Euclidean

QK:

You said it yourself. They already have this information.

You are absolutely right in that there is no good reason for the government to take an interest in you. However, the reality is that the government is full of people who hate people like you.

Do you think morality is a higher authority than the law?
Do you think it's your choice what you think?
Do you think it's okay to carry a loaded pistol around?

If you answered yes to any of these questions you are a threat to the new government. The agenda here is state dependence. This is, believe it or not, much bigger than guns and that's pretty big.

They already keep track of how many guns you own. Why on earth would anyone honestly need to know that?

You are projecting your logical thinking onto the non logical mind of your enemy. These people want to decide what kind of health care you receive, what you think, how many kids you can have, what you believe, and when you're no longer of use to the state.

__________________
I am The Armed Educator.

Team American

Prospector has the right outlook....panic is nobody's friend. Are I.D. cards the end of America? I don't think so....the information flow goes both ways. As computers and internets make the collection of info easier, it also makes the distribution of info easier. As long as we have an open and free internet, we can keep tabs on OUR government.

What are your greatest fears about the ID cards? That the information collected will be used to oppress the citizens of this country? That the citizens of this country no longer have the will or ability to straighten OUR government out? It's easy to think this....it's much harder to believe that at least 100 million of our fellow citizens feel the same way we do. I at least hope that our politicians believe it. The IDEA of America is too strong to be snuffed out by the brain-sucking TV's in our living rooms.

How far can thinking citizens be pushed?

[/rant off]

__________________
"I surrounded 'em"- Alvin York

"They're ain't many troubles that a man can't fix with seven hundred dollars and a thirty ought six"- Jeff Cooper

QKShooter

Heck...I am throwing a few things against the wall to see what sticks and what hits the floor.
And never assume that I am not paying close attention to each and every statement and thought and every reply...because I honestly am.

I mean there were "ration cards" during W.W.II and domestic security was very TIGHT...letters were censored...spies were planted in factories to watch employees. Loose Lips Sink Ships & all that sort of thing.
It was a time of war and the country worked through it.
We are at war right now.
The govt. messed up by nabbing and rounding up our Japanese American citizens during War2. They sure did that without the help of any National ID cards.
Holy heck though the Govt. can't even track where all the food stamps are going....for everything...except food.
So...do I expect Big Govt to mess things up some?...yeah...they usually always do.
Do I think the Federal Government hates me because I'm a gun owner...no I don't.
SOME in Government are Left Wing Libs and they hate firearms.
They seem to be seriously losing the fight though.
Why is it that we can never accept the fact that we are actually winning something for a change? Slowly...but we are winning. The pendulum is amazingly swinging our way these days.

"The agenda here is state dependence. This is, believe it or not, much bigger than guns and that's pretty big."
OK...I will sleep on that statement...right now I am hitting the pillow.
I am not copping out...but, it was a Long Day today.
And if you worked for the government...you would know that already! :poke:

__________________

Support Our Troops

How Very Fortunate You Are To Have Two Arms To Put Into A Ward 57 T-Shirt.
DC MEMBERS ~ PLEASE BUY A WARD 57 SHIRT. Click Here.

Monty

Don't get caught up in this as a tool to track as it is mainly a tool to control groups of people. Just another step, chip chip chip go our freedoms, we hardly even knew ya.

Don't think that as simple Americans that our existance is so boring and unimportant that people do not want to control our lives and that this isn't a tool to do so.

I don't believe I am being "over reactionary" or "paranoid" but I certainly am concerned but I'm certainly in the minority. The majority don't know and don't care what we are talking about and wouldn't understand even if they heard it. But you seem to understand and yet you cast a suspect glance not toward the government but toward me

Monty

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsel or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands, which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
- Samuel Adams, debates of 1776

Monty

And why is it you think it is unnecessary to guard againt this pendulum swinging back our way. You are right in your assessment, it is not a wall that we as gun owners have pushed over, it is a pendulum that once we turn our backs on it and fail to provide resistance against it, it WILL swing back our way and take all of our firearms rights with it, the very foundation of our freedom. Do not think the enemies of our firearms rights have gone away and are defeated, they may be down but they are certainly not out. They will be back to restrict what they observe as privilage (as reflected by that CCW license you carry in your wallet) and not your right.

We have won some great battles but we should not be content to rest on those few victories and consider the matter decided.


http://www.gunowners.org/op0514.htm
Watch-List "Justice"
by John R. Lott, Jr. and Sonya D. Jones
as published in the Washington Times

Should people lose rights because they are sympathetic to, but do not actually help, terrorist groups? Should law enforcement and not judges be the arbiter of those sympathizers who should be placed on "watch lists"?

In Senate hearings on renewing the Patriot Act last week, Democratic Senators Ted Kennedy and Charles Schumer said the answer to both questions was "yes." Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller were grilled over a report showing that 35 gun purchases during the first half of last year were made by people on terrorist "watch lists," and the Senators called it a major public security risk.

Messrs. Kennedy and Schumer's proposed solution? Simply ban the sale of guns to people law enforcement places on the watch list.

The New York Times also sounded the alarm last week with an editorial entitled, "An Insecure Nation." The Times could not resist further sensationalizing the concerns. Fanning fears of terrorists being "free to buy an AK-47," it failed to mention that in the worst case these would be civilian, semi-automatic versions of the guns (just like any hunting rifle), not the machine guns used by militaries around the world.

The 35 "suspected" purchases, out of 3.1 million total transactions, were allowed because background checks found no prohibiting information. No felonies or disqualifying misdemeanors, for example. They were neither fugitives from justice nor illegal aliens. Nor had they ever disavowed their U.S. citizenship.

As Mr. Mueller pointed out, the FBI was alerted when these sales took place, but the transactions weren't stopped because the law didn't prohibit them. But Mr. Mueller assured the Senators that "we then will pursue [these leads]. We will not let it go."

Ironically, this debate occurred just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court slapped down state laws that use police reports to set prison sentences because police reports are not reliable. Being on the "watch list" would also just rely on police reports. There would be no adjudication by a judge, no trial by jury, before being placed on the list. "Suspects" don't even have to be foreigners. They may have simply been individuals classified by law enforcement as sympathetic to militia groups or other undesirable domestic organizations.

Some politicians have recently experienced being on a "watch list" firsthand.

Interestingly, the same Senator Kennedy who wants to rely on "watch lists" was understandably upset last year and publicly complained to the Senate Judiciary committee when he was prevented from flying on an airplane because his name was placed on just such a "watch list." Rules did not allow him to be told at the airport why he was being denied a ticket, but fortunately for him being a U.S. senator meant the problem was eventually resolved with a few telephone calls.

Ultimately, though, despite all the fears generated, background checks simply aren't the solution. The federal Brady Act has been in effect for 11 years and state background checks even longer. But despite all the academic research that has been done, a recent National Academy of Sciences report could not find any evidence -- not a single published academic study -- that background checks reduce any type of violent crime.

Surely, it would be nice if these regulations worked. But it's hard to believe they will be any more successful stopping terrorists. Criminals and terrorists share much in common, starting with the fact that what they are doing is illegal. In addition, terrorists are probably smarter and engage in vastly more planning than your typical criminal, thus making the rules even less likely to be successful.

People need to remind themselves that a "watch list" is only that. It is not even probable cause. If you had probable cause that these suspects had done something illegal, you could arrest them.

Ironically, during the hearing, Mr. Kennedy spent most of his question time concerned that foreign combatants held in Guantanamo were not treated by the military with the respect that the FBI uses to handle American criminals. At the same time, he believes Americans can lose their rights to own a gun without an evidentiary hearing.

Democrats may think that people on "watch lists" should be denied their rights to own a gun, but what is next? Why not just make the system much "more efficient" and simply put all people on "watch lists" directly in prison?


Your papers please.

Monty

Bumper

Well, I don't have much to say that QK hasn't already said. I can't find one thing that he has said that I don't 110% agree with. There's just nothing of interest about the average person that the government gives a whit about except the taxes you pay. You may not believe that and that's okay. Calll me "sheeple" for not being in a panic like some of you and I will tell you you are full of "it". Most of you are living a bit too far from the Mexican border to see them pouring across like cockroaches. You don't see them committing the bulk of the crimes here. I can agree with the statement that the number one thing we need to do is to close the border. It would be much more effective than an ID card. But QK is right, it will never happen because it is too much like the wall (China or Berlin). I would say to hell with it and do it anyway. Personally, I think the US should give them a VERY personal experience that would make them never want to set foot back in this country, but that's just me. I want all illegal aliens out of here whether they are Mexicans, South American, Chinese, Middle Easterners or any other variety you can come up with including blue haired Canadians.

We are at war in this country and not just in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those that would do us harm are operating literally under our noses and probably laughing at us because instead of focusing on the immediate threat we are making it easier for them to move among us undetected.

BTW, this has gotten into a borderline (no pun intended) consipracy topic which we don't do here. Just in case someone decides to take this "spirited thread" to name calling or expanding the number of threads for "conspiracy topics" on this forum (I can feel it coming), it ain't gonna happen.

__________________
Bumper
Administrator
DefensiveCarry.com Forum
Coimhéad fearg fhear na foighde; Beware the anger of a patient man.

Euclidean

Bumper the immediate problems are immensely practical.

#1. This does not help fight illegal immigration. If this helps fight illegal immigration then 4473 forms help fight gun smuggling.

#2. They're going to spend 500-700 million on this... Why oh why can't we just give 300 or 400 million to the Border Patrol instead? Wouldn't that be a much better use of the money?

And for that matter pass a law making English the only official and recognized language. Ban driver's license applications from being printed in Spanish. That costs nothing. It even saves money.

The fact is there's not a real benefit to this other than making people feel better like registering guns or making bikers wear helmets or putting warning labels on food processors makes people feel better. You shouldn't spend money on something that has no actual benefit.

What it does create is a massive potential for abuse. Our current systems get abused enough already. We need less government not more.

__________________
I am The Armed Educator.

Bumper

I disagree. Here in Arizona, if they have a driver's license they are immediately invisible. They are allowed to do just about anything any of the rest of us can do, including vote. Lack of a driver's license will get them sent back to Mexico. Right now, when the police stop you, you better have ID. The police are not allowed to inquire about your legal right to be in this country (this is REALLY BS) in any way. But right now, illegal aliens have driver's licenses. The police ask for their license, they produce it, they go on their merry way. Under the new system, the police ask for their license, they don't have one, they will get taken to jail until positive identification is made. Once positive ID is made, they get a bus ride south to the border. They will, of course, just turn around and come right back but they will have to pay a coyote again to get them back here. A few times making that cycle and maybe, just maybe, they will decide to stay home and push for their government to change their rotten living conditions.

Absolutely! I agree that giving the money to the Border Patrol would be a better use of the money. Even better than that would be to build a wall. Don't get me wrong guys, there's lots of things I would rather see than a national ID card, I just don't believe it is the scourge that ya'll do. We have to do something and, IMHO, an ID will help at least here in southern border states.

I absolutely agree that "English only" should be the rule here. The sad fact is that our Governor just refused to sign that law. She's pandering for votes because, guess what, illegals can vote here with a driver's license. Motor Voter gets them registered when they get their license. Driver's licenses here are not printed in Spanish. I wish I could say that about the press "1" for spanish, press "2" for english thing, billboards, ballots, etc. Way too much of that crap going on.

I don't think this is a "feel good" thing except that many will feel much better if we get a respectable percentage of them back across the border. Look at those warning labels you mentioned, they are also written in spanish. We DO need less government in areas that government does not belong. Illegal immigration IS a government issue, however and I want them to do anything and everything to slow the problem down if they're not willing to do anything and everything required to resolve it completely.

Again, this is simply my opinion. If you don't have literally millions of these people in your state, committing crime, draining resources, causing liberal politicians to tax us even higher to provide them an education, free healthcare and coddling them so maybe they can wring a vote from them you might feel differently. Resolve that one problem and I there will be no more reason to have a national ID card. But for now there is a reason. A damned big one......

__________________
Bumper
Administrator
DefensiveCarry.com Forum
Coimhéad fearg fhear na foighde; Beware the anger of a patient man.

rfurtkamp

To enforce the borders, one needs to be able to determine who is here legally and who is not. It's not as simple as the one parter you suggest.

I have yet to have anyone quote section and verse of the alleged violations in context - it's always "it's bad" with vagaries. I've had constitutional law classes in college - I know how to read and prepare briefs and look at case law as well as read court decisions and legislation. What exactly is so horrid in Patriot?

I'm more concerned with the folks to whom the government can do no right and create conspiracies, like the press release that started this thread.

Those who would protect our liberties must be honest - or else they themselves are even worse than what they claim to reveal.

In Idaho, I have the *right* to carry a firearm.

I have a license to carry one concealed.

That's an important distinction for me. As long as I can carry my firearm on the street (and I have, many, many times) I'm exercising my right to both keep and bear arms.

Other than the machine gun stupidity, FOPA of 1986 was a major victory. Bush Sr's ignorant import ban has been practically gutted in many respects since there are now domestic producers of many firearms that were previously imported, a victory both for our own production and to illustrate the futility of banning in the first place. Add to that the expiration of the Clinton Gun Ban, and I'd say, yes, there's been significant improvements - especially when I look at the Justice Department opinion on the 2nd Amendment posted late last year.

It's a lot easier to complain, though.

Hyperbole and straw man - this is the exact sort of thing that's turned me off to the whole paranoid the government is coming to get me fantasy movement.

__________________
Driver carries less than $45 worth of remorse.

rfurtkamp

When looking for the big picture, don't miss the whole forest. They don't care if you own a gun, what kind, or how many. Individual states, sure - but well, that's their issue.

On a federal level, I demand that that extraordinary proof be levelled with any extraordinary claims about conspiracies, "big pictures", or anything else of that nature.

There does come a point, as has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, in regards to the multitudes of conspiracies that have emerged over the years that I start to wonder. Who are the ones who benefit from promoting anti-government conspiracies? Who are the ones who benefit from your fear?

It's certainly not the gov't here.

Some of the "freedom" oriented folks would chop off their own nose to spite themselves, I swear - if only Ron Paul endorsed it.

__________________
Driver carries less than $45 worth of remorse.