HopefulFuture

I have no disagreements here that what you say is a real threat. But then, as you've watched me state over and over again, morale degradation. Mussolini, Hitler and even Lenin came to power in the way in which you speak. So yes, it's a true statement that you make when you point this out. This by no means subscribes to the automatic assumption that the Constitution fails however. It all comes back to the intentions of an armed citizenry. Certainly were not suggesting that an armed revolt in this country based on bringing the Constitution back to it's rightful place as the law of the land is automatically going to degenerate into a tyrrany by the citizens armed themselves, are you? If that be the case, I can't see an armed revolt happening with any success. The entire core conversation is on defending the Constitution itself, I doubt you'll have much, if any, support from those that are involved in such a journey altering their direction to do something entirely different. But, once again, it all comes down to the morale standing of those individuals. Edit: And I should point out, I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America against both foreign and domestic enemies. As of right now, this very minute, my own federal government is a very real domestic enemy to that document. Understand, I didn't take an oath to defend the existing powers that be, or any group at all, I took an oath to that document and I deeply, and I mean deeply, hold firm to that oath. It's not merely words I spoke, it means something much deeper to myself. It's been handed down to me through generations of not only my family, but my community.

Interesting view of it, and I wouldn't disagree with you entirely. But the citizens are armed. With more than just shotguns. You don't have to require every citizen own or carry a gun however to consider the general public armed. The questions I've seen raised on gun control, especially after such tragic events as Sandyhook have thrust assault rifles and weapons into the forefront. Not a great deal of debate on sporting weapons such as the 30.06, semi-auto shotguns, 22 caliber rifle and some various other weapons. I can assure you, a well dressed out 30.06 can place a round much more effectively than an assault rifle. As for the multiple round scenario's, where magazines hold multiple rounds, well, I have never disagreed with minimizing the amount of ammo a clip should hold. There has to be common sense however. Limiting a clip to say 10 rounds isn't so bad, any individual that has the motivation can circumvent that with custom built magazines. The gun is designed to operate at a certain level regardless, that includes the stresses, heat and residue build up it can take overall for ammo. Those clip limits on 7 or 10 rounds really won't stop anyone who takes the time to do an end around on them. Handguns are also targeted by the anti-gun lobby which makes 0 sense to me since I can and have sawed off the end of a Remington 870 shotgun and added a pistol grip making it a close in, short range, concealable weapon. I did that when I was 22 years old back in the early 90's and would Quail hunt with it. The lighter fire arm with it's shortened length made it easier for me to navigate the marshes down around Charleston, SC when I was hunting. I did it merely for those hunts. I no longer have the weapon since I haven't hunted Quail for over 15 years now. I took the weapon, broke it down and used the components as replacement parts for some of my other weapons. It's just an example of how simple it is to circumvent any type of handgun ban. Just a ridiculous notion, to me in any event. EDIT: As for the government turning, as you put it, I submit to you it already has. The moment a governing body instituted policies that went completely against the morale standing of said body, such as using the public as a revenue stream, I would most certainly consider that as the government turning.

While I understand the sentiment, I don't believe our representatives should fear the public. There has to accountability. My Grandfather, god bless his soul, once told me something as a teenager that has stuck with me for some 27 years now. "When an individual enters public service either through elections, appointment or simply as a civil servant, they should do so answering a higher calling within themselves. It should never be about personal gain for themselves through money and power, it should always be about the drive within themselves to serve their communities." My Grandfather was a simple man, a WW2 vet, he was at Bastogne, helped form the 101st airborne. It only became obvious to me later in my life just how correct he was when he told me this and it also told me that he was aware of the corruption that rears it head in politics. That comment also made me a better citizen and drove me to become actively involved as not only a voter, but a citizen. In effect, what he told me was to be always vigilant on what governing bodies are doing in this country. It has been a long time since I've been watching, voicing my concerns, and what I've seen across 20 years or so since has me shaking my head in disgust all the while wondering just how long the American people will tolerate such nonsense. It's truly astounded myself the apathy I see across the nation when it comes to the political landscape in this nation. Nearly the entire voting populace are completely brainwashed by the 2 party system. It's surreal, as if the populace knows nothing else but party A or party B's ideologies. All the while, those 2 power parties do nothing, absolutely nothing, to hide just what it is they are doing to the public treasury, morale degradation, attempting to silence alternative competition in the political landscape and massing great power over the masses. Scary really, just scary.

The Constitution never directly promotes slavery, it was an arrangement by the founders to keep the union together. The stance I take relates directly to the fact that it is the law of the land. To date, the first 10 amendments are the citizens "Bill of Rights". The founders, in particular, Thomas Jay, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were the core framers of the Constitution, in it they left the door open for other laws to be added through what you know as amendments. It was never the intention of the founders to alter the Bill of Rights, ever. And that is well documented in both previous writing to and post writings as well of the Constitution from it's very authors. Before Shay's Rebellion, the Articles of Confederation left the federal government very weak. The Constitution settled once and for all time the issue. As for slavery, womens right to vote and other groups ability to enjoy these rights, the framers left the ability to make the document inclusive in the future. These men were way beyond their time when writing a document to govern the people. It may not appear to be perfect, but it's guidelines, specifically those first 10 amendments, are pretty dam good. As for your question to my last statement, you educate the American populace much better than they are now, that's a start. Law is not taught to any great degree in early education, grades k thru 12. When you come out of that educational system, you know little to nothing about the law in this nation. And not just federal law, but law's at all level of government, the lower tiers are specific to your state/county/local laws. An informed citizenry that is taught from birth on that participation is the only way this is going to work combined with that knowledge should offset some of the insanity that is going on now. I truly believe our public educational system is specifically designed to do the opposite.

This ties in to the 2nd amendment for me. When the currency does collapse, and it will, it's inevitably the next step to a falling empire, I'd like to be armed to protect my person and property. I know so many people that have little to no true understanding of what's coming. My uncle moved to Phoenix, AZ in 79, 7 years ago they ran a mini experiment with the Amero. For those not in the know, the Amero ties together the US, Canandian and Mexican currencies. It fell flat on it's face and to top it off, my uncle who was a city of Phoenix employee, was told out right this would adjust their pay by almost 55% if it was successful. It's coming, it's just a matter of time. It's not as difficult to get these weapons as many believe. Military units with the active duty US Military as well as National Guard units are sure to jump on board with a mass citizen uprising. It would be impossible for the Federal government to stop a mass uprising. Especially with the citizens army.

No doubt Eleven. I have friends in other countries who say it like it is.......The US looks like a monkey fuking a football. The next big crises to come will be the currency collapse. I think it's hilarious that people actually believe we are going to pay off 18 trillion in debt while were still running trillion dollar deficits annually and the baby boomers are now entering the picture in full masses for social security. It's going to be a 3 wheeled circus in the next 15 years as both the executive and legislative branches try to kick the big problems down the road.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. -Thomas Jefferson Liberals push aside the founding fathers like they never existed in an attempt to "recreate America" in their own image. I don't agree with every stance this individual has taken, but Ron Paul has been spot on and to date, the only politician I have seen with TRUE INTEGRITY! When he made statements, the people should have listened. You don't have to agree with every view, but it cost nothing to listen and use common sense to judge for yourself with the facts at hand. Fools, the American populace at large are pure fools. Your letting your freedoms slip away, and yet, a majority of you do nothing, say nothing. It's beyond pathetic, it's just out right sad.

I don't believe any of the youngsters see much NHL time, and certainly not our 2nd overall pick this draft. It'll be a full on tank for McDavid.

Well, thank you. I only hope the people who read what I say at least take a moment to ponder it. Research it, then draw their own conclusions based on the facts at hand. Not on emotion, but on what has actually transpired. That's all I can really hope for.

In my best John Banner voice (for those of you younger folk, John Banner played Sgt. Hans Georg Schultz in Hogan's Heroes): "Show me ze papers"! Checkpoints, while not truly legal early on due to the probable clause have in fact been rubber stamped by the Supreme Court. A court by the way, that is appointed through political affiliation. Which brings up an entirely separate set of debates unto itself. But here is the jist of it: http://traffic.findlaw.com/traffic-stops/are-dui-checkpoints-legal-.html The article is correct. Not that I agree with the Courts decision.

Hehe, sorry Eleven, I didn't mean to slander your good name, I'll edit to fix. Now, before I do, are there any 13's in here? :blink:

I don't need a 12 gauge to take down a drone, all I need is the frequency of the signal going to it, and that isn't that hard to find. My job in the Navy dealt directly with this, I was a telecommunications specialist. It's not as difficult as many believe to find equipment to do such. Ask Iran.

Quaint or not, it's still reality, not made up nonsense or opinion. I truly do fear our government, it's become an 11 (per Eleven's request :P )13 headed monster. And I see many citizens following it blindly all the while our national wealth, morale compass and leadership at just about all levels degrades heavily. These aren't mere statements of opinion, it's factual. And both the large power parties are equally responsible. Republicans and Democrats have been at the helm of the executive branch and the legislative branch at one time or another while all of this has gone on. It's not as though I'm defending one or the other, they are equally guilty in the eyes of common sense.

I don't doubt the numbers, they've been widely reported for a number of years now. That is irrelevant to the issue. The issue is that it is a right and one of the core rights that make up The Bill of Rights. You can hang up ever getting rid of it. Like I stated earlier, you aren't getting your Utopia, a noble idea to be sure but not realistic in the least. Gun ownership is not only a part of our culture, it's ingrained in our youth through games such as cowboys and indians, army and other various shoot em up games as children. It's what helps us to produce such great warriors. Whether or not you subscribe to that is your choice, it's a fact non-the-less. But more to the point is that statement on "it's a right". Individuals who actively pursue to limit or end the ability to own a gun put myself and my family at grave risk. I will fight until my dying breathe to oppose your views. As I've said over and over again, I don't trust my government. How did we ever stop Germany and Japan when only 16 million people out of a population of 134 million served? There were about 68 million able bodied men in the US, with these numbers 20.6% served in the military Oh, and those Germans, they had far superior weapons than we did, how did we ever win? We must have lost. :rolleyes: And that statement about oppressive government that you say people claim to be hypothetical, open your eyes man, it's not hypothetical, it's a reality. Whether or not you choose to acknowledge it, our government is truly oppressive. No bureaucracy should have this much power over individuals lives and certainly no government entity should use it's own populace as a revenue generation stream to pay for it's own pension/medical/bloated payscales. May god man, take a look at what is going on around you, the economy nearly tanked and to date, not one thing has been done to bring those who created the mess to justice. Why is that? Because they are all in bed together. This isn't rocket science man, it's simple common sense. In the absence of any real testimony to the contrary, the US government, and subsequently many of the lower tiered governing bodies are beholden to the almighty dollar, not the general publics welfare.

Lundqvist is playing exceptional. But the one thing I notice about the Rangers is their top 2 lines apply some nice pressure in the offensive zone. The trade for St. Louis has paid off in spades. But, and there is always a but, they haven't faced off in a series with an opponent the western conference has to offer. Chicago and LA are extremely well rounded rosters.

So you say. But your statement is not true at all. I know thousands, yes, thousands of American citizens who choose to exercise that right. Just because you do not believe you yourself are protected by no means is the norm for a large portion of this population. I believe you when you say what you say based on your experience. All I can say to that is pick up a gun, and man a post for our rights. Yes, OUR rights, because it's yours as well as the rest of us.

I don't believe it adds fuel to the fire. Often, after tragic incidents, family and friends look for someone to lay the fault of losing a loved one on. And I can't say I blame them, it's heart wrenching. I can't begin to know his pain, losing a loved one, child, parent, close relative, to senseless violence always is. Edit: However, this in no way should impede my rights as a gun owner. Why should individuals such as myself give up a right that generations of my family have fought and died for? Are their beliefs, their lives, any less in value then a victim of a crime?

lol, well, I wouldn't call myself mild per say. More along the lines of amiable in a debate, or, for that matter, in a confrontation, if you will. I only look to secure my rights granted to me by the highest law in the land, The Constitution of the United States of America. I am what many would call a Libertarian or Constitutionalists. But, in the end, shouldn't we all be? After all, these rights are not mine alone, and I surely don't want that as a message. I would like all citizens to stand up for what so many have gave their lives for, isn't that what this weekend encompasses? Didn't those in the revolution give the same as those in other conflicts? Do I dare so more so considering the outcome was heavily in doubt. Agreed.

I understand. I try to walk a common sense line here. I realize to many maybe my views appear to far to the right as they say. I can assure you, I'm conservative but I'm not one who you need worry about when it comes to fire arms. I house my weapons in a 650lb safe and my ammo is kept in a separate safe. I take great pride in my ability to handle a fire arm responsibly and fully realize the power I wield while those weapons are in my hands. I am not the type to pull them out to show them off, nor am I the type to list what I have and boast about their capacity to do harm. I am merely a responsible United States Citizen who understands the accountability of owning such tools. I do not trust my government however, and with good reason. I can draw a distinction between tragic events at the local, county, state and national levels and the onus of my responsibility to own such powerful tools.

The standing military as you call it, is so small in number compared to the larger citizenry I can't begin to grasp what you are saying. And those in the military, how many are on which side of the aisle? I would fathom a guess the government still fears the larger public at broad and I believe the 2nd amendment plays a role in that fear.

I, as a citizen, and millions of others, haven't waived it. Where your getting this information I have no idea, unless it's opinion, in which case I would have to disagree. You state that it cannot help myself or others like myself, we state other wise. I don't see the federal government dropping a nuke on my house, do you? In so far as those other powerful weapons you speak of, I don't deny what you say on their power, but again, I see the right to bare arms as a valuable tool. The fact is, the number of citizens in my mindset, far out numbers the governments ability to field an active force. Millions of people facing off against a few million, with many of those millions trained to use the very weapons you speak of, I think the numbers speak for themselves here.

The examples given were to show some of what I've experienced in as far as governmental agencies abusing their powers. The examples weren't meant to show direct interaction of the 2nd amendment, merely to point out why I have been re-affirmed in it's need to exist. If these agencies feel constraints for their abilities are non-existent or at the very least, bendable, then I believe the 2nd amendment is necessary should matters degenerate further, say, in to open detainment without probable cause or the removal of due process. It's not a matter of putting faith into anything, it's a matter of standing your ground on the rights provided to you.

I can give 2 examples I've personally experienced in my life where law enforcement (a government entity, the muscle if you will) has re-affirmed my beliefs. 2007, Aiken, SC While taking a weekend off from my job with my wife, I spent the weekend in Hickory Knob, at a cabin. Upon returning to Aiken on Sunday afternoon, 10 miles down the road from our weekend retreat I was pulled over for doing 67 in a 55. My vehicle was set in cruise control at 55. The officer asked for my license and registration, which I gave, and I, in turn, asked for his radar gun calibration date and serial number, which, by law, he has to give. He became hostile when I did so and it was only after I had the ticket in my hand and he threatened me with jail for disorderly conduct for asking for the information that I informed him he was being recorded by my onstar and that my vehicle records would show my exact speed. He demanded the ticket back, I said no, I will see you in court. Needless to say, my case was dismissed immediately and my lost time at work that morning was paid by the county in question. But I didn't stop there, I threatened to file a civil suit, they were only then fully aware I meant business. Money talks after all. In short, I lectured the judge, the officer and the officers immediate superiors on the dangers of attempting to use the general public as a source of revenue generation as opposed to serving and protecting the public. I further reminded them I was legally armed at the time of the traffic stop and had the officer attempted to illegally take me into custody I would have been within my rights to use my fire arm. They had nothing, because the law is the law and they knew I was correct. It's a slippery slope but it is the law. The 2nd example is 2010 in Wheatfield, NY I was working at Dupont in NF and was coming home from work. An illegal checkpoint was setup on River Rd. just past Williams Rd. Lasalle field day was going on and they were checking for DUI's. A noble cause to be sure, but my rights were infringed the moment they stopped me "without probable cause". My ability to travel unhindered shall not be infringed. Once again, I was threatened with jail time for not rolling my window down to the level the officer wanted. My only statement to him was "am I being detained". Once he did so, onstar recording proved him wrong. That particular deputy sheriff spent 3 weeks on paid leave and was ultimately sent back out on patrol, but only after he had to take some courses on the law. EDIT: Standing up for your rights may lead to short term discomfort in you life, the long term benefits from defending your rights are shared by all, not just by yourself. The more people stand up to do so instead of caving to an obviously corrupt system, the less they will attempt to use these obvious strong arm tactics. Just my opinion on it, but as I said, freedom isn't free.

It's more than likely true that it means prevention. But then again, in both cases you site, prevention could have been done, there were afterall, a fair amount of warning signs. To me it all comes back down to responsibility with accountability. It's citizens duty to put forth both on an earnest scale and hold the line. That failure in the United States of America is clear for all to see. Who is at fault, what is at fault? Many variables here, but it is more than clear that the morale degradation of the nation has been on a steady march for longer than many suspect. The balance between freedom and what it takes to ensure freedom has been a 240 year battle and counting. I can only attest to what I, personally feel. That is the right to bare arms is as necessary in today's America as it was 250 years ago, post revolution. After all, I don't bare arms for food collection alone, I do so for self protection, both against criminal citizenry as well as my own government if necessary. And I answered you in my very statement of said opinion. It was of comfort to know that many others felt as I had that our governments at all levels were not to be followed blindly, but that a true "domestic" threat is the governing agencies themselves. In short, many of the men I was stationed with felt lessons from the past combined with what they felt they had taken an oath to at times, were not going to meet the criteria for them to step in. Many of my comrades in arms that are both still in the service or now retired or had left the service still agree to this day that failure of any governing agency to offer up true probable cause to use such force would heavily influence their decisions.

Actually, it does. Your interpretation of it does not in fact, present the intentions of those who wrote it, the founding fathers. You have to keep it in context for the era, coming out of the revolution we just threw off tyranny, the people didn't want that to occur again.