Tennessee Hunting Rights Amendment

[767]

You

[Moose]

Mississippi Gurl wrote:

<quoted text>ROTFLMAO!!! I sure hope somebody gets a recent pic of the fatass government mooching b!tch!

who might that be?

[SexySassySenior]

Moose wrote:

<quoted text>who might that be?

Himself!

[Done my homework]

SexySassySenior wrote:

<quoted text>
Himself!

Who self? And what does all this have to do with Hunting Rights, 2nd Amendment, "Gun Control", or anything else this topic might include?

[Bob]

Gun control! If we give them any more control over our lives than they have already amassed we can kiss all of our right goodbye. Law abiding citizens have the right to possess legal arms and ammunition. Law abiding citizens do not have to give up that constitutional right! Remember that if they come to take our only source of personal protection against criminals and tyrants.

[Woodrow]

Obey all hunting laws

[Done my homework]

Bob wrote:

Gun control! If we give them any more control over our lives than they have already amassed we can kiss all of our right goodbye. Law abiding citizens have the right to possess legal arms and ammunition. Law abiding citizens do not have to give up that constitutional right! Remember that if they come to take our only source of personal protection against criminals and tyrants.

You know how sometimes you'll know something, but it stays over in another section until something happens that connected two or more issues with this one something?

There is a word,'Allodial', that connects quite a lot together when it clicks. It is defined as "Free; not subject to the rights of any lord or superior; owned without obligation of vassalage or fealty; the opposite of feudal. A description given to the outright ownership of land that did not impose upon its owner the performance of feudal duties."

Allodial ownership can not be touched, taxed, or attached in any way, except by express permission of the owner. It means that if you had it, your own property could not be seized by law enforcement, attached by a court, or taken from you by the IRS.

However, if we don't have allodial ownership, then by default we have feudal, and that means we don't own anything only that we are allowed to use it within certain guidelines set by the allodial owner. Not "Rights", but permissions/permits/licenses/p rivileges.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Obey the laws, Woodrow? Did you choose that name intentionally? I can't help but wonder considering that your namesake said:

"A great industrial nation is controlled by it's system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated
in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely
controlled and dominated governments in the world--no longer a government of free opinion, no
longer a government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and
duress of small groups of dominant men." --President Woodrow Wilson

Could it be that allodial ownership is held by the Banksters?

Theory? Maybe so, maybe not. Has no one bothered to ask who originated these laws, or where they came from? We the people didn't; they've been sold to us by crafty snake oil salesmen we call politicians.

[enough]

So so sick of this subject. We have to keep the guns away from the nutcases. Some people shouldn't be allowed out of house. Let along if they are packing a gun....GET REAL!!!!!

[Shalea]

enough wrote:

So so sick of this subject. We have to keep the guns away from the nutcases. Some people shouldn't be allowed out of house. Let along if they are packing a gun....GET REAL!!!!!

Finally a couple of post from people that actually make sense, when it comes to gun control. Those rapid, repeat firing guns, capable of shooting 100 rounds in less than a minute, those guns do not need to be in the hands of anyone but the military of specific police fields, as some police go batshit crazy and start shooting the place to hell and back. Why is this so hard for people of the South, specifically SE, to accept. No one wants their damned guns, just regulations and control over who is able to obtain those "guns of war".

[ManeBrane]

Shalea wrote:

<quoted text>
Finally a couple of post from people that actually make sense, when it comes to gun control. Those rapid, repeat firing guns, capable of shooting 100 rounds in less than a minute, those guns do not need to be in the hands of anyone but the military of specific police fields, as some police go batshit crazy and start shooting the place to hell and back. Why is this so hard for people of the South, specifically SE, to accept. No one wants their damned guns, just regulations and control over who is able to obtain those "guns of war".

The second amendment is clear, we have the right to bear arms. Just because you don't like it, don't mean it ain't so!

[enough]

Yeah you have a right to bare arms but should the nutcases be allowed to have them. What's wrong with not allowing a nutcase or someone that has been a trouble making jailbird not ti be able to walk in a buy a gun without questions being asked. I am sure when our forefathers wrote this they had no idea how many drug addicted no good mean craziest would be packing. An why would any law abiding normal Christian need assault rifle. Don't even give me crap about hunting. If you need something that shoots that many times to kill a dear then your one of the nutcsases that shouldn't be allowed out of the house!!

[Done my homework]

Shalea wrote:

<quoted text>
Finally a couple of post from people that actually make sense, when it comes to gun control. Those rapid, repeat firing guns, capable of shooting 100 rounds in less than a minute, those guns do not need to be in the hands of anyone but the military of specific police fields, as some police go batshit crazy and start shooting the place to hell and back. Why is this so hard for people of the South, specifically SE, to accept. No one wants their damned guns, just regulations and control over who is able to obtain those "guns of war".

Not sure if you know this, but the Revolution was fought on our own soil with guns that the government wanted to confiscate. Another revolution was fought almost 100 years after between those who felt that the states constituted units of a larger political whole, and those who felt that each state was sovereign in and of itself with those of the first group willing to do most atrocious things to insure their own point of view prevailed.

This information is freely available, and easily verified. The question is, will you, and if you do what will you do about it? Perhaps you think there is security in surrender, but that would be the security of a prisoner/slave.

[Done my homework]

enough wrote:

Yeah you have a right to bare arms but should the nutcases be allowed to have them. What's wrong with not allowing a nutcase or someone that has been a trouble making jailbird not ti be able to walk in a buy a gun without questions being asked. I am sure when our forefathers wrote this they had no idea how many drug addicted no good mean craziest would be packing. An why would any law abiding normal Christian need assault rifle. Don't even give me crap about hunting. If you need something that shoots that many times to kill a dear then your one of the nutcsases that shouldn't be allowed out of the house!!

Nutcases? There are background checks required to ensure "jailbirds" and your nutcases don't get their hands on firearms through legal means. How odd that criminals tend not to use these means, but your solution is to make the world safer for criminals? I'm so sure they appreciate that.

Hunting Rights is not why we should protect and win back the 2nd Amendment, and I've never said that it was.

I have the right to have RPG's, Assault rifles, magazines that hold thousands of rounds, sniper rifles, various hand guns depending on desired result, and those laws that limit my right are illegal, immoral, and serve only to enforce the slavery that has been imposed on all citizens of the USA since the mid to late 1800's.

[Done my homework]

This thread has been more about the 2nd Amendment long before I joined. I find it odd that with all the discussion no one has raised a few fundamental questions, so I will.

1) Do we have the right to eat?

2) If we do have the right to eat, where does that right come from?

3) If we don't have the right to eat, how can we claim we have the right to procure food, either from game or garden?

4) Is there one source for our "Rights", and if so what is that source?

[Really Sassy]

Done my homework wrote:

This thread has been more about the 2nd Amendment long before I joined. I find it odd that with all the discussion no one has raised a few fundamental questions, so I will.

1) Do we have the right to eat?

2) If we do have the right to eat, where does that right come from?

3) If we don't have the right to eat, how can we claim we have the right to procure food, either from game or garden?

4) Is there one source for our "Rights", and if so what is that source?

All of your "homework" ie: common sense will ultimately fall upon deaf ears of people like the poster above you. Something in their brain apparently isnt, pardon the pun, firing properly, so they can't seem to grasp the idea that mentally disturb people or criminals as a rule don't go in to purchase firearms to use for mischief. In not sure why that connection don't register and I never will.

[haha]

Let me put it in plain English if you live in the house with someone who is crazy as can be don't have guns around. If you know they are flipping lunatics or mean to the bone don't buy them assault rifles an take them out to target practice. Nobody is trying to take your guns people are just wanting a little common sense used. BUT as unreasonable and narrow minded as some people in talking about gun control those are probably some more nutcsases that shouldn't br packing...

[ManeBrane]

enough wrote:

Yeah you have a right to bare arms but should the nutcases be allowed to have them. What's wrong with not allowing a nutcase or someone that has been a trouble making jailbird not ti be able to walk in a buy a gun without questions being asked. I am sure when our forefathers wrote this they had no idea how many drug addicted no good mean craziest would be packing. An why would any law abiding normal Christian need assault rifle. Don't even give me crap about hunting. If you need something that shoots that many times to kill a dear then your one of the nutcsases that shouldn't be allowed out of the house!!

The second amendment is clear, we have the right to bear arms! Why I want an assault rifle is none of your's or anyone else's business. Just like your choice of religion (or none)is any of my business.

[haha]

Didn't say it was my choice but all nutcsases should have access to fund...if your not a nutcsases you have no worries!!

[Really Sassy]

haha wrote:

Let me put it in plain English if you live in the house with someone who is crazy as can be don't have guns around. If you know they are flipping lunatics or mean to the bone don't buy them assault rifles an take them out to target practice. Nobody is trying to take your guns people are just wanting a little common sense used. BUT as unreasonable and narrow minded as some people in talking about gun control those are probably some more nutcsases that shouldn't br packing...

While I agree you must admit not every circumstance is the same. We don't live in a perfect world and mental illness can often be hidden by the patient or by drug therapy. Then there is life in general, people divorce, homes are broken/robbed and often guns fall into the wrong hands. There will always be those select cases where a brutal crime is committed regardless of any kind of gun control law. That's simply part of life and being human. Common since can only dictate in this instance.

[Really Sassy]

ManeBrane wrote:

<quoted text>The second amendment is clear, we have the right to bear arms! Why I want an assault rifle is none of your's or anyone else's business. Just like your choice of religion (or none)is any of my business.

That should certainly be the case but sadly Americans love to pick and choose rights and vote based solely how if effects their personal beliefs. A great example is equality for all. I may or may not agree with same sex marriage but my beliefs shouldn't be law.