New anti-firearms bill - Page 3

New anti-firearms bill

This is a discussion on New anti-firearms bill within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; That doesn't mean we have to lay back and take it. The same people who are in charge and are treating us like terrorists for ...

Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 239

Thread: New anti-firearms bill

  1. #31
    Member Array Torrid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    296
    That doesn't mean we have to lay back and take it. The same people who are in charge and are treating us like terrorists for dissent are the same people that said dissent is very American and Americans have the right to protest before they had power. That shrill windbag Hillary Clinton was the person that was yelling this at such a high pitch that it could crack glass.


  2. #32
    VIP Member Array zacii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    arizona
    Posts
    3,749
    Who decides who is terrorist? I don't think this bill would change anything. Once a person can be determined a 'terrorist', then they are less than human, no rights, no due process, nothing.
    Trust in God and keep your powder dry

    "A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

  3. #33
    VIP Member Array TN_Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shelby County TN
    Posts
    11,118
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    I come from a completely different mindset, which is why I run into so much opposition here. I trust our elected officials.
    And this is why most of us do not trust nor think too highly of you.


    Quote Originally Posted by Torrid View Post
    That doesn't mean we have to lay back and take it. The same people who are in charge and are treating us like terrorists for dissent are the same people that said dissent is very American and Americans have the right to protest before they had power. That shrill windbag Hillary Clinton was the person that was yelling this at such a high pitch that it could crack glass.
    Agreed. Some how it is now un-American and un-Patriotic to question our elected officials, protest their socialistic proposed legislation and call them out about it. But just a year ago, this was the absolute height of patriotism and the very best in American participation in the Democratic process.

    It makes me sick.
    ,=====o00o _
    //___l__,\____\,__
    l_--- \___l---[]lllllll[]
    (o)_)-o- (o)_)--o-)_)

  4. #34
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by TN_Mike View Post
    And this is why most of us do not trust nor think too highly of you.
    It must be difficult to go through life afraid of your shadow and the people we elect to public office.

    Yes, many people hate the United States government and demonstrate disdain for the Constitution. They are well represented on this forum. The groupthink must be satisfying for you. I prefer to think for myself.

    As to your opinion of me? My reaction is the same as those who are so concerned with how the US is perceived by our enemies in the world. Who cares?

  5. #35
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by zacii View Post
    Once a person can be determined a 'terrorist', then they are less than human, no rights, no due process, nothing.
    You put terrorist in quotes as if you do not understand the enemy.

    And yes, once a terrorist is determined to be an enemy of the United States they ARE less than human and they have NO rights and not accorded due process. Nothing.

    We should extract whatever actionable intelligence they possess and toss them aside like a used condom.

  6. #36
    Senior Member Array KenInColo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    991
    Quote Originally Posted by srtops View Post
    Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009 (S. 1317) on June 22, 2009. The summary states:

    [INDENT]"...the Terrorist Watch List that has had notible people on it such as Ted Kennedy...
    While Kennedy probably shouldn't have a gun, he definitely shouldn't have a car.
    An armed populace are called citizens.
    An unarmed populace are called subjects.

  7. #37
    VIP Member Array rodc13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    2,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Torrid View Post
    That doesn't mean we have to lay back and take it. The same people who are in charge and are treating us like terrorists for dissent are the same people that said dissent is very American and Americans have the right to protest before they had power.
    No one has treated dissenters like terrorists. If they were, they'd be locked up and undergoing interrogation. I think you're confusing criticism because of rudeness and distortion for brutality.

    If, on the other hand, you engage in terroristic threats or actions and advocate the violent overthrow of our Constitutional republic, then you'll get treated like a terrorist, and you'll deserve it.
    Cheers,
    Rod
    "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

  8. #38
    Member Array Torrid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    296
    I'm not saying that we are being treated like them, but the released bulletin says that people with these certain political stances could be "homegrown terrorists". That alone is disturbing as they now have a precedent to actually label someone because of their political stance. I'm not saying something bad definitely will happen, but we're walking a fine line with all this loaded language.

  9. #39
    VIP Member Array TN_Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shelby County TN
    Posts
    11,118
    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    It must be difficult to go through life afraid of your shadow and the people we elect to public office.

    Yes, many people hate the United States government and demonstrate disdain for the Constitution. They are well represented on this forum. The groupthink must be satisfying for you. I prefer to think for myself.

    As to your opinion of me? My reaction is the same as those who are so concerned with how the US is perceived by our enemies in the world. Who cares?
    I do have a question for you SD. If you think so little of us group thinkers here, why do you continue to post here and at the Conservative Stronghold?

    What ever your reasons are, my life just became easier, as I now have you on my ignore list. Don't bother responding, I won't see it. I am simply tired of your completely deluded and continuously kowtowing to the Government. I half think you work for the Obama admin.
    ,=====o00o _
    //___l__,\____\,__
    l_--- \___l---[]lllllll[]
    (o)_)-o- (o)_)--o-)_)

  10. #40
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by TN_Mike View Post
    I do have a question for you SD. If you think so little of us group thinkers here, why do you continue to post here and at the Conservative Stronghold?
    I post here because I share a common interest and I learn a lot from the wiser posters here. And not everyone here requires the constant drumbeat of agreement with incorrect thinking like the government is bad, our rights are diminishing, revolution, we have no liberty, rebellion, they are out to get us...

    I post at conservative stronghold because there is a diversity of views sharing a common ideaology, conservative values.

    I half think you work for the Obama admin.
    And that, my friend, is exactly the problem. At least you are half right.

    Just curious, why did you post a direct question if you are not interested in reading the answer?

    More importantly, why is it important for you to announce you are going to ignore my posts?

  11. #41
    Member Array nasal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    96
    SelfDefense, there is no due process associated with this bill. The potential for abuse is astounding. Remember, Lautenberg is the same guy who pushed through the Lautenberg Amendment on the 1968 Gun Control Act, which revokes the the RKBA from anyone merely accused of domestic violence. Sure, in theory it might sound good but in the end it is just an attack on gun owners. Now losing your guns is a standard risk for men undergoing a divorce.
    Lautenberg hates gun owners (he's from NJ). We are all terrorists to him. And, according to the recent release from the Department of Homeland Security, members of the current administration feel the same way. The "Terrorist Watch List" uses an arbitrary, classifed criteria to populate a secret blacklist that strangely enough contains many prominent political dissentors. Not to mention incidents where several people ended up on the "No-Fly" list because they share the same name. If revoking basic civil rights from people based on some secret list that cannot be challenged in court, without any other evidence of wrongdoing, doesn't disturb you, you might want to re-read the Bill of Rights.

    ETA: Seriously, this bill is full of "buzzwords" and reeks of fear-based legislation. That alone sets off alarm bells.

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array rodc13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    2,753
    Quote Originally Posted by TN_Mike View Post
    Some how it is now un-American and un-Patriotic to question our elected officials, protest their socialistic proposed legislation and call them out about it. But just a year ago, this was the absolute height of patriotism and the very best in American participation in the Democratic process.

    It makes me sick.
    All a matter of whose ox is being gored, isn't it?

    When a Republican was in the White House, the right didn't hesitate to cast dissenters as anti-American, commies, and terrorist sympathizers. Guys like Beck and Lushbaugh constantly ranted about how people should just shut up and trust and support the President.

    Now the shoe's on the other foot, and it's fashionable for the right to praise the protesters and their disruptive tactics, and it's the administration that can't be trusted. How loudly would the right howl if town hall attendees were screened for loyalty first?

    Personally, I'm in favor of dissent. It's one of the hallmarks of our republic, that freedom of expression, including dissent and protest, is protected by the Constitution. I enjoy a good debate, vigorously argued.

    I don't respect those who attempt to just shout down their opponents. It's cowardly. I don't respect those who resort to lies and fakery, rather than honestly defending their position. And all the whining gets tiresome.
    Cheers,
    Rod
    "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

  13. #43
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by nasal View Post
    SelfDefense, there is no due process associated with this bill. The potential for abuse is astounding. Remember, Lautenberg is the same guy who pushed through the Lautenberg Amendment on the 1968 Gun Control Act, which revokes the the RKBA from anyone merely accused of domestic violence. Sure, in theory it might sound good but in the end it is just an attack on gun owners. Now losing your guns is a standard risk for men undergoing a divorce.
    Lautenberg hates gun owners (he's from NJ). We are all terrorists to him. And, according to the recent release from the Department of Homeland Security, members of the current administration feel the same way. The "Terrorist Watch List" uses an arbitrary, classifed criteria to populate a secret blacklist that strangely enough contains many prominent political dissentors. Not to mention incidents where several people ended up on the "No-Fly" list because they share the same name. If revoking basic civil rights from people based on some secret list that cannot be challenged in court, without any other evidence of wrongdoing, doesn't disturb you, you might want to re-read the Bill of Rights.

    ETA: Seriously, this bill is full of "buzzwords" and reeks of fear-based legislation. That alone sets off alarm bells.


    SelfDefense, please reply to this post and my post # 19 "Should be through Judicial Branch judgment ONLY".

    How do you justify/accept this type of "Star-Chamber" process -- regardless of the political leanings of the administration in charge of the particular "Star-Chamber."

    Do you approve of the Second Red Scare blacklisting of 1940s & 1950s with the same vigor as you do this proposed potential for abuse?

    I, for one, don't care who is in control of such blacklisting (right, left, or in-between) -- the non-due-process underpinnings are counter to one of the basic tenants of our republic, IMHO.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  14. #44
    Member Array Torrid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by rodc13 View Post
    All a matter of whose ox is being gored, isn't it?

    When a Republican was in the White House, the right didn't hesitate to cast dissenters as anti-American, commies, and terrorist sympathizers. Guys like Beck and Lushbaugh constantly ranted about how people should just shut up and trust and support the President.

    Now the shoe's on the other foot, and it's fashionable for the right to praise the protesters and their disruptive tactics, and it's the administration that can't be trusted. How loudly would the right howl if town hall attendees were screened for loyalty first?

    Personally, I'm in favor of dissent. It's one of the hallmarks of our republic, that freedom of expression, including dissent and protest, is protected by the Constitution. I enjoy a good debate, vigorously argued.

    I don't respect those who attempt to just shout down their opponents. It's cowardly. I don't respect those who resort to lies and fakery, rather than honestly defending their position. And all the whining gets tiresome.
    I'm aware there are those on both sides that will use this attack, but the worst of it is actually coming out of politicians mouths. Pelosi and the comment about being Nazis with swastikas, it just makes me sick. I can't speak on the part of Limbaugh because I don't listen to him on a regular basis, but I can't think of a single time Beck called anyone unamerican and I've listened to him for a few years now.

    For the record, I do have a tendancy to call them commies, but not the supporters, just the politicians that are supporting communist style legislation.

  15. #45
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by rodc13 View Post

    All a matter of whose ox is being gored, isn't it?

    ....

    Now the shoe's on the other foot

    ....

    Personally, I'm in favor of dissent. It's one of the hallmarks of our republic, that freedom of expression, including dissent and protest, is protected by the Constitution. I enjoy a good debate, vigorously argued.

    I don't respect those who attempt to just shout down their opponents. It's cowardly. I don't respect those who resort to lies and fakery, rather than honestly defending their position. And all the whining gets tiresome.
    ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑

    Agree 100%

    Attacking the Person is a form of distraction, trying to force the other side into a defense of self and away from their argument. It is used to tap into the fight-or-flight reaction -- to get the opponent to either jump to their own defense or will cognitively flee, dropping any argument they are making.

    As far as this thread is concerned, the attempts to just shout down opponents is obfuscating the content of a good debate -- as is often the case when one, or both sides resort to it.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Gov. Jindal vetoes anti-gun parade bill
    By ppkheat in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: July 14th, 2009, 04:55 PM
  2. New HR 2159 Anti-Gun Blacklist Bill Introduced in U.S. House
    By tns0038 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 20th, 2009, 08:55 AM
  3. H.R. 2640 Military.com Gun Bill Not Anti-Veteran
    By mrreynolds in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: October 16th, 2007, 03:24 PM
  4. The current anti-gun bill introduced in Congress
    By Ron in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 21st, 2007, 04:56 PM
  5. Anti lawsuit bill passes
    By rachilders in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 21st, 2005, 11:54 PM

Search tags for this page

, patriot act aided in 179 terror convictions, human events, july 19, 2004; and report from the field: usa patriot act a
,
boliva gun laws
,

david freddoso, patriot act aided in 179 terror convictions, human events, july 19, 2004; and report from the field: usa

,

debate it is difficult to value human right when facing bullets in the field

,
debate topic it is difficult to value human rights when facing bullets in the field
,
it is difficult to value human rights when facing bullets in the field.
,
lautenberg amendment and divorce
,

lautenberg amendment arizona

,
libertarians do not understand
,
list of recent anti firearms legislation
,
new anti gun legislation forum
,
www. sherfen sog.
Click on a term to search for related topics.