• 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.

A reminder to be careful with loaded weapons

killchain

killchain

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
788
Location
Richland, Washington, USA
imported post

ap_finger.jpg


Behold. The Ranger Safety.
 
V

virgil47

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
90
Location
Tacoma, Washington, USA
imported post

oneeyeross wrote:
Here is a location for an Etext of the Federalist Papers, so you don't have to buy them or have someone shipp you a copy...

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/

Another fine read is Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance, written in 1785, which describes his feelings about a 3 pence assessment, to pay for religious teachers... http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/madison_m&r_1785.html
Click to expand...
Tis strange that I can find no reference to the federalist papers in the Constitution. Perhaps you would be so kind to direct me to them. If you can not do so then please do read the Constitution as it was written not as you would have it. I believe that the establishment clause speaks to the government establishing and becoming the head of a religion much as the King of England had done not the total separation of church and state as some of the time had wanted. Those that wanted the total separation lost the argument as can be seen in the decor of our courts and the fact that our politicians and courts swear on a holy book. The founders were smart enough to realize that the vast majority of the citizenry were of the Christian faith and most had come to the U.S. in order to have the freedom to practice that faith. So it would seem that the government chose to be tolerant of religions other than Christianity rather than ban all religion.
 
killchain

killchain

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
788
Location
Richland, Washington, USA
imported post

gutshot wrote:
1970camaroRS wrote:

I respectfully must disagree with bible study as our founding fathers clearly say in the federalist papers that the church is to be kept separate from the state. It's not freedom of religion, it's freedom from religion. And so long as it's a publicly funded school...no religion can be indoctrinated. However, you will find there are a few high schools that still have trap and target shooting as an after school activity. I know because my brother, the Dean of Students and Burlington Edison High School teaches it.
Click to expand...
I must respectfully disagree with you. The founding fathers did not "clearly' say anything of the sort. The first amendment guarantees the freedom of religion.
Click to expand...
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.


Read literally, this only prevents Congress (and Congress alone) from establishing a national religion.

Thomas Jefferson wrote of a "wall of separation between church and state" in a (personal) letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, long after the Constitution was written and ratified. During the early years of the US it was common practice to have nationally proclaimed, christian based, holidays of fasting and thanksgiving. This was particularly true during the Washington and John Adams administrations. Both would qualify as a "founding father" in my book. When Jefferson became President he discontinued the practice. We have had a National Christmas Tree for years. Christmas and Thanksgiving are national holidays. It's only been in fairly recent years that the extreme left have gained enough influence to achieve the removal of the Ten Commandments and banning of prayer from schools. When I was in elementary school we started every day with a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance. The U.S Supreme Court starts each session with a prayer and a proclamation of God save the United States and this honorable court. The concept of separation of church and state is far from "clear" and its future uncertain.
Click to expand...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

It says both. You can freely practice your religion, and the government will not establish one.



 
O

oneeyeross

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
500
Location
Winlock, , USA
imported post

The reason people always bring up the Federalist Papers and other documents written at the time by the people who were at the convention is that the Supreme Court DOES use these documents to try to put themselves in the mind set of the framers of the Constitution.

The Court has, in the past, and will, I am sure, in the future, try to divine the mindset of the people who write laws. "What did Congress mean?" is something that you'll read a lot when you read court decisions.

Although the exact phrase "Separation of Church and State" does not appear in the Constitution, the Court has ruled that it can be inferred from the 1st Amendment, and the writings of the original framers of the document. It is the logical endpoint of the establishment phrase. Anytime that a Government allows preferential treatment for one group over another, it is, in effect, establishing that group as the "accepted" class. That was the whole point of Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance, that forcing everyone to support teachers of religion violated the establishment part...and I do think Madison had a bit more of an understanding of what the Constitution was meant to say than we do today....

[font="Arial, Helvetica"] "The preservation o a free Go[/font][font="Arial, Helvetica"]f[/font][font="Arial, Helvetica"]vernment requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people." James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, 1785
http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/madison_m&r_1785.html

We can argue all day long over whether the left or the right is correct in the establishment and separation parts, but in the long run, we have what we have. For almost 100 years, slavery was the accepted norm in this nation. That didn't make it right. Heck, at one point, Dred Scott was good case law.

We have moved on from the days when a group of superstitious men could hold the nation's hand and guide them along.
[/font]
 
O

oneeyeross

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
500
Location
Winlock, , USA
imported post

Going by your logic, the 1st Amendment would only protect newspapers and books, the second only flintlocks, etc. etc... Cultures change over the course of time, but the founding ideals don't. Not forcing religion on people is one of the founding principles of our nation, not just not forcing Catholicism, Baptism, Janism, Deism, etc., etc. It's not forcing religion, period. People have as much right to be agnostic/atheist, Wiccan, or what have you. To force an agnostic to participate, or pay for, a religious event is anathema to the ideal of the 1st Amendment.
 
1

1970camaroRS

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
49
Location
Mill Creek, Washington, USA
imported post

gutshot wrote:
I don't understand how you could possibly get this from what I wrote. Please point out the parts that brought you to this conclusion. I strongly recommend that you reread what I wrote. Please, read slowly.
Click to expand...

I read what you wrote...slowly. You two are both in agreement that laws change over time becauseEVERYTHING changes over time. Neither of you see eye toeye on which direction this particular law issupposed to go.

Also, I don't thinkthere's a goodunderstanding ofwhat the words "no laws regarding an establishment of religion" means. It does not mean the government can not establish a religion. If that's what it meant, in would read "Congress shall not establish a religion". An establishment of religion is just that, a body of people and their religion. Simply put,it means the government will make no law pro or con(no laws regarding )that has to do with any religion. (an establishment of religion) There's no trickery, no interpretation needed. It is simply put, as long as you understand grammar and what words mean. The government simply has no power to say anything at all about anything regarding an establishment of religion.
 
1

1970camaroRS

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
49
Location
Mill Creek, Washington, USA
imported post

oneeyeross wrote:
The reason people always bring up the Federalist Papers and other documents written at the time by the people who were at the convention is that the Supreme Court DOES use these documents to try to put themselves in the mind set of the framers of the Constitution.

The Court has, in the past, and will, I am sure, in the future, try to divine the mindset of the people who write laws. "What did Congress mean?" is something that you'll read a lot when you read court decisions.

Although the exact phrase "Separation of Church and State" does not appear in the Constitution, the Court has ruled that it can be inferred from the 1st Amendment, and the writings of the original framers of the document. It is the logical endpoint of the establishment phrase. Anytime that a Government allows preferential treatment for one group over another, it is, in effect, establishing that group as the "accepted" class. That was the whole point of Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance, that forcing everyone to support teachers of religion violated the establishment part...and I do think Madison had a bit more of an understanding of what the Constitution was meant to say than we do today....

[font="Arial, Helvetica"]"The preservation o a free Go[/font][font="Arial, Helvetica"]f[/font][font="Arial, Helvetica"]vernment requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people." James Madison, Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, 1785
http://religiousfreedom.lib.virginia.edu/sacred/madison_m&r_1785.html

We can argue all day long over whether the left or the right is correct in the establishment and separation parts, but in the long run, we have what we have. For almost 100 years, slavery was the accepted norm in this nation. That didn't make it right. Heck, at one point, Dred Scott was good case law.

We have moved on from the days when a group of superstitious men could hold the nation's hand and guide them along.
[/font]
Click to expand...
This is perfect.
 
O

oneeyeross

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
500
Location
Winlock, , USA
imported post

Anyway, the memorial service is Monday...for the gentleman who was killed...which is what this thread was originally about.

Regretfully, I have other obligations (CT scan) so won't be able to attend and support his son....who is having a very bad time dealing with this.
 
1

1970camaroRS

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
49
Location
Mill Creek, Washington, USA
imported post

gutshot wrote:
Well, after all of this, does anyone out there agree with 1970camaroRS that the First Amendment  "clearly says ________________" about anything? (You fill in the blank)
Click to expand...

I didn't say the First Amendment says, "..."

I said the Federalist Papers clearly say, "..." about the First Amendment.
 
Son_of_Perdition

Son_of_Perdition

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
166
Location
SW , Washington, USA
imported post

Trigger Dr wrote:
Now, to get SLIGHTLY back on topic,

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa157/Rollershooter/BPCR/Heart%20break/44mag1.jpg
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa157/Rollershooter/BPCR/Heart%20break/44mag3.jpg
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa157/Rollershooter/BPCR/Heart%20break/44mag4.jpg
Click to expand...




Wow? On topic... Was this due to operator error due to inattention; like the poor guy from the OP article? I have only seen this from a caplock revolver when someone forgot to grease their balls.


LOL I said " Grease their balls!"
44mag4.jpg



EDIT: to add pic for future viewing.
 
1

1970camaroRS

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
49
Location
Mill Creek, Washington, USA
imported post

gutshot wrote:
1970camaroRS wrote:
gutshot wrote:
Well, after all of this, does anyone out there agree with 1970camaroRS that the First Amendment "clearly says ________________" about anything? (You fill in the blank)
Click to expand...

I didn't say the First Amendment says, "..."

I said the Federalist Papers clearly say, "..." about the First Amendment.
Click to expand...
My apologies sir. I did misquote you, but you also misquoted yourself. Actually, you wrote "the Founding Fathers clearly stated in the Federalist Papers.......", bolding is mine. My problem is with the word "clearly". If it is all so clear why is there so little agreement on its meaning? Don't say stupidity or ignorance, that just makes people sound superior.
Click to expand...
You want to split hairs like that? This is no longer about the debate or the topic at hand. As far as saying clearly stated, it is my opinion that a logically minded person will think it's clear. Back to what this thread was about.

Everyone, remember to be careful about your guns in your safe. And be careful with your hand loaded rounds! I hope no one was hurt when the 44 mag tossed its cookies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top