How do we protect kids in school?

Jan 8, 2013 Full story: Ruidoso News 6,103

During a newsroom discussion about guns about a decade ago, a woman piped up: "I don't understand what the big deal is.

Full Story
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2630 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".
More US citizens own more guns than ever in the history of America.

What part of that do you not understand?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2631 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
GunShowTray-tor, the right of the people to keep and bear arms has nor been infringed. More US citizens own more guns than ever in the country's history.
You're hysterical over something that does not exist, illiterate imbecilic Tray-tor.
<quoted text>
You REALLY are ignorant, aren't you?

1934 National Firearms Act

1938 Federal Firearms Act

1968 Gun Control Act

1972 Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms created

1986 Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (They pass a 'law' to protect our HIRED SERVANTS? In VIOLATION of We The People's CONSTITUTIONALLY SECURED RIGHT?)

1990 Crime Control Act

1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act

ALL of which they had NO valid Constitutional authority to 'pass'. And conversely, they VIOLATED We The People's Constitution. Which EXPRESSLY DECLARES:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

Take a hike, you simplistic TRAITOR.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2632 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
<quoted text>
More US citizens own more guns than ever in the history of America.
What part of that do you not understand?
CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?
factologist

Farmington, NM

#2633 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You REALLY are ignorant, aren't you?
1934 National Firearms Act
1938 Federal Firearms Act
1968 Gun Control Act
1972 Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms created
1986 Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (They pass a 'law' to protect our HIRED SERVANTS? In VIOLATION of We The People's CONSTITUTIONALLY SECURED RIGHT?)
1990 Crime Control Act
1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
ALL of which they had NO valid Constitutional authority to 'pass'. And conversely, they VIOLATED We The People's Constitution. Which EXPRESSLY DECLARES:
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".
Say what you want, but clearly all these laws are in effect. You say they infringe in some way on your right to "keep and bear". Ok, now what are you going to do besides whine about it? NADA, ZERO, ZILCH, except find away around the law that is legal or find away to violate the law without getting caught. Other than that, you'll just keep whining. Music to my ears.
And you call others "coward". Jeez!

What part of "being infringed on" don't you get?
Here's hoping to infringe on your ass more and more as time goes by.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2634 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?
I've said this before to you, but you don't read, so once again--I am armed.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2635 May 12, 2013
Do you even have a clue what any one of these laws says?

Clearly they have done nothing to infringe upon your right to own firearms.

If you feel your rights have been violated, as factologist asked, why aren't you out there fighting? You nuts are always blathering on about how you will fight to defend your rights.

What are you, some sort of coward?
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You REALLY are ignorant, aren't you?
1934 National Firearms Act
1938 Federal Firearms Act
1968 Gun Control Act
1972 Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms created
1986 Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act (They pass a 'law' to protect our HIRED SERVANTS? In VIOLATION of We The People's CONSTITUTIONALLY SECURED RIGHT?)
1990 Crime Control Act
1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
ALL of which they had NO valid Constitutional authority to 'pass'. And conversely, they VIOLATED We The People's Constitution. Which EXPRESSLY DECLARES:
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".
Take a hike, you simplistic TRAITOR.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2636 May 12, 2013
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Say what you want, but clearly all these laws are in effect. You say they infringe in some way on your right to "keep and bear". Ok, now what are you going to do besides whine about it? NADA, ZERO, ZILCH, except find away around the law that is legal or find away to violate the law without getting caught. Other than that, you'll just keep whining. Music to my ears.
And you call others "coward". Jeez!
What part of "being infringed on" don't you get?
Here's hoping to infringe on your ass more and more as time goes by.
But ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

The U.S. Congress has Constitutionally delegated authority;

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

The "militia" is confined to whatever rules that Congress makes on the subject.

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms" is a PREEXISTING Right that was EXPRESSLY RESERVED by We The People. And has NOTHING to do with militia service whatsoever. Our hired servants are Constitutionally BOUND from "infringing" upon that right in ANY way, shape, or form. Hence the use of the prohibition; "shall NOT be infringed".

In regards to the militia, Congress does have clear delegated authority.

In regards to the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. They are expressly DENIED the authority to enact ANY law which contravenes that specific Right.

And this is borne out by not only the express terms of the U.S. Constitution. But by ALL commentary by recognized legal authorities of the period regarding the subject. Thus, ALL 'gun control laws' are Constitutionally REPUGNANT, and therefore NULL and VOID.

CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2637 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
<quoted text>
I've said this before to you, but you don't read, so once again--I am armed.
Then you are a HYPOCRITE.

CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2638 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
Do you even have a clue what any one of these laws says?
Clearly they have done nothing to infringe upon your right to own firearms.
If you feel your rights have been violated, as factologist asked, why aren't you out there fighting? You nuts are always blathering on about how you will fight to defend your rights.
What are you, some sort of coward?
<quoted text>
But ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

The U.S. Congress has Constitutionally delegated authority;

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

The "militia" is confined to whatever rules that Congress makes on the subject.

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms" is a PREEXISTING Right that was EXPRESSLY RESERVED by We The People. And has NOTHING to do with militia service whatsoever. Our hired servants are Constitutionally BOUND from "infringing" upon that right in ANY way, shape, or form. Hence the use of the prohibition; "shall NOT be infringed".

In regards to the militia, Congress does have clear delegated authority.

In regards to the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. They are expressly DENIED the authority to enact ANY law which contravenes that specific Right.

And this is borne out by not only the express terms of the U.S. Constitution. But by ALL commentary by recognized legal authorities of the period regarding the subject. Thus, ALL 'gun control laws' are Constitutionally REPUGNANT, and therefore NULL and VOID.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2639 May 12, 2013
OK. You have said that repeatedly--no law shall be passed that infringes on your right to keep and bear

NOW......tell us how your rights have been infringed. Are you SURE these laws infringe upon your right to keep and bear? If so, why don't you describe how?
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
But ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
The U.S. Congress has Constitutionally delegated authority;
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
The "militia" is confined to whatever rules that Congress makes on the subject.
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms" is a PREEXISTING Right that was EXPRESSLY RESERVED by We The People. And has NOTHING to do with militia service whatsoever. Our hired servants are Constitutionally BOUND from "infringing" upon that right in ANY way, shape, or form. Hence the use of the prohibition; "shall NOT be infringed".
In regards to the militia, Congress does have clear delegated authority.
In regards to the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. They are expressly DENIED the authority to enact ANY law which contravenes that specific Right.
And this is borne out by not only the express terms of the U.S. Constitution. But by ALL commentary by recognized legal authorities of the period regarding the subject. Thus, ALL 'gun control laws' are Constitutionally REPUGNANT, and therefore NULL and VOID.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2640 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you are a HYPOCRITE.
Oh? How?
factologist

Farmington, NM

#2641 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
But ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
If you say so, but try to legally get an automatic rifle and you'll have to follow the law to get it. Try to buy an AR-15 from a FFL and you'll have to follow the law to do it. Try and carry a gun openly in a Gun Free Zone and if a cop sees you he will most likely confiscate your gun and give you a court summons. But you can't have it both ways, whine bag. You claim these "gun laws" infringe on your right to "keep and carry" and yet you set on your ass and simply whine like a baby. Too funny.
Do you suck your thumb too? LOL!9848
factologist

Farmington, NM

#2642 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
Thus, ALL 'gun control laws' are Constitutionally REPUGNANT, and therefore NULL and VOID.
CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?
Oh, I forgot your question. I am one of the CRIMINALS on the street who is going to lobby for more- by your definition REPUGNANT gun control laws and support political candidates who will do the same.
So look for me, whine bag, I'll be the guy following you around to catch you violating one of those Constitutionally REPUGNANT gun control laws I helped pass.
Love to watch you whine.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2643 May 12, 2013
LOL
factologist wrote:
<quoted text>Oh, I forgot your question. I am one of the CRIMINALS on the street who is going to lobby for more- by your definition REPUGNANT gun control laws and support political candidates who will do the same.
So look for me, whine bag, I'll be the guy following you around to catch you violating one of those Constitutionally REPUGNANT gun control laws I helped pass.
Love to watch you whine.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2644 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
OK. You have said that repeatedly--no law shall be passed that infringes on your right to keep and bear
NOW......tell us how your rights have been infringed. Are you SURE these laws infringe upon your right to keep and bear? If so, why don't you describe how?
<quoted text>
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

For direct evidence:

Why were there NO 'gun control laws' from 1791 all the way up to 1934?

WHY would it take the government that long to pass a 'gun control law', if it actually had the 'power' to?

Even after a CIVIL WAR?

After which the 14th amendment was passed in order, among other rights, to give the freed slave the Right to Keep and Bear arms?

EXPLAIN THAT, traitor-troll.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2645 May 12, 2013
"A well regulated Militia, being necesarry to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

What is a well regulated militia?

If laws have been passed regarding guns, have they infringed the people's right to keep and bear? If so, how, since US citizens own millions of guns?

The 2nd does not seem to forbid laws--it warns against infringement.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2646 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
Has your arsenal been threatened? If so, how, when, etc.?
You, yourself, made the point that gov weaponry is much more potent and powerful than it was when the 2nd was created. What weapons do you want that you are prevented from acquiring? Why do you want those weapons?
<quoted text>
What difference does it make what kind of arms I want? What difference does it make what I want them for? As long as I am a law abiding citizen who practices proper care and safety what does it matter? I have not been prevented from obtaining what I want.......yet. If you and your gun grabbing pals had your way I'm quite sure the story would be different. That's why I'm all about seeing that you and your gun grabbing pals don't have your way. There are many unconstitutional laws which infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, the ban that just failed and ineffective background checks are just the latest. We need to work on repealing as many of them as possible. The "assault rifles" (as you erroneously refer to them) are no more or less dangerous than many other types of firearms. If you want to stop the violence, go to the source and work on controlling the violent criminals and psychos walking free among us and stop attempting to control and limit my rights, freedoms, and choices.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#2647 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
For direct evidence:
Why were there NO 'gun control laws' from 1791 all the way up to 1934?
GunShow1 wrote:
Why were there NO 'gun control laws' from 1791 all the way up to 1934?
Why do you lie every time you open your mouth, GayDavy?
Kentucky enacted the first carrying concealed weapon statute in the United States in 1813.

Wipe your lying mouth, GayDavy.

Why do you have a big wad running down your chin?

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#2648 May 12, 2013
xando wrote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necesarry to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
What is a well regulated militia?
If laws have been passed regarding guns, have they infringed the people's right to keep and bear? If so, how, since US citizens own millions of guns?
The 2nd does not seem to forbid laws--it warns against infringement.
1.) Read the Militia Act.

2.) YES!

3.) The 2nd does not "warn against infringement", it forbids infringement which includes laws that infringe.

Hope that helps.
xando

Gilbert, AZ

#2649 May 12, 2013
SQUACH:
1.) Read the Militia Act.

XANDO:
Which one?

SQUACH:
2.) YES!

XANDO:
How? As I have said repeatedly, US citizens are extremely well armed and own millions and millions of guns.

SQUACH:
3.) The 2nd does not "warn against infringement", it forbids infringement which includes laws that infringe.

XANDO:
It says the right to keep and bear shall not be infringed. Tell me how your right to keep and bear has been infringed.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 1 hr danny the GRUBER 11,901
Eric Frein manhunt turns up explosives Tue FormerParatrooper 28
Moms Demand Action Calls On Kroger Family Of St... Tue Frank 49
Locked And Loaded: Thank God These 'Good Guys' ... Tue Squach 96
FOX&#x27;s Resident Windbag Claims Prez&#x... Nov 24 caesar 2
Elk restoration plan is moving forward with the... Nov 23 dried 4
Comfortably Numb: The Navy Yard shooting rampag... (Sep '13) Nov 23 Enough already 3

Guns People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE