Comments
641 - 660 of 938 Comments Last updated Dec 8, 2013

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#687
Jan 10, 2013
 
VADoc wrote:
<quoted text>
No they will just circumvent it anyway they can.
Hence discussing executive orders, the nuclear rule, etc.
Now please answer my question.
Frankly I think a team of lawyers would be a far better resource than a pile of guns.

Actual nullification of the Second Amendment requires a process that includes ratification by the states. Simply acting in violation is not going to be resolved by a bunch of folks shooting people, but through the court system.

The Supreme Court has across history resolved many instances of Unconstitutional behavior. Armed insurrection has been successfully employed when?
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#691
Jan 11, 2013
 
Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
Our right to own the same firearms as the military is mostly restricted, I cannot acquire a new manufacture M4A1 without becoming a Class III Dealer with an agency letterhead.
Therefore, the Constitution is already been rendered irrelevant because the Supreme Court has not struck down Section 922(o) of the 1986 FOPA.
The Governor of New York has said he will confiscate if the Senate approves. The problem in New York is that only handguns are registered, so that's all they can steal for now. But since they are giving lip service to "self defense", which does not exist in most NY counties, they won't do that. But I predict that a final bill will require that all "evil rifles" will have to be turned in for "ballistic fingerprinting and microstamping" and then the State Senate will pass a confiscation bill to destroy them.
This is what happened in 1997 in the UK after all.
That happened in the UK in 1997? What year did the Crown's forces move in on the unsuspecting villagers?
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#692
Jan 11, 2013
 
Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
Battle of Athens
It only needs to be done once, the Canuckistaners resisted long gun registration and got the registry sunk. I predict that NY long gun owners will do the same.
If the courts don't deliver justice, then we know that violence is often the result.
You do realize, don't you, that the lawmakers who will be passing these laws were duly elected by the people and will stand for relection again in the near future? If so many people are so enraged by the looming gun regulation, perhaps it won't get passed in the first place or new lawmakers can be elected to correct the mistake.

That, or more people support the notion than you think and once again you are a fringe outlier on this issue.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#695
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
The original Firearms Act of 1997 banned all handguns greater than .22LR.
The .22LR handguns were required to be stored in shooting clubs. When Blair won the election, a second Firearms Act of 1997 was passed that confiscated the .22LR handguns in the clubs.
Thus, the UK Olympic shooting team, cannot practice in the UK.
I think that New York might do the same thing.
So you are worried about our Olympic team. They will be ok.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#696
Jan 11, 2013
 
Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
NY is heavily gerrymandered.
I really don't care if I am a fringe outlier, gun bans are immoral.
We may find out today if Mikey has thrown around enough cash to pass it in the Senate.
Immoral? Interesting take. How so?
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#697
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
NY is heavily gerrymandered.
I really don't care if I am a fringe outlier, gun bans are immoral.
We may find out today if Mikey has thrown around enough cash to pass it in the Senate.
Aren't all you guys State's Rights guys too? If you don't like New York's gun laws, move to Idaho.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#700
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
The natural right to self defense from the Creator, and the generalized idea that government should not be more powerful than the citizenry.
There was a movie where only the police and military had guns, it's called Schindler's List.
I'm missing your point on the immorality of restrictions on firearms. And spare us the Holocaust comparisons. It's insulting and reflects poorly on your intelligence.

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#701
Jan 11, 2013
 
Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
The natural right to self defense from the Creator, and the generalized idea that government should not be more powerful than the citizenry.
There was a movie where only the police and military had guns, it's called Schindler's List.
In the Declaration of Independence the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are directly addressed. Nothing about self-defense.

Did God appear to you and state that's a natural right?

Don't get me wrong, I believe in self preservation, which is a natural reaction. Some perceive that submission is the best manner, some violent reaction and others attempt conflict resolution.

Nowhere are you granted the right to kill or maim a fellow citizen.
Duke for Mayor

Uniontown, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#702
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
The natural right to self defense from the Creator, and the generalized idea that government should not be more powerful than the citizenry.
There was a movie where only the police and military had guns, it's called Schindler's List.
The right you refer to has been enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

Like that old soup commercial..."its in there".

woof
Duke for Mayor

Uniontown, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#705
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>The only thing that can be restricted is WMD, which ideally would be held by the states.
wrong again Karl.

woof

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#706
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Aren't all you guys State's Rights guys too? If you don't like New York's gun laws, move to Idaho.
That's already under way...
----------
So where to people want to live?

United Van Lines reports that the nation's capital and the Northwest are the big winners. After Washington D.C., top destinations include Oregon, Nevada, North Carolina and South Carolina.

The other top losers with New Jersey include West Virginia, New York and New Mexico.
http://articles.philly.com/2013-01-09/news/36...
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#707
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
Would you like a more recent comparison, say "Mexico" or "Chicago" or "China"
The only thing that can be restricted is WMD, which ideally would be held by the states. Given that privateers operated with cannon, and many Americans had superior Kentucky rifles compared to the inaccurate Brown Bess musket, it can therefore be seen that the Constitution protects arms used by the military and arms that were too expensive for the military.
If the government disarms the law abiding, the criminal element will actually be emboldened unless Amendments 4 and 5 are waived, as in England where similar ideas were only statutory. Further, there is no guaruntee that the government will not turn genocidal or tyrannical, they held the 1984 Winter Olympics in Bosnia after all, seven years later, ethnic cleansing broke out.
Yikes.

Since: Sep 10

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#708
Jan 11, 2013
 
Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
"life"
Interesting.

How does your pro-life stance balance with death sentences issued by the government?

And 'life' by itself doesn't stretch to killing someone else.
WiseAmerican

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#709
Jan 11, 2013
 
If the government disarms the law abiding...

I'm all for the 2nd amendment, but the reality is the only Americans who are systematically and unconstitutionally disarmed by Federal and State law, are those that have felony convictions. No law abiding citizen, that HAS NOT been convicted of a felony offence, is legally able to purchase ANY firearm that is sold in a gun store or sporting goods department. I see no push by any party or group/organization fighting against the constitutional rights to bear arms for those who have a felony conviction in the past but has shown to be a law abiding citizen/tax payer years after the conviction and punishment by law!
Until all rights are restored to those individuals the gun lobbyist and rightwing conservatives are not champions of constitutional rights. Include every Americans rights in your arguments. As I've stated before, there are millions of people, many who are business owners and family men/women are being denied their 2nd amendment right by unjust legal statutes

Anyone who has been convicted of a felony is banned by federal law from ever possessing ďany firearm or ammunition." Specifically a person "convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year" cannot possess any firearm in any location. 18 U.S.C. 922(g) is the federal law that prohibits anyone ever convicted of any felony to ever possess any firearm either inside or outside of his home. The federal punishment for felon gun possession is up to 10 years in prison.

In the end, federal restrictions on the possession of firearms by convicted felons are entirely dependent upon the restrictions imposed by the various states. If there is a state restriction on an individualís gun possession as the result of a criminal conviction, then possession is a violation of federal law.

This is a direct obstruction to the bill of rights/2nd amendment clause.
WiseAmerican

Columbus, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#710
Jan 11, 2013
 
You 2nd amendment patriots say nothing about the government removing millions of people 2nd amendment, for life, yet you're howling about rights that are not being taken from you or your ability to own and posses firearms for protection of your homes and person. Limiting a magazines capacity IS NOT taking away your 2nd amendment, nor is banning a "certain type" of rifle, which most who's complaining already own one or more of said type! I feel that there's a biased reasoning why no action has been put forward to challenge this federal/state life ban for felons to have their 2nd amendment rights. You read it, they're not even able to be in a house that has a firearm! This law is ridiculous and insane.

Most of the people with felony live in an area that has the most crime, and need protection greater than a person in an suburban nonexistent crime community. Of the people who petition the courts or governor to grant 2nd amendment rights to the ex-felon, 99% of the request are denied, thus labeling that individual a criminal in the eyes of the law forever.
Hugh Victor Thompson IV

Galena, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#711
Jan 11, 2013
 
My daddy's not talking to me.
Pale Rider

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#712
Jan 11, 2013
 
How many believe this. Raising taxes on the wealthy will hurt economic growth and the job creators.

In October, Speaker of the House John Boehner wrote,ďAs a former small businessman, my experience has taught me that raising taxes on families and small businesses will only hurt job creation.

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#713
Jan 11, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Pale Rider wrote:
How many believe this. Raising taxes on the wealthy will hurt economic growth and the job creators.
In October, Speaker of the House John Boehner wrote,ďAs a former small businessman, my experience has taught me that raising taxes on families and small businesses will only hurt job creation.
You really are a moron.
Pale Rider

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#714
Jan 12, 2013
 
Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:
<quoted text>You really are a moron.
You are a stuck on ones self, non religious Jew.

Do you have a big nose III?
Hugh Victor Thompson V

Uniontown, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#715
Jan 12, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Hugh Victor Thompson IV wrote:
My daddy's not talking to me.
Send him a check. He won't leave you alone.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Columbus Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••