• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Engel and an "assault" weapons ban

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

What part of "Shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

Charlton Heston is my President.

The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

If Thomas Jefferson had believed in "common sense" gun laws we'd all still be wearing powdered wigs.

A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

These phrases: "right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people" all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arm" refers to the state.

The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

:)
 

Smurfologist

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
536
Location
Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
What part of "Shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

Charlton Heston is my President.

The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

If Thomas Jefferson had believed in "common sense" gun laws we'd all still be wearing powdered wigs.

A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

These phrases: "right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people" all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arm" refers to the state.

The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

:)
That's deep.........How about the following:

Life, Liberty, and my Beretta for Happiness!!:X
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

USNRCorpsman wrote:
How about "My Beretta to protect my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" ?
The biggest problem with the entire prospect of the "pursuit of happiness" is that is was a compromise to the Hamiltonian school of thought in exchange for "property" which is what Jefferson and Madison preferred.

Now the government can disoblige you your property because, well, there's no context for it in any founding document. And they bloody-well know it.
 

Smurfologist

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
536
Location
Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
USNRCorpsman wrote:
How about "My Beretta to protect my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" ?
The biggest problem with the entire prospect of the "pursuit of happiness" is that is was a compromise to the Hamiltonian school of thought in exchange for "property" which is what Jefferson and Madison preferred.

Now the government can disoblige you your property because, well, there's no context for it in any founding document. And they bloody-well know it.

Wow......This is harder than I thought it would be. What about:

Justice for the 2nd Amendment........Preserved by my Beretta!!:X
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

That reminds me a little of a couple of classic bumper stickers:

Insured by Smith & Wesson

Warning: Driver Only Carries $20 Worth of Ammunition


How about:

The 2nd Amendment... brought to you in part by Beretta and the number 1787.
 

Smurfologist

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
536
Location
Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
That reminds me a little of a couple of classic bumper stickers:

Insured by Smith & Wesson

Warning: Driver Only Carries $20 Worth of Ammunition


How about:

The 2nd Amendment... brought to you in part by Beretta and the number 1787.

That sounds like a winner. The "number 1787" is a nice touch (smile). Thanks so much!!:celebrate

The 2nd Amendment... brought to you in part by Beretta and the number 1787!!:X
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

Looking back on it, I might be tempted to drop the "in part" part.

Otherwise, you're quite welcome. It got me thinking, as well. I mean, I consider myself a "patriot" and the Constitution is a (THE) critical cog in that device.

If America could be salvaged from the over 150 years of usurpation and illegal congressional, judicial and executive acts, then I would support its survival. I would even fly its flag once more. Presently, only the Betsy Ross represents liberty in America. The 50-star federal rag represents war, theft, tyranny, murder, imprisonment, imperialism and despotism.

We need more Bonnie Blues.
 

Smurfologist

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2006
Messages
536
Location
Springfield by way of Chicago, Virginia, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
Looking back on it, I might be tempted to drop the "in part" part.

Otherwise, you're quite welcome. It got me thinking, as well. I mean, I consider myself a "patriot" and the Constitution is a (THE) critical cog in that device.

If America could be salvaged from the over 150 years of usurpation and illegal congressional, judicial and executive acts, then I would support its survival. I would even fly its flag once more. Presently, only the Betsy Ross represents liberty in America. The 50-star federal rag represents war, theft, tyranny, murder, imprisonment, imperialism and despotism.

We need more Bonnie Blues.

Wylde007, you are very deep........

The 2nd Amendment... brought to you by Beretta and the number 1787!!:X
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
imported post

wylde007 wrote:
USNRCorpsman wrote:
How about "My Beretta to protect my life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" ?
The biggest problem with the entire prospect of the "pursuit of happiness" is that is was a compromise to the Hamiltonian school of thought in exchange for "property" which is what Jefferson and Madison preferred.

Now the government can disoblige you your property because, well, there's no context for it in any founding document. And they bloody-well know it.
I think you may be incorrect in that assesment about property, but I have no context to quote nor documents. Let's research it shall we? I know that Abe Lincoln spoke about not taking the house of one's neighbor because you don't have one, but I'm pretty sure the founders knew the value of property and it was mentioned in the 3rd and in the 4th Amendment and the 9th could be construed as pertaining to it also. The Tenth Amendment also being the catch all that to me would cover the right to property, since it's "The People" who retain all rights to govern those powers which are not granted BY US (We the People) to the Feds.
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
imported post

Gordie wrote:
As a result, the civilian firearms market is flooded with imported, inexpensive military-style assault weapons, primarily from former Eastern bloc countries including Romania, Bulgaria and the former Yugoslavia.
Where exactly is this flood of "imported, inexpensive military-style assault weapons"? I haven't been able to find any of the weapons or the ammo to fire from them for a decent price since last summer.:cuss:
Same here Gordie, flood they say? Then why is it you have got backorders for most "military style" "Black guns" ?And the same M1A that I could have bought last year for around $1100 now costs $1800 to 2K IF you can find one? Inexpensive?? yeah right. 7.62x51 used to cost about .50c a round.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
imported post

KansasMustang wrote:
I think you may be incorrect in that assessment about property, but I have no context to quote nor documents. Let's research it shall we?
Short time: http://wrenncom.com/CommentaryArchives/2001/20y01m07d04-01.asp#T01

That article tends to defend your perspective, but only in the 5th and 14th Amendments is mention of property referred.

My reference was, admittedly, specifically directed towards the Declaration of Independence which, I am well aware, is not a document of binding law.

I did, however, deliberately mean to imply that the Hamiltonian school of thought was decidedly Marxist and socialist, desiring a strong, overreaching federal government to dictate and mandate "rights" as they saw fit. Hamilton did not believe in the right nor ability of free men to govern themselves and was a proponent of the nanny state.

He was frequently at great odds with both Jefferson and Madison, sharing a desire to separate from England among their few true common interests.
 

Gordie

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
716
Location
, Nevada, USA
imported post

KansasMustang wrote:
Gordie wrote:
As a result, the civilian firearms market is flooded with imported, inexpensive military-style assault weapons, primarily from former Eastern bloc countries including Romania, Bulgaria and the former Yugoslavia.
Where exactly is this flood of "imported, inexpensive military-style assault weapons"? I haven't been able to find any of the weapons or the ammo to fire from them for a decent price since last summer.:cuss:
Same here Gordie, flood they say? Then why is it you have got backorders for most "military style" "Black guns" ?And the same M1A that I could have bought last year for around $1100 now costs $1800 to 2K IF you can find one? Inexpensive?? yeah right. 7.62x51 used to cost about .50c a round.
Go back 5 years and I bought a case ofthe same ammo (Australian manufacture)at a gun show for $160 for 1,000. I remember crying about how expensive it had gotten. I wish that I could find some more of that expensive stuff today.:lol:
 

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
imported post

And might I add that all the while the Antis are yapping up the case for resurrecting the so-called "assault weapons ban" (and I will skip here the broader manure pile of "assault"="full auto"); they are either obscuring or ignoring or are ignorant of the fact that "assault" rifles do NOT have as their main purpose "To kill as many people as possible" but to GREIVOUSLY WOUND as many people as possible. Every wounded soldier needs anywhere from one to ten of his fellows to support him. If I wanted to kill someone, my choice of rifle would not be an M-16 or an AK. I would use a Winchester lever-action in .30-.30, with hollowpoints, or something similar.

And what of the bow? A broadhead shot from a 60lb compound bow will pierce Kevlar. And it is silent. Three or four bowmen operating at night can take out scas of people with nary a sound before anyone in the target group has a clue as to what is up. The guys with deer rifles can then mop up. "Assault weapon"?? I got yer "assault weapon".... RIGHT HERE!
 
Top