up any reserves to sustain a guerilla army. In our state of weakness, after a few days wandering in the jungle, death would have been inevitable. [108]

      The authors estimate that Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge murdered about a million people, at least 14% of the Cambodian population. [109] The percentage was about the same as the percentage of the Soviet population murdered by Stalin, except that Pol Pot accomplished in three-and-a-half years what took Stalin twenty. [110]

      The mass murders of the Khmer Rouge became well-known in the international community, but no nation made an effort to try to rescue the Cambodian people. Finally, Pol Pot was driven from power by a Vietnamese invasion that was motivated by imperialist, rather than humanitarian reasons. [111]

      Pol Pot’s fate was thus similar to Idi Amin’s: the world would tolerate genocide, but threatening the borders of a neighboring country would lead to the regime’s demise. According to the New York Times, “Pol Pot is today a free, prosperous and apparently unrepentant man who, 15 years after his ouster from Phnom Penh, continues to plot a return to power. The calls for some sort of international genocide tribunal for Pol Pot and his aides have not been heard for years.” [112]

      The authors have demonstrated that every nation in the twentieth century which has perpetrated genocide has chosen a victim population which was disarmed. If the intended victims were not already “gun-free,” then the murderous governments first got rid of the guns before they attempted to begin the killing.
      Notes
      [4] Id. at 81.
      [5] Id.
      [6] Id. at 81, 94.
      [7] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 82.
      [8] Id. at 79.
      [9] Id. at 83.
      [10] Id.
      [11] Yves Ternon, Report on the Genocide of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, 1915-16 in A Crime of Silence: The Armenian Genocide 117-18 (Gerald Libridian ed., London, Zed Books 1985), quoted in Simkin et al., supra note 2 at 83.
      [12] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 98.
      [13] Id., at 106-7.
      [14] Id.
      [15] Id.
      [16] Financial rewards were offered for informants who turned in persons possessing unlicensed guns. Decree of the Council of People’s Commissars, 10 December 1918, reprinted in 4 Decrees of Soviet Power 123 (Moscow 1968), reprinted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 123.
      [17] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 98.
      The decree also specified that minors could not be given arms unless the license specified the name of an adult who would be responsible. As in New York City (for handguns) and New Jersey (for all guns) under current laws, unlicensed persons were not permitted even for a moment to touch a firearm, even for supervised use at a range. Decree of the Council of People’s Commissars on the Issuing, Keeping, and Handling of Firearms, reprinted in 9 Decrees of Soviet Power 104 (Moscow, 1978), reprinted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 129. (“It is absolutely forbidden to hand over weapons to anyone, whether for temporary use, or for storage.”)
      [18] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 101.
      [19] Id.
      [20] Id. The “crime bill” enacted by the United States Congress in August 1994 provides for the death penalty for offenders as young as thirteen-years-old. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 199th Pub. L. No. 103-332, 108 Stat. 1796.
      [21] Id. at 100-04.
      [22] Jay Simkin & Aaron Zelman, “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny (1992). The authors’ copyright permission requires the following exact citation: “Gun Control”: Gateway to Tyranny, Jay Simkin & Aaron Zelman, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, 2872 South Wentworth Avenue, Hartford, WI 53027, (262) 767-0760.
      [23] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 150.
      [24] Id. at 151.
      [25] Id.
      [26] Id.
      [27] Id.
      [28] Id. at 152.
      [29] Id. at 153. The Nazis (on a pages per year basis) issued laws and regulations at 2.5 times the rate of the Weimar government. Id. at 155.
      [30] Id. at 153.
      [31] William Sheridan Allen, The Nazi Seizure of Power: The Experience of a Single German Town, 1922-1945, at 184-85 (1984), quoted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 154.
      [32] Id.
      [33] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 163-70.
      [34] As the then-head of the German police, Hermann Göring, stated, “I refuse the notion that the police are protective troops for Jewish stores. The police protect whoever comes into Germany legitimately, but not Jewish usurers.” Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out 188 (Don B. Kates, Jr. ed., 1979).
      [35] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 156.
      [36] Id. at 156.
      In the Atlanta suburb of Brownsville in 1906, the press incited the city over a non-existent epidemic of assaults on white women by blacks; a wave of beatings and shooting of blacks followed. The police arrested Negroes who armed themselves against further attack. American Violence: A Documentary History 237 (Richard Hofstadler & Michael Wallace, eds., 1971); see also Richard Maxwell Brown, Strain of Violence: Historical Studies in American Violence and Vigilantism 210-11 (1975).
      In Michigan, handgun permit laws were enacted after Dr. Ossian Sweet, a black, shot and killed a person in a mob that was attacking his house because he had just moved into an all-white neighborhood. The Detroit police stood nearby, refusing to restrain the angry crowd. Don B. Kates, Jr., History of Handgun Prohibition in the United States, in Restricting Handguns: The Liberal Skeptics Speak Out, supra note 34, at 19. Indicted for first degree murder, Sweet was acquitted after a lengthy trial at which Clarence Darrow served as his attorney. Black newspapers such as the Amsterdam News and the Baltimore Herald vigorously defended blacks’ right to use deadly force in self-defense against a mob. Walter White, The Sweet Trial, Crisis, Jan. 1926, at 125; Irving Stone, Clarence Darrow for the Defense 529-47 (1941); Herbert Shapiro, White Violence and Black Response: From Reconstruction to Montgomery 188-96 (1988).
      Darrow summed up for the jury: “[T]hey may have been gunmen. They may have tried to murder. But they were not cowards . . . . [E]leven of them go into a house, gentlemen, with no police protection, in the face of a mob, and the hatred of a community, and take guns and ammunition and fight for their rights, and for your rights and for mine, and for the rights of every other human being that lives.” Clarence Darrow, Attorney for the Damned 241-42 (Arthur Weinberg ed., 1957).
      [37] See supra text accompanying notes 12-16.
      [38] Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews 318-20 (1985).
      [39] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 157.
      [40] David I. Caplan, The Warsaw Ghetto: 10 Handguns Against Tyranny, Am. Rifleman, Feb. 1988, at 31.
      [41] Caplan, supra note 40.
      [42] Elliot Rothenberg, Jewish History Refutes Gun Control Activists, Am. Rifleman, Feb. 1988, at 30.
      The Jews had built bunkers with underground tunnels, and grew increasingly well-armed with rifles, machineguns, handguns, grenades, and other explosives supplied by the Polish resistance, smuggled out of Nazi factories, or taken from dead Nazi soldiers. A major Nazi assault began on April 19, with the expectation that the ghetto would be cleared in time for Hitler’s birthday on the 20th. The assault was led by a tank and two armored cars; a Jewish unit set the tank on fire twice, forcing a Nazi retreat. See Simkin et al., supra note 2; Caplan, supra note 40.
      The Nazis returned with artillery, and after April 22, Nazi artillery drove many Jews into the Jewish tunnel system that connected with the sewers. The Nazis used poison gasses to attempt to clear the Jews out of the sewers. Nazi forces could not directly take on the buildings where the Jews had built hidden bunkers, cellars, and attics; room-to-room fighting would have inflicted unacceptably high casualties on the Nazis. So the Nazis began to burn down the Warsaw ghetto, one building at a time. Explosives and artillery were used to smash the buildings that were not flammable. On April 25, the Nazi commanding general recorded in his diary “this evening one can see a gigantic sea of flames.” Even so, the Jewish will to resist was not broken. Finally, on May 15, the Warsaw synagogue was blown up, and the battle was over. In contrast to the usual result when the Nazis made an area into a “Jew-free-zone”, there was nothing of economic value for the Nazis to take; to the contrary, the Nazis had been forced to pay a price in order to take Jewish lives. Id.
      [43] Hilberg, supra note 38, at 499. For a full discussion of the Warsaw ghetto battle, see Yitzhak Zuckerman, A Surplus of Memory: Chronicle of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising (1993); Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, The Warsaw Ghetto: The First Battle to Re-Establish Israel (1993).
      [44] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 158.
      [45] The story can be found, among other places, in Harold Werner, Fighting Back: A Memoir of Jewish Resistance in World War II (1992); Yechiel Granatstein, The War of a Jewish Partisan (1986); Nechama Tec, Defiance: The Bielski Partisans (1993); and Chaika Grossman, The Underground Army: Fighters of the Bialystok Ghetto (1987).
      For Jewish difficulty in obtaining arms for resistance, see Israel Gutman, The Armed Struggle of the Jews in Nazi-occupied Countries, in The Holocaust 457-98 (Leni Yahil ed. & Ina Friedman & Haya Galai trans., 1990).
      [46] Another strength of the chapter is that the authors merely mention in passing, but do not elaborate on, their theory from their previous book that the Nazi gun law served as a model for America’s Gun Control Act of 1968. Simkin et al, supra note 2, at 2. The theory is actually not quite as absurd as it might seem at first glance. The 1968 American law was primarily the work of Connecticut Senator Thomas J. Dodd, who served as a senior prosecutor on the American legal staff at the Nuremburg trials. Dodd was apparently familiar with the Nazi gun laws. See Lewis C. Coffin, Law Librarian, Library of Congress, to Senator Thomas J. Dodd, July 12, 1968 (sending Dodd a translation of the 1938 Nazi gun law, and noting that Dodd has supplied the Library of Congress with his own German text of the law). It is also true that Senator Dodd, as a Nuremburg prosecutor, had no reason in any of his professional work to need a copy of the German gun control law. Id. at 79-80. But the fact that Dodd was interested in the Nazi law is hardly proof, by itself, that the Nazi law was the basis for the American law.
      Ultimately, any claim of linkage between the two laws must depend on common elements in those laws. What similarities do Simkin and Zelman see between the 1938 German law and the 1968 American law? Both laws: exempted the government from the controls that applied to law-abiding citizens; treated firearms ownership as a privilege granted by the government rather than as a right; and required that gun buyers meet some test of reliability. The 1968 American law requires the gun purchaser to affirm under felony penalty that he is not a convicted felon, dishonorably discharged from the military, an alcoholic, a drug user, or otherwise disqualified under federal law.) Simkin & Zelman, supra note 22, at 83. All these features are indeed common to the 1938 Nazi and 1968 American laws. But these features are common to virtually any gun control anywhere in the world. The premise of the vast majority of gun laws around the globe, before and after 1938, is that the government can be trusted with weapons, but certain classes of citizens should not, and accordingly gun acquisition or ownership should be regulated by the government so as to disarm those untrustworthy classes. These three common features, rather than proving that the American law derives from the Nazi law, simply prove that American and Nazi law both followed the standard world-wide pattern of gun control.
      A fourth feature common to the Nazi and American laws is more intriguing. The Nazi law allowed guns with particular features to be banned based on governmental determination that they were not “sporting.” The American law allowed the government to prohibit the import of guns which the government did not find to be “particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.” Gun Control Act of 1968, Pub. L. 90-618, 82 Stat. 1213 (codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3)).
      The distinction between supposedly benign “sporting” weapons (supposedly used for killing animals) and other weapons (which might be used for killing government troops) is not, however, original to Nazi law. The 1921 Firearms Act in Great Britain, for example, set up a licensing system for handguns and rifles, but left shotguns unregulated. Although the Act did not use the word “sporting,” the reason that shotguns were treated differently from rifles and handguns is that shotguns were seen as benign sports instruments for bird-hunting, whereas rifles and handguns were (in the wake of World War I) considered military weapons whose main purpose was anti-personnel. David B. Kopel, The Samurai, The Mountie, and The Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies? 78-79 (1992).
      [47] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 187.
      [48] Id. at 188.
      [49] Id.
      [50] Id.
      [51] Id. at 190.
      [52] Id. at 229-234.
      [53] Id. at 230.
      [54] Id. at 237. The law actually listed particular firearms manufacturers (“as for example, a rifle or carbine made by Henry, Winchester, Sneider [sic], Remington, etc.). Id. The 1971 Guatemalan law was one of the very few brand-specific gun control laws ever enacted, until American local governments began enacting “assault weapon” bans in the late 1980′s that defined “assault weapon” not by characteristic, but by brand name and model. David B. Kopel, Hold Your Fire, Pol’y Rev., Jan. 1993, at 58.
      [55] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 231.
      [56] Id.
      [57] Id.
      [58] Id. at 232.
      [59] Peter Calvert, Guatemala: A Nation in Turmoil 75 (1985), quoted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 232.
      [60] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 232.
      [61] Id.
      [62] Id. at 233.
      [63] Id.
      [64] Id.
      [65] Id.
      [66] Id.
      [67] By way of historical precedent, some American colonies bought guns for militiamen who could not afford their own. Don B. Kates, Jr., Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment, 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204, 215 n.46 (1983).
      [68] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 233.
      [69] Id.
      [70] Id.
      [71] Id.
      [72] Id. at 234.
      [73] Id. at 229.
      [74] Id. at 234.
      [75] Id.
      [76] Amnesty International, Guatemala: The Human Rights Record 150-51 (1987), reprinted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 234. By way of disclosure, I should note that I have been a monthly donor to Amnesty International since 1984.
      [77] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 234.
      [78] Id. at 275, 280. See also Angus Denning et al., Idi Amin’s Rule of Blood, Newsweek, Mar. 7, 1977, at 29.
      [79] The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour: Excerpts of Bush News Conference, Saddam’s Future; Gergen & Shields; A Quiet Patriotism (Educ. Broadcasting and GWETA television broadcast, Mar. 1, 1991).
      [80] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 280; Lee Stokes, Iraq Warns Against Foreign Interference in Kuwait, UPI, Aug. 2, 1990, available in LEXIS, News Library, UPI File.
      [81] Stokes, supra note 80.
      [82] See excerpt from Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, Schwarzkopf, in Newsweek, Sept. 28, 1992, at 52.
      [83] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 159.
      [84] Hilberg, supra note 38, at 1048.
      [85] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 269.
      [86] Id. at 271.
      [87] Id.
      [88] Id. at 272.
      [89] Id. at 274.
      [90] Id. at 271, 274, 283-99.
      [91] Id. at 277.
      [92] Id. at 276.
      [93] Id. at 278.
      [94] Id. at 280.
      [95] Id.
      [96] Chet Lunner, Idi Amin Benefits from Desert Storm Protection, Gannett News Service, Feb. 11, 1991, available in LEXIS, News Library, GNS File.
      [97] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 305.
      [98] Id.
      [99] Id.
      [100] Id. at 305.
      [101] Id. at 306.
      [102] Id.
      [103] Id.
      [104] Alec Wilkinson, A Changed Vision of God, New Yorker, Jan. 24, 1994, at 54-55, quoted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 306. Similarly, one refugee recalled the days after the Cuban revolution overthrew Batista: “We believed [Castro] when he said we should surrender our arms because we did not need guns now that we were a free country . . . [and] we rushed to the police station to give up our guns.” Lin Williams, The Rise of Castro: ‘If only we hadn’t given up our guns!’, Medina County Gazette, Oct. 15, 1976, at 5.
      [105] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 306.
      [106] Id.
      [107] Id. at 312.
      [108] Pin Yathay, Stay Alive, My Son 102 (N.Y., Simon & Schuster 1987), quoted in Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 314.
      [109] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 315.
      [110] Id. As with the other nations studied, the authors use a conservative estimate for the total number of deaths. Other scholars of genocide put the number of killings in Cambodia much higher. R.J. Rummel, Death by Government 175 (1994).
      [111] Simkin et al., supra note 2, at 316.
      [112] Philip Shenon, Pol Pot, the Mass Murderer Who Is Still Alive and Well, N.Y. Times, Feb. 6, 1994, § 4 (Business), at 1.

      • cawmun cents

        I was going to cut and paste the entire third edition of Funk and Wagnalls Encyclopedia,but for pitys sake I fought the urge……
        Cheers!
        =CC.

      • Kevin

        Well at least we agree on something…. My post was way longer than I realized……sorry.

  • Mike

    Talking about the billion hollow points bought by our National SS oops I mean homeland Security. Hollow points violate the Geneva convention. so if they are willing to do that they are willing to gas us too. Unfortunately our best defense would be to strike first. Hopefully they use the hollow points for target practice over five years instead. After all maybe it was forseen that WE would buy up all the bullets as soon as the winds against the second ammendment started blowing in earnest.

  • Jim B

    Those anti-American, anti-2nd Amendment, anti-gun zealots have infiltrated American PoliTics (Poli meaning many, Tics meaning tiny bloodsucking creatures). What did we expect from a liberal run education system. We are fighting our own creation, it’s our own doing. Those who understand and live by constitutional law are now the minority, look no further than the re-election of BHO for evidence of that! From the land of the brave and the free, to the land of free stuff and serfdom, we are pathetic!

    • richard brooks

      the constitution? do you support any of the restrictions to the 2nd?

      • STEVE E.

        I don’t, only tyrants do.

      • 45caliber

        No

      • Mike Austin

        No restrictions at all on the Constitution. If someone breaks a law and hurts someone, that is not part of the 2nd amendment. If your argument is someone will get hurt, we will have to ban just about everything. Including this forum, since “someone” could kill themself because of it. Do not try to infringe on my RIGHT because a person does something wrong.

      • Flashy

        45…do you support any restrictions to the 1st Amendment?

      • Jim B

        Richard, the Bill of Rights is Gods given rights of man, not governments given rights of man. Your cannot take away that which is God given. I cannot be make that any clearer, I hope you understand.

      • cawmun cents

        None should be restricted….
        But when someone uses them as an excuse to do evil toward another citizen,they should be stripped of their citizenship,and their rights.
        In that way there would have to be necessary proof of willfully ignoring Constitutional law.
        But in accordance with that,if guilt was established,then there would only be the tarring and feathering to commence with,before floating them out of the nation on a tenuous barge.
        There is no room here for discretion…at least not Constitutionally.
        For those who seek to hide behind it in order to wage some kind of agenda,there can only be contempt,and derision.
        Hence the need for Constitutional Committees,established by average Americans for all Americans.They would be trained by the populace for the populace making sure that high-minded Ivy League lawyers werent interpreting things their way.
        But what do I know?
        Apparently very little……
        Cheers!
        -CC.

  • cawmun cents

    “Wait until you see the red of their eyes!”
    Cheers!
    -CC.

  • richard brooks

    these stories, and the indignant comments from gun owners, are hilarious. the gop, the nra and most of today’s current gun owners, are the very same people who have supported all of the current, unconstitutional, restrictions on weapons and gun ownership.
    did you think you would be exempt from any future restrictions?
    if you support any of the current restrictions then you effectively support any future ones. even if they include you.

  • jopa

    In doing some research on this story what caught my attention the most is that there are ninety differant federal agencies that have armed personnel.After 911 i heard that Bush created an agency for dozens of differant terror scenarios but I didn’t realize how bad it really was.So much for the GOP and small government.

    • momo

      The GOP just gives lip service to small government. They’re just as guilty as the Democrats, perhaps more so, with the expansion of the federal government.

      • Kevin

        (The GOP just gives lip service to small government. They’re just as guilty as the Democrats) Finally someone says something I can agree with.

    • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

      jopa: So much for the GOP and small government.

      So much for the Dems and small government…obviously both, love BIG-government just fine!

      • Kevin

        Wow two comments I agree wtih … Im on a roll…

  • ROGER, Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

    I dont believe the government will have an all-out shooting war with Americans BECAUSE they ( the Government) are WINNING by GRADUALISM.Why would they bother starting a shooting war, when Americans,like their Canadian cousins will just give in to law after law until ,in effect, they have no gun rights at all. By that time it will be too late to fight back.Americans like Canadians do not see the CUMULATIVE effect of each of the laws.YES the odd American individual or even group of individuals may be foolish enough to start shooting ( a few Canadians did) but will end up either dead or in jail, but Americans will not rise up to help them. There are already MANY examples of people like,Waco, Dorner etcetera, to prove my point. The DIRECT cause is MAJORITY IGNORANCE of their ABSOLUTE RIGHTS.. MOST Americans and Canadians believe laws are supreme,NOT their NATURAL RIGHTS and the proxies/stooges (Governments) of the Establishment KNOW that. ONLY when we regain believing in our ABSOLUTE and INHERENT NATURAL RIGHTS, as reasonably ( but not absolutely as they should have been) described in our constitutions, INSTEAD of laws, which are only created by corporations ( YES the U.S. Government is a corporation),will we be able to BEGIN to return to a FREE society

    • 45caliber

      I think you are right … unfortunately.

      • JUKEBOX

        We are becoming like the frog that was put in a pot of cool water and then put on the stove until he was boiled to death. Our government is like termites, eating one small bite at a time, until the structure collapses.

    • Charlie

      Roger,,,
      You’ve a valid point ,,,but,,,why don’t you Canadians “fix” your own “”Problems”,,,such as No pistols are allowed in Canada,,,and We lower 48ers can’t even drive to Alaska on the Alcan Hiway ,which We built , without sealing all guns and Pistols are “Prohibited” ???
      Then you would set an example for the lower 48ers to follow… Meanwhile……………………..
      Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing and gun “Rights”, see Luke 22:36…

      Charlie Freedom

      • ROGER,irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

        Charlie, you tell me and we’ll both know :-) I was a founding member of the Libertarian Party of Canada in 1974 and the violations have only gotten much worse than even we predicted.I stopped participating in the party because i see only activism as the solution-if there is a solution, anymore!!! the fact is .Charlie I have decided to leave Canada and my company has land in South America, and Africa, plus I am also and Irish citizen, a couple of my choices where to live out my remaining years. Believe it or not those areas have more freedom than exists here in North America, if you dont mind the lack of certain things such as good roads,sanitation and comfy transport.All things considered though the inconveniences are preferable to the tyranny here and in the U.S. where my daughter lives-pity her..

      • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

        Englishmen have always lived under a king whereas Americans at the time of the revolution only recognized one king, the Lord Jesus Christ. Americans saw their government as their servant, when needed, not the kingdom that held them in bondage to do it’s will. The culture of Canada is far different than the American culture.

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      What your saying is we need a lot more “organized” Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty or give me death”.

  • Uknowho

    I have a question:

    Does any of the furvent 2nd amendent advocates agree with limits to the 1st Amendment at all?

    The first amendment ios pretty clear here.

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    So under this clear law, you should be able to have child pornography Afterall, the Constitution says nothing about child pornograghy so the founders must have been ok with it right?

    Of course not…

    So as with the second amendment, there are limits on the 2nd amendment so sensible gun control, helping law enforncement do its job better and aiding the mental HC infrastructure in this country deal with people who are suseptable violence and helping law enforcement keeping guns out of their hands is not “disarming America”

    Get over it people and concentrate on a real issue.

    • FreedomFighter

      Bon 2 says:
      March 18, 2013 at 9:13 am

      BENEFITS OF GUN CONTROL:

      CONCENTRATION CAMPS
      KILLING FIELDS
      GULAGS

      Real Men Own Guns ~ Slaves Don’t

      American gun owners are 80-100 million strong adult voting block, that is 1/3 of the country and bigger than any other voting block in America — write letters telling liberals just that, and let them know there political careers are over if they violate your rights under the constitution.

      Laus Deo
      Semper FI

      • Cindy

        As usual, you are assuming that all 80 million guns owners are the voting radical right nut cases. Guess what dude, over half the gun owners are flaming liberals who believe in gun control. That narrows it down to 40 million. Not going to win you any elections with that amount. I guess you are not familiar with drones are you? If our government wanted you, you are done. You would think that an ex military dude would know and understand the power of this great military that we built. Those automatic rifles will not help. You and the other radicals are giving yourselves a false sense of security by thinking that you can oppose this government and survive. You obviously didn’t watch “Enemy of the State” either did you? This high tech military has eyes on everybody and if they want to take you out, consider yourself done! The radicals in this country don’t like anything about this country. I say take your guns and leave. Go find a country that will take a group of haters. Paul Ryan is the classic hyprocrite, who rec’d SSI and used it to go to college, but now doesn’t want anyone else to receive the same assistance. All of Mitt Romenys sons used Invitro to produce their children, and now Mitt wants to stop those procedures. The examples would take me days to write, suffice to say, that the repubs want to do what they want and don’t want anyone else to receive the same benefits that they have. Leave, please leave this country to those who truly do honor our founding fathers concept. Hey, did you know that they weren’t able to read the future? They probably would have banned those automatic rifles, as they didn’t want anyone to be able to topple the gov that they worked so hard to secure. They knew from the beginning that radicals within would be our biggest threat and they could only protect us up to a certain point using what history had taught them. Have you ever thought to ask how many repubs are on disability, receive food stamps, filed banktruptcy, receive medicare or medicaid, don’t have insurance, are in jail, defaulted on student loans, committed rape, murdered someone, got an abortion, got raped,? No of course not, your peeps are perfect aren’t they? LMAO.

    • Adolf Schmidt

      When politicians state ” It is my goal to remove all guns from the hands of Americans” we will stand in their way! When politicians have no knowledge on a matter but insist on passing legislation anyway, we will stand in their way! There have been many pieces of legislation passed bases on their ignorance of the subjects at hand and Country is in a huge mess! It is not too much to ask our politicians to educate themselves on the topic or leave it to someone that knows what the hill they are talking about! There are too many people OK with trusting the Government to do the right thing! How’s that going for ya?

      • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.sherman.589 tgsherman

        They can make new laws & they may try to change the Constitution but if some one breaks my door in at 4:00 in the morning then I have my own law!! I would suggest that you knock 1st…….& after 8:00 am……..

    • 45caliber

      Uknow:

      Do you want child porn? I don’t care … as long as all you do is look at the pictures. However, if you make child porn pictures, which harm the star, or attack a child that is another matter. And you should be executed for it. But the left, like you, doesn’t believe in harming criminals, do you? If we did, you might be the one harmed. And the left wants to insure that they aren’t harmed regardless of what they do.

      Besides, your example is trying to match apples and oranges. There is a BIG difference in harming others by committing a violent act against children and defending yourself from harm from those violent people.

    • Uknowho

      FF, Adolf, and 45 cal,

      Do you all have the “reading into” glasses that some many conservatives have?

      45 Cal,

      You are missing the point. Please try and understand the point of what I am saying here. Nobody wants child porn, I am extremely liberal on social issue and like most liberals I know, we believe in responsibility so if you engage in the production of creating the stuff, you should be thrown in jail and the key should be thrown away. If you view child porn, you should also be thrown in jail but that isn’t the point.

      The point is that any law against child porn is technically a violation of the 1st amendment but society understands that child pornography is vile so we don’t allow it. Just because that speech is not allowed, it doens’t mean its an all out assualt on the 1st Amendment.

      Do you understand?

      The same deal hold true with gun control measures with the 2nd Amendment.

      • Ted Crawford

        Liberal? ! ?
        Au Contraire ! Here is the real Liberal viewpoint on this issue:
        ” By calling attention to a well regulated Militia, the security of the Nation, and the right of each citizen to keep and bear arms, our Founding Fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. The Second Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basis Civilian-Military relationship, in which every Citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his Country. For that reason the Second Amendment will always be important” John Kennedy
        ” Gun bans don’t disarm criminals, they attract them!” Walter Mondale
        ” Certainly one of the chief guarentees of Freedom under any Government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the Citizens to keep and bear arms” Hubert Humphrey
        I became interested in Politics in 1968 and actively involved in 1973, I remember the Liberals, before they were purged and in Kennedys case even murdered in the Progressive take-over of the Democrat Party. In fact, I was one, I volenteered in the campaign of Pat Schroeder for nearly 3 years !

    • Ronald Wolfe

      What part of INFRIENGMENT do you not understand.

    • ROGER, Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

      “UKNOWHO” proves my point beyond a shadow of a doubt-See my comment below

      • Uknowho

        Roger,

        Do you vote for your elected representatives in Canada?

        See we vote the people in here…

        If you feel that Canada is oppressing you, get together and vote the oppressors out.

        Personally, I don’t believe you are being oppressed, you and others like you simply have no clue how a society functions under the rule of law and and misunderstand that as “oppression”.

        Please go to Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, China if you want to understand real oppression.

        On the other hand, if you want a free for all…

        Somalia is wonderful this time of year. I suggest you check it out.

    • JUKEBOX

      Evidently, you are not a believer, and as such, are unaware that Satan is alive and well today, occupying the hearts and minds of many people, including many of our alleged political leaders. I am so glad that the new Pope refuses to accept the new standards of the pseudo Christians.

    • Ted Crawford

      Really? ! ?
      ” Waiting periods are only a step, Registration is only a step. The prohibition of Private Firearms is the goal” Janet Reno
      ” The goal is an ultimate ban on all guns, but we have to take it a step at a time and go for limited access first” Jayner Sims
      ” As you know my position is we should ban all hand guns, get rid of them, NO manufacture, NO sale, NO importation, NO transportation, NO possesion of a hand gun ” John Chafee
      ” We’ll take one step at a time, We’ll have to start working again to strenghten the Law, and then again to strenghten the next Law. Our ultimate goal, total control of hand guns, is going to take time” Peter Shields
      ” If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an oughtright ban, pick-up every one of them! Mr. & Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it” Diane Feinstein
      ” We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless Legislative strategy! We’re going to beat guns into submission” Charles Schumer
      ” Gun bans are an idea who’s time has come” Joe Biden
      REALLY?

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      Freedom is a word simply meaning “Status”, like serfdom. I am free to live a moral life or free to act immorally or amorally. John Adam’s, one of the authors of the Constitution, said: This Constitution is for the governance of a moral and religious people. It is UNFIT for the governance of anyother. What does that say for today’s American’s?

    • chowthen

      Hey [expletive deleted], in child pornography that you keep emplying as freedom is not because there’s someone else involved and that’s the child. Even if it’s just a picture of a child, the child privacy is violated. In other words our “Bill of Rights” exist as long as it doesn’t infringe on anybody else.

      When it comes to guns what is it to anyone if I have a jet fighter armed with cruise missile (and nor fused) if I just have it on display in my living room?

      • Uknowho

        Chowthen… The point went by, you missed it.

    • Frank Kahn

      Uknowho says:
      March 18, 2013 at 10:01 am

      “I have a question:

      Does any of the furvent 2nd amendent advocates agree with limits to the 1st Amendment at all?

      The first amendment ios pretty clear here.

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

      So under this clear law, you should be able to have child pornography Afterall, the Constitution says nothing about child pornograghy so the founders must have been ok with it right?

      Of course not…

      So as with the second amendment, there are limits on the 2nd amendment so sensible gun control, helping law enforncement do its job better and aiding the mental HC infrastructure in this country deal with people who are suseptable violence and helping law enforcement keeping guns out of their hands is not “disarming America”

      Get over it people and concentrate on a real issue.”

      There are several problems with your logic in this post.

      If we follow your idea of something being okay with the founders, simply by the omission of it, is ridiculous. Since the documents, being referenced, are of limited size, it would be impossible to list everything they felt was not acceptable.

      They did not specifically mention murder, does that mean that they approved of it?
      They did not specifically mention abortion, does that mean they approved of it?
      They did not mention co-habitation, does that mean they approved?

      In the area of freedom of speech, there are limits. You will find that the majority of those limits concern areas where the speech is violating the rights of someone else. In the example you gave, there is also another law that is being broken. It is against the law to engage in the acts required to produce child pornography. It is usually how you use the right that is limited, not the right itself. This is the slippery portion of the concept.

      There are also limits to the right to bear arms. You will find that, like the limits to freedom of speech, these limits are in areas where the arms are used to violate the rights of others. You are not allowed to use arms to threaten or harm another person, unless acting in self defense, or the defense of the life or property of others. You can be charged with manslaughter for accidentally killing someone due to improper handling or use of arms. If you use a gun in the commission of a crime, you are permanently refused the right to bear arms in the future.

      So, there are laws that restrict both rights, when the right is abused. The laws allow the restriction to be placed on the perpetrator of the abuse, not on society in general. If you produce child porn, or you either slander or commit libelous acts against someone, you will be charged and have to pay the penalty. If you kill someone with a gun, or threaten people with it, you will again be charged and have to pay the penalty.

      Here is the problem with your assertion about gun control.

      In the case of child pornography, does congress limit access or ban the sales and possession of the video equipment used, by the pornographer, to make the video? Since he / she used a high tech digital video recording device, should all such devices be outlawed? Should all sales of said equipment be subject to a background check, and ownership registered?

      My questions about the equipment used for child pornography might sound ridiculous to you. However, if you think about it, it is exactly what is being done and / or proposed for gun violence. You might even extend the claim that “it is for the children”, to the cry for stricter video equipment regulation.

      Your final statement is 100% accurate, lets focus on the real issue here. It is not about the equipment used (GUNS or VIDEO EQUIPMENT), it is about the people who abuse the equipment.

      I don’t disagree with you, that there is a problem, I just disagree with your ideas about how to solve it.

      • Patriot

        Now here is someone with absolutely no education in Constitutional history.
        I am too tired to educate you here myself, but I have a degree in this particular field and while your argument has logic and is lucid, you are completely wrong in terms of the intentions of the founders regarding the Second Amendment, nor do you actually understand the application of the First Amendment as it pertains to freedom of speech. I suggest you do a great deal of reading and research into the founding before saying things like this. The First Amendment protects free speech, but child pornography isn’t even covered under Free Speech as it violates the sovereignty of the individual. And that is what the entire and complete basis for our Republic IS: INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY AND PERSONAL SOVEREIGNTY.
        It was also made VERY clear that if the Constitution was to be changed due to the will of the people, there is an Amendment Process that must be followed. Jefferson said that if a translation of the documents is ever required, you need look no further than the documents themselves. That is because they were never meant to be open to interpretation. If you wish to change that, the Amendment process can be used for that as well.

        • Frank Kahn

          You said:

          “Now here is someone with absolutely no education in Constitutional history.
          I am too tired to educate you here myself, but I have a degree in this particular field and while your argument has logic and is lucid, you are completely wrong in terms of the intentions of the founders regarding the Second Amendment, nor do you actually understand the application of the First Amendment as it pertains to freedom of speech. I suggest you do a great deal of reading and research into the founding before saying things like this. The First Amendment protects free speech, but child pornography isn’t even covered under Free Speech as it violates the sovereignty of the individual. And that is what the entire and complete basis for our Republic IS: INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY AND PERSONAL SOVEREIGNTY.
          It was also made VERY clear that if the Constitution was to be changed due to the will of the people, there is an Amendment Process that must be followed. Jefferson said that if a translation of the documents is ever required, you need look no further than the documents themselves. That is because they were never meant to be open to interpretation. If you wish to change that, the Amendment process can be used for that as well.”

          While this was posted as a reply to me, I don’t see the relevance to my post. I did not try to say, or even imply, that child porn was covered under the first amendment.

          • Patriot

            Sorry, it was in response to something else. I think I hit the wrong REPLY button. :)

      • JeffH

        Frank, bravo!

        As we’re watching and listening to all of these “gun grab” talks on tv, the WH and in the states and the senate the one question that is never asked is “why is the focus based on restricting law abiding citizens rather than focusing on stopping the law breaking criminals”? Why are they not focused on enforcing existing laws and focusing on preventing or controlling the mentally disabled? Easy answer…gun control leads to gun confiscation. CONTROL!

        There was a recent poll taken on the law enforcement website PoliceOne.com, the go to website for law enforcement professionals with more than 1.5 million unique visitors per month and more than 450,000 registered members. PoliceOne is becoming the leading destination for Law Enforcement professionals.

        The poll question asked below was voted on by LEO members and webste participants
        http://www.policeone.com/polls/6119689-What-is-your-opinion-of-some-law-enforcement-leaders-public-statements-that-they-would-not-enforce-more-restrictive-gun-laws/
        What is your opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more-restrictive gun laws?

        The poll results were:

        Very favorable – 71 %

        Favorable – 13 %

        Unfavorable – 6 %

        Very unfavorable – 10 %

        Remember tha ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM.

        ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T SHOOT anyone AT ALL. Not even by accident.

        Join us the NRA, GOA, SAF and Rand Paul in telling them to STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Patriot says, he is “too tired to educate you here myself” to Frank Kahn, and thereby makes a very smart decision. Trying to educate Frank is a job for a whole “village”, a LARGE one. I usually try to conserve my energy by only attempting to educate Frank on science-related matters, particularly on AGW where he is SO abysmally ignorant and confused.

        However, I can’t let this little bit of “Frank’s Fractured Foolishness” go by without comment. Yes Frank, your ideas about “the equipment used for child pornography” DO sound ridiculous—-TO ANYONE WHO MAY READ THEM—-, and you even seemed to know that when you stated them. Which raises the question—Why did you post them?

        Thank you for providing us with another candidate for the “Top Ten Ridiculous Arguments Of All Time”, Frank. It won’t beat out Steph’s “Since people drown in it, why don’t we outlaw water”, but it will be a good runnerup.

        • Frank Kahn

          Your inability to comprehend the analogy does not surprise me.

      • Uknowho

        Frank,

        You write:

        “If we follow your idea of something being okay with the founders, simply by the omission of it, is ridiculous. Since the documents, being referenced, are of limited size, it would be impossible to list everything they felt was not acceptable.”

        Right, it is rediculous… The founding fathers never could see the advent of assault weapons, bazookas, tanks, nukes, chemical weapons and the like.

        But to take some of the midset here, they are saying the avg person should have access to any weapon they want. It is non-sensical just like the 1st Amendment does not allow me to view child pornography or to create that pornography in a foriegn country and bring it into this country for sale.

        The issue of gun violence has little to do with the “gun” itself but has mostly to do with society’s attitudes on guns and violence and the lack of responsibility as far as the people who have guns are concerned. Certain kinds of guns, the avg person should not have because of their ability to inflict massive casualties and destruction.

        NOTHING and I repeat nothing anyone in DC is calling for is a “grab of all your guns”

        And JeffH,

        Why don’t you use your awesome power of stats to find out the % of people that:

        1) approve of universal background checks for ALL guns sales
        2) approve of a national database to track movement of weapons
        3) approve banning assault weapons
        4) approve of better methods in the HC side to keep guns out of the hands of the menatlly handicapped

        If you did, you would know that all of thse stats go against what you are saying and want.

        When this country becaomes a country where gov officals are not voted it and answer to the people, then you have a case. This country has no such history of taking such extreme forms of gov so the likihood of this tyranny is so remote, its not even worth discussing at this point… yet we do here daily.

        Of course this will be the case until the next GOPer gets elected… Tghen everything will be hunky-dory

        • Frank Kahn

          Look, Dave67, you can twist the truth and facts any way you want, you can misinterpret the meaning of what is said, but you cannot change the fact that you are wrong.

          “Frank,

          You write:

          “If we follow your idea of something being okay with the founders, simply by the omission of it, is ridiculous. Since the documents, being referenced, are of limited size, it would be impossible to list everything they felt was not acceptable.”

          Right, it is rediculous… The founding fathers never could see the advent of assault weapons, bazookas, tanks, nukes, chemical weapons and the like.”

          NEVER TRY TO TWIST MY WORDS TO MAKE YOUR POINT. What I said has nothing to do with the nonsense you just said. They were very specific in what they said was okay, with regards to guns. They said that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. They did not say some arms, or civilian style arms. Maybe a bazooka was not invented yet but, they had cannons, which were included in the arms that we were allowed to bear. We had explosives, mostly black powder, that we were allowed to bear. They were not stupid, they understood that what they wrote was all encompassing.

          “But to take some of the midset here, they are saying the avg person should have access to any weapon they want. It is non-sensical just like the 1st Amendment does not allow me to view child pornography or to create that pornography in a foriegn country and bring it into this country for sale.”

          Why do you keep harping on the fact that they won’t let you have child porn? Do you, for some strange reason, think having child porn is an expression that is protected by the first amendment? Is it a form of speech, religion or a way of giving redress for grievances against our government? Do you see it as a form of peaceful assembly? Do you think that the children are making a statement? Check the laws, it is considered to be a crime against children, not a form of expression.

          “The issue of gun violence has little to do with the “gun” itself but has mostly to do with society’s attitudes on guns and violence and the lack of responsibility as far as the people who have guns are concerned. Certain kinds of guns, the avg person should not have because of their ability to inflict massive casualties and destruction.”

          Just pure and utter BS. The issue of gun violence has to do with the mental state of the person committing the crime, not societies attitude. If you really believe that gun owners are all irresponsible, you need to get a reality check, or have a mental checkup. Maybe, we don’t follow your ideas of how we should store and handle our guns, but that is a matter of opinion, not a matter of being responsible. You are wrong, and probably insane, when you attempt to justify the restriction of a gun based on its ability to inflict massive casualties. I can inflict massive casualties with a tube fed 22 long rifle gun. My .45 semi-auto pistol has a standard 9 shot magazine, with one round in the chamber that is 10 rounds. 5 magazines give me 46 rounds of very lethal fire power. Are you trying to say that this weapon is unacceptable because it could be used to kill 46 people? It hasn’t killed anyone yet, I keep an eye on it for any signs of it trying to shoot someone when I am not paying attention.

          “NOTHING and I repeat nothing anyone in DC is calling for is a “grab of all your guns”

          Nothing, and I repeat nothing allows them to try and limit my ability to have any gun I want.

          “And JeffH,

          Why don’t you use your awesome power of stats to find out the % of people that:

          1) approve of universal background checks for ALL guns sales
          2) approve of a national database to track movement of weapons
          3) approve banning assault weapons
          4) approve of better methods in the HC side to keep guns out of the hands of the menatlly handicapped

          If you did, you would know that all of thse stats go against what you are saying and want.”

          Ah, the use of stats to prove a moot point? It does not matter what percentage of people want to violate the constitution, it is still illegal.

          “When this country becaomes a country where gov officals are not voted it and answer to the people, then you have a case. This country has no such history of taking such extreme forms of gov so the likihood of this tyranny is so remote, its not even worth discussing at this point… yet we do here daily.”

          We discuss it daily because people like you never seem to get the point. When the country stops being a republic and has tyrannical government, it is too late. You cant say, “wait while I go out and get a gun”. Being naive and thinking it is so remote that we don’t need to worry about it is your problem. Don’t think that, just because it has not happened yet, it can never happen.

          “Of course this will be the case until the next GOPer gets elected… Tghen everything will be hunky-dory”

          We don’t care if the tyrant is a democrat or republican, we are prepared for either.

      • JeffH

        Uknowho doesn’t get it…that’s just the regression of progressive thinking…DUH! Assault weapon???…Feinstein think???…DUH!

        ~300 MILLION AMERICANS DID NOT ASSAULT ANYONE USING ANY FIREARM.

        ~300 MILLION Americans DIDN’T SHOOT anyone AT ALL. Not even by accident.

        Join the NRA, GOA, SAF and us in telling them to STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Now JeffyH has taken up Vicki’s mindless chant

        ~300 MILLION Americans didn’t-don’t-haven’t-won’t-shouldn’t-can’t-aren’t——–

        (GAG—GAG—UPCHUCK—wipe mouth)

        I will say to him what I say to Vicki———–

        Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations, Jeffy!

        Stop denying!
        Stop evading!
        Stop deflecting!
        Stop obfuscating!

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • Vicki

        Right Brain Thinker doesn’t and says:
        “Now JeffyH has taken up Vicki’s mindless chant”

        Ad Hominem.

        - RBT: “Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations, Jeffy!”

        And I will ask you down here, how many is “a lot”?

        Oh and here is a test to see if guns can be in harmful situations without the help of humans.
        http://personalliberty.com/2013/01/23/do-guns-kill-people-pistol-shotgun-assault-rifle-put-to-the-test/

      • Uknowho

        And Frank… The right of free speech shall not be infringed either… It says so in first amendment… it doesn’t say “some speech”

        So my example is dead on correct. You and others just don’t like it when you are wrong.

        Sorry Frank.

        The 2nd Amendment is subject to limits, otherwise we can have nukes as citizens. It is not unreasonable to get assualt weapons off the streets and still keep your 2nd Amendment rights.

        • Frank Kahn

          This may turn into a war about wording.

          “And Frank… The right of free speech shall not be infringed either… It says so in first amendment… it doesn’t say “some speech””

          It also does not say infringed, it says prohibited.

          “So my example is dead on correct. You and others just don’t like it when you are wrong.”

          First of all, the idea that freedom of speech can not be prohibited does not cover your example. The subject of child porn is not about speech, it is about the infringement of the rights of children.

          “Sorry Frank.”

          Apology is accepted, you just did not understand the error of your theory.

          “The 2nd Amendment is subject to limits, otherwise we can have nukes as citizens. It is not unreasonable to get assualt weapons off the streets and still keep your 2nd Amendment rights.”

          Actually, there is a law against possession of fissile materials which would make the possession of a nuke illegal. There are already regulations that control true assault weapons possession. What you are advocating is not banning assault weapons, it is banning semi-automatic hunting rifles that have a magazine capacity that exceeds some arbitrary limit, or resemble their military assault weapons counterpart in looks.

      • Vicki

        Frank Kahn writes:
        “Actually, there is a law against possession of fissile materials which would make the possession of a nuke illegal.”

        So all the anti gun people need to do is outlaw the possession of lead? Somehow I don’t think that the 2nd Amendment was designed to be overcome that easilly.

        • Frank Kahn

          Actually, I was not suggesting a formula for bypassing the second amendment. And, if you wanted to use my nuke reference, it would make more sense to outlaw the propellant as an explosive instead of lead. Lead is used in other acceptable pursuits such as fishing weights and tire balancing weights. I believe that the purchase of black powder is regulated because of its greater explosive power. They could say that anything that explodes is a danger to society, thereby making it a community safety issue.

          I don’t advocate any form of infringement on the second amendment, but if they wanted to get particular and nasty, it does not grant us the ability to obtain the items to make the arms work. If they outlawed ammunition it would serve the same purpose as outlawing the guns. Then we might need a good lawyer to explain how a tool (gun) without ammunition does not qualify as arms.

          Sometimes I get frustrated with these people “uknowho” “dave67″, that seem to think that an AR-15 is a military grade weapon. They think that, because it looks like an M-16, it is the same thing. Well, it does use the same caliber of ammunition, but then so does a semi-automatic .308 caliber hunting rifle. That is the same caliber as the M-60 machine gun. Maybe we need to outlaw the M-1 carbine and M-1 Garand, they were military weapons at one time. And, I am not really certain about all the various pistols that have seen service in the military. Would be hard to find many guns that would not fit the description of military grade if we went by general usage.

      • Vicki

        Frank Kahn says:
        “{Actually, I was not suggesting a formula for bypassing the second amendment.”

        You weren’t. I was pointing out the problem with outlawing the possession of anything in a free society.

        - Frank Kahn: “And, if you wanted to use my nuke reference, it would make more sense to outlaw the propellant as an explosive instead of lead.”

        I was going to but realized there were far too many propellents. Even compressed air.

        - Frank Kahn: “Lead is used in other acceptable pursuits such as fishing weights and tire balancing weights.”

        As is fissionable material. Including power generation and medical treatments.

        - Frank Kahn: “I believe that the purchase of black powder is regulated because of its greater explosive power. They could say that anything that explodes is a danger to society, thereby making it a community safety issue.”

        Gasoline. Alcohol. Powered sugar, Flour. The list is rather long.

        - Frank Kahn: “I don’t advocate any form of infringement on the second amendment, but if they wanted to get particular and nasty, it does not grant us the ability to obtain the items to make the arms work.”

        Of course it does. That part of the amendment the gun-grabbers keep insisting is the primary. “…a well regulated militia….” Well working. Firearms are just clubs without ammo.
        And the founders made the point pretty clear that the firearms had to be operational with statements like “…And every other terrible instrument of the soldier.”

        - Frank Kahn: “If they outlawed ammunition it would serve the same purpose as outlawing the guns. Then we might need a good lawyer to explain how a tool (gun) without ammunition does not qualify as arms.”

        Better to have the lawyer explain how ammo IS part of arms and thus equally protected.

        - Frank Kahn: “Sometimes I get frustrated with these people “uknowho” “dave67″, that seem to think that an AR-15 is a military grade weapon. They think that, because it looks like an M-16, it is the same thing.”

        They know full well that it is not. But their agenda is to ban all firearms. Incrementally.

        - Frank Kahn: “Would be hard to find many guns that would not fit the description of military grade if we went by general usage.”

        That is in fact the key point in US vs Miller 1939. The court was unable to notice that the sawed off shotgun had and purpose to a military use and thus the court felt that its possession by “the people” could be infringed on.

        http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/miller.htm

    • speedle

      Bad analogy Ukno.

      The Constitution prohibits any action that harms or infringes on the rights of others. The first amendment does not usurp that prohibition by protecting the freedoms of speech, religion and assembly. The same is true of the second amendment. It does not give one citizen the right to harm another citizen.

      Sorry pal, that dog just won’t hunt. Come up with something else.

      • Vicki

        In fact our keeping and bearing arms can not possibly harm ANYONE. Thus there can be no infringing any rights of someone else if we possess and carry firearms.

  • Don 2

    Even The LEFT Finds DHS Ammo Buy ‘Very Troubling’

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/even-left-finds-dhs-ammo-buy-very-troubling/

    • Vicki

      good to know that even the “useful idiots” can fall across a clue now and then. Good for freedom. Not so good for the statists.

  • 45caliber

    I really wonder about their order of ammo. .40 bullets are only good in pistols … which are not useful in a full scale war. Even the police don’t use them in SWAT tactics. Their sniper rounds are a problem – but again, they aren’t useful except as sniper rounds. (They are too expensive to waste in battle.) Do they intend to send out a sniper to shoot one or two members of a family at a time?

    Actually the bullets make me think more of terrorist tactics. They shoot a couple with a sniper rifle and then threaten the living with more kills if they don’t obey. No one knows who is doing it. And those with pistols keep them hidden until just the right moment to pull them out and blaze away at a crowd to frighten the survivors. It does, of course, mean that no one else can have guns since you might shoot back. Again, the shooters remain hidden and annonomous.

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      They are arming themselves with .40 Sigs or S&W’s and Remington 308′s for sniping purposes and M16′s to be used against God fearing lovers of our Constitutional Republic.

    • Mike in MI

      45cal –
      Well, perhaps they are planning – with all those pistol shells – for a lot of shooting at close range, at immobile targets, maybe, targets to the back (or base) of the skull. Like Lenin and Trotsky, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. and various other exalted leaders.

      • Vicki

        1.6 Billion? It only takes one bullet per slave. There are not many countries that have that many undesirable people.

      • Mike in MI

        Vicki –
        Gotta remember, “undesirables” include anybody supernumerary to the hallowed 500 million vertebrate trilobites who vote for anything “D”.

    • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Joe Anthony

      MP5-40′s, UMP .40′s (should come in .40) as in subguns short range but work ..

  • Uknowho

    Ronald,

    What part of

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech”

    Do you not understand?

    Yet we don’t allow child porn or snuff videos…

    Can you comprehend?

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      Religion is simply one’s “heart felt belief”. Everyone is religious in that everyone has a heart felt belief. Some people’s religion includes, some not. The Founders believed in God but not establishing some particular religion in America. Do you understand now?

  • George Chatraw

    Anybody have any idea what the cost is for all the ammo ordered by the Dictator? We are broke and cutting corners and services to survive yet the government spends how many billions on ammo to serve what purpose.

    • JUKEBOX

      The incompetent regime is not as stupid as they would have you believe. Our guns are of no use without ammunition, so they are buying up the supply in order to render us defenseless. Our local WalMart stores are out of stock of many types of ammunition. Americans today are being relegated to becoming freedom fighters.

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      To put you and every other politically incorrect person in bondage, one way or the other. Their not going to find it easy to destroy our God fearing Constitutional Republic and replace it with their godless socialist communist State.

  • Harry

    Americans are becoming like sheep being led to the slaughter. When are you people going to wake up and smell the coffee. Our government is no longer working for us, their working against us and for their own agenda’s. Guns do not kill people, people kill people. When are people and government going to start telling the truth. All the laws in the world will not stop a bad guy from getting a gun from the streets and killing. Just like in the Connecticut school shooting. That maniac killed his mother to steal her guns to commit that horrible crime. Law abiding people buy their guns legally, register them, safe guard them and apply for their permits and do everything by the law of the land. And because of this, we the people get shafted. And to this day, I still have not seen any laws passed to protect our children in schools. What would have happened if that madman had been met by two armed security guards. I think there would have been a different outcome. I say we need stronger laws for those who commit crimes with guns or any weapon. We need to show these deranged people that we will not tolerate anyone who commits a crime with a gun. Why do we have so many laws to protect the guilty and hardly any to protect the victim. Why does our government allow gangs to grow, crime to rise, but yet, pass laws to take away legally owned guns. We all need to be able to defend ourselves and our families. To be able to live in pease and to allow our children to grow without fear. If our government won’t do, then we must do it ourselves. Why do we allow millions of illegal aliens into this country every year. These people commit crimes, pay no taxes, do not pay for health insurance, and in part, are bringing the economy of this country to a screeching halt. How can people and politicians be so blind. We must stand strong as a people and as a nation. We have to show our government that we are still a nation of strong people. I am not afraid to fight, and if I must fight, I will. I hope in up-coming elections, the people of this great nation can take out the trash and elect politicians and government that have the people in mind instead of their own agenda’s. If not, then like Chalton Heston, then president of the NRA always said concerning his guns.”I have only five words for you: FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS.”
    Thank you for listening,

    • http://wildeyguns.com The Christian American

      These people know that. Your looking at wrong hand of the magicians. Their goal is to establish a godless socialist communist style government in America. Truth to them is their own truths which are evil to God fearing Americans. Bush took an incident that involved largely Saudi Arabians and twisted it around to invade the soerign country of Iraq. They’ve taken an incidence where handguns are involved and twisted around against semi automatic rifles. They know EXACTLY what they are doing and saying and we feel we can “educate” them into truth.

    • http://patrioticvets.com/america/ jb

      Exactly.

  • Stewart Burchell

    S.P. Burchell —-Are you ready people, have you chosen sides? The governing body that is in place now, which is literally what the writers of the 2nd amendment had in mind when debating it, or……. that’s the Question isn’t it What would take its place? Well here’s one scenario I kinda like: The Military takes upon itself to fulfill their Oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, move on Washington D.C., install retired army General Colin Powell as Chief Liaison with the existing Governing body, he’s worked in those circles before and didn’t like it and quit as a civilian can. But I feel sure he would step forward to defend the constitution and the nation it defines. Business could continue as usual at least for the commercial businesses and the infrastructure of the government could continue to run and provide services. The money markets could be closed, while common sense rules concerning foreign investments in this country and excess profits made from food and other necessary products were established. The airports closed and only foreign nationals allowed to leave and none to enter except as required to speed this transition period. Business which operated from American soil would be required to bring their profits home. Including foreign owned businesses which had no production facility’s on this soil. Certain classes of manufactured goods would cease to be imported and to be specified to be made in America to be sold in America, which would bring some manufacturing and jobs and investments back to America. As for the displaced Government officials, including state Senators and Congressmen the extent of their contribution to the abuse of the constitution would be let known to those who put them in office and special elections would be had to re-affirm or deny their seat in government. Term limits of three terms would become effective at that time. Election funds would be equalized from funds contributed by the voters of each state and limited to those funds only. These elections would be held for every seat of government. And hence forth the constitution would be taken literally with no obscure translation necessary. This would have to be a purely military operation to work. And to make it work the military would have to fulfill the duties of those of the federal government whom they deposed.—— I’m tired finish my fantasy, let me know how it turns out.

    • Joshua Durant

      Um Stewart when the military installs someone that has never ever worked out. I for one would immediately continue the fight against the new installed dictator and the military that put him there and all the service men and women I know would be with me. The only answer is immediate free elections.

    • s. hughes

      I have a great concern related to treaties signed by the nations after the previous wars which this administration is ignoring or is ignorant of. No hollow points could be used during war against each other. I believe that was a priority in the Geneva Convention transcripts & this nation signed onto that principal. Everyone should contact & ask their politicians why the HS & many other agencies are buying H.P ammunition ? If nation, in war, are not to use this type of round, is it o.k. to use it on us ???

  • Freeport56

    Chosen sides??? No, just following and upholding my Oath !

  • angelwannabe

    The Constitution and the 2nd Amendment is THE ONLY PERMISSION WE NEED in our right to bear arms!__Natural law is the law!__NO infringement means, no restrictions, regulations or bans___PERIOD!

    • jopa

      angelwannacracker; The 2nd amendment states “well regulated” a term most of you wish didn’t exist there. But it does so learn to be regulated.

      • angelwannabe

        I won’t!

      • John

        jopa; The second amendment states a well regulated militia: A well regulated militia is not under control of the feds as they would have you believe. The state militia is by definition. Any able bodied male between the ages of 18 and 65 that resides in said state or territory may be called with firearm to serve in the state militia as deemed by the governor of said territory in times of emergency. The state militia was placed in the exclusive control of the governors as to keep the pres elect from becoming the emperor. barry the liar (wanna be emperor) knows this if he is indeed a constitutional law professor. Then again no one has seen the emperors qualifications. His administration is as transparent as a bucket of mud and butter will not melt in his mouth

      • Patriot

        And the SINGLE MOST misinterpreted statement in the Constitution is misinterpreted yet AGAIN.
        I will say this ONE MORE TIME:

        THERE ARE TWO parts to the 2nd Amendment
        A well regulated militia being necessarty to the security of a free state
        IS NUMBER ONE
        Ok?
        Now for the SECOND part:
        The Right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
        THAT is EXCLUSIVE of the first part.

        There are COUNTLESS documents supporting this from the very people that framed the Constitution, as well as the minutes, notes, and diaries from those that attended the First Constitutional Convention that CREATED the Bill of Rights.

        PLEASE, if you are going to vote, or argue politics or policy, GET EDUCATED first.

      • angelwannabe

        JP___Finish it, IT says WELL REGULATED MILITIA’S! The second amendment says NOTHING about regulating, registering or the banning of firearms!!!!

        DEFINITION OF regulated: Control or supervise (something, esp. a company or business activity) by means of rules and regulations. That’s the Militia’s that is to be regulated! NOT OUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS! If you believe anything else your part of the problem!

        And just like Bob stated, they’re trying to disarm us completely by gradualism!

      • Nadzieja Batki

        jopa, you do know that well regulated means “self control” on the part of the population. Or is that you need others to control you because you cannot control your own behaviours? she dog, you write and you tell on yourself.

      • Alan

        Once again Jopa takes the entire meaning out of context.

        The Random House College Dictionary (1980) gives four definitions for the word “regulate,” which were all in use during the Colonial period and one more definition dating from 1690 (Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1989). They are:

        1) To control or direct by a rule, principle, method, etc.
        2) To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc.

        3) To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation.

        4) To put in good order.

        [obsolete sense]
        b. Of troops: Properly disciplined. Obs. rare-1.

        1690 Lond. Gaz. No. 2568/3 We hear likewise that the French are in a great Allarm in Dauphine and Bresse, not having at present 1500 Men of regulated Troops on that side.

      • Vicki

        jopa says:
        “angelwannacracker;”

        Ad Hominem

        - Jopa: “The 2nd amendment states “well regulated” a term most of you wish didn’t exist there. But it does so learn to be regulated.”

        There are many words in the 2nd amendment. You seem determined to wish that “…shall NOT be infringed.” didn’t exist. But it does. So learn to STOP INFRINGING on the rights of the people to KEEP and BEAR arms.

      • http://itsootsme.wordpress.com sootsme

        “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” is a prerequisite to a well regulated militia. Too bad public school can no longer be bothered to teach reading comprehension…

      • TomyrisHandsCyrusHisHead

        The U.S. Federal Government and any State Government and any Local Town, City or County Government has absolutely NO jurisdiction over a “well regulated” militia because the “well regulated” militia exists as an intentional and deliberate totally independant armed counter force of private U.S. Citizens and private State Citizens, also known as We The People, to any armed tyrannical outlaw government(any government that deliberately and intentionally infringes on, aka intrudes on, contradicts and violates, the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights) that commits any form of Treason, Sedition and Tyranny against the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights at any time. A “well regulated” militia is We the People’s armed deterrence, armed security guard dogs, armed persuaders, armed coercers, armed corrections administators to deter, persuade, prevent, prohibit, coerce and if necessary totally neutralize(by use of armed force if necessary) any infringements(contradictions, intrusions, violations) against the Constitution, aka the ultimate law of the land, committed by any tyrannical outlaw government that crosses the line by criminalizing itself when that tyrannical outlaw government commits the Crimes of Treason, Sedition and Tyranny by infringing on(contradicting, intruding, violating) the guaranteed Constitutional rights and freedoms of any U.S. Citizens or any Citizens of any State. In military science terminology, the term “well regulated” explicitly means to be equipped with the same military equipment including the same weapons and ammunition, to be trained using the same tactical and hand to hand combat military training methods and to be commanded and led by equally competent militia commanders that compose and are approximately equal to the “regular” army units. The famous privately owned and privately equipped and trained Washington Artillery militia unit founded in 1838 but tracing the original artillery battalion militia unit to an earlier artillery battalion militia unit founded in approximately 1728 and used during the War Of 1812 against Great Britain, had full batteries of field guns and howitzers including a few 12 Pounder Napoleon Cannons, which were the most advanced weapon system before the Civil War. The Washington Artillery was a 100% Constitutionally LEGAL and LAWFUL militia unit as permitted by the guaranteed rights of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The Washington Artillery was only one of a few militia units that privately owned and equipped themselves with artillery howitzers and field guns long before and during the Civil War. The only reason that many other militias did not own and equip themselves with artillery cannons was because the expensive cost to manufacture artillery cannons and train with artillery cannons and also because artillery cannon ammunition was very expensive. Even American merchant sea captains bought or constructed fully armed merchant ships and fully armed exclusivly purpose built military warships, known as privateers, in privately owned shipyards on U.S. soil and that were launched and docked in any U.S. harbors at privately owned docks and wharves and at public docks or wharves. Many privately owned armed merchant warships and exclusively purpose built military warships, known as privateers, were armed with up to 20 or slightly more naval artillery cannons that easily outgunned many of the naval warships in the U.S. Navy, except for the U.S. Navy Frigates and Large Brigs Of War before the Mexican War. Many American built and owned Clipper Ships and Whaling Ships were armed with a few naval artillery cannons that were docked in private and public dockyards(shipyards) in U.S. harbors. Privately owning and training with a 12 Pounder Napoleon Cannon in a militia unit in the 1850′s before 1865 anywhere in the United States was the equal to a modern 21st Century militia unit training with a privately owned M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank with live ammunition at a designated artilley shooting range in 2013. Attempting to infringe on the Second Amendment by Unconstitutionally(and therefore illegally and unlawfully, because the Constitution IS THE ULTIMATE LAW OF THE LAND) banning and confiscating so called “assault” rifles or so called “assualt” weapons in 2013 will be the equivalent to the U.S. Federal Government or any State Government or any Local Town, City or County Government attempting to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of U.S. Citizens and State Citizens by Unconstitutionally banning and confiscating Kentucky Long Rifles and Pennsylvania Long Rifles in 1813 which would have been the guaranteed beginning of the Second Bloody American Revolutionary War beginning in 1813 and ending with many elected and appointed so called government servants of We the People being caught and captured alive if possible, formally, officially and legally arrested, arraigned in a court of law, immediately given a fair public trial complete with a criminal defense attorney, prosecuted and convicted of intentionally and deliberately committing Treason, Sedition and Tyranny against both the Constitution and against We the People which would have resulted in many if not most of those convicted Ex-government Constitution Infringer Seditionist and Treasonous Traitors being publically hanged together side by side at the top of the brand new gallows in front of hundreds and probably thousands of American Citizens who were victims of Tyranny when those same government Constitution Infringer Seditionist and Treasonous Traitors attempted to infringe on the Second Amendment by their Unconstitutional attempt to ban and confiscate those tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of Kentucky Long Rifles and Pennsylvania Long Rifles from Constitutionally Protected Second Amendment Law Abiding U.S. Citizens and or various State Citizens.

    • angelwannabe

      and jopa cut the sh*t with the name calling!!! No one’s impressed!

      • JeffH

        :) In the immortal words of Mrs. Gump…Stupid is as stupid does.

        • angelwannabe

          :)

      • Right Brain Thinker

        I’m impressed, although I would hardly call it “name calling”. “Angelwannacracker” seems to be well chosen for someone who just loves to “parrot” whatever right wing horsepucky she comes across.

        And it’s much more “delicate” and suitable to a “lady” than another “name” that comes to mind—-”Puker of wing nut Koolaid”. (Although angels language wasn’t all that ladylike—-S**t?—-is angel trying to be a “tough guy” here?)

        • angelwannabe

          RBT__”When the debate is lost, slander becomes the the tool of the the loser” Socrates/….Alinsky :P

      • Vicki

        Right Brain Thinker doesn’t and says:
        “I’m impressed, although I would hardly call it “name calling”. “Angelwannacracker” seems to be well chosen for someone who just loves to “parrot” whatever right wing horsepucky she comes across. ”

        Call it as you will. It is still an ad hominem.

        Oh Btw JeffH. Had you noticed that

        ~300 MILLION Americans didn’t shoot anyone with any type of gun today? Yet the anti-gun people what to punish all of us for the acts of a few. What is wrong with them?

      • JeffH

        HalfWitThinker trolls the board proving that Ron White was correct when he said “You can’t fix stupid”…it’s forever and a serious progressive(regressive)disease.

        • angelwannabe

          Yeah, ole’ ” They call me Tater’ Salad!”!__Lol_-The Libs, They’ll never wake up Jeff, I’m not sure whether they actually believe in repeating what they’re handlers say, or the pay forces them into it__who knows!!

  • Tommy cunningham

    Child pornagraphy has nothing to do with 1rst admendment, it is unlawful and unnatural to abuse a child. Individual rights only go so far as to stop when taking another’s liberty such as abusing a child. 2nd admendment has no correlation in regard to ur “logic” as everyone has the right to defend their life, child’s life against abuse, liberty, and property from all, including goverment

  • boyscout

    How about we don’t equip anybody with this ammo, keep it out of human hands entirely, find a way to load it into “surveillance” drones and surveil our way to policy and population control.

    • Vicki

      Thus speaketh the terminator.

  • CaveAdsum

    The sheep live in fear and pretend that the wolf will never come. The sheepdog lives for that day.

  • Bimbam

    Don’t believe a word from your Demoncraps or politicians that say taking your guns away make you safer.

    That can only come from an insane person bent on your destruction. You must realize one thing. Most politicians are insane.

    Look at Barry, Pelosi, Feinstein. Their lies, hypocrisy, and law-breaking are incredible and are there for all to see.

    • Vicki

      They may or may not be insane but they are certainly cruel. Why else would they propose punishing ~300 MILLION Americans for the acts of a very few?

      ~300 MILLION Americans did NOT shoot ANYONE.

      Stop punishing the INNOCENT for the acts of the very few (less than 0.01%)

      Stop it
      Stop it NOW.

      Now the insanity comes when you consider that the politicians are buying lots and lots of ammo and guns apparently to have a war with those same innocents.

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Vicki arrives and once again bludgeons us with the ever-mindless mantra,

        ~300 MILLION Americans didn’t-don’t-haven’t-won’t-shouldn’t-can’t-aren’t——–

        (GAG—GAG—UPCHUCK—wipe mouth)

        Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations, Vicki!

        Stop denying!
        Stop evading!
        Stop deflecting!
        Stop obfuscating!

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • Vicki

        Right Brain Thinker doesn’t and says:
        “Vicki arrives and once again bludgeons us with the ever-mindless mantra,”

        Yawn, Ad hominem

        - RBT: “Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations,”

        Proof by bald assertion. But since you brought it up, how big is “a lot”.

        - RBT: “Stop denying!

        I am obviously not denying. I just finished asking you for a number.

        Though I had noticed that no guns were involved in any harmful situations were there was not a human controlling the gun. Someone was even nice enough to run a test for us to see if guns could be harmful without a human controlling them.
        http://personalliberty.com/2013/01/23/do-guns-kill-people-pistol-shotgun-assault-rifle-put-to-the-test/

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

        Hey RBT, are you aware that 300 MILLION Americans did NOT shoot ANYONE today? No? Well now you know…no need to thank me!

  • http://HUGHESNET BLUEDOG

    evben a ten year old can read and understand what Hitler did in the 30s. So whats the secret? Why dont they tell what they want to do? We will find out sooner than later matter of fact some of US already know what they are trying to do and when they are going to do it. Dont plan on a election in 2016 as there will be things going on that will over ride an election. I know some of this due to my son working for a federal law enforcement agency. He moved out of ATF&E before the public knew anything about Fast& Furious. If you want to keep your fireARMS THEN GET WITH PEOPLE THAT FEEL THE SAME AND PREPARE FOR A FIRE FIGHT.

  • An Old Seabee

    Ancient Rome declined because it had a Senate; now what’s going to happen to us with both a Senate and a House?
    Will Rogers
    Be thankful we’re not getting all the government we’re paying for.
    Will Rogers
    I belong to no organized party. I am a Democrat.
    Will Rogers
    On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does.
    Will Rogers
    Our constitution protects aliens, drunks and U.S. Senators.
    Will Rogers
    There is nothing as stupid as an educated man if you get him off the thing he was educated in.
    Will Rogers
    There ought to be one day– just one– when there is open season on senators.
    Will Rogers
    There’s no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you.
    Will Rogers
    There’s the one thing no nation can ever accuse us of and that is secret diplomacy. Our foreign policies are an open book, generally a check book.
    Will Rogers
    This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.
    Will Rogers
    The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that’s out always looks the best.
    Will Rogers
    I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
    Will Rogers

    • Tommy cunningham

      We are not a democracy, we are a republic, and furthermore , we would have all these problems if the senate/congress “legislative” branch would obey constitution, it limits what the they can do for or to the people, they seem to ignore that, also the executive branch for a long time had ignored constitution and the judicial branch has ignored it and interprets as they feel rather than how it is written. That’s the whole problem, along with the idiots who vote for a person in promise of special treatment, whether it be a poor person, corporation, union, or minority group, there should be only one set of laws equally applied to all regardless of being poor, race, union affiliation or in a corporation.. That’s how it is suppose to be.

      • Vicki

        Tommy cunningham says:
        “We are not a democracy, we are a republic,”

        Or more specifically a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic.

        - Tommy: “and furthermore , we wouldn’t have all these problems if the senate/congress “legislative” branch would obey constitution, it limits what the they can do for or to the people,”

        Quite true. The Constitution is a set of specific powers that we, the people delegated to government. And to be sure they didn’t overstep (commerce clause) we even included a SPECIFIC set of rights that they can NOT infringe on. One of those is the right to keep and bear arms. No amount of commerce clause justification can override this fact. No attempt to tax this right can survive actual constitutional muster. (See SCOTUS US Vs Miller 1939 http://www.preventtyranny.com/guns_1939_miller.htm)

      • Vicki

        Tommy Cunningham writes:
        “they seem to ignore that, also the executive branch for a long time had ignored constitution and the judicial branch has ignored it and interprets as they feel rather than how it is written. That’s the whole problem, along with the idiots who vote for a person in promise of special treatment, whether it be a poor person, corporation, union, or minority group, there should be only one set of laws equally applied to all regardless of being poor, race, union affiliation or in a corporation.”

        For much the same reasons the Republic that was Rome fell and became a tyranny under a series of caesars. This video explains starting at about 8:20. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

        The entire video is only about 10 min long and well worth watching to learn about types of government including democracy and why it always fails.

    • Kevin

      Liked your Will Rogers quotes and think some are very accurate

  • pissed of & liberal

    Want to know the irony? many consider gun-grabbing a sign of socialism but the Party of Socialism and Liberation advocates arming the ENTIRE WORKING CLASS!

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Who told you that fairytale and why would they tell it and why would you believe them?

      • pissed of & liberal

        It’s written in the party manifesto that the revolution will be defended by the arming of the entire working class.

  • mark

    More paranoid nonsense about the government’s conspiracy to murder all of its own citizens. This canard never fails and always leads to massive gun and ammunition purchases and a huge boost to gun company profits. In all my life I have never seen such a collection of lemmings and sheeple as Libertarian and Conservative extemists. They will fall for any nonsense, and I do mean any crazy, nonsensical story with zero proof or documentation, as long as it targets the U.S. government as constantly organizing to kill them and steal their freedom. Well, the gun companies are laughing all the way to the bank – and so are the funeral homes, as the domestic body count keeps rising. But hey, at least we’re all free – free to kill one another over small disputes, private suspicions, and paranoid fantasies.

    • Vicki

      mark says:
      “More paranoid nonsense about the government’s conspiracy to murder all of its own citizens.”

      Of course they don’t plan on murder of all their own citizens. How silly.

      They just plan on murder of the resistant ones.

      - mark: “In all my life I have never seen such a collection of lemmings and sheeple as Libertarian and Conservative extemists.”

      Have you seen liberals and obama recently?

      - mark: “Well, the gun companies are laughing all the way to the bank – and so are the funeral homes, as the domestic body count keeps rising.”

      Body count? Has the war started?

      - mark: “But hey, at least we’re all free – free to kill one another over small disputes, private suspicions, and paranoid fantasies.”

      And we are all free to resist efforts to kill us. That is the important part. That is unless people like you succeed in your dream to punish the

      ~300 MILLION Americans who DIDN’T kill one another over any dispute. No matter how big or small.

      STOP PUNISHING THE INNOCENT for the acts of a very few.

      STOP IT
      STOP IT NOW

      • Right Brain Thinker

        Vicki arrives and once again bludgeons us with the ever-mindless mantra,

        ~300 MILLION Americans didn’t-don’t-haven’t-won’t-shouldn’t-can’t-aren’t——–

        (GAG—GAG—UPCHUCK—wipe mouth)

        Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations, Vicki!

        Stop denying!
        Stop evading!
        Stop deflecting!
        Stop obfuscating!

        STOP IT

        STOP IT NOW

      • mark

        Vicki, over 30,000 Americans die from gun violence each year and another 70,000 are wounded each year from guns. Of the 30,000 who die, a little more than half do so from suicides and accidents, the rest from homicides. So stow it with this nonsense about 300 million Americans who never kill anyone. They kill all right. And they kill and they kill and they kill, each and everyday. Americans killing Americans. This is the constant domestic war that our nation endures. And the federal government has nothing to do with it. It is practically the national sport – Americans killing Americans over private matters, delusions, and crime. We kill a lot more of one another than we do people oveseas – although our military is doing a fairly good job on that count as well.

        • Patriot

          More ridiculous and unfounded comments.
          I am willing to bet you get your numbers from moveon.org.

          HERE are the ACTUAL numbers from the UN:

          Murders with firearms 9,369 [1st of 36]
          DEFINITION: Total recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.
          SOURCE: World Health Organization: World report on violence and health, 2012

          You are listing 100,000 victims of firearms here.
          IF you are going to argue a point, be certain that you have the correct numbers and that your information is correct.
          So far from you, I haven’t see much of that.
          It is also to be noted that this number includes justifiable homicide by police officers in the line of duty as well as by homeowners and individuals protecting themselves.

          And I will remind you that taking MY Guns will not prevent CRIMINALS from using guns to kill people.

      • Rock Savage

        mark,

        Over 30,000 killed by firearms in the USA each year — where the hell did you get your stats (provide your source)?

        According to Wikipedia, ” In 2010 there were 358 murders involving rifles. Murders involving the use of handguns in the US that same year totaled 6,009, with another 1,939 murders with the firearm type unreported.” — that’s a hell-of-a-difference!!!

        • Patriot

          He got those ridiculous numbers from an even more ridiculous source: moveon.org

      • Vicki

        Right Brain Thinker says:
        “Stop trying to ignore the fact that guns are involved in a lot of harmful situations, Vicki!”

        How many RBT? How many. (Bet he doesn’t answer. He hasn’t the courage.)

      • Vicki

        mark says:
        “Vicki, over 30,000 Americans die from gun violence each year and another 70,000 are wounded each year from guns. ”

        Hmmm…. That’s a really big number there mark. 100,000 every year. 100 thousand. So lets pretend those numbers are reasonably close and add ~ in front to signify approximately. Lets further presume that there each person shot is shot by one person. (This means that sandy hook is a problem cause the single shooter there shot more than one). That means that there are ~100 thousand bad guys out there. 100 thousand. That is less then ~0.03% of the population. THREE HUNDREDTHS of ONE percent.

        300 Million. More than 99.9% of the population DIDN’T do it. And you are telling me that you want the

        ~300 MILLION AMERICANS who did NOT shoot anyone to give up their GOD given rights?

        STOP Punishing the INNOCENT for the acts of a VERY few.

        STOP IT
        STOP IT NOW.

      • Michael Guy

        The majority of homicides are by inner city or barrio gang members as they battle for control of the drugs bought welfare, EBT, and other government entitlements. the tax payers give money to the drug addicts. the drug addicts give money to the drug dealers. the drug dealers then buy, or receive from Eric Holder, weapons of murder. The drug gangs then kill wantonly, randomly and without remorse both gang rivals or bystanders. This usually being done in a democratically controlled city like Chicago where white middle class productive citizens are not allowed to have guns. but all the welfare recipients, drug addicts and drug dealers, as well as the Mexicans, support Obama and the Democrats.
        The Democrats hate Nicene Creed Christianity, the Us Constitution ( preferring the 1936 Soviet one) , capitalism and the conservative Caucasian middle class.

    • jUSTacOUNTRYbOY

      HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH OR IS IT
      JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJ MARKY???

      tALK ABOUT IGNORANT LEMMINGS.
      hAVE YOU LOOKED IN THE MIRROR?

    • Kevin
    • Texas Ride

      Mark, don’t forget to add that all the shooters have been registered demonrats and/or self-proclaimed lefties.

      • Karolyn

        And you have proof of this Texas?

    • http://itsootsme.wordpress.com sootsme

      So buy some stock, already. Free enterprise is a wonderful thing. Make of it what you will. Or not. Geez.

    • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

      mark: More paranoid nonsense about the government’s conspiracy to murder all of its own citizens.

      Not ALL the citizens, mark. Just the one’s who refuse to heel…but don’t worry, i think you’re safe.

    • http://google john

      One question,,,,,why the purchase of three thousand MRAV and all the ammo and true assault rifles and such, WHY,,,WHY ,, WHY IT IS THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD FOR GOVTS.TO OPPRESS AND KILL THEIR CITIZENS.

  • TUNAMAN

    WELL THERE WE GO AGAIN! ALL THIS NOISE ABOUT THE 2ND AMENDMENT WILL NEVER BE SETTLED BY THE REAL AMERICAN PATRIOTS IF THEY ALLOW THE THUGS IN DC TO ARTICULATE WHAT THE CONSTITUTION MEANS! IF THESE DC THUGS WANT TO ACT LIKE “HITLER ET ALL” AND PASS THESE ILLEGAL LAWS, THEN I GUESS THAT WILL MAKE ME A MINUTE MAN AND I WILL DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION WITH MY LIFE! I’VE BEEN AROUND TOO LONG TO HAVE TO LIVE UNDER A DICTATOR WHICH I WILL NOT! BUT IF THESE THUGS THINK THAT THEIR SORRY-ASSES ARE WORTH IT , I’LL EXACT MY POUND OF FLESH BEFORE I’M GONE! LONG LIVE THE FREE MAN!!!

  • ROGER, Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

    “UKNOWHO” you really do have masochistic tendencies because you are determined to prove to me ( and others) you have no concept of NATURAL RIGHTS. A constitution is only a REASONABLE, description of RIGHTS, albeit not necessarily complete, because it was created by imperfect people. My RIGHTS are not determiend by a document or other individuals, corporations, governments or the fictitious beliefs of man, such as a GOD. “I think therefore I am” carried to its proper, logical conclusion- “I believe I have rights,therefore i do” is SUFFICIENT .I do not have to answer to nor ask others regarding my rights or what they are. For your simple indoctrinated mind. I have a right to property and a gun is property THEREFORE I have a RIGHT to ONE or any number of guns,providing I make them or earn them. I further have a right to DEFEND myself with or WITHOUT a constitution listing my rights, and by my definition,NOT yours or anyone else’s but thank you for proving to me once again how right I am and further, I dont expect you to comprehend this concept. .

    • Vicki

      Roger. Think of it this way. Your Creator gave you ALL of your rights. The Constitution is merely a contract between you and government to PROTECT those rights.

      That is even what is said in the Declaration of Independence:

      “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,”
      .http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html

      • Patriot

        Just be sure that the word ‘Creator’ is properly understood.
        I have spoken to 5th graders that have a far better understanding of our founding and it’s documents than the VAST majority of people on this board.
        Contrary to the beliefs of some, this is not a reference to a Christian god.
        Jefferson had a classical education and studied philosophy from the age of 9.
        It was Aristotle that originally noticed that all beings were born of the earth and not of society, and that the rules of earth apply to all of her creatures. It was John Locke that refined this idea into what ended up in our Declaration of Independence.
        So to clarify, it means that if you believe that your Creator is nothing but 6 billion years of evolution, you were STILL endowed by that 6 billion years of evolution with rights that since you are of the earth, cannot be granted by man, nor taken from you by man.
        If you believe you are a child of the Universe, the same applies. If you believe you are a product of Satan himself, then it applies.

        I am sorry to have to explain that to both the Christians as I am sure that will raise their hackles, as well as the atheists as now they have an entire argument that has been summarily invalidated.

        However, this was without a doubt Jefferson’s intention in his choice of words.

      • ROGER, Irish-Canadian LIBERTARIAN

        Sorry VICKI but as an Atheist I do NOT BELIEVE in a creator and since i have no intention of trying to convince you of that,I do not wish nor appreciate you to try to convince me a CREATOR created anything. My RIGHTS are SELF EVIDENT-PERIOD. I understand your feelings though.You are a victim of indoctrination from childhood.I was fortunate to have parents ( I am 72 now and know my mind) who were both Christians and respective enough of my individuality to allow me to think for myself. Thank you for your opinion however but I have no intention of discussing this any further

      • http://itsootsme.wordpress.com sootsme

        On a practical note: The Second Amendment means whatever serious people with guns say it means! Such folks are generally agreed that “shall not be infringed” is absolute, plain English. ALL “laws” infringe, as they neither create nor allow more options or choices than those already enjoyed by any free person, without or prior to such “laws”. To be a Citizen of our Republic is to be, each and every one of us, a king or a queen; our rights and freedoms bound only by the equal rights and freedoms of our peers. None of us is beholden to any government, unless we allow ourselves to be… The time for choosing is upon us each and every one…

      • http://yahoo don

        vicki, in this day and age in this society men are no longer equal. the people with all the money have taken over the rights of the people with less. our government is run by them. our congresspeople are manipulated by them our government decides what we can have and can do. there is a way to make things more balanced. i am a firm believer in about the only way to beat the so-called superior and thats the vote. if it was used and done right the big money superiority could not beat it. our elected officials could once more become servants of the people. how many of the elections going back forever has been decided by the people. hardly any. kennedy might have been the last and he was snuffed by the powerful. i am convinced the warren report was a lie. its about time the people get away from the beauty padgent like elections and take the country back. then men would be equal.

      • Adolf Schmidt

        I agree with you Vicki! Regardless of if anyone believes they were created(I do), we have rights. It should not be in the power of government to impose upon my rights as long as my rights(as I see them) does not impose upon others. A lot of people believe (mainly government) they know what is best for the masses. They(the gov.) feel they need total control of the people to be effective. The government has over stepped it’s realm of power by micromanaging the people. The government needs to realize they have their plate full with the economy, and foreign affairs(getting out of)! The government feels they have bought the right to ultimate control through entitlements, and they’re are plenty of Americans willing to give up their rights as long as they get their check! People, don’t sell out! We will fail if we rely on the government to sustain our every need. What has made The United States a world power, is it’s peoples ability to stand on their own if necessary!

    • Uknowho

      Roger,

      I understand natrual rights theory but when you talk about a society and the complexities therein, it changes the conversation and the dynamic.

      Sometimes, the good of the many, outweigh the wants of the one.

      You seem to think that there should be no limits to the 2nd Amendment, I disagree. There are some weapons that people who are not soldiers have no business owning. Especially in a society that has being killed by your own weapon or being killed in a “crime of passion” far more likely that being killed by someone who is protecting home or family.

      Some people here get angry because I showed why there are and should be limits to the various amendments in the Consitution and used the first Amendment to show an example.

      In Canada, you have a large amount of land and a small population. We have less land in the lower 48 and 10 times the population and a different culture as it pertains to guns and violence.

      A tool expressly made for killing has different rules in Canada as it does the United States, as it does any other country in the world.

      I would love to own a P-51 Mustang with working guns but I can’t and nor should I. I would love to own the USS Iowa with working guns but I can’t and shouldn’t.

      Have your handguns, your rifles, your shotguns… Nobody needs military grade weaponry. It only invites disaster.

      • Don 2

        Uknowho states, “Sometimes, the good of the many, outweigh the wants of the one.”

        You make a good little Alinsky-ite following his “Rules For Radicals – 101″: To diminish the danger that ideology will deteriorate into dogma, and to protect the free, open, questing, and creative mind of man, as well as to allow for change, no ideology should be more specific than that of America’s founding fathers: “For the general welfare.”

        Give me a break, you’re so freek’in obvious…..

      • Uknowho

        Sorry Don if you don’t know how sucessful societies operate.

      • Don 2

        Uknowho,

        So….. like the good little Alinsky-ite that you are, you immediately fall back to “Rules For Radicals” 5th. rule of power tactics: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.

        Don’t hold your breath waiting for that reaction…..but it is fun toying with you guys and your playbook.

      • Uknowho

        Don,

        I don’t mean for you to take what I said as redicule. I just stated a fact. You do not understand the way societies work.

        Don’t worry, you are not the only one.

      • Karolyn

        Don – It seems to me that rightists know a lot more about “Rules for Radicals” than any liberals I’ve ever known, because they seem to quote them a lot and also use them.

      • Adolf Schmidt

        Roger, there is not military grade weapons available to the public! People with the same knowledge as yourself are making these laws based on their ignorance! The guns that are under scrutiny are not, and would not, be used by our military or anyone else’s for that matter! Our military does not use a semi auto rifle, but that is what they want to ban because it looks scary! What’s scary is the Country ran by uneducated people, backed by more uneducated citizens!

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          No, what’s really scary are the folks who show up at a school or movie theatre or Marine Base or shopping mall with powerful guns and start blowing people away. Call the guns whatever you like but the victims of these mass shooting sprees are just as dead.

  • jopa

    To some it seems as though they believe the 2nd amendment was written by a state government when it comes to “well regulated militia “and to others they claim the phrase has no power to limit and regulate state militias.Sorry folks it was written by and for the federal government to set the rules and regulations of state militias, hunters ,preppers , gun owners and we all have to abide by them for the good of America.We are the government and it is the will of the majority that rules.

    • Patriot

      Again, you COMPLETELY ignore it when you are corrected in regards to the TWO SEPARATE clauses in the 2nd Amendment.

      So here is your lesson for the SECOND TIME:

      The FIRST PART of the Second Amendment SAYS:

      . A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state

      THAT IS THE FIRST PART

      HERE is the SECOND part:

      the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

      Ok? DO you have it yet??

      The terms and rules for what constitutes a ‘militia are IN the Constitution, NOT the Bill of Rights. I am TIRED of educating the ignorant in this country that have ZERO education in our founding and it’s documents. Therefore, this time I CHALLENGE you to do the right thing and look up MILITIA as DEFINED by the Constitution.

      • Uknowho

        Patriot,

        What were the conditions inside America at the time of the 2nd Amendment’s creation? Did America have a standing army?

        • Patriot

          Yes, America had a standing army as well as specific provisions in Section 8 of the Constitution defining congress’s powers to create and maintain an army, a navy, and a militia. That alone clearly separates the militia from the People.
          Before you get in over your head any more than you have, I suggest you do some studying in terms of the intent and execution of the 2nd Amendment. There is a welath of information in the Federalist Papers and the diaries, notes, and minutes from the first Constitutional Convention. The diaries of James Madison make it pretty clear as well. This board is filled with people claiming to have knowledge of our Constitution and so far I can’t really name one of you that has more than a basic idea, and a lot of opinions without foundation.
          Here is THE ONE AND ONLY bottom line: The Constitution can be changed through the Amendment Process. Therefore, if you wish to infringe my rights to keep and bear arms, then you will have to amend the Constitution to do so. Otherwise, every single argument I have seen here is invalid.

    • Dave Bishop

      Ignorance is bliss. Anyone who can interpret the Constitution in that manner must also believe that we can trust our elected EMPLOYEES to do our will. Those EMPLOYEES have proven time and again that they can be trusted only to follow the lead of the purse strings that open at election time. The 2nd amendment is meant for us to stop the EMPLOYEES when THEY decide a dictatorship will serve THEM better.

      • angelwannabe

        Dave, Well said!

      • nc

        Dave, how do you propose to use YOUR Second Amendment Right to stop the government EMPLOYEES ? CHARGE SINGLEHANDEDLY INTO TO THE STREET TO YOUR CERTAIN DEATH ? WAIT FOR A “GROUP” TO FORM AND ENCIRCLE THE US AIR FORCE FROM THE GROUND?

        MY SUGGESTION IS THAT YOU USE IT TO GET A COUPLE GUNS FOR PROTECTION OF YOUR HOME OR HUNTING OR RECREATIONAL SHOOTING AND WAIVE THAT PART OF THE RIGHT THAT ALLOWS YOU “TO SAVE THE NATION”!!!!! THAT WILL GET YOUR BUTT KILLED BY THE “EMPLOYEES.”

      • Rock Savage

        NC,

        I’m very grateful that our Founding Fathers didn’t have your attitude when they decided to go against the most powerful armed forces in the world.

      • Matrix

        Dave

        Of course “ignorance is bliss” as the American public has been so “watered down” by indoctrinated communist “university children” (drugged out morons), ignorant blacks, millions of democratic “refugees”, (mostly from muslim countries) illegal aliens and authentic communist from Russia and China!

        Yep, ignorance is bliss/communism=anti-American, and this is our war!!!!

    • sid14

      You are obviously a product of our leftist “indoctrination” system because you have no concept at all about the Constitution or the founders. The Constitution was written to limit the powers of the government, NOT to place any limits on the people. The Declaration of Independence makes this quite clear, I doubt you have ever read it. The whole notion that the Federal gov was created to rule over us with an iron fist, as you imply is simply preposterous on it’s face.

  • jUSTacOUNTRYbOY

    cOULD IT JUST BE, THAT SOME DOOR TO DOOR CONFISCATORY
    GUN GRAB TYPE ENFORCERS KIDS, MAY NOT SEE “DADDY” COME HOME THAT NIGHT?
    wOULDN’T THAT BE A SHAME? mAYBE WHY PLANS ARE TO USE FOREIGN AGENTS TO DO IT???????
    aNYONE SEEN GUN GRAB OFFICIALS ON A STREET WHEN CIVIL UNREST IS GOING CRAZY????? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM?????
    nOW i ASK YOU????????

  • Don 2

    Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Law, a highly influential legal commentary at the time of Second Amendment’s framing, was the standard for American attorneys and judges. Concerning the right of citizens to own and use arms, Blackstone declared: “The right of the [citizen] that I shall at present mention, is that of having arms for their defense….[This is] the natural right of resistance and self-preservation when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression….[T]o vindicate these rights when actually violated or attacked, the [citizens] are entitled, in the first place, to the regular administration and free course of justice in the courts of law; next, to the right of petitioning the [government] for redress of grievances; and lastly, to the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense.”

    Justice Joseph Story, historically recognized as one of the “Fathers of American Jurisprudence.” having authored perhaps the most authoritative legal commentary ever written on the U.S. Constitution, declared: “…The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the [catalyst] of the liberties of a republic since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the prople ro resist and triumph over them….

    George Washington, U.S. President, signer of the Constitution: “A free people ought….to be armed.”

    James Madison, U.S. President, signer of the Constitution, a framer of the Second Amendment in the first Congress: “[T]he advantage of being armed [is an advantage which] the Americans possess over people of almost every other nation….[I]n the several kingdoms of Europe….the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”

    George Mason, Delegate to the Constitutional Convention, ‘Father of the Bill of Rights’: “….when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British parliament was advised…to disarm the people. That it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them. But that they should not do it openly; but to weaken them and let them sink gradually.”

  • jeri107

    The only reason the government is amassing all the guns and ammo, is because they know very well, that not all of us are going to roll over and turn our guns in. I, for one, will maybe die by their bullets, but I’m going to take some of them along with me. The gov’t knows what they are trying to do is against everything this country stands for. If we’re lucky, they will become so paranoid, they’ll turn on each other. Our ancestors risked their lives coming to this country, to escape tyranny. There are too many of us that believe in what they fought for, and are willing to fight for those very beliefs.

  • angelwannabe

    Ya gotta love the Liberal parasites who frequent opposing blog sites, they do try to disrupt the flow and get people off topic. but the facts remain, and UN-armed public will be lead like cows to a slaughter.

    and BTW_Cyprus banks are closed til Thursday, they are unarmed citizens, so the Guv can do that to them, who’s going to stop them?,…. ask yourselves this___ why the push for more and more gun control RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW?… could the same affliction plaguing Cyprus, soon be coming to a town near you?

  • Jibbs

    The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

    The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

    The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

    The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

    Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, “the Organized Militia (the National Guard) can not be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.”

    The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

    During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.

    The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.

    Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: “The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States.” In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, “that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it.”

    “This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power.”

    The Honorable William Gordon

    Congressional Record, House, Page 640 – 1917

    • gunner689AI

      Do you really believe that the Socialists in the White House and the Senate give a rats rearend about the Law ? It just a pot hole in there way to domination of the citizens.

    • http://naver samurai

      Thanks for the info Jibbs. Here is something from Wild Bill>

      http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-is-martin-luther-kings-worst-nightmare/

      He is right. Leave it to the libturds of the 5th column to make everything about race. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!

      You need both love of country and faith in God to be a patriot.

      “A patriot must be a religious man.”

      Thomas Jefferson

  • Charles Calhoun

    Would these people be so quick to ban guns, bullets and magazines if they knew that both Newtown and Aurora were events staged by the Administration, like Fast and Furious.
    While the government arms to the teeth with a billion antipersonnel (hollow point made for KILLING) bullets. Somebody is preparing for lots of killing. And they want us disarmed and vulnerable.

  • Right Brain Thinker

    Just took a quick look back at the thread and see that Vicki’s bosses at the Shills’n’Trolls’r’Us shop are paying her overtime tonight, and have even brought in the JV to help out—-JeffyH and angel. The NRA must be flush with cash from all the new members and sending special “spread the lies” grants to SnTrU. Haven’t got time to waste on their mindless chanting of the ~300 AMERICANS horsepucky. Later. Hope they don’t bore you all to death.

    • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

      And this from a “gullible-simpleton” who worships at the feet of Morris Dees. LOL!

    • angelwannabe

      Good Grief Right Brain…….who’s the troll on here????__Vicki??___hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahah!!!!

    • JeffH

      angel and Jay, :) If HalfWitThinker was half as smart as he thinks he is he might actually be dangerous.

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

        A half-wit gave RBT a piece of his mind, and RBT held on to it…

    • http://naver samurai

      This coming from someone who always seems to get put back into his place by Bob Livingston? This coming from a person who prostrates himself in front of his “messiah” Obama bin Laden and is a child of satan? Here is a video where Pat Boone puts Obama to shame. I agree with him that Obama bin Laden is trying to destroy this country.

      http://www.westernjournalism.com/pat-boone-obama-purposely-destroying-america/

      Time for you to pack up and leave RBT. The 5th column are going to start feeling more heat. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!

      You need both love of country and faith in God to be a patriot. This leaves you out.

      “By means of schrewd lies unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is hell – and hell heaven. The greater the lie, the more readily it will be believed.”

      Adolf Hitler
      Mein Kampf

      *This sounds like every 5th columner on this site.

    • Right Brain Thinker

      [personal attack has been removed]

      • Right Brain Thinker

        What? What did I say? Lord love a duck that I should be accused of a “personal attack”, since that’s about all the fools do in response to my postings (which many of them can’t understand or don’t even try to because it doesn’t fit their truth). Since when it is a “personal attack” to say such self-evident things as “The sky is blue” or “So-and-so is ignorant”.

        Speaking of fools, Sam should rethink his comments about the exchanges I have had with Bob Livingston. Bob is far more intelligent than Sam and would never have said that.

      • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

        You need to get yourself under control, RBT. You are starting to set a really bad example…smarten-up!

  • Robert Roenfeldt

    We’ll win!

  • FreedomFighter

    “TO CONQUER A NATION FIRST DISARM ITS CITIZENS” —ADOLF HITLER

    You wonder why DHS or Department of Human Sacrifice buys 2 billion bullets, why all the machine guns, why all the light armored tanks, why all the guard dogs, why are they activating FEMA camps, why are they buying up all the civilian ammo supplies, why!? There is no outside enemy, no invasion force threatening the United States, no current sign of open rebellion in the streets just Americans going about daily business as usual.

    Only one reason can be deduced from current actions:

    It is preparation for the Collapse of the monetary system and then Socialist/Communist/fascist cabal takeover of the United States by force of arms.

    Do not let them provoke you into useless acts, they want this, government control media is already calling “whites” terrorists, the demonization of law abiding citizens has begun.

    Let them pull another false flag event – dont give them propaganda tools or justification for brutality, its what they need to justify thier existance… they will fake or provoke a confrontation soon enough anyways but we will all know they did.

    Laus Deo
    Semper FI

    • Matrix

      Freedom

      I can think of no greater danger to the American public, then a liberal with a weapon!

      Time and time again, and in everyday news and newspapers, is the liberal black man murdering innocent lives for drugs, money or sex!

      These animals have no place amongst humans, but now we have one as a so called “president”!

      When will you idiots wake up to the fact that the majority of liberal blacks are out of their minds, and truly have succumbed to our government and their “church” indoctrination of hatred of the white man!

      Are all evil scum?

      Only the insane 93% that voted for the obamanation!

      True American Blacks will be fighting side by side against this evil, as we have for many generations!

      Yep, they labeled us “Uncle Toms”, but know that these men are true American’s, and are horrified at the insanity and corruption of their own culture!

      The war is coming, and it ain’t going to be pretty, but in the end, America will survive, but it’s unfortunate that most communist blacks won’t!

      As the saying goes, for all of you “useful idiots” that have sold out your country, your family and your souls for a perverted, demented, corrupt and evil man, because he is black……

      Enjoy your choice, because your ignorance is so bliss that you will not ever realize your days are numbered as you sit in your “lazy Boy” and eat the poison your corrupt leaders have approved as healthy, as your logic and life are dwindling, as you take your last useless breath, will God be a thought?

      Doubt it!

      God Bless America, and those who fight for her!!!!

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Liberals will ban guns and gun owners thru “mental” check program
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRW-W97OjO8

        They have to start from O’Homobama and 250 Homos in his administration,, and 250 Perverts in his administration, Reid, pelosi, dianne feinstein, debbie wasserman schultz, barbara boxer, schumer, durbin, schakowsky, maxine waters, sheila jackson lee…

        Feel free to add to list.

  • http://www.facebook.com/darwan.winkler.3 Deerinwater

    Well, ~ there is call for concern as the Fed tends to overdo everything it does. Knowing this,~ over reaction of the NRA and gun owners is to be expected. ~

    I’m not sure what I can do about all of this as I’ve accepted the fact long ago that I could be labeled a criminal and indited of carrying ~ as I never thought it wise to broadcast or document the fact ~ I fail to see it as my responsibility while present laws attempt to make it so. ~ Having lived 40 years this way ~ I fail to be impressed with it all.

    I’m not telling you what to do ~ do what you think is best for you, is my advise.

    Peace officers work on the premise, ~ that everyone is a criminal and if called on, left to “prove” otherwise. ~ There is enough laws on the books to hang you for something if that is their intentions. If you carry, be wise and avoid trouble , if you can.

    People that are overly obsessed with guns are dangerous to themselves and others.

    Gun owners that are not skilled with guns and gun ownership are just about as dangerous.

    • http://google john

      Who are you so say who is obsessed with guns,to the elite every owner is “obsessed”The spirit of resistance is very high and there is a knowledge of something in the air.Americans have a nose for tyrants,or use to.To arm up and get prepared for a very obvious tyranny around the corner?Well,it does’t get more American than that.

  • Chuck S

    Normally, there should b e a small number of criminals, so a moderate amount of law enforcement and ammo is enough. If the government gets outrageous – maybe obviously dictatorial, there will hopefully be very large number of people opposed to the government.many people The government shouldn’t need that much ammo for ordinary crime.

  • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

    I agree that our government is now almost completely out of control, for reasons explained succinctly in Power to the People:

    http://tinyurl.com/a2ocxtq

    Details and references on the rise of a tyrannical one-world government (1945-2013) are summarized here:

    http://tinyurl.com/atf8w63

    But violence is not the answer. To protect your liberty, pay attention to what is happening in real life and stop watching video games, reality TV shows, gladiator sports, supposedly world news, and doing drugs, alcohol or mood-altering psychotropic medicines.

    With kind regards,
    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo
    http://www.omatumr.com

    • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

      Today the New York Times published intriguingly factual information on the Sun:

      http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/03/19/science/space/0319-solar.html?_r=0

      Space-age measurements and observations show that is also the source of energy that:

      a.) Made our elements,
      b.) Birthed the Solar System 5 Gyr ago,
      c.) Sustained the origin and evolution of life after 3.5 Gyr ago, and
      d.) Endowed mankind with special talents and unalienable rights to self governance,
      e.) Just like the Creator, Destroyer and Sustainer of lives and worlds in the Solar System,

      That religions have worshiped throughout recorded history: http://tinyurl.com/ahfx8kl

  • http://gravatar.com/bychoosing WTS/JAYS

    To protect our individual rights to possess guns we are going to need to become more knowldegeable about the source of, or authority for, those rights, which requires us to stop blathering about the Second Amendment.

    The Second Amendment is one of the most grossly misunderstood constitutional provisions, widespread ignorance about which will fuel the fires of the gun control prohibitionists. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Those who try to pound their square peg of personal possession interests into the square hole of those purposeful words would be better off studying and thinking on fundamental things, and on what the Framers really felt about people protecting themselves, their homes, their families, and their goods.

    As reported in Blackstone’s Commentaries and elsewhere, it is and was a fundamental component of rights to life, liberty, property, and familial well-being that one has the right to own and possess arms to protect those things. That was so fundamental that it required no specific recognition in the Constitution, because the national government [the sole focus of the Bill of Rights, remember] never arguably granted the national government power to encroach on those fundamental things. And it is not a right created by government.

    The purpose for the Second Amendment is found in two phrases, and in study of the considerable concerns the Framers had of the possibility of erosion of state sovereignty by a possibly usurpatious national government that might start spilling over its intended boundary lines [as is dramatically the case now]. Those two illuminating but misunderstood phrases, which mutually impact and define each other, are “well regulated Militia” and “bear Arms.”

    In inverse order, the term “bear Arms” means other than individuals carrying them. You and I could own, keep, and carry our own guns for our own and family protection from now until doomsday and not be “bearing” those arms, because bearing arms has an official, martial connotation. It signals a focus on one participating in…, well, a regulated militia or other sort of quasi-official, paramilitary community protection service. At the time of the framing, communities across the Fruited Plain had groups of local militia drilling up and down the community green, the ultimate and most dramatic example being the “Minutemen” of Lexington and Concord fame.

    And it was felt that the surest way to protect those communities from national invasion and encroachment was to retain those militias, but the states might not have the resources to arm all of the people necessary for an effectively protective militia, so the militia members could arm themselves and keep those arms at home for purposes of “bearing” them in service to the community if the national government did not respect its intended and narrow boundaries, as defined in Article 1, section 8.

    That community protection role had nothing to do with the fundamental individual right to self and family protection firearms, which are protected by a proper reading of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

    So, the modern debate on our rights to self-protection firearms should not revolve around the Second Amendment, because that opens the door to correct assertions by the anti-gun lobby that it does not confer an individual right to firearms. That is technically correct, because that individual right, again, is not conferred by government at all: it inheres in our natural rights to life, liberty, property, family, home, etc., and is recognized by the unenumerated values in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

    So when these so-called “conservatives,” most of whom are police power state-ists and very, very few of whom have ever studied the Framers’ intents, such as Limbaugh, Hannity, Huckabee, the new Giuliani, Romney, Hewitt, Benoit, Beck, and so many others trumpet “we support the Second Amendment,” the query should then be, “Fine, but do you also support our individual rights to possess guns?” Their eyes will glaze over and they’ll give you the empty stare characteristic of Dan Quayle, because they have no idea what you are asking or what they are saying.

    The Second Amendment was a protection of the structure of federalism; we have individual fundamental rights quite broader and quite otherwise.

    And this reality of the Second Amendment makes me concerned about the pending litigation in the United States Supreme Court regarding the District of Columbia gun ordinance. At least two problems lie there.

    One is the fact that the litigators don’t know the difference between what the Second Amendment protected and the natural rights for firearms, as discussed above. The other is related to the constitutional structure of the nation and how it came about, as discussed in previous posts.

    The states gave up some of the power, retaining a sizeable residuum, to a government whose power is enumerated and limited by Article 1, second 8, and the Second Amendment is to protect the states’ residuum from encroachment. One of the limitations inhering in the enumeration is that the national government does not have police power over the states. But the District of Columbia is different.

    The District of Columbia [“DC”] was not a sovereign enclave that surrendered limited powers to the national government but retained its police power; it is a 10 miles square area that Article 1, section 8, expressly recognizes to be an area over which the national government has plenary power. The national government does exercise police power over the DC. The DC has no residuum of police power, nor retained and inherent government prerogatives recognized in the Tenth Amendment. It is not an area that enjoys protection-of-federalism concerns of the Second Amendment or otherwise.

    So, true Second Amendment concerns, the protection of the grantors [states] from the grantees [national government], does not apply whatsoever to the DC. Residents of DC have always been able to be treated differently from residents of virtually all other areas in the Republic, evidenced by the fact that it has no voting representation in the houses of Congress.

    Notwithstanding that DC’s residents could argue that they enjoy the inherent, fundamental right to arms possessed by all people of this Land, so long as the argument is ineptly [read “ignorantly”] phrased solely in terms of the Second Amendment, scalawags on the High Court could accurately and credibly proclaim that the Second Amendment does not limit the Congress in its regulation of the citizens of DC. That would drive a weighty nail in the coffin of the death of individual gun rights for us all, because the proponents would lose even more credibility in ensuing litigation than they already have lost with me by then urging “Uh, well, what we really mean is the fundamental right to own self-protection arms, and not really the Second Amendment issue.”

    But it has to be done right on this first modern attack, or the loss will redound to the benefit of the gun prohibitionists and will embolden the evil sorts who want to disarm the nation.

    There is no substitute for people knowing what they are talking about before opening their mouths or uncapping their pens, and there is no provision of the Constitution where Justice O’Conner’s parting admonition that people need to study the thing to prevent loss of the Republic is more apt than the Second Amendment. -by Capmotion Constitutional defense attorney: Lecturer, practitioner, teacher.

    • Patriot

      Brilliant
      Accurate
      Absolutely correct
      Well thought out
      Well researched

      Which is why it was ignored. The people of this country deserve what they are getting. Under-educated fools combined with idealist sycophants are in the majority. Thereofre we all suffer.

    • Kevin

      One of the Better arguments Ive read.

  • Matrix

    wizzardous

    As I have stated so many times; the asylum is being run by the inmates, hence planet of the APES!!!!

  • http://personalliberty Alondra

    Who commits the most brutally violent crimes in America? You might be surprised.

    Most Evil murderers in America are Democrats:

    1) Forthood killer was a registered Democrat Muslim

    2) The Columbine school shooters were too young to vote, but their parents were registered Democrats and openly Liberal

    3) The Virginia Tech murderer wrote hate mail to President Bush. Gee, who gave him that idea?

    4) The Colorado Theater killer was a registered Democrat, staff worker on the O’homo campaign and an Occupy Wall Street participant. He was as a Liberal as he could possibly to be.

    5) The assassin of the kindergartens of Newtown, CT was a registered who hated Christians.

    Do you see a pattern here? The most brutal vicious crimes in America are being committed by Liberal Democrats WITH GUNS. How could the media to miss that connection?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeTCkoXslsE

    Doctor Lyle H. Rossiter a respectful practitioner psychiatrist and a forensic psychiatrist, who has consulted in more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases in both state and federal jurisdictions. Dr. Rossiter has lectured to various groups on subjects ranging from psychotherapy to the prevention of suicide. In his book “The Liberal Mind” he is analyzing the Liberals’ behavior and he makes the case that Liberalism is a “Mental Illness”.

    So now we know where we have to focus: We have to keep guns out of the hands of the psychos aka Liberals/DEMONcrats.

    So there is a proposition/ RECOMMENDATION/ advice to place EVERY registered Liberal on the Mental Ill list. And because the mental illness is a “can’t do in confidence”, we should consider, so they should be removed from the certain positions.

    Banning Liberals from the Public schools will be the greatest advance in the Education in 50 years. And it will solve the security problems.

    Banning them from Congress would quickly restore our economy and MORAL standards.

    The Liberals in America tried so hard to strip others from their rights. Perhaps we should give them to test their own medicine. After all it’s for the children.

    Pass it on – Spread the TRUTH

    • http://personalliberty Alondra

      Talking about MORAL values and ethics check this one. I am sure you’ll like it.
      http://theblacksphere.net/2013/03/first-lady-pole-dancing/

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Who wants to take O’Homo dance class for FREE, you can go directly to the dance room:
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk6JVUM2lEM

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Also you can take the French Manners class: How to Eyes Roll during the shoveling food into your mouth.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGcbXiuCM0o

      • FreedomFighter

        When th Man Comes Around

        “Its hard to kick against the pricks”–Johnny Cash

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aAeif20Vc0

        Laus Deo
        Semper FI

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Whoever is unjust, let him be unjust still.
        Whoever is righteous, let him be righteous still.
        Whoever is filthy, let him be filthy still.
        Listen to the words long written down,
        When the man comes around.

        Hear the trumpets, hear the pipers.
        One hundred million angels singin’.
        Multitudes are marchin’ to the big kettle drum.
        VOICES CALLIN’, VOICES CRYIN’.
        Some are born an’ some are dyin’.

        It’s Alpha’s and Omega’s Kingdom come…
        And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts,
        And I looked and behold: a pale horse.
        And his name, that sat on him, was Death.
        And Hell followed with him. (Johnny Cash)

        Thank you, FreedomFighter, for the song.

        P.S. Man is born with the FREE Will. So it’s up to him which ladder to choose: One, that leads to Up (), another – Down ()

        I like this one too:
        “You can run on for a long time,
        Sooner or later God’ll cut you down”

        Johnny Cash – God’s Gonna Cut You Down
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJlN9jdQFSc

    • Karolyn

      Polly want a cracker? Just keep parroting false information, Alondra, even after it’s been shown to be false.

  • http://personalliberty Alondra

    Colorado Sheriff Speaks Out Against Democrats’ Threats – 3/9/2013
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHzx3ZyXRWw

    Listen how CO State DEMONcratic majority leadership is very angry at the State Sheriffs’ Association for their support of the 2nd Amendment and their testimony for opposition to the State’s anti-gun Bills and DEMONcrats are threaten Sheriffs with the reduce of their salaries and thus to prevent them to testify against the anti-guns laws in the future, which is absolute EXTORTION by the Democratic Public Officials.

    Start listen @5:00
    DEMONcrats are at their filthiest and nauseating work.

    “Dems do everything possible by changing the rules hours before the hearing to eliminate the opportunity for the citizens to be heard…This is an example of injustice and abuse, that taking the place by the legislators/ lawmakers. The Sheriffs took some hit for coming up and testify in the support of the 2nd Amendment.” – Sheriff Terry Maketa

    “Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the DEVIL HAS COME DOWN to you, having great wrath, because HE KNOWS THAT HE HAS A SHORT TIME.” (Revelation 12:12)

    Spread the TRUTH.

    • Kinetic1

      Alondra,
      Before you post another string of “truths” found in a right wing e-mail, I would advise you to check your facts.

      “1) Forthood (sic) killer was a registered Democrat Muslim”
      Nidal Hasan (the Ft. Hood shooter) lived in either Virginia (his state of residence prior to being sent to Ft. Hood) or Texas, neither of which has partisan registration. He may have been Muslim, but how can you say that he was “a registered Democrat”?

      “2) The Columbine school shooters were too young to vote, but their parents were registered Democrats and openly Liberal”
      Harris’ father was a retired Air Force pilot and Eric Harris wanted to join the Marine Corps. The boys lived in Littleton, Colorado a relatively conservative and affluent suburb of Denver. The claim that their parents were Democrats is UNSUBSTANTIATED.

      “3) The Virginia Tech murderer wrote hate mail to President Bush. Gee, who gave him that idea?”
      Seung-Hei Cho was a resident alien, not a US citizen, so he was not eligible to vote in the US. So that leaves his opposition to President Bush as evidence of his probable party affiliation. Numerous Libritarians who post on this site have also posted opinions opposed to the policies of former President Bush. Are they now suspects as well?

      “4) The Colorado Theater killer was a registered Democrat, staff worker on the O’homo campaign and an Occupy Wall Street participant. He was as a Liberal as he could possibly to be.”
      The allegation that James Holmes was registered Democrat comes from Joel B. Pollack, a Breitbart blogger who found voter registration records for a DIFFERENT James Holmes. The site has since printed a retraction as he was not registered and there is NO evidence to support the claim.
      What we do know is that he came from a churchgoing family, played soccer and ran cross country and was a brilliant scientist at the top of his class.

      “5) The assassin of the kindergartens of Newtown, CT was a registered who hated Christians.”
      Again, there is no proof that Adam Lanza was a “registered” anything. The evidence provided is simply that Democrats outnumber Republicans in CT by about 2 to 1, so he MUST have been a Democrat. Of course the fact that the county in which he lived voted for Romney in the last election seems to have slipped by those who make these claims.

      “Do you see a pattern here?”
      Yes, I do. Your attention to details and facts seems to be about as lax as your attention to proper English. Also, that unsubstantiated claims like those often made on this site help to promote the fears and action of people like;
      Former U.S. Army private, Jim David Atkinsson, who hated Democrats, liberals, African Americans and homosexuals, and using a Remington Model 48 12-guage shotgun, murdered two people and injured seven others inside the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, TN on July 27, 2008.

      Or white supremacist Keith Luke, who, the day after Obama’s inauguration,went on a killing spree in Brockton, Massachusetts. His goal was to kill as many Jews, blacks and Hispanics as possible. When questioned by investigators, the deranged gunman who had stockpiled hundreds of rounds of ammunition, proclaimed that he was fighting the extinction of the white race.

      A little over a month later, Donnie Baker, a former Republican campaign volunteer shot seven Chilean immigrants in Florida. Those who knew him said he was obsessed with the fear that illegal immigrants were taking over the country.

      How about Richard Popalowski, a white supremacist in Pittsburgh. He shot and killed three police officers following a domestic disturbance call. Seems he thought that Obama was part of a government conspiracy to seize all guns, and he feared the government would take his guns away. “Gee, who gave him that idea?”

      Yep, watch out for those “DEMONcrats”!

      • Patriot

        I am a Federalist to be sure, so watching all of this Democrat vs Republican crap was entertaining for awhile, but posts like the one you are responding to remind me of how sad it really is to watch an completely under-educated population pitted against each other by the specific design of those that they so blindly support. Arguments suggesting that psycho killers and their parents are clearly Democrats should insult the intelligence of ever American. Arguments like all Republicans are racists and Theocrats and hate women should be regarded for the stupid and absolutely inane crap that they are.
        The end result is that this nation and it’s fine traditions, laws, and virtues, along with it’s rich and unique history will continue it’s decline into ashes. So keep believing that your guy is right, and the other guy is wrong. Keep believing that since the founders were ‘slave owners, land grabbers, and religious nuts’ that our founding documents are somehow illegitimate, keep fighting with your fellow Americans over how much sugar should be allowed in soda and whether or not we should be paying for everyone else’s living expenses, health care, and food. The day will come when both sides finally snap out of this stupid argument about who is right and see the destruction that has been right in front of their eyes all along.

      • Kinetic1

        Patriot,
        Thanks (I think?) You seem to get my point that this ridiculous game of trying to blame the actions of killers on their political affiliation or rhetoric has to stop. Yes, I am a registered Democrat, but I don’t hate my neighbors who are Republicans. I may disagree with then from time to time, but we all pull together when it comes to our town, our church and our kids. We generally want the same things in life.

        Look at the list I provided. Yes, one of the killers was noted as having worked in a Republican election, and maybe his beliefs and actions were, in part motivated by his politics, but the others were simply motivated by hate. And that’s the point. Whether you are a Democrat who hates all Republicans, Libritarians and TEA party members, a Republican who hates Democrats, Liberals and Green Party members, or someone who is not registered but hates the President, homosexuals, blacks, Jews, Muslims, etc. whether for personal or religious reasons, it’s all hate. And once you begin to judge an entire group of people based on hate, once you forget that they are people, that’s when all Hell breaks loose.

      • Karolyn

        Too many have an unfounded hatred of their fellow Americans and will parrot anything said or written that will support their agenda. Half the time they never seek substantiation of what they read and hear. It’s like the fake emails that go around and are passed on by people who don’t care whether they’re true or not. As long as it’s against the “other side”, that’s good enouth for them!

    • Kinetic1

      Alondra,
      Basing your claims on a right wing radio interview of Sheriff Maketa falls short from presenting facts. The e-mail referenced here is from Chris Olson, Executive Director of County Sheriffs of Colorado (CSOC). Following a string of e-mails about the Sheriff’s actions upsetting the state Democrats, he stated in that e-mail
      “I was advised that a letter of support for SB197 might sooth certain bad feelings.”
      So, is that extortion? Well, let’s first look at SB197.
      “When a court subjects a person to a protection order to prevent
      domestic violence or a protection order that prohibits the person from
      possessing or controlling firearms or other weapons, or the court convicts
      a person of a misdemeanor or felony domestic violence offense, the court
      shall require the person to relinquish any firearm or ammunition in the
      person’s immediate possession or control or subject to the person’s
      immediate possession or control.”

      In this case, “relinquish” is defined as;
      “Sell or transfer possession of the firearm or ammunition to
      a federally licensed firearms dealer;
      Arrange for the storage of the firearm or ammunition by a
      law enforcement agency; or
      Sell or transfer the firearm or ammunition to a private
      party; except that the person shall not transfer a firearm or
      ammunition to a private party unless the private party has
      been approved to possess or purchase a firearm pursuant to
      a background check of the national instant criminal
      background check system.”

      And why is the Sheriff opposed to the bill? Well, aside from his apparent opposition to any gun control bill, he claimed the bill was illogical because it would force the man to return to his home to gather his firearms to relinquish them. However, as noted above the legislation states the man would only be required to relinquish firearms in his “immediate possession or control.”

      Now, about the wage bill. Despite the Sheriff’s claims, the Democrats have supported the bill all along. The problem is that the state’s Republicans, the Sheriff’s own party have opposed the bill. According to an e-mail in the same string, Sheriff Joe Pelle believes that “Speaker Ferrandino and House Majority Leader Hullinghorst indicate they will give late bill status on the House side if we get a Republican to sponsor a bill with Claire. This is still proving to be difficult.”
      Yes, the Dems are upset by the Sheriff’s opposition, and give and take is not unusual in the world of politics, but it’s the Republicans that are holding up the pay increases, and your claim that the Dems “are threaten Sheriffs with the reduce of their salaries.(sic)” is simply false.

  • Zenphamy

    Ben: Thus we begin again the long train of comments from all sides and all arguments for and against the 2nd, for and against the Constitution, the arguments for Constitutional law vs. the arguments for Supreme Court precidential interpretation of the words, meanings, and applications of the Constitution, comments on Original Intent and the derivation of Natural rights vs. societal obligations, the opportunity to begin discussions of God and godliness, Obama, other meaningless drivel, and on and on. I’m beginning to think that there’s more to this blog than just a discussion and reporting of the actual threats to our personal liberties. Why else not begin a discussion and conversation about the whole of these developments and the integration of the totality of attacks and threats rather than just the snapshots provided by yourself and so many others?
    Any reasonable discussion or reporting of such an issue, it seems to me, needs to include the beginnings of the attacks against the Republic begun immediately by Hamilton, Marshall, and others upon and even before ratification. The almost immediate development of parties and special interests and those that began to develop and use the weaknesses of humans in general for their own power and money benefit.
    I believe that the Constitution was written utilizing common language completely comprehensible to the everyday voting citizen of that time, not requiring specialized political or legal education or understanding or interpretations. The major weakness of the Constitution lies in the lack of an additional Bill of Rights amendment to clearly state that common language, common law, and natural rights held primacy over any legislative law or governmental enforcement or regulation.
    Our current crisis can be traced back to LBJ and then Nixon and allowing him to declare a ‘war’ on drugs. By that point, the governmental structure envisioned at the Constitutional ratification was pretty much gone and the checks and balances were ineffective. But LBJ’s and Nixon’s declaration of ‘wars’ on poverty and Drugs began the ‘politically justified’ attacks on and weakening of personal and civil liberty, even a redefining of the basic concepts and meanings of such. Through the attack on poverty and drugs, who could argue, (or would dare to) against the enforcement practices that didn’t respect Bill of Rights for abusers and criminals. Then a further reduction could be justified by the ‘war’ on drunk drivers and then equality then hate crimes and many others till terror attacks beginning in the late 80′s and mass murders until we reach today’s crisis.
    We allow ourselves to be seduced into these discussions and arguments about the individual issues and examples, thus distracting us from the only meaningful issue to be determined; that being the devolution of power back to the citizen, individually and at the local level, or the loss of all individual or personal liberty. Nothing else is of import in any of what’s going on today or even tomorrow.
    Until a sufficient number of citizens with loud enough voices and demonstrated manly determination (as described by Jefferson) rise in meaningful ways, these blogs and comment interactions only serve to distract from the real and important decisions we’re all faced with, or very soon will be. It’s past the level of mere slight of hand and wording and is now plainly at the level of bullets and armor. Are we facing another Lexington or do we need one to get through thick heads and individual belief systems?
    C’mon guys, I respect and will defend everyone’s basic human (natural) right to their own belief systems and little idiosyncracies, but we really need to begin conversations about what corrections should happen, can happen, and how to accomplish any of them.

  • http://MSN Jimmy

    I know this is just a very small piece of the equation, but DHS does practice with what they carry, really, you think expense is an issue?. So, all those hollow points are used universally. I know with that much ammo it makes it a moot point. This is a known fact personally and just to keep the story to facts. What they’re going to with it, anybody’s guess.

  • Kevin

    Helpful Tips for the Identification Of “Charlie” …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….There is growing, irrefutable evidence that the Crimean Khazars, whose kingdom extended over what is now the Ukraine to the Caspian Sea, officially converted to pure Mosaic Judaism in 861 under the rule of King Bulan. The Khazars do not appear to have been a people unto themselves, but rather a blend of many races resulting from the heavy trade that was going on at the time. The campaign of the Rus (Russian) Prince Svyatoslav of Kiev effectively broke the back of the Khazarian empire in 965 AD, although Khazar itself continued until at least 1030 AD. Under the growing persecution of Kiev Rus in the 11th and 12th century, the Khazars disappeared as a people. Nonetheless, there is overwhelming evidence that at least a portion of the Jewish Khazars fled to Eastern Europe and north into Poland and Lithuania.
    Some people have taken this body of evidence and claim it proves that the Abraham Ashkenazim Eastern European Jews were of the Khazar bloodline, rather than the bloodline. In his book God’s Covenant People, evangelist Ted R. Weiland cites mostly third party and circumstantial evidence in a convincing way to conclude the East European Jews were not Semites (blood descendants of Shem and Abraham). “Since they are not Semites, then today’s Jews certainly can not be of Abraham’s lineage because Abraham was a Semite… descended from Shem, the Son of Noah. Following the same line of reasoning, since today’s Jews are not Semites, they can not be Israelites either because Jacob/Israel was also a Semite, a direct descendant of Shem through Abraham.” 1
    Are the ten lost tribes of Israel the Celtic-Saxons that populated the US?

    [excessively long cut-and-past post edited. please use a hyperlink]

    • Charlie

      Kevin,,,
      Your “prima faceia ” evidence is NOT backed up with Bible Scriptures ,,,therefore it is very suspect ,,,you are in gross ignorance of ‘””Esau””and his sins in The Bible and his lineage which God “”Hates””,,,see that at Malachi 1:1–5,,,remember one CANNOT just pick and choose Scripture they want to use…Why?… Because that violates Revelations 22:18,or 19… AND,,,violation of any Biblical Law is called “””Sin””… SO???,,,any words, written or spoken MUST be in “”Harmony”” with Bible Truth,,,OR,,,it will have to be one’s personal “”Opinion”” ….
      Meanwhile… Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation,,,because Peter said so at 1 Peter 3:21……………………………………….

      Charlie Freedom

    • Kevin
      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Kevin, maybe Charlie is a member of the Westboro Baptist Church?

      • Kevin

        They are another bad example of christianity……. but charlie represents a deluded faction of white supremacy that fantasize that they are a lost tribe, and that Jesus is white. its comical really and such a stretch of the Imagination that its just sad. whoever indoctrinated him into this cult has done a good job because he is past any reason or logic. even the Bible itself is useless as proof against his strange and fanatical Doctrine.

      • Kevin

        An example of this is clear in charlies last post here where he states……((((,,,remember one CANNOT just pick and choose Scripture they want to use…Why?… Because that violates Revelations 22:18,or 19… AND,,,violation of any Biblical Law is called “””Sin””))))
        Charlie fails to recognize that his quote while accurate to the book of revelations does not apply to the entire Bible as Revelation was not part of the Bible when it was written. I would think that any person who professes to have some secret knowledge of scripture would at least have some basic Information about its History. But it seems some would simply re-write history to fit their personal Bias and prejudice.

      • Charlie

        Kevin,,,
        We have ask you so many questions ,,,that you did not answer such as……………
        1. How did you become a “”Christian”””PER Bible Scriptures??? IF? you are one ?
        2. What do you know about basic psychology ???
        Now you come up with the stupid statement,,, that Revelations does not relate to other parts of The Bible… Does King Jesus relate to The OT and NT??? Well,,,guess who wrote and / or had Revelations Written????
        Your credibility in general and regarding The Bible in particular has sunk to the level of Whale Manure in the Pacific Trench .,,,but,,,keep it up,,, We’ll throw as much “”Truth””on your lies as We can……. Meanwhile……………….
        Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation , because Peter said so at 1 Peter 3:21…………………..

        Charlie Freedom

      • Kevin
      • Charlie

        Kevin,,,
        Another false prophet site,,,well still no answer to basic Bible questions………………

      • Kevin
      • Charlie

        Kevin,,,
        You will have to answer My basic Bible questions from your knowledge and condition,,,these goofy sites ,,,DON’T HAVE the answer that fits you,,,because they don’t know you…………

      • Kevin
  • VINCENT MARQUETTE

    some people in office are a growing threat to our rights, if it is left unchecked,or these people are not removed , there are going to be more and more violations of our rights. if they do not carry an american flage, get the hell out of office.

  • Strightothepoint 2012

    I Agree JP!!!!It took nearly fifty years,before the public really found out about what really happened to JFK!!!!And just think what they could to a common citizen,like you or me,if they wanted to!!!!(Then they(Goverment)have the guts to ask for our guns?)No way!!!!

    • http://www.facebook.com/thomas.sherman.589 tgsherman

      If the killing of JFK was not a conspiracy Then how come the Warren Report Investigation has been put on ICE! Kind of like Benghazi & Fast & Furious! Can you imagine what would happen if they took away the 2nd Amendment!!

    • Kevin

      I think the Root to your assertion may be found here. it is a bit long but a real eye opener.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfEBupAeo4

  • http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/ omanuel

    The great challenge will be to restore:

    Integrity to government sciences,
    Rights to citizens and civilian control of
    Government, without reviving racism,
    The threat of nuclear warfare, and/or
    Retaliation for deception after 1945.

  • VINCENT MARQUETTE

    the people in office running this country have many faces,none of them seem to be very good.

    • Kevin

      Unfortunately to be a successful Politician one must wear many faces… be everything…. to everyone. In order to get elected politicians compromise. How much depends upon the Individual. It is the reason we see so many caught in Flip / Flop situations. My contention is that the way the system is currently set up Most candidates are compromised to such an extent, He or She is no longer worth Voting for in my Opinion.

    • ranger09

      Its your politicians people, I just cannot understand why these people are still allowed to be in office. I agree with one comment that was made about starting local and working your way up by getting rid of anyone who goes againest the constitution, Local people get your politicians into townhalls FIND out where they stand, Let them know where YOU stand,. It sure would be a sad day if americans started killing ea other again. GUNS IN THE HANDS OF FREEDOM LOVING AMERICANS HAVE KEPT THIS COUNTRY FREE FOR 250 YEARS.

      • Jim

        You have to remember where most of these anti-gun polticians come from the, Socialists Republics of New York, New Jersey ,Maryland, Connecticut, Rhode Island ,Massachusetts and California just mention a few.

  • jeff martin

    JFK was the last true centrist Democrat and I’m sure with his military background would be appald at what these “regressive, demonizercrats”are doing to The Constitution and Bill Of Rights!!

  • RivahMitch

    Those who are unwilling to kill and die to preserve their rights and freedoms will surely lose them and deserve to. Semper Fi!

  • Dick Farris

    Let us all remember that it was only 25% of Americans that wanted independence from GB in 76. There are at least that many if not more that are tired of the way things are now. Maybe time for another one.

    • LiveFree1200cc

      Actually Dick, it was only 3% that stood up took our freedom from Britain in 1776. 3% went against the strongest army of the world at the time – and won. Today 3% would be over 10 Million people.

  • James-n-Q8

    It’s coming quicker than any one realizes! The International Monetary Fund and the BRIC nations (Brazil, Russia, India and China )have already decided to remove the dollar as the international reserve currency. When that occurs, the dollar will be worth less than toilet paper. Prices for everyday goods will double weekly. Food and energy costs will skyrocket and we won’t be able to afford our own agri products. Roving bands of scavengers will be in every street. Put that in with your powder and keep both dry and within reach!

    • joe berger

      I hate to say it but James is right. And our present immigration policy isn’t gonna help. Compare and contrast what happened in New Orleans in early Sept 2008. with what happened in Japan after their Tsunami. ALAS…. the veneer of civilization is very thin.
      We had unrestricted and unrestrained barbarism( rape looting stealing murder ). None of that in Japan. ( just people helping each other cope with a huge gigantic disaster ).
      ALL of North America is a civilization in steep decline. And that decline will only accelerate as long as we have our present immigration policy which favors 3rd rate humans from 3rd rate countries. At present birth rates whites will be virtually extinct in 200 years.
      The whites in South Africa made a terrible blunder and are now paying the price. They should have divided the country into two parts ( yes 2 entirely separate countries ) ….one part where whites would always be the majority. ….like in Israel today. Then each country would be free to pursue their own destiny.
      Look at Europe… so many little countries with only 5 to 8 million people, each happily and productively independent. And now we are seeing the problems with Euro zone unification. Big is certainly not always better.
      Look at England today….Every day it continues to decline as foreigners pour in from all their former colonies.
      And look at Czechoslovakia…a country foolishly created by the West. initially comprising 3 separate ethnic groups. In ’45 and ’46 they kicked out all the Germans. ( Sudetenland had been around 90% German ) But still they couldn’t get along and they finally separated into Czechs and Slovaks. Such is the legacy of Marx. Maybe its time to think about “separating” here too. The great “melting pot” idea did work as long as those being melted were physically indistinguishable from each other. But it just isn’t gonna work with extremes in ethnic diversity….here or anywhere.

      • Walt

        Well said Joe, you are obviously a “history student” and a well educated man. Something that is scarce today in America. Your foresight in how things will devolve in North America in the not so distant future is chilling but fairly accurate. This is the nature of humanity and Americans are not immune from humane nature.

        Your comments about South Africa are spot on. Their leaders, at the time of the 1994 vote were cowards, who believed the fairy tale Mandela was proposing, ie, that all races could live in peace and harmony. South Africans woke up to the reality of the grave mistakes their leaders made, by having themselves dispossed of their culture, their farmlands, their jobs and their future. They are now victims of tyranny by the racial majority.

        What we see currently taking place here in America in the last 4 years is similar to what happened in Spain in 1931, when the socialists, communists, anarchists banded together into a winning coalition to take power. They then proceeded to implement all the usual agendas of their ideological beliefs: secularism, wealth distribution, nationalization of private industry, brutal repression, which finally resulted in a bloody civil war.

        They took control of the education system, weakened the traditional military, strengthened the labor unions, purged the government of traditionalists and conservatives, destroyed churches and murdered over 8,000 priests and nuns. They emptied the treasury, by sending Spain’s gold to Stalin in exchange for military aid to establish their own military structures, independent of and equal to the traditional standing Spanish Armed forces.

        Does most of this sound familiar?

        • pissed of & liberal

          The Spainish civil war was started when General Fransisco Franco arrived in the then colony of Morocco and declared war on the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED goverment. this was followed by uprisings in Barcelona and Madrid. it was not however untill Hittler gave Franco access to planes that Fraco could get his men to the mainland to fight the volunteer forces of the ruling coalitian. and for the record the measures implamented by the coalitian could be viewed as moderate as they still had to go thru the parlament as it was a elected goverment not a revolutionary one. and what sorces do you have to suport the ” brutal repression ” you claim happenend?

  • dan

    What they haven’t figured on is that this is the stone upon which their NWO dreams will be dashed….they won’t get our guns, we’ll replace them and their funny money and we’ll stop fighting their trumped up wars.

  • Chris

    Maybe gun owners should think about stocking up on ammunition cause if they can’t get your guns, they may just prevent you from getting the ammo.

    • Rainey Grimes

      Too late for that, have you tried to buy any ammo lately? The shelves are always bare!

      • gray beard

        Hay i got an idea. Theres 50 states, lets give the liberals 25 and will take 25 and in 5 years will see who is doing the best. Of course that would take 20 years to figure that out.

  • Rich

    The idea that gun grabber politicians are open to reason is a dead end
    street. They are not open to reason or facts. They are only open to how many
    people they can deceive with emotional cries that will further their own
    careers. The real issue at hand is the 2nd Amendment. If we are to be able
    to resist a tyrannical government we need weapons commensurate with the
    common American soldier. That would start with military select fire common
    issued rifles, M4 and M16. That would include body armor, available armored
    vehicles, and grenades. Any other discussing is Kabuki theater. Either we
    have a 2nd Amendment or we don’t. “Keep”, means I own it and you can’t have
    it. “Bare”, means I have it right here on me and its loaded. “Not be
    infringed” means not in any way be limited. Its simple. We have let the so
    called ” national conversation” be controlled by the grabbers. Political
    correctness will be the death of freedom and this nation.

  • http://google gary gerke

    The government is fooling themselves if they believe they can win a shoot out with at least 40-million gun owners. Yes, they have better weapons, armored troop carriers and tanks…that is until until they are taken away from them. Our military can’t beat a few hundred thousand camel jockey’s let alone patriots fighting to save a republic from the government.

    • Sheep Dog

      Gary,
      I think you’ve got the wrong picture of OUR military. Our boys are being told by the Chicken-in-Chief what to do, where to go, and who they can shoot. It’s a BS war all the way around. These guys will not go up against the citizens of this country. At least not the majority. Who will go up against us are all of the Russian and other foreign military individuals that are being trained in this country and being paid for with your and my tax dollars. I think it’s time to defund the Federal Government. I personally call on every American and every business to stop paying taxes in any form that supports this regime. That would be my solution…….and, there are over 90 million gun owners in this country.

      • Charlie R

        $40 million gun owners cannot defeat the US government. And there are lots of reasons why, so don’t kid yourself on this idea.

        Now, not paying income tax is a great idea except it cant work either. Here is why …. very few people “pay” income tax …. I will repeat … very few people “pay” income tax …..
        The Federal Government TAKES THE TAX from your paycheck.

        The day the fed opens “tax collection store fronts” and people line up to pay income tax …. you will then be paying your income tax and not having it taken from you That said, the Federal Government has us coming and going.

      • Walt

        Hey Sheepdog, if you don’t supply the government with enough revenue to run things, no worries for them, they will just get their “private banker buddies” at the Federal Reserve to print more money; which, in case you haven’t noticed, is their current method of operation.

        As long as they can get your “voluntary” contributions, they will accept them. But, in the end, they really don’t need them. Hitler financed the so-called “economic miracle” between 1933 and 1939, by getting off the gold standard and stopped borrowing money from private central bankers. He then printed his own money, pumped money into the economy to build up Germany’s defenses, infrastructures like the Autobahn, expanded exports and brought Germany back to economic life.

    • Salman308

      Anytime they feel froggy, they best jump! The longer they drag their feet the stronger we will become and we will not go into the nite and not be heard!

    • http://personalliberty Alondra

      Based upon surveys (2009), the following are estimates of private firearm ownership in the U.S. as of 2010: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp
      1) Households with a Gun – 47-53 million – 40-45%
      2) Adults Owning a Gun – 70-80 Million – 30-34%
      3) Adults Owning a Handgun – 40-45 Million – 17-19%

      Gun Owners have firearms for the following reason:
      1) Protection Against Crime – 67%
      2) Target Shooting – 66%
      3) Hunting – 58%

      Households – 42%
      Individuals – 30%
      Male – 47%
      Female – 13%
      White – 33%
      Nonwhite – 18%
      Republican – 41%
      Independent – 27%
      Democrat – 23%

      The NRA has seen an “unprecedented” spike in membership numbers in the last month…
      Gun sales jumped with the O’homobama “re-election”.

      • Savage

        Alondra,

        Isn’t it simply amazing — they have no problem attacking you using their “right of speech”; yet, when you exercise your God-given (not man-given) right to speech they clamor, chatter, and spew out hateful messages that you need to shut up! So much hypocrisy on this site!

        • pissed of & liberal

          They arn’t god-given or man-given they were earned by the men ( and women ) who fought,bleed, and died in the revolution and giving the credit that they earned to any one else but especially to something you can’t even prove exists is frankly an insult to those who gave ther live and to those who had to live with the injuries.

          • Savage

            pissed of & liberal,

            You are 100% WRONG — they are God-given; always have been and always will be — man’s role was to fight (and sometimes to die) to keep these “God-given” rights.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Rights are never given niether by god nor goverment man ust fight to win them and fight to keep them. history teaches us this and will teach you more if you let it.

          • Savage

            So, our 56 Founding Fathers, when they issued our Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776 were also wrong when they wrote (and I quote):

            “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

            Are you that dense of just a jack ass?

          • pissed of & liberal

            It was 1776 they did not have a of the science we have today. lacking the technology capible to explain the workings of the world they turned to religion. that’s all remember ther was a time when man thought if he sailed far enough the planet in that was disproven in time.

          • Savage

            pissed of & liberal,
            [What are you "pissed of"? or is that a typo and you meant to type "pissed on" or "pissed off"? I'm curious and just asking.]

            OK, I get it. You don’t believe in God and that’s why you refuse to believe that our rights come from God not man. That’s OK. You keep believing that and I’ll keep believing there is a God and He gives us “certain unalienable Rights” (and our purpose in life).

            Having said that, I can see that you only believe in physical things, things you can see, touch, taste, hear, and feel — you’re not able to comprehend the mere existence of a Creator which comes from faith. If you don’t have “faith” you cannot understand the existence of the spiritual realm nor can you see the earth as God’s creation. I feel sorry for you but I accept the fact that there are and always will be many scoffers just like you.

          • pissed off & liberal

            Exept i DO belive in a higher power just not the christian one. christianity has been twisted so many ways the good messages it does contain have been lost by 95% of people who claim to follow it. and for the record i had not noticed the spelling untill you pointed it out. thanks.

          • Savage

            Pissed off & Liberal,

            I can understand your negative feelings toward the Christian faith – many, many people have been misled by organized Christian churches and it is a total turn-off (I’ve been there). In fact, my first indoctrination into Christianity was through the Catholic Church by attending weekly catechism classes.

            Unfortunately, many Christian organizations have made the belief values of the Church into some sort of money machine (among other things that isn’t supported by the Bible).

            Although, I was lost for many years after my experiences with “church” my faith in a “One God” never wavered. It was faith that led me to a church that is what I can only call a “true Believer” Christian Church. How did I recognize this “church”? I was led by the Holy Spirit to that church after much searching and visiting many churches.

            Pissed off & Liberal, I hope you will search for one of these “real” churches. What I’ve said may not make any sense (if yu use man’s logical reasoning/common sense) but if you will search (“knock on the door”) it will be given to you. This may not make any sense but that doesn’t make it invalid. I hope what I’ve said makes sense to you — it’s hard to put something so important into just a few short paragraphs.

            Take care,
            Savage

          • pissed off & liberal

            Savage

            First of all i sincerely thank you for being so polite about this my views do not mesh with those promoted by this site and because of that i’ve benn called stupid,retarded, among other things and been told to shut up and in some cases told to leave the countrey so compaired to some other posters i’ve dealt with you’ve actually been rather respectfull.

            having said all that i feel the only way to repay that is to be honest with you so here goes. i am a Marxist and Marx teaches that main stream religion has been historically used to keep the working class from revolting against ther oppressors. now i grant you that ther are indivual preachers and churches whowho do try to aid the working class and i belive that most christians are good people it’s just that they let themselves be led by people who are using them. and between you and me if ther was a church that followed the teaching of the patrion saintsa of animals ( i forget how to pronounce his name ) the one who gave up a rich life to help the poor i could get into that one because he was actually Marxist in nature.

            But it seems that every time i hear about religious people now adays it’s because ther trying to deny LGBT’S ther rights or to deny women the ability to control ther bodies or to slander the names of people who actually get out and TRY to help the world like environmentalists they try to protect the only planet we have and people like the 700 club mock them on live tv.

            Look you do seem like a nice guy and i can’t stress enough that i don’t have a problem with christianity was but with what it’s turned into but i feel that to delve into religion at this time would divert to much time and energy from activates i’m engaged in that i feel CAN improve conditions for the working class.

            Yours

            Pissed off & liberal

          • Savage

            Pissed off & liberal

            WOW – you’re certainly not stupid or retarded — the people who called you that were speaking with anger or pissing vinegar (can I say that) and must have disengaged their ability to reason and allowed emotion (anger) to over-rule their brains (I’ve done that myself and then was ashamed of myself). I can see you’re intelligent. And, your beliefs are not mainstream America but I respect that even though I don’t personally agree with your political or religious beliefs. And, in this country (at least for now) we can practice our beliefs provided we don’t try to “force” our beliefs upon others.

            You are right and seem to understand the long historical misuse of religion which seems to be used by some to control the masses. The key word is “religion” which is man-made, not God-made and is often misused (sometimes intentional and sometimes the intent was/is for good). If my memory serves me correctly, religion started over 100,000 years ago as a belief in animism which evolved into many different religious beliefs. Even the original text of the Bible doesn’t refer to “Christians” it refers to “Believers” and only in the New Testatment. With all this confusion, I can understand where you’re coming from.

            I believe you must be talking about St. Francis of Assisi (real name: Giovanni di Bernardone) who died on October 3, 1226.

            I commend you on your honesty and candor for admitting you’re a Marxist – you may get a lot of “heat” on this site for saying that.

            Regards, Savage

          • pissed off & liberal

            Savage

            First of all you may be happy to know that ” pissing vinegar ” was not censored so apparently you can say it.

            Secondly thanks for the name of that saint. i really do like what i’ve heard about him.

            Third thank you for taking my being a marxist so well i was hesitent to tell you because every time i tell someone on this site ther reaction is somewhere between ” your a thief” or ” get out ” it’s nice to know that ther is someone here that can be rational about it.

            Thanks

            Pissed off & liberal

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            How come god didn’t give unalienable rights to humans in other countries?

          • pissed off & liberal

            Because rights are not given they are earned through millitant struggle. look through history it is filled with cases of people fighting for rights against goverments who use god as a exuse to deny them the rights they demand. if everyone waited for god to act America would never have won it’s independence.

          • Savage

            Give me the references for documented scientific evidence that there is no God. Show me where science has proven that there is no God.

          • pissed off & liberal

            I was refering to the fact that as science progressess it disproves alot of previous notions we had about god. and they are close to finding the god adam they belive at least that’s what they said on the science channel.

          • Frank Kahn

            “I was refering to the fact that as science progressess it disproves alot of previous notions we had about god. and they are close to finding the god adam they belive at least that’s what they said on the science channel.”

            It is called the Higgs Boson, nicknamed the God particle. It is not an atom. They have verified it tentatively in the Large Hadron Collider.

          • pissed off & liberal

            Right God particle my mistake. but if they can prove with absolute certenty that it does exist and is what they think it is would’nt that disprove religion?

          • Frank Kahn

            There are a couple things wrong with your post.

            “Right God particle my mistake. but if they can prove with absolute certenty that it does exist and is what they think it is would’nt that disprove religion?”

            I have only read a couple news articles about the Higgs Boson, so I am not fully aware of all the properties they may be attributing to it. From the little I read, it seems like they are saying that it does, in some way, impart some form of mass attraction to other sub-atomic particles, thereby allowing atoms to form and create the matter in the universe. If there are additional properties of this particle, I did not read about them. If this is true, then there is some support for saying that they are responsible for creating matter in the universe, from already existing particles. I don’t know the reason that some scientists nicknamed it the god particle, but this process of creation might be what they are basing it on.

            If they do prove absolutely that it exists, and it does what they claim, then they have found and proven the existence of the Higgs Boson. Is, what it does, the same as what religion says God did? NO, it takes already existing particles and builds something from it. The premise of God is that, he started from nothing and created everything.

            What it would appear, to me, is that you are saying that the fact that some scientists nicknamed the Higgs Boson the god particle, that means that it takes the place of God.

            My answer to that question would be NO.

          • pissed off & liberal

            i did not ask just because they called it the god particle. i asked because they say it is respocible for creating matter which would make it crucial to the creation of the universe which of course has been attributed to god. hence they call it the god particle. understand now?

          • Frank Kahn

            I got it the first time, I don’t think you get what you are saying.

            “i did not ask just because they called it the god particle. i asked because they say it is respocible for creating matter which would make it crucial to the creation of the universe which of course has been attributed to god. hence they call it the god particle. understand now?”

            A logic flow follows a single path from premise to conclusion. Using this concept I will track your logic to your conclusion.

            1. The Higgs Boson is responsible for creating matter (no it is not, it helps bind particles)
            2. By creating matter (sic) it creates the Universe (see comment above)
            3. God is attributed as having creating the Universe
            4. So it is called the god particle
            5. So since the Higgs Boson is called the GOD PARTICLE it proves that God does not exist. (actually you say it disproves what religion says)

            Now, logic says you need to walk the logic tree backwards to determine the reason for the conclusion. You will notice that I put everything in the same order as your post. Since you included the phrase “hence they call it the god particle” as your final statement, I included it as the last part of your logic tree. Your conclusion is from the question you previously asked.

            Like I previously stated, there is a major difference between what the Higgs Boson does and what God is said to have done.

            The Higgs Boson BINDS PARTICLES that already EXIST.

            God CREATED the Universe from NOTHING.

            You might also be interested to know that not all scientists agree with using the nickname.

          • Savage

            to pissed off & liberal,

            Well, you do make sense in what you said. And, you are right about science disproving previous notions “we” had about god. However, I believe the operative words are “we had about god” — that is very, very different from what God says through His Word (Bible).

            Although science has, over the year, invalidated many beliefs of man, I can find nothing in the Bible which science can invalidate.

            The day is still young, have a great day!

          • pissed off & liberal

            What about the so-called ” God particle ” ?

          • Savage

            to pissed off & liberal,

            When you say the ”God particle” I assume you’re referring to the Higgs particle and I must confess I understand very little — I can just barely put my arms around understanding basic quantum mechanics. It’s above my level of intelligence. However, from what I understand, it’s still controversial and has not been proven to exist.

            I would like to share one of my favorite emails of all times (I’s sorry it’s so long but it’s a fast read):

            Subject: God vs. Science –

            Let me explain the problem science has with religion.’ The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

            ‘You’re a Christian, aren’t you, son?’

            ‘Yes sir,’ the student says.

            ‘So you believe in God?’

            ‘Absolutely.

            ‘Is God good?’

            ‘Sure! God’s good.’

            ‘Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?’

            ‘Yes’

            ‘Are you good or evil?’

            ‘The Bible says I’m evil.’

            The professor grins knowingly. ‘Aha! The Bible!’ He considers for a moment. ‘Here’s one for you. Let’s say there’s a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?’

            ‘Yes sir, I would.’

            ‘So you’re good…!’

            ‘I wouldn’t say that.’

            ‘But why not say that? You’d help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn’t.’

            The student does not answer, so the professor continues. ‘He doesn’t, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?’

            The student remains silent.

            ‘No, you can’t, can you?’ the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

            ‘Let’s start again, young fella. Is God good?’

            ‘Er..yes,’ the student says.

            “Is Satan good?’

            The student doesn’t hesitate on this one. ‘No.’

            ‘Then where does Satan come from?’

            The student falters. ‘From God’

            ‘That’s right. God made Satan, didn’t he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?’

            ‘Yes, sir.’

            ‘Evil’s everywhere, isn’t it? And God did make everything correct??

            ‘Yes’

            ‘So who created evil?’ The professor continued, ‘If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.’

            Again, the student has no answer. ‘Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?’

            The student squirms on his feet. ‘Yes.’

            ‘So who created them?’

            The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. ‘Who created them?’ There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. ‘Tell me,’ he continues onto another student.

            ‘Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?

            The student’s voice betrays him and cracks. ‘Yes, professor, I do.’

            The old man stops pacing. ‘Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?’

            ‘No sir. I’ve never seen Him.’

            ‘Then tell us if you’ve e ver heard your Jesus?’

            ‘No, sir, I have not.’

            ‘Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelled your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?’

            ‘No, sir, I’m afraid I haven’t.’

            ‘Yet you still believe in him?’

            ‘Yes’

            ‘According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?’

            ‘Nothing,’ the student replies. ‘I only have my faith.’

            ‘Yes, faith,’ the professor repeats. ‘And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.’

            The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. ‘Professor, is there such thing as heat?’

            ‘ Yes.’

            ‘And is there such a thing as cold?’

            ‘Yes, son, there’s cold too.’

            ‘No sir, there isn’t.’

            The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested.

            The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.

            ‘You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees.’

            ‘Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matte r have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.’

            Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

            ‘What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?’

            ‘Yes,’ the professor replies without hesitation. ‘What is night if it isn’t darkness?’

            ‘You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? That’s the meaning we use to define the word.’

            ‘ In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?’

            The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. ‘So what point are you making, young man?

            ‘Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.’

            The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. ‘Flawed? Can you explain how?’

            ‘You are working on the premise of duality,’ the student explains.. ‘You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even explain a thought.’

            ‘It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it. ‘Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?’

            ‘If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.’

            ‘Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?’

            The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

            ‘Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scient ist, but a preacher?’

            The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.

            ‘To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.’

            The student looks around the room. ‘Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor’s brain?’ The class breaks out into laughter.

            ‘Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt the professor’s brain, touched or smelled the professor’s brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.’ ‘So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?’

            Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.

            Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. ‘I guess you’ll have to take them on faith.’
            ‘Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,’ the student continues. ‘Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?’

            Now uncertain, the professor responds, ‘Of course, there is. We see it everyday It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.’

            To this the student replied, ‘Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.’

            The professor sat down.

            The student was Albert Einstein. Albert Einstein did write a book titled God vs. Science in 1921…

            ‘For we walk by faith, not by sight.’ 2 Corinthians 5:7

          • pissed off & liberal

            To Savage

            I really liked that story i’m a big fan of Einstein. But let me just say this evil may be the abscense of a higher power in man’s heart and i know Einstein and his professer were talking for the most part about the christian god i belive that the princaple still counts for other faiths besides christianity

            For instance my mother is what you would call a pegan as such does not have ” god ” in her heart. however she does have several christian ideals such as caring for the weak and needy and all people being equal. she also is a big admirer of Pope Jean Paul ll she also belives that everyone has a dragon that is born at the same time we do and dies when we do and that hers is half her soul. she raised me even though my father left before i was born and took care of her parents untill they died and a disbled cousin of mine and her sister after she fell and broke her leg all the while working a job at jefferson steel works.

            my point is even though my mother does not have ” god ” in her heart but also cannot be classified as ” evil ” and i know that’s not what you meant to sujest but what i’m is that what Einstein said applies to several other belief other then christianity including other reiligions and philosophies in fact Marxism is what feels that role in my life and probably for a lot of the same reasons christianity appeals to you.

            Yours

            Pissed off & liberal

          • Patriot

            Why don’t you prove that there IS one? And that YOURS is the RIGHT one when there are so many others.

          • Kevin

            Why are Trucks Red??
            Because they have eight wheels and four people in them,and four plus eight is twelve, and there are twelve inches in a foot, and one foot makes a ruler, and Queen Elizabeth was a ruler, and The Queen Elizabeth was also a ship,and this ship sailed the seas, and in the seas are fish, and fish have fins, and the Finns fought the Russians, and The Russians are Red, and Thats why Firetrucks are red.

          • Patriot

            Firetrucks also come in green and white.

          • Kevin

            Thanks…. now I will have to write Equally Nonsensical posts on those as well.

          • Patriot

            Only if you continue writing verses from the bible could you keep the nonsense alive.

          • Savage

            Kevin,

            Your answer is one of the best I have ever seen!

          • pissed off & liberal

            Ok i think i speak for everyone who sees that when i say WTF was that?

          • Kevin

            Exactly !!!! I feel it is just a relevant as bringing Religion into a political conversation. Thanks for noticing.

          • Savage

            Patriot,

            It’s not my place to prove the existence of God; for no man (or women) can do this. Only the Holy Spirit can prove the existence of God. My responsibility is to plant seeds. What happens to these seeds is not my responsibility but yours.

            Patriot, it is good that you are asking questions and if you keep asking, you will find the answers but the “true” answers will not be given by man but by the Holy Spirit.

          • Patriot

            You know, I got similiar answers from the Islamic, the Jew, and the Satanist. Funny thing is that each of you say the other is wrong.

            Thanks tho.

          • Savage

            Patriot,

            I’m not sure who you’ve talked to about other beliefs (and I don’t want to fight/argue with you). However, from what I understand:

            Satanist Cults — surely you understand this is pure evil. Murdering animals (and sometimes even humans) and calling it a sacrifice to whatever deity is not just wrong — it’s evil in its purest form!

            Islam Faith — they believe that anyone whose beliefs are different from theirs is to be put to death. This “lack of tolerance and compassion” separates them from every other belief. Surrely, in your heart, you can’t accept such a belief system.

            Jewish Faith — Christians and Jews are on the same page except for one small difference (I have some close friends who are Orthodox Jews) and that is the Jews are waiting for the Son’s first appearance and Christians are waiting for the Son’s second Appearance.

            Christian Faith — They don’t kill you for your beliefs, they pray for you.

            Just my two cents worth.

          • Patriot

            and those differences mean that the myths that you believe are true are actually true, but the myths they believe in are not. Got it.

          • Kevin

            It never ends…. I truly cannot understand The Insecurity of the average “Christian”

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Not that any of the various mythologies are true but I personally kind of like the ancient Egyptian gods more that the Bible god. They are more interesting.

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Look, its time you got something straight. Science does not try to prove that god does not exist. Science is the study of the natural world in an attempt to understand reality. Science is not interested in things that don’t exist nor should it be. Science is not involved in investigating the existence of Zeus, Annubis, god, the Tooth Fairy, the Wizard of Oz or Santa. If you want to create and believe in some mythological figures that is your own business.

      • Kevin

        Savage…. some of us have already been where you are and moved on. If you are content with your “answers” then I am Happy for you. I am at a loss though as to why it is that Christians who post here on this site cannot control their desire to Proselytize to the rest of us. It is not a big revelation that the word God is found in our founding documents. Most if not all who participated in the beginnings of this country would have claimed to be christian. they also went to great Pains to separate church and state. Why do you suppose that is??? Just take a look at some Muslim Countries where Religion and Government are intertwined. While I do not equate most modern day Christians with Radical Islam, one could make the argument that Christianity in the past when used as justification in conjunction with a ruling body, has committed some very nasty atrocities. While I agree that Ethical behavior founded on some christian moral equivalences are a good thing. not all christian beliefs are Equitable to the variety of differing peoples living here in the United States. Whether you like it or not we are made up of a mixed bag of cultures. if you feel compelled to constantly bring Religion into the conversation on a political site with those who are not Interested in your Personal Faith. then you will not always be received in a understanding manner.
        With Respect K.T.
        .

        • Patriot

          Actually, Kevin, it WOULD be a HUGE revelation that the word GOD was included in our founding documents, because it is not.
          You all are so fond of quoting the bible, and it seems you may know something about that set of documents.
          But alas, I have spoken to 5th graders that know vastly more about our Constitution, The Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence than the overwhelming majority of the people on this message board.
          While there were without doubt christians that participated in the founding of this country, this is NOT, nor has it ever been a ‘Christian Nation’.
          Jefferson was a deist, and was classically educated in philosophy starting at the age of 9. There is a single passage in our Declaration of Independence that refers to a ‘Creator’ in regards to inalienable rights. That is in reference to the observation of Aristotle that opined that humans are creatures of nature, and that in all natural systems life starts and ends with the same set of chances or rights to survival as all others. John Locke, in ‘A Treatise on Government’ furthered this philosophy by saying – in essence – that regardless of how it is you believe you were Created, you were born with rights as a creature of nature that cannot be granted by men, nor taken away. Jefferson, in writing the Declaration of Independence, made reference to man as a creation of the natural systems of the earth and further observed that all creatures are created equally and with rights that cannot be granted by government, only taken by government.
          Essentially, if you believed that your creator was 15 billion years of evolution, or if you believed you were hatched from an egg you were created with those rights.
          There are many quotes from founding fathers referencing their own beliefs in a deity, but in terms of our founding, there was no reference whatsoever to god or christianity in any form.
          And THIS, is why our country is eroding into history. Our own people do not understand our founding or our history, but argue for it like they have knowledge of it.

        • Savage

          Kevin,

          I don’t understand your comments addressed to me. It’s my God-given right (as support by the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court) to have the freedom to say what I desire to say. It is not your place nor anyone else’s to tell me otherwise. As far as this being a “political” site, where did you come up with that? This site covers just about every subject of interest (not just politics)!

          Also, where is the evidence that there must be a separation of church and state (as defined and accepted today) which was designed by our Founding Fathers who wrote our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution and formed the First Congress? They never said or practiced a separation of state and church. They said we have the freedom to practice our faith; and, not be “forced”: to practice the faith of the state — that concept is very different from a “separation of state and church.”

          With respect, as well
          Savage

          • Kevin

            Patriot…I am sure you are correct in your assertions about our founding documents. I am not versed in these and only have a Limited knowledge of them. My use of the word God was in an attempt to make a point. Your clarification is noted. It does not however negate my point.
            As for Savages message I think that you Understand me very well. your playing the innocent victim here does not suit you as I read your previous comments above mine at the beginning of this Volley. The subject here is about Whether or not the Government is getting ready for a shooting match with citizens. It is not however about whether or not there is a God or are Christians right and everyone else is wrong.
            Do you have the right to speak your mind about these things??? certainly. thats why we are free here in the good old US of A. If you want or wish to discuss these things with others then I am sure there are plenty of places to do so across the Internet. Places where the subjects are relevant to your personal Faith. Otherwise you only appear to be preaching or trying to convert people. If that is your purpose here then you will continue to get negative responses from some of us who are not here to discuss your personal revalations on Religion.
            With……. respect. K.T.

    • http://Nowebsite. James D. Gillman

      I believe our alleged “government” will find itself facing mass military defection, desertion, and “jumping ship”. Military personnel joined the armed services to DEFEND the American people, not to kill them. Add that number to the number of veterans and armed civilians, and add in the Law Enforcement Officers who will not join in a battle against American civilians, the anti-gun people will be facing a “civil war”, the likes of which they’ve never seen in any country before.

      Locked and loaded.

    • Kevin

      I would advise any and all to keep their cards close to their vest and stop advertising as to what they might or might not do. unless of course you wish to bring unwanted attention to yourselves. While I might agree or not agree with certain sentiments, I certainly would not Make statements that remove all doubt and thus place myself in the position of possible classification by aspects of our Government that could Take an unhealthy Interest in my personal affairs. not that there is anything to see. If you suspect that what I am saying sounds like double talk then you are Understanding me correctly.

      • Savage

        Kevin,

        You are 100% right. Everything being said here (and anywhere else on the Internet) is being recorded and monitored and, as you type from your computer, they can trace it back to you. EVERYONE should be VERY careful of what they write on the Internet (this includes emails) because “lists” are being created by those who “watch” (monitor) the Internet.

        A few months ago there was a guy who, on another site, talked about his weapons and the fact that he had over 10,000 rounds of ammo. Maybe he’s the one that was recently in the news (I believe this happened in California) and taken to a “hospital” for “observation” and his weapons and ammo were confiscated.

      • Kevin

        Not sure how deep that rabbit hole goes but I would suspect that you are not too far off the mark.

  • http://yahoo.com Luke Gokey

    There needs to be a published list of the names and addresses of the members of the democratic socialists of America AND a published list of the members of the communist party USA. These people are backing all of this gun-grabbing stuff. They need to be exposed like the broad that so willingly published the list of gunowners in NY!

    • http://itsootsme.wordpress.com sootsme

      Um, it’s not members of political parties driving this garbage. As always, FOLLOW THE MONEY. Old Baron Von Rothschild said many years ago that he who controls the money cares not who controls the government. If you want to stop the madness, you need to stop the central bankers and their lackeys. As Mel Gibson tells his sons in “The Patriot”, “Start with the officers”. In this case, that would be those who run the money. They are the ones running the politicians, who are running the mid and lower level stooges. If you are not yet ready to start shooting, you need to get your assets out of the fiat money system and into physical stores of wealth (commodities) with long or infinite shelf lives and universal demand/utility. These items retain their relative worth compared to all other items. Fiat money is at the effect of an ever increasing supply of dollars (or other denomination) chasing a fairly constant supply of stuff, meaning that each unit of “money” is worth less and less as the bankers’ game progresses. If you get this, you have no excuse for losing your ass-ets as things move forward. If you act on this understanding, you can survive and even prosper in the coming days. On an individual level, this means having a business serving a real need, the converting your profits from “money” into the aforementioned assets as quickly and as much as possible. On a community level, this means producing, buying, and selling locally as much as possible (look up Catherine Austin Fitts), and when possible, using non-fiat means of exchange such as: barter, Bitcoins, precious metals, ammunition, labor swaps, whatever works… The more communities move in this direction, the more self reliant they become, which is a good thing. America is about individual Freedom and Responsibility- you pays yer money and you takes yer choice…As to the One World Order gang, we can indeed “Just say NO” by just saying “Yes” to the exercise of our God given self determination.

    • pissed of & liberal

      One problem with your theory. The Party for Socialism and Liberation belives that the ONLY way to defend the coming revolution after it occurs will be to ARM THE ENTIRE WORKING CLASS!
      Exerpt from

      The Program of the PSL Chapter 1 page 9 paragraph 3

      Socialism and Communism

      ” The foundation of any state power is repressive force-the military,police,prisons,courts and so on.The standing army and police must be disbanded and replaced by the ARMED PEOPLE, organizedin workers’ defence councils. A critical task of the new socialist order will be defending itself from the displaced capitalist class who would like to return to the days of exploitation.

      Also i notice that you have NO PROBLEM keeping track of your fellow Americans as long as they don’t share your ideaology. hypocrite

      • tedbest

        Get real pissed off. The last statement on your post is the Halmark of your ideology. The police force you speak of has historically been among the most brutal of terrorist organizations the world has ever known. Don’t believe me ? Do some research ! Ah but you won’t do that will you ? No, you’ll do what those of your ilk always do. Ridicule and call me names. Juvinile !

        • pissed of & liberal

          I was merely pointing out how YOU were calling for the goverment to moniter people based on ther political ideaology however if someone was calling for that to happen to libertarians. you would cry about big goverment. i call it as i see it and i see your request as hypocriticall. don’t like it? tough that’s my opinion. and the party’s policey is to ABOLISH the police force and it is BECAUSE of ther BRUTALLITY that they will be ABOLISHED. try reading the post BEFORE you respond hmm?

    • Walt

      Here is a list published by the Democratic Socialists of America in 2009, of their members in Congress. As a result of the 2010 elections, some of these folks were not re-elected.

      http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/191605/ (article listing 70 members of Congress)

      http://www.wnd.com/2010/08/191609/ (updated article claiming 82 DSA members)

      If you study the names, you’ll see that many, if not most of these folks are the ones that support all the left-wing Liberal agendas that are slowly strangling our nation, with over spending, undermining our rights and the Constitution, supporting moral and ethical corruption, fostering wealth re-distribution and social welfare entitlement programs.

      Of course, the DSA is just the tip of the iceberg. Other organizations of course exist, who do not openly publish member lists, such as the Communist Party USA, whose members share many of the same ideological goals of the DSA.

  • http://WindowsInternetExplorer George Peck

    My, my, how interesting things can get. Let’s see: People like Feinstein, Obama, Schumer, etc. etc. are going to sit back at the “command post” and tell all those people with all that ammunition they’ve stockpiled to “go get em. ” It’s going to be a historical miscalculation ; one that will leave them and a million other wannabe despots facing a rope, because just about all of those “soldiers” will bolt when they hear the first bullet “pop” as it passes their head (I heard it many times). They are forgetting that those people they are depending on have families, etc..

  • Mick

    One (very) minor point… as one who uses hardened-steel targets for practice, hollow-point ammunition has less ricochet risk than full metal jacketed ammo. There is HP ammo intended for this type of target shooting; I doubt, though, that this is what DHS is buying it for. Carry on.

  • R. Fine

    A shooting war? Are you nuts?

    • Kevin

      Not too bright I suspect. I think its a bad Idea to spout such Sentiment. even if you believe it.

    • Charlie

      R. Fine,,,
      Just nutty enough to stand and fire in Honor of The King and His Blessings… All “”Rights”” come from The King… Meanwhile…………………
      Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation…

      • robbiefine@hotmail.com

        Yup, shootin’ for King Jesus! Blasting away for the Lord! Gunin’ for the Creator! Firing for the Lord of Hosts! Go for it macho guy (but make sure your will is up to date).

  • http://twitter.com/JayJoyce Jay Joyce (@JayJoyce)

    Truth is the government and the FED are balancing three huge bubbles, and they don’t know what will happen, but are preparing for the worst. The first is the bond market bubble, the second is the stock market bubble (why are stocks going up when consumer demand and profits are still down) and third is the dollar.

    The dollar is the kicker, cause when that goes the other two follow and madness and mayhem will follow. There will be civil unrest because when the money runs out they will have seize assets and private property, think Cyprus.

    In a sense the debt is meaningless because we can never pay it back. It’s like giving a murderer 10 life sentences. It a juggling act that is coming apart and they know itbut no one knows for sure when the music will stop, they only know it will.

    • http://twitter.com/JayJoyce Jay Joyce (@JayJoyce)

      Instead of taking up arms which may eventually become necessary, why don’t we start by breaking up the too big to fail banks, and doing away with the FED !

      • Charlie

        Jay Joyce,,,
        Good idea ,but,,you’re a few years late,,, We of The American Militia have been taking down the ungodly money system at the timing and “”Will””of Our Commander King Jesus Christ , that’s why a American Militia Man must Know The Holy Bible ,inside out, backward, and forward,,, We dare not get into trouble with King Jesus as Peter did with the ear cutting… Battles will be won by the Individual as well as squads,,,the battle cry of the Founding Fathers, ”’no King but King Jesus!””” is still vibrating in the ether ,,,can you feel it? The reason for weapons is because of the order at Luke 22:36… Peter, the guy that cut the ear off without “Orders”,,,did give a Order on how to become one of The King”s Men ,at Acts 2:38… Meanwhile……………………………..
        Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation, because, Peter said so at 1 Peter 3:21…

        Charlie Freedom

    • Savage

      Jay, I believe you are right. There are three bubbles and when they go, we go! However, there is a bubble that most people don’t seem to recognize; a bubble that makes the three you mentioned look like “pimples” because when this bubble goes, it will collapse not just businesses, all fiat currencies, the world’s financial system but will bring down entire nations.

      Research the Global Derivatives Market which is currently valued at $1,200 trillion dollars and is 20 times larger than the entire world’s economy (which runs around $60 trillion a year).

  • gray beard

    It took only 3% of the population to win the war back in the mid 1700 hundreds for our freedom.they were called minute men. Today there alot more people ready to stand up for there rights than they think so. I hope a shot is never fired,but it could turn into one hell of a war. God bless America With God at our side we can’t loose.

    • robbiefine@hotmail.com

      Alrighty then, why don’t you and some of your gun hugging buddies get out there with your god given weapons and start shooting up some government buildings in your effort to bring about a new American revolution. Hopefully your local police dept. will deal with you in the appropriate manner which should involve a stay at a mental health unit after they take your toys away.

      • Charlie

        robbiefine,,,
        None of The American Militia will be taking heed to any orders or threats from any nitwit Edomite jews… Edomite jews are pointed out by King Jesus at John 8:30–50, AND at Revelations 2:9 , 3:9… Meanwhile………………………………
        Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation…

        Charlie Freedom

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          Oh come on Charlie; you’re not being very nice. I was just responding to someone who was all puffed up about gettin’ out there and having a revolution against the big bad government. I was merely encouraging him to follow up on the hot air. You know, I was trying to be supportive gosh dern’it. I wasn’t giving him orders as you intimate – just trying to help. Anyway he and his buds I’m sure could take on any swat team what with all the weaponry they play with in their basements. Frankly I’m waiting to see the TV coverage of their rebellion! Should be entertaining. I just hope they don’t murder too many little children in an elementary school.

      • tedbest

        Go back to sleep robbiefine, I’m sure it was just a nightmare. Maybe when you wake up we can have an intelegent conversation. You certainly aren’t very “awake” right now.

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          Maybe you didn’t read the posting to which I was responding. It was a posting proclaiming that he and his sort were going to get together and take down the government (with, I assume guns). I was merely trying to encourage him if you get my drift.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        robbiefine aka R. Fine on the March 22, 2013 @10:51am in his reply to Alondra said:
        “Medical science confirms that homosexuality happens naturally in about 20% of any given population. It may not be to your liking”

        Oh, REALLY? Where are you took this information? From LGBT or it “to be your liking”.
        Please CARE to cite a source to back up your FALSEHOOD.

        “Scientists have not been able to conclude that there is any gene or combination of genes that will make someone gay.” None Biological study could find any “gay” gene or chromosome.

        A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene”
        “The human X and Y chromosomes (the two “sex” chromosomes) have been completely sequenced. Thanks to work carried out by labs all across the globe, we know that the X chromosome contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes (see NCBI, 2004). The National Center for Biotechnology Information reports that the Y chromosome—which is much smaller—contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes. Educational institutions such as Baylor University, the Max Planck Institute, the Sanger Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, and others have spent countless hours and millions of research dollars analyzing these unique chromosomes. As the data began to pour in, they allowed scientists to construct gene maps—using actual sequences from the Human Genome Project. And yet, NEITHER THE MAP FOR the X NOR the Y chromosome CONTAINS ANY “GAY GENE.”

        “What is the truth regarding homosexuality? Too often, speculation, emotions, and POLITICS PLAY A MAJOR ROLE in its assessment. The following is a scientific investigation of human homosexuality.”

        REAL STATISTICS
        While no one has carried out a door-to-door census, we do have a fairly accurate estimate. Interestingly, these statistics came to light in an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2003, in the Lawrence vs. Texas case (commonly known as the Texas sodomy case). On page 16 of this legal brief, footnote 42 revealed that 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following:

        The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (Laumann, et al., 1994).
        The study also found that only 0.9% of men and 0.4% of women reported having only same-sex partners since age 18—a figure that would represent a total of only 1.4 million Americans as homosexual (based on the last census report, showing roughly 292 million people living in America). The resulting accurate figures demonstrate that significantly less than one percent of the American population claims to be homosexual. The NHSLS results are similar to a survey conducted by the Minnesota Adolescent Health Survey (1986) of public school students. The survey showed that only 0.6% of the boys and 0.2% of the girls identified themselves as “mostly or 100% homosexual.”

        http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

        Robbie, NEXT time please have the CORRECT facts and do NOT forget to cite a source to back up your “facts”. TY

        “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION/DETESTABLE/ HATEFUL…But YOU SHALL KEEP MY STATUTES AND MY RULES AND DO NONE OF THESE ABOMINATIONS … So keep My charge NEVER TO PRACTICE ANY OF THESE ABOMINABLE CUSTOMS, that were practiced before you, and NEVER to make yourselves unclean by them: I am the LORD your GOD.” (Leviticus 18:22-30)

        “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” 2Ezdra 4:41

        “You SHALL NOT LIE” – God’s 9th Commandment

        • Patriot

          The one and only time something from the Old Testament seems to apply….

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Yes, the Bible does condemn gays to death but then the Bible also condemn to death children who swear at their parents. Are we ready to follow that one? No eh? I didn’t think so. So rather than truly follow the so-called holy laws of god just pick and choose the ones you want based on your own hangups.

          • Patriot

            That is exactly my point. Leviticus says all kinds of silly crap. You are condemned for eating shellfish, shaving your beard, you are encouraged to physically abuse your wife should you determine she is deserving. The punishment for adultery is public stoning. Women are not to have opinions or hold positions of power, on and on. And whenever you bring this up to Christians, they say ‘oh that’s Old Testament. Jesus came and changed all that’.
            EXCEPT for the subject of homosexuality. That one seems to be the only thing that still applies from the Old Testament, and the only thing Jesus won’t forgive.

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            But ask those same Bible thumpers if they believe in the Garden of Eden and how god created the world, and the flood story and Job and the Ten Commandments etc., etc. and they’ll answer in the affirmative. That’s all Old Testament stuff. But 7/8 of it they reject when you actually question them. They are just to scattered to even have a conversation with. They like to tell me and you and anyone else that the Bible (all of it) must be followed but they break 95% of the rules and pick only the ones they like to follow.

          • Patriot

            Bottom line – If you aren’t gay, why are you so concerned about people that are?
            Secondly, if you are gay, how about the same rights that everyone else gets under the Constitution and no special ones, hmm?

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Do I have to be gay to be concerned about how gay people are treated? Do I have to be black to be concerned about civil rights? Do I have to be Jewish to be anti Nazi? Do I have to be a street person to be concerned about the homeless?

          • Patriot

            You misunderstand me. I was not inferring that you should not have a healthy concern for your fellow man! Not at all! I was saying that I don’t understand why all of these people have opinions about the righteousness or morality of gay people when they should be far more concerned about their own and leave the gay folks alone. It is none of their business at all.

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Hold on for just a moment. Now you are turning the entire issue on its head. Basically the actual situation is up tight religious folk thumping their Bibles who are coming down on gay people and some even advocating that gays be killed according to Bible law.

          • Patriot

            I don’t think we are communicating here.
            First of all, I agree with you completely. Religious nuts are persecuting gay people and their insane beliefs are part of the huge problem here. Got it. Yes, we are on the same page. I even said that it is funny how the whole of the Old Testament is overlooked EXCEPT for the passages about homosexuality. The ultimate hypocrisy.
            NEXT
            I am saying that it is no one’s business if you are gay, or straight, or a-sexual at all and I do not understand why religious people must MAKE it their business.
            NEXT
            I was saying that gay people are protected under the same laws that all of us are, THUS making their need to lobby for their rights is completely wrong. They should be allowed to marry, work, live, and thrive as the rest of us do without fear of persecution.
            You see? Not all conservatives are religious weirdos with an agenda to push their ancient beliefs on everyone.

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Sounds good.

          • Frank Kahn

            Many people seem to misinterpret the meaning of death used in that respect. Because those who commit this unclean act have turned their face from God they must surely die. It is talking about the final death. They will not be taken into Gods temple for eternal life. This is the true death that is spoken of.

            This all depends on your belief in God and his words in the Bible, if you don’t agree with them then it does not apply to your thinking. But, to expect those who do believe, to accept something that is taught by scripture as bad, is not acceptable.

            The true marriage, from God, is a joining of the flesh of a man and a woman, making them one. To modern ideas in this country it is called the consummation of marriage. Once you consummate the marriage (from man) you are married in the eyes of God.

            The idea that, man, creates a married couple is wrong. For government to give the privilege of being married to same sex partners does not make them married in the eyes of the Lord.

            There is a saying I remember from my childhood days, God said, go forth and multiply. Was he telling two men or two women to go forth and create offspring?

          • Patriot

            So then it IS the job of government to get involved in the personal lives of people as long as it is for religious reasons. Got it.

          • Frank Kahn

            The attempt to define something as religious is wrong. Homosexuality is wrong, it goes against nature as well as religion. Almost all animal species on Earth have a dual gender reproductive design. It takes a male and a female to reproduce. The NATURAL instinct for all species is to find and mate with a member of the opposite sex that best ensures the survival of its personal genetic uniqueness. Humans NORMALLY seek a partner that exhibits the traits that foster sucessful child bearing results. That is normal inherited traits. The homosexual, of either sex, is incapable of natural reproduction by their sexual encounters. So, without human intervention, such as artificial insemination, or by violating their stated same sex desire, the homosexual population is not self sustaining. The cause of the homosexual mind set can be debated, it might be said to be the work of Satan, or it might be some abberation of the wiring of the brain. Whether it is explained by religious criteria or scientific does not really matter.

            The problem is not having the government interfer on the side of religion, it is a matter of staying out of the controversy totally. It is the governments decision to give entitlements to a specific group that causes the problem, not religion. The idea of a domestic partner, should engender the same entitlements as marriage. If this was true, then there would be no perceived injustice for same sex partners.

            The same is true with abortion, it is none of the governments business to enter the debate on either side. I believe that it is wrong to get an abortion, so I should not be expected to condone it, or help to pay for it. If someone else thinks it is okay to have an abortion, that is their decission and should not be limited by the government.

            When the government gets out of the business of making policies and rules that affect religious beliefs, then we will not have the controversy. Don’t accept them intervening on the side of homosexuals if you are not willing to have them intervene on the side of religiious morals.

          • Patriot

            Frank -
            If you have read any of my posts you know that I am a Constitutionalist. The issue of marriage PERIOD is not the business of the Federal Government. End of story. This is a State’s Rights issue if ever there were one. Abortion is also not the business of the Federal Government. The list goes on and on.
            However, I am simply stating that your beliefs are protected under the Constitution, as are mine. I am not gay, nor do I believe the stupid idea that you simply choose to be, or not to be. That is ridiculous. But even if you DO, that is never the business of the Federal Government. That is YOUR business and it is between you and YOUR god, not your government.
            IN essence, the idea that there are Federal laws either restricting or supporting this stuff is just plain ridiculous as the Constitution does not provide for them to be involved. In fact, it provides that they stay the hell out of it.

          • Frank Kahn

            You said:

            “If you have read any of my posts you know that I am a Constitutionalist. The issue of marriage PERIOD is not the business of the Federal Government. End of story. This is a State’s Rights issue if ever there were one. Abortion is also not the business of the Federal Government. The list goes on and on.”

            You almost have it right, I said government should keep out, I did not say Federal. I don’t think that the state government should meddle in these matters either.

          • pissed of & liberal

            The reason some ” straight ” people is simple. ther is an old revolutionary proverb that goes.

            An injustice commeted to one of us is an injustice commeted towards ALL of us. an injustice anywhere commeted ANYWHERE no matter how remoat is still an injustice.

            understand?

          • Patriot

            I understand your fantasy-land of collectivism, yes. But in reality, an injustice to me is an injustice to me. If there are those that sympathize and wish to support me in my quest to rectify it, I appreciate their CHOICE to do so.

          • pissed of & liberal

            I must disagree. an injustice to one IS an injustice to all because if the goverment is allowed to get away with the first injustice against a small part of the population it enboldeds them to act against other parts of the population.

          • Patriot

            You have made a very good point, which which I agree. However, I am sure that you would disagree that your hero, Hugo Chavez was clearly immune from being held accountable for the massive injustices foisted on his own people, by his own hand.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Ok before we start down that road answer thes three questons please.

            What were the ” massive injustices ” you refer to?

            Who told you of them?

            And how do you know you can trust the people telling you about them?

          • Patriot

            I could answer, but it doesn’t matter. You are incapable of being objective when it comes to your ‘great revolutionaries’. I could tell you that I have information from Mr. Chavez himself in the form of sworn testimony regarding all of the evil he has done to his people, and you would say he was an impostor. So it is a moot argument.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Hey if you want to call it quits that’s no skin off my nose.

          • Patriot

            Actually, the decision not to engage the intellectually retarded is a victory for my side.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Yeah right. keep telling yourself that.

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          No falsehood intended. Fact is that stats vary depending on many factors and of course we know that there is a wide range of sexual identities and, therefore, different rates of occurrence. But the numbers per se are not that important. The real issue is that homosexuality in all its forms does occur naturally and we have to decide how to react to it. Obviously those of us who are straight react in varying degrees. Your reaction is based on what you have read in the Bible. You may also have some homosexual feelings of your own and are reacting to that. Oft times certain politicians who are most vocal against gay rights turn out to be homosexual themselves.

          You feel that gay people should be shot or hanged or burned at the stake like witches in olden times. I have a number of friends – and one relative – who happen to be gay so I am more used to it I suppose. I also have come to think that what other people do in their bedroom really is none of my freakin’ business. You may want to get into that but I don’t. Neither do I think that government has any business getting its nose into our private business. You wouldn’t mind government involved in dictating sex. Which is odd seeing as right wingers are supposed to think that government should butt out of our private lives. Oh well.

          I guess you think gay people like Vice President Cheney’s daughter and Senator Portman’s son should be killed. I don’t. So we have different views.

          You may also think that sex is for reproduction only which is really not how most of the world’s population thinks. Sex is fun, its enjoyable, its exciting and it comes in all kinds of positions! If you’re only doing it to produce a baby you’re limiting the experience pretty drastically. But then that’s your business. And if its only for babies you have to stop doing it once your wife is of a certain age. Wow. you are one tight ass I must say.

          Now to the Bible. Yes, the Bible condemns gays to death. We know that. But did you also know that the Bible condemns children to death if they swear at their parents? In fact that’s one of the ten big ones. Are you going to follow that one? Maybe not right? Maybe you’ll bypass that Law of the Almighty Everlasting God of the Cosmos on that particular one. Right? So if you feel comfortable picking and choosing which Holy Laws to obey so will I and I opt to be tolerant to all men and women regardless of who they love.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Patriot @1:32am says: “The one and only time something from the Old Testament seems to apply”
        It is a LIE. It’s NOT “The one and only time something from the Old Testament”.

        But here is the New Testament:
        “That is why God abandoned them to THEIR SHAMEFUL DESIRES. Even the WOMEN turned AGAINST THE NATURAL WAY to have sex and instead indulged in SEX WITH EACH OTHER. And the MEN, INSTEAD OF HAVING NATURAL SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH WOMEN, BURNED WITH LUST FOR EACH OTHER. MEN DID SHAMEFUL THINGS WITH OTHER MEN, and as a result of this SIN, they suffered within themselves the PENALTY THEY DESERVED.” (Romans)

        “Do NOT BE DECEIVED: neither the SEXUALLY IMMORAL, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor MEN WHO PRACTICE HOMOSEXUALITY [here are the two Greek terms that refer to the passive and active partners in consensual homosexual acts], nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1Corinthians)

        “FLEE SEXUAL IMMORALITY. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he WHO COMMITS SEXUAL IMMORALITY SINS AGAINST HIS OWN BODY.” (1 Corinthians)

        “For you may be sure of this, that everyone, WHO IS SEXUALLY IMMORAL OR IMPURE, or who is covetous, has no inheritance in the Kingdom of Christ and God. LET NO ONE DECEIVE YOU with vain words, for because of these things the WRATH OF GOD COMES UPON THE SONS OF DISOBEDIENCE. Therefore DO NOT ASSOCIATE WITH THEM … TAKE NO PART IN THE WORKS OF DARKNESS, BUT INSTEAD EXPOSE THEM.” (Ephesians)

        “For this is the will of God, even your sanctification; that YOU SHOULD ABSTAIN FROM FORNICATION/SEXUAL IMMORALITY. That every one of you should know how to possess/control his vessel/own body in sanctification/holiness and honor; NOT IN THE LUST OF CONCUPISCENCE, even as the Gentiles, who know not God.” (1 Thessalonians 4:3-5)

        “Have you not read that He, Who created them from the beginning, made them MALE and FEMALE? Therefore a MAN shall leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his WIFE and THEY SHALL BECOME ONE FLASH. So then, they are no longer two but ONE FLESH. Therefore WHAT GOD HAS JOINED TOGETHER, LET NOT MAN SEPARATE.” – Jesus Christ (Mt.19:4-6; Mk.10:6-8; Genesis 1:27; 2:22-24)

        “Patriot”, if you need more from the New Testament, just let me know. But I am sure you do NOT care. You just spewing mantras of the PERVERTS and DEBAUCHED.

        “Patriot”, are you a patriot of the DEPRAVITY? Just asking.

        • Patriot

          BUT Sharia is wrong somehow…Sounds very similar to me…..

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          Why don’t you reprint here the entire freakin’ New Testament? Thanks.

        • Patriot

          No, I am a patriot of the First Amendment, which – if you understand the history of it – states that we have freedom of religion….and in turn freedom FROM religion as well.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        robbie says: “Yes, the Bible does condemn gays to death but then the Bible also condemn to death children who swear at their parents.”

        robbie, please cite a source to back up your lies and “your own hang-ups”

        robbie, you AGAIN spun your falsehood, but you totally skipped that I totally debunked your intentional LIES.

        Your comment on March 22, 2013 at 10:51am was:
        “Medical science confirms that homosexuality happens naturally in about 20% of any given population. It may not be to your liking but then it’s actually none of your bee’s wax. But my question is why would god create homosexuality? According to folks like you god created everything so why create something disgusting according to you?”

        I proved that neither Medical science nor NONE Biological study could find any “gay” gene or chromosome. The Scientific Examination of the X chromosome, which contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes the Y chromosome—which is much smaller—contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes showed that NEITHER the X NOR the Y chromosome CONTAINS ANY “GAY” GENE.
        I provided you with the source.

        Also, YOUR number of the homosexuals is FALSE.
        It’s NOT 20%, as you claimed, but less than 2%.
        I provided you with the source as well.

        HOMOSEXUAL behavior is a CHOICE and a BAD CHOICE, SICK CHOICE!!!

        Homosexuality is a PSYCHO PATHOLOGY = Abnormal psychology and thus is a MENTAL Disorder/Illness. It was included into the DSM (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) by the American Psychiatric Association. But under extremely forceful political pressure from the LGBT’s radical activists like Frank Kameny, who started a PROGRAM OF INTIMIDATION aimed at the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and attacking many psychiatrists publicly with the request to remove Homosexuality from the DSM list. The APA’s board of trustees finally CAVED in to the demands of the Mentally PERVERT and Sexually DEPRAVED activists and declared that Homosexuality is no “longer” Mental Disorder.

        Yep, it’s “according” to APA, but the MAJORITY of the HEALTH and MENTAL HEALTH professionals do maintain that HOMOSEXUALITY is a Mental Disorder like Necrophilia, Bestiality/Zoophilia, Pedophilia or any other “-philia”. I am one of them.

        HOMOSEXUALITY is a MENTAL ILLNESS/DISORDER!!!!!!

        PROVE I am wrong.

        “The look on THEIR FACES TESTIFIES AGAINST THEM, and THEY PARADE THEIR SIN like SODOM; THEY DO NOT HIDE IT. Woe to their soul! THEY HAVE BROUGHT DISASTER UPON THEMSELVES.” (Isaiah 3:9)

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          No problem. I will “back up” what you call “a lie” by asking you to look up a line in YOUR BIBLE. Check out the Book of Exodus, Chapter 21, verse 17. Actually I’ll make this very easy for you. Here is what your Holy Bible clearly states: “And he who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.” I’ll accept your apology for calling me a liar at any time.

          You don’t really know what’s in your Bible do you even though you love thumping it all the time? And I can assure you there are literally hundreds of God’s laws that you not only don’t follow but you actually BREAK. But, again, it’s not your fault – you just lack knowledge of what is in the good book.

          Seeing as you are so keen on following Bible laws such as your hatred for gays perhaps you will now add Bible hatred for kids who curse their parents. Mind you I bet you won’t follow this new one for you because you prefer to pick and choose the Bible laws you want to crow about.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        Hey, robbie, where is you apology for LYING that “Medical science confirms that homosexuality happens naturally in about 20% of any given population.”
        Why all the time you are skipping the subject. And yes, I will “thumping it all the time”
        robbie: “Seeing as you are so keen on following Bible laws such as your hatred for gays perhaps you will now add Bible hatred for kids who curse their parents. Mind you I bet you won’t follow this new one for you because you prefer to pick and choose the Bible laws you want to crow about.”
        1) I do not need to follow Old Testament Laws. Those were Mosaic Laws for Jews “the law was given through Moses, but grace and TRUTH came through Jesus Christ.”
        “For if that FIRST COVENANT had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a SECOND. Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I WILL MAKE A NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because THEY DID NOT CONTINUE in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I WILL PUT My LAWS IN THEIR MIND AND WRITE THEM ON THEIR HEARTS … In that He says, “A NEW COVENANT,” He has MADE THE FIRST OBSOLETE. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” (Hebrew 8:7-13)
        Do NOT come to me with Mosaic Law.
        Jesus said to woman caught in adultery: “go and FROM NOW ON SIN NO MORE.” (John 8:11)
        “…unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”
        2) I do NOT hate HOMOS. I despise HOMOS like you, who are twisting and distort Bible. But I told you once: If you do not believe in God and His moral standards, the UNITY of MAN & WOMAN is absolute TRUTH of the Natural Law/ Law of Nature as well.
        Homosexuality is UNNATURAL, ABNORMAL, IMMORAL and UNHEALTHY.
        The homos are using their bodies not for what they were designed. It does not matter if you believe in the Creation or evolution; the Human body was not created for the sexual perversion and depravity. To poke your penis into the anal hole or suck it is not only abnormal, but revoltingly disgust.
        Homosexual behavior is a MENTAL DISORDER, it’s Abnormal psychology and should be treated per se. Just look at Homos’ behavior and their face expression. Totally unbalanced and deranged – NUTS!!! SICK NUTS!!!

        “The look on THEIR FACES TESTIFIES AGAINST THEM, and THEY PARADE THEIR SIN like SODOM; THEY DO NOT HIDE IT. Woe to their soul! THEY HAVE BROUGHT DISASTER UPON THEMSELVES.” (Isaiah 3:9)

        “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION/ DETESTABLE/ REPUGNANT/ DISGUSTING/ REVOLTING” (Leviticus 18)

        “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” 2Ezdra 4:41

        Alondra, definite Homodespiser & Islamophobe, the PC snubber and the Hater of the VOLUNTARY Stupidity and Idiocy

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          Did you look up the bit about death to children who curse their parents? I gave you the Biblical reference you said I was lying about. So now along with your hatred of gays you can start a movement to attack (and kill) children who curse their parents. You do advocate following the Bible right? I mean you are constantly quoting chapter and verse. But now I find out something new: you really don’t follow the Bible. What you do is pick and choose the bits that cater to your hatreds and you run with those. The rest of the Bible you skip or ignore or just don’t know anything about. And if you want to claim that the Old Testament is not a part of the Bible then you are clearly ignorant. Mind you you believe in the Creation story and the 10 Commandments which are basic parts of the Old Testament so it does get kind of confusing. Maybe you should sit down with pen and paper and write down just the bits of the Bible you like and see if you can promote that to the world. Call it “The Word According to Alondra”. You could get famous.

          As far as the incidence of homosexuality goes I certainly did respond but you may have missed it. The fact remains that homosexuality is mainly inherent and occurs naturally in all human populations. You happen to want to stick your nose in other people’s business to find out what they’re doing in their private life and then kill the people who love someone you think they should not love. Actually you sound like a sick puppy but you have other problems if you think sex is exclusively for procreation. What a sad waste of a life with that attitude hanging around your neck. Maybe you are just jealous of others you think (rightly so) are having a heck of a lot more fun than you are. The word pathetic comes to mind.

          Have a nice day – unless you have plans to the contrary (which is probably the case).

        • Patriot

          Alondra – Massive Hypocrite.
          What is in your book isn’t any more the truth than what is in the Quoran, or the Torah. All the same stuff.
          But what I found fascinating was this one:

          1) I do not need to follow Old Testament Laws. Those were Mosaic Laws for Jews “the law was given through Moses, but grace and TRUTH came through Jesus Christ.”

          And then in less than 4 paragraphs, you start throwing Old Testament jive out anyway:

          “The look on THEIR FACES TESTIFIES AGAINST THEM, and THEY PARADE THEIR SIN like SODOM; THEY DO NOT HIDE IT. Woe to their soul! THEY HAVE BROUGHT DISASTER UPON THEMSELVES.” (Isaiah 3:9)

          “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION/ DETESTABLE/ REPUGNANT/ DISGUSTING/ REVOLTING” (Leviticus 18)

          Your language and hatred are very telling of exactly what kind of a Christian Soul you really are.
          So filled with anger, and hate toward your fellow man, as if you are qualified to judge. I think maybe it is time you study the parts of the Bible that teach forgiveness, and understanding, and kindness, and that you are NOT qualified to be ANYONE’S judge. You leave that up to your god.

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Alondra: You seem to be on the hot seat thanks to me and others and you don’t seem to have any logical response.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        “patriot” – MASSIVE TWISTER AND IGNORANT PERVERT:

        1) “What is in your book isn’t any more the truth than what is in the Quoran, or the Torah. All the same stuff.”
        Yep, Satan’s LIE. And “You are of your father the devil, and the DESIRES OF YOUR FATHER YOU WANT TO DO. He does NOT STAND IN THE TRUTH, because THERE IS NO TRUTH IN HIM. When he speaks a LIE, he speaks from his OWN resources, for HE IS A LIAR AND THE FATHER OF IT.” (John 8:44)

        2) Yes, “the law was given through Moses, but grace and TRUTH came through Jesus Christ.”
        And we are living in the New Testament.
        New Testament:
        “That is why God abandoned them to THEIR SHAMEFUL DESIRES. Even the WOMEN turned AGAINST THE NATURAL WAY to have sex and instead indulged in SEX WITH EACH OTHER. And the MEN, INSTEAD OF HAVING NATURAL SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH WOMEN, BURNED WITH LUST FOR EACH OTHER. MEN DID SHAMEFUL THINGS WITH OTHER MEN, and as a result of this SIN, they suffered within themselves the PENALTY THEY DESERVED.” (Romans)

        “YOU SHOULD ABSTAIN FROM FORNICATION/SEXUAL IMMORALITY. That every one of you should know how to possess/control his vessel/own body in sanctification/holiness and HONOR; NOT IN THE LUST OF CONCUPISCENCE.” (1 Thessalonians 4)

        Old Testament:
        “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION/ DETESTABLE/ REPUGNANT/ DISGUSTING/ REVOLTING” (Leviticus 18)

        3) “The look on THEIR FACES TESTIFIES AGAINST THEM, and THEY PARADE THEIR SIN like SODOM; THEY DO NOT HIDE IT. Woe to their soul! THEY HAVE BROUGHT DISASTER UPON THEMSELVES.” (Isaiah 3:9)

        This passage is a description of the homos. You can recognize them just by looking at their deranged faces, which are expressing the cracked, wacky, nutty mentality, which is MENTAL Sickness.

        4) My language is the Bible language, which you, PERVERT, so hate.
        “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for TEACHING, REBUKING, CORRECTING and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 2Timothy.

        5) I told you, I do NOT hate. I just despise those, who advocating for the sexual IMMORALITY. Do in your bedrooms and your homo clubs what you want. Just do not enforce us to accept it as a normal behavior or life style. It is NOT and NEVER was. Neither from God’s standards, nor the Law of Nature. It’s UNNATURAL, ABNORMAL and UNHEALTHY. It’s Psycho Pathology and thus it is the MENTAL DISORDER.

        You do not like my language? Sorry, I am NOT PC. I’ll CALL A SPADE A SPADE and not put a happy face on something just so you and like you (mentally PERVERT and sexually depraved) can feel good. I call SIN Evil, whether you like it or not.

        6) “I think maybe it is time you study the parts of the Bible that teach forgiveness, and understanding, and kindness, and that you are NOT qualified to be ANYONE’S judge. You leave that up to your god.”

        Exactly, start to study the BIBLE. Before “forgiveness” there MUST be REPENTANCE! Without REPENTANCE there is NO FORGIVENESS. This is God’s condition, NOT mine.

        “…repent and believe in the Gospel.”
        “…unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”
        “…repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations.”

        By Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary the “true repentance” means to change one’s heart and mind, as the result of cognition and knowledge of God.

        The self-conscience brings the true repentance, which is the true deep sense of one’s own guilt for a violation of God’s holy law and relinquishment of any wrong doing or any ill practice, that OFFENDS AND DISHONOR God.

        And I qualify to rebuke, but final judgment it’s God’s job.
        “You shall surely REBUKE your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.”
        “Do not rebuke MOCKER or he will hate you; Rebuke a WISE man and he will love you.”
        “he who regards a REBUKE will be honored.”
        “The ear that hears the rebukes of life will abide among the wise.”
        “He who disdains instruction despises his own soul, but he who heeds REBUKE gets understanding.”
        “He who justifies the WICKED, and he who condemns the JUST, both of them alike are an ABOMINATION to the LORD.”
        “He who is often rebuked, and hardens his neck, will suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.”

        “For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.”

        P.S. Before to accuse me in my “language and hatred” look at YOUR language and YOUR hatred toward those, who do NOT accept and tolerate your PERVERSION & DEPRAVITY.

        • pissed of & liberal

          WOULD YOU PLEASE JUST SHUT THE HELL UP! NO ONE CARES FOR YOUR BIBLE THUMPING LIVE-YOUR-LIFE-MY-WAY-OR-BURN-IN-HELL BS BESIDES YOU!

          • Frank Kahn

            Shame be to you for your desire to take from her, her right to free expression. Maybe, there are others who believe the truth of the Bible as she does. It is not your place to condemn her for her beliefs.

          • pissed of & liberal

            But it is HER place to condemn people she does not even know because of ther sexuallity? typical christian logic ” How dare you condemn my condemnation ? “

          • Frank Kahn

            I understand that you are incapable of understanding the meaning of posts here, but you need to re-read what I posted.

            I condemned you for saying that she does not have the right to voice her opinion. You told her to “shut the hell up”, that is unacceptable.

            She follows the teachings in the Bible, the condemnation is there. The fact that you are a lost soul, one who forsakes the teachings of God, does not give you the right to put others down for their beliefs.

            Actually, if you read, and comprehend, what she has quoted, you are condemned the same as if you were a homosexual yourself.

            The fact that you don’t believe it does not make the fact that the Bible says you are condemned go away.

            If you don’t like the beliefs of Christians in this matter, I suggest you ask a Jew if they have the same scripture in their holy book, the Hebrew Bible.

          • Patriot

            While I agree with you in terms of – no matter how insane, rude, or filled with hate that Alondra is – saying she should shut up is not acceptable, you make no point in using the bible as a foundation for saying much of anything. While it is a wonderful collection of fairy tales, you may as well be using the quoran, or the satanic bible as your foundation. They are all based on the same fantasies. One is no more rooted in fact than the other.
            How about using the simple, inherent notion of decency that we are all born with, rather than gathering support from a book of ancient myths? You would carry more weight in your arguments.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Exept i don’t forsake God i forsake people like YOU and her who try to cram God into a tiny box. see i don’t belive that the bible is the word of God but rather the word of man GUESSING as to what God wants and i find it VERY hard to belive that God would find time to care about who sleeps with whom considering every other problem in the world. you and Alondra seem to conveniently forget the passage were the crowd is about to stone a women for adultrey and jesus himself stands in front of her and says ” ler he who is without sin cast the first stone ” and the concept of you and her living as long as you have and being without sin is something else i find VERY hard to belive.

          • Frank Kahn

            Okay, lets take your rant one item at a time:

            “Exept i don’t forsake God”

            NEED I REMIND YOU OF YOUR WORDS? YOU HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID THAT GOD WAS INVENTED BY MAN, THAT HE IS A FANTASY, MYTHOLOGY AND NOT REAL. YOU SAID THAT GOD WAS MADE IN MANS IMAGE, IMPLYING THAT HE IS MADE UP BY MAN.

            ” i forsake people like YOU and her who try to cram God into a tiny box.”

            YOU MIGHT LOOK UP THE WORD FORSAKE. IT DOES NOT APPLY IN THIS CONTEXT. A TINY BOX? IT IS STRANGE THAT WE BELIEVE HE IS OMNISCIENT, OMNIPOTENT AND OMNIPRESENT WHICH SOMEHOW MAKES HIM LIMITED TO A TINY BOX.

            “see i don’t belive that the bible is the word of God but rather the word of man GUESSING as to what God wants”

            ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE DENYING THE IDEA OF GODS WORD, THIS IS A FORM OF FORSAKING GOD. YOU ARE AGAIN IMPLYING THAT MAN CREATED THE IDEA OF GOD OUT OF NOTHING.

            “and i find it VERY hard to belive that God would find time to care about who sleeps with whom considering every other problem in the world.”

            HERE YOU MAY HAVE MADE A FREUDIAN SLIP. YOU IMPLY THAT HOMOSEXUALS ARE ONLY ONE OF MANY PROBLEMS IN THE WORLD. IF YOU ACCEPT GOD AND HIS LOVE AND CONCERN FOR HIS CHILDREN, THEN IT IS REASONABLE TO ACCEPT THAT HE CARES ABOUT ALL THINGS THAT ARE WRONG IN THE WORLD.

            “you and Alondra seem to conveniently forget the passage were the crowd is about to stone a women for adultrey and jesus himself stands in front of her and says ” ler he who is without sin cast the first stone ””

            THIS IS SAID TO RESTRICT US FROM PASSING JUDGEMENT. WE SHALL NOT JUDGE, THAT IS THE PURVIEW OF GOD. IF YOU CANNOT JUDGE, YOU CANNOT PUNISH SOMEONE FOR THEIR SINS AGAINST GOD.

            “and the concept of you and her living as long as you have and being without sin is something else i find VERY hard to belive”

            I DO NOT KNOW ALONDRA, I CANNOT SPEAK FOR HER, BUT I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT I AM WITHOUT SIN.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Ok i feel you may be confusing me with PATRIOT with regards to the ” god is invented by man ” portion. and by ” tiny box ” i mean that people like you and Alondra who think they know with 100% certainty that they know what God want’s,what he does and does not like when in reality it is IMPOSSIBLE to for you to know that unless a God talks to you or b you’ve already been to heaven. i doubt either of those things has happened. but you are right about one thing i did slip i MEANT to say i find it VERY hard to belive that god has time to care about who is sleeping with whom CONSIDERING all the problems in the world. homosexuallity is NOT a problem exept for people like you. and you can’tsay ” you shall not judge ” because that’s ALL people like you and alondra do is judge.and you may never have claimed to be without sin people like you always seem to think your sins are less serious then everybody else and i know because i got a aunt just like ya!

          • Frank Kahn

            OKAY, PEA BRAIN, THIS HAS GONE FAR ENOUGH.

            “Ok i feel you may be confusing me with PATRIOT with regards to the ” god is invented by man ” portion.”

            I dont get confused like that, I will be more than happy to go provide links to your many comments saying that God is imaginary and created by man which you have made. With the exception of your last two posts, you have consistently denied the existence of God. You even say that everyone is lying about the Bible being the word of God.

            ” and by ” tiny box ” i mean that people like you and Alondra who think they know with 100% certainty that they know what God want’s,what he does and does not like when in reality it is IMPOSSIBLE to for you to know that unless a God talks to you or b you’ve already been to heaven.”

            Don’t try to force your delusional ideas on me. I will be more than happy to explain just how wrong you are in your interpretation of my posts that has led you to this insane statement. I have supported Alondra’s statements about what it says in the Bible. That is a statement of fact, not opinion. If you want to claim that the Bible is all lies, that is your problem not ours.

            ” i doubt either of those things has happened.”

            God speaks in many different ways, no, I don’t hear voices in my head claiming to be God speaking.

            ” but you are right about one thing”

            Wrong, I was right about everything I said.

            ” i did slip i MEANT to say i find it VERY hard to belive that god has time to care about who is sleeping with whom CONSIDERING all the problems in the world.”

            What you find hard to believe is enormous. Since you find it hard to believe anything in the Bible comes from God, you won’t believe anything attributed to him. The Bible says he is concerned about homosexual conduct. Like it or not that is a fact.

            ” homosexuallity is NOT a problem exept for people like you”

            You are making an assumption, that is not based on facts you have taken from my posts. The things that I don’t approve of about homosexuals has not been discussed yet.

            ” and you can’tsay ” you shall not judge ” because that’s ALL people like you and alondra do is judge”

            This one is either silly or down right stupid. I have not made any comments that would make you believe that my beliefs are the same as hers. I have studied many religions, and I know that many things in the New Testament are wrong. And, I can almost guarantee you that Alondra will not agree with me on that point.

            “and you may never have claimed to be without sin people like you always seem to think your sins are less serious then everybody else and i know because i got a aunt just like ya!”

            I am sad to hear that you hate your aunt so much. I don’t know her, but if she is as bigoted and spiteful as you portray her to be, she is nothing like me. Since I don’t judge others, I don’t compare my sins to theirs, that is between them and their God.

          • pissed of & liberal

            Ok yes i may have said god did not exest BUT i was refering to the christian god. And i’m well aware the bible is not made of of lies because it is made up of STORIES made up by men relating to how they GUESS that ther god wants them to live. the only thing you were right about my slip up.

          • Frank Kahn

            This is getting fun, even if I am up way past my bedtime.

            “Ok yes i may have said god did not exest (EXIST) BUT i was refering (REFERRING) to the christian god. And i’m well aware the bible is not made of(UP) of lies because it is made up of STORIES made up by men relating to how they GUESS that ther (THEIR) god wants them to live. the only thing you were right about (WAS) my slip up.”

            Would you like to guess which parts of this is correct and which are wrong?

            Well here is the break down.

            You admitted to my being right about you previously saying that God did not exist, that is what you got right.

            I am not sure if you are prevaricating over the Bible or what. It may be that you have a different concept of lying than me. If somebody makes up a story, and tells me that it is the truth, I consider that to be lying. Since I can’t recall seeing the words “I think” or “I guess” or “maybe” in the Bible, It would appear that they are saying HE DID or HE SAID. Now if HE DID NOT DO or SAY, I would call what is in the Bible lies. So, if it was just MADE UP STORIES MADE UP BY MEN RELATING TO HOW THEY GUESS THAT THEIR GOD WANTS, can you explain how that is not calling it lies?

            Oh, and can you clarify which God is the Christian God? If you do some research you will find that the Jewish God is the same God as the Christian God. The only real difference is the Jews don’t believe the New Testament, which is where Jesus comes into the picture as the Christ.

            Now, since the slip up you are referring to was a different portion of my post than the item you just admitted to, you are lying when you say the slip up was the only thing I got right.

          • pissed off & liberal

            I don’ think any ONE religion has it right christianit,jewdaism,islam,etc they all have somethings right and somethings wrong but that’s just my theory.

          • Savage

            Frank,

            Excellant post.

        • Kevin
        • Patriot

          Alondra -
          I have spoken to a number of insane people in my life. You have so far been the most entertaining.
          You are by FAR the most angry, spiteful, and filled with hate religious nut I have ever had a conversation with.
          Pretty funny how you spew SO much anger, SO much hatred and bigotry, then dare say that you don’t.
          Anyway, all of the chapter and verse stuff is a waste of your time as yours comes from the same realm of fantasy as those in the Quoran.
          I think it’s REALLY funny how you have Christians that SEETHE and say the idea of a Muslim dying in a suicide bombing reaching heaven and being greeted by 75 virgins is ridiculous, but the idea that a dead guy rose from the grave and walked on water is perfectly legitimate. It’s all the same bit of religious theater, written in two different books.
          Anyway, thanks for being so amusing, Alondra.
          Take care. :)

          • Kevin

            Top Ten Signs You’re a Fundamentalist Christian
            10 – You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.
            9 – You feel insulted and “dehumanized” when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.
            8 – You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.
            7 – Your face turns purple when you hear of the “atrocities” attributed to Allah, but you don’t even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in “Exodus” and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in “Joshua” including women, children, and trees!
            6 – You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.
            5 – You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.
            4 – You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs — though excluding those in all rival sects – will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most “tolerant” and “loving.”
            3 – While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in “tongues” may be all the evidence you need to “prove” Christianity.
            2 – You define 0.01% as a “high success rate” when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.
            1 – You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history – but still call yourself a Christian.

          • robbiefine@hotmail.com

            Excellent. I love this list.

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          I thinkit would have been better if god had not created the devil.

          • patriot

            I, however, I am absolutely certain that it would be better if man had never created God.

    • momo

      Gray Beard, The Bible says “If My People” sadly there are very few Americans seeking Gods face…..so do not count on HIS intervention unless many more of use start seeking his face…………

  • http://personalliberty Alondra

    Kevin @8:27am
    “[M]uch of Europe supported the Confederacy against the Union, with the expectation that VICTORY OVER Lincoln WOULD MEAN THE END of the Greenback. France and Britain considered an outright attack on the United States to aid the confederacy, but WERE HELD AT BAY by RUSSIA, which … had a state central bank SIMILAR to the system the United States had been founded on. Left free of European intervention, the Union won the war, and Lincoln announced HIS INTENTION TO GO ON ISSUING GREENBACKS. Following Lincoln’s assassination, the GREENBACKS WERE PULLED FROM CIRCULATION and the American PEOPLE FORCED TO GO BACK TO AN ECONOMY BASED ON BANK NOTES BORROWED AT INTEREST FROM THE PRIVATE BANKERS.”
    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/allwarsarebankerwars.php

    Here is the current Russian leader – Vladimir Putin
    WHY Putin is hated so much and demonized by West and U.S.?

    1) “When Putin was elected president of Russia in 2000, Russia was BANKRUPT. Russia owed $16.6 billion to the Rothschild-run International Monetary Fund while her foreign debt to the Rothschild-controlled Paris & London Club of Creditors was over 36 billion dollars.”
    By 2006 Putin had PAID OFF Russia’s DEBT to the Rothschilds. Russia’s FINANCIAL DEPENDENCE on the foreign financiers was now OVER.

    2) Putin issued international ARREST WARRANT for Rothschild & Financial TERRORIST George Soros.
    Watch YouTube video (“2012-01-24 Soros Arrest Warrent Issued by Putin by Tom Heneghan”) and you’ll understand why Greece in mess & financial chaos.
    Now the terrorist Soros and also the Rothschilds & the Rockefellers can’t continue the evil speculations that have devastated the entire GLOBAL FINANCIAL SYSTEM.

    3) Putin won the battle for oil over the Rothschilds & Company (The Bushes, The Clintons, Soros, Kissinger and others)

    Jacob Rothschild created The Menatep Banking Group in Russia, which was associated with the Rothschild-Soros Carlyle Group. Then thru his agent Mikhail Khodorkovsky (the former Russian oligarch found guilty of stealing billions of dollars in oil) they bought Yukos Oil for $309 million. In 2003 the same company was ASSESSED AS WORTH $45 billion (or 145 TIMES the purchase price).
    The 40% (!!!) share of his Yukos stocks would pass into the hands of Lord Rothschild.

    “Just prior to his arrest, Khodorkovsky attempted to hand over control of the Yukos oil company to Jacob Rothschild. Khodorkovsky had a “previously unknown arrangement” with Jacob Rothschild for the latter to take control of the former’s Yukos stock in the event that the former could no longer “act as a beneficiary” of the shares. This effort to give control of Yukos to Rothschild was THWARTED when, in 2004, the government of Russia [Mr. Putin!!!] seized and sold Yukos’s largest production unit in compensation for large back tax bills.”

    “In 2007, JNR acquired a corporate intelligence firm called Diligence to coordinate its intelligence operations in Russia as well as elsewhere. Diligence was founded in 2000 by Nick Day, a former British special forces and MI5 operative, and ex-CIA agent Mike Baker, who no longer works for the company. Day reportedly saw an opening for a new business when British companies were entering emerging markets, TARGETING Russia. According to Handelsblatt, more than half of their roughly 100 employees are FORMER MEMBERS of an intelligence service.”

    Kevin, do not you think that America needs her Putin?

    • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

      Yes, but I do not personally trust Vladimir Putin any more than Barack Obama, George Soros, the Rothschilds or the Rockefellers.

      We desperately need to return to constitutional government, as laid out in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Boll of Rights.

      With kind regards,
      Oliver K. Manuel
      Former NASA Principal
      Investigator for Apollo
      http://www.omatumr.com

      • Charlie

        omanuel,,,
        We agree with you mostly,,,but,,,you did not mention The Bible ,,,which is THE number ONE CONTRACT in America with King Jesus Christ,,,and King Jesus Christ is The Commander of The American Militia… Meanwhile………………………….
        Praise King Jesus for Salvation and Healing… Acts 2:38 is salvation…

        Charlie Freedom

    • Savage

      Alondra,

      You’re right when you say “Putin won the battle for oil over the Rothschilds & Company (The Bushes, The Clintons, Soros, Kissinger and others)” — however, the operative word is “battle” — who wins the “war” is the winner!

      Besides, it doesn’t matter who wins. Putin is no better (may even be more evil) than the Rothchilds & Company. My take is that it doesn’t matter who wins because we will be the losers and will pay a heavy and painful price.

    • Kevin

      I am aware of a few things
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exAuNXzn3fw

  • http://msn JONE BRIGHT

    I surehope they are ready for a good old shooting match. They want power over us WE. had better wake up. God Bless the good people in America

    • robbiefine@hotmail.com

      Yes sir a real “good old fashioned shootin’ match”. You and some of your buds and those guns you covet in your basement against the local swat team! I wonder who’s going to end up on a slab in the morgue.

      • http://personalliberty Alondra

        robbiefine@hotmail.com aka R. Fine on the March 22, 2013 @10:51am in his reply to Alondra said:

        “Medical science confirms that homosexuality happens naturally in about 20% of any given population. It may not be to your liking”

        Oh, yes? Where are you took this information? From LGBT or it “to be your liking”.
        Please CARE to cite a source to back up your FALSEHOOD.

        “Scientists have not been able to conclude that there is any gene or combination of genes that will make someone gay.”

        None Biological study could find any “gay” gene or chromosome.

        A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene”
        “The human X and Y chromosomes (the two “sex” chromosomes) have been completely sequenced. Thanks to work carried out by labs all across the globe, we know that the X chromosome contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes (see NCBI, 2004). The National Center for Biotechnology Information reports that the Y chromosome—which is much smaller—contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes. Educational institutions such as Baylor University, the Max Planck Institute, the Sanger Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, and others have spent countless hours and millions of research dollars analyzing these unique chromosomes. As the data began to pour in, they allowed scientists to construct gene maps—using actual sequences from the Human Genome Project. And yet, NEITHER THE MAP FOR the X NOR the Y chromosome CONTAINS ANY “GAY GENE.”

        “What is the truth regarding homosexuality? Too often, speculation, emotions, and POLITICS PLAY A MAJOR ROLE in its assessment. The following is a scientific investigation of human homosexuality.”

        REAL STATISTICS
        While no one has carried out a door-to-door census, we do have a fairly accurate estimate. Interestingly, these statistics came to light in an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2003, in the Lawrence vs. Texas case (commonly known as the Texas sodomy case). On page 16 of this legal brief, footnote 42 revealed that 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following:

        The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (Laumann, et al., 1994).
        The study also found that only 0.9% of men and 0.4% of women reported having only same-sex partners since age 18—a figure that would represent a total of only 1.4 million Americans as homosexual (based on the last census report, showing roughly 292 million people living in America). The resulting accurate figures demonstrate that significantly less than one percent of the American population claims to be homosexual. TheNHSLS results are similar to a survey conducted by the Minnesota Adolescent Health Survey (1986) of public school students. The survey showed that only 0.6% of the boys and 0.2% of the girls identified themselves as “mostly or 100% homosexual.”

        http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

        Robbie, NEXT time please have the CORRECT facts and do NOT forget to cite a source to back up your “facts”. TY

        “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMINATION/DETESTABLE/ HATEFUL…But YOU SHALL KEEP MY STATUTES AND MY RULES AND DO NONE OF THESE ABOMINATIONS … So keep My charge NEVER TO PRACTICE ANY OF THESE ABOMINABLE CUSTOMS, that were practiced before you, and NEVER to make yourselves unclean by them: I am the LORD your GOD.” (Leviticus 18:22-30)

        “Great is TRUTH, and mighty above all things.” 2Ezdra 4:41

        “You SHALL NOT LIE” – God’s 9th Commandment

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          This is the second time I’m seeing this same posting. I have already answered it.

      • John

        Have you ever been to a country run by a muslim dictator? I would rather die a free man than a whimpering coward.

        • robbiefine@hotmail.com

          Yes.

  • ron

    If anyone has been noticing the federal spending and the fed printing 85 billion dollars per month the obvious thing to know is the U.S. economy is months from a total collapse.The only logical reason for the purchase of so much ammo is for an all out civil war inside the country.When the welfare,food stamps and social security checks stops the riots we saw over seas will be nothing to what we will see here.In the inner cities within days people will be preying on one another like animals.The thugs will start moving unto the countryside when all the stores have been pillaged. The only protection from a crumbling civilization will be your private owned firearms.

    • Kevin

      I do not disagree that the Governments surge in Bulk ammo purchase may be motivated by its concern over public Riots. It does see to its own Interest…. always.

    • Tommy cunningham

      Could be true in regards to riot control? I live in the country, so I’m stocking up as well for my ar10, 303, and 3-06 for hunting and protecting my property.

  • olsubsailor

    In my view anyone who does not activly support the second ammendment is is a traitor to the Constitition and should be treated as such.

    • robbiefine@hotmail.com

      Thanks for your opinion.

    • http://www.yahoo.com DJ

      I wouldn’t go so far as to say that. But working actively to disarm or hinder Americans from protecting themselves could be seen as such. Please don’t overreach. That’s the seal the government left (and maybe even a few on the right) needs to stifle 1st and 2nd Amendment rights. In those cases, you never do more than necessary.

  • Gary Belote

    Obama is sly as a fox. He will try to goad the patriots into firing the first salvo with his attacks on our 2nd amendment rights and then declare Marshall Law. Under Obummercare he has the right to call out the National Guard without the states permission.Its just a matter of time. Its an attack on all fronts. Our food surplus is being decimated by the continued production of Eythonol. Another drought like last year and we will be importing rice from China. Our leaders such as Boehner are so stupid they cant see whats going on. The House could defund EPA and Homeland Security and Obummercare but they are afraid of Obama. I’m very afraid for our country. What will we do if a caravan of Hum-Vees pull up in our yard and 15 U.N. troops get out with weapons drawn?

    • Eric Hendley

      Don’t make the mistake of assuming any of these politicians are stupid, they know exactly what they’re doing and they’re all in on it.

      • robbiefine@hotmail.com

        What does the National Guard have to do with health care? This is a new one on me. I’d like you to provide some details on this accusation. Thank you. (P.S.: If you do not provide details I will assume you are either making it up or that you have been duped by some kind of loonie talk show host).

    • http://yahoo bob peters

      I suggest you dont tell them where you hid your weapons…after they leave you become an insurgent freedom fighter…U.N. troops are to be seen as invaders and destroyed. Organize now so you wont be caught alone when the time comes…never surrender….

      • http://www.yahoo.com DJ

        Organizing can and usually does spark concern from government goons and sympathizers alike. So be prepared for possible snitches in the ranks. This scenario looks pretty scary at this point. It’s as though it is all so finely planned and crafted, no stones left unturned.

  • http://midcontent ridge runner

    There isn’t any food surplusses, the dumbocraps emptied all of the 3 month supplies of wheat in Obozo’s first term. There is still millions of acres of farm ground laying idle, producing weeds and some wildlife. The wildlife is extra income for the landowners who charge citizen to hunt on it, even though the citizen have been paying rent on this land for over 3 decades. Most lawyers and bankers and politians consider their owned/government rrented property their private hunting preserve You can go to any of the 50 states and see where your tax money get peed away. If the uke Obozo wanted to cut 85 billion out of the budget, cut the welfare (CRP) paymenys the next 10 years to the millionares getting these checks. It isn’t the Mom and Pop small farmer harvesting your tax money. Taxpayers could save $88 billion a year, and that would put people back to work doing soomething productive. For every 10 acres that is farmed in some crop, employes 1 person in some type of business, from retail, manufactoring of equipment of all types, to food processing plants. Our domestic beef production is lower than it was in 1952, wheat stocks are lower than 1942, and our costs for everything is the highest it has ever been compared to what it was in the late 30′s and 40′s, stats anyone can look up. Government can not create any thing good or positive, justmore worthless beltway fks and crimminals.

  • George E. Suitor

    I say they better be if they intend to follow through with these modern day POWDER ALARMS. When the Brittish tried it, we began the American revolution. The 2nd. Amendment prohibits the very actions the various State and Federal Govt.’s have been taking against our civil liberties from the very beginning. The 2nd. Amendment was placed in the constitution to gaurantee our right and ability to prevent tyrany against our freedoms and to take arms if necessary. The 10th. and 14th. amendments further restrict the State and Federal Govt.’s from making or enforcing the very laws they are cramming down our throats right now. Stand up to them we will. The 2nd. amendment gives us the tools, the 10th. and 14th. prohibit the infringement on any of our privileges or immunities enshrined within our CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ! So if they intend to continue this attack , I suggest they prepare for WAR!!!

    • robbiefine@hotmail.com

      88% of Americans and some 75% of gun owners favour comprehensive background checks on those purchasing guns. Of course there are those who think should be no concern about who is buying weaponry and they probably also feel that bazookas and flame throwers and high explosives should also be freely available.

      • Steve

        And your point is?

        • R.F.

          The point is that America is more than ready for stronger gun controls – and rightly so.

      • http://www.yahoo.com DJ

        Your point is crystal clear to me! Others, not so much . . .

  • http://omanuel.wordpress.com omanuel

    The problem we face is just this: Can we find a way to:

    a.) Resore integrity to government science
    b.) Restore constitutional limits on our national government
    c.) Retain the benefits reaped from forming the United Nations:

    _ i.) Reduced racism,
    _ ii.) Reduced nationalism,
    _ iii.) Reduced risk of nuclear war.

    Oliver K. Manuel
    Former NASA Principal
    Investigator for Apollo
    http://www.omatumr.com

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.