Author Topic: Some Rights must be repealed? (Read 1194 times)

Maverick · « **Reply #45 on:** January 13, 2007, 11:42:10 AM »

If the Officers and or NCO's lie, it will likely be seen for that very very shortly. Troops, as much as they get sold short by some, are not stupid.

The oath taken at enlistment or commissioning is to support and defend the Constitution, not the govt. administration in place.

wrag · « **Reply #46 on:** January 13, 2007, 12:14:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
If the Officers and or NCO's lie, it will likely be seen for that very very shortly. Troops, as much as they get sold short by some, are not stupid.

The oath taken at enlistment or commissioning is to support and defend the Constitution, not the govt. administration in place.

I know, I took that oath "against all enemies forgien and domsetic". (dang it never could spell forgine, err fourin? )

And IMHO the Bill of Rights is an important part of the Constitution.

But if you recall. I service person was court martialed for refusing to take the oath for the U.N.

Which IMHO that person had every right to do!

If a person enlists in OUR military they should never be required to take an oath for any other country or conglomarate of countries.

Although it bothered me a very great deal when the military got invovled at Waco! IMHO THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED!

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #47 on:** January 13, 2007, 04:00:00 PM »

Quote

Ownership of guns is not necessary to fight against a tyrannical government.

I stopped reading at that sentence because the author lost all credibility. Gave me quite a good laugh too.

Listen to all this dissent. And y'all call me crazy when I tell you the revolution is only a few years out.

moot · « **Reply #48 on:** January 14, 2007, 10:13:29 AM »

Laser, the pen's at least as mighty as the sword.

lazs2 · « **Reply #49 on:** January 14, 2007, 10:32:49 AM »

Well regulated meant well equipped and well trained. It would be impossible for that to happen if the people were not allowed to have modern weapons.

simply put... regulated and regulations are not the same. A well regulated firearm meant, and still means... one that is sighted in properly.

zarkov.... you do not know much about the "wild west" the worst towns had murder rates lower than the cities like DC. The difference is that no town banned guns back then. No town said that you could not have firearms they simply said that you could not wear them openly.

People carried concealed... it was the golden age of pocket pistols. In DC... firearms have been all but outlawed and the lawless use the fact to prey on their weaker, and defensless brethern.

The murder rate for DC is higher than for U.S. soldiers in iraq. you need a firearm more in DC than in iraq.

Tyranny is being robbed or burgled or assaulted. Firearms give the weak power against such tyranny. In states that pass right to carry laws... rather than those places turning into some OK coral at every fender bender... what happens is that crime and killings of innocent people goes down.

In the end... the founders understood that in order to have a free society you need the ability for the PEOPLE to defend themselves against all forms of tyranny... from the government hauling you off in the middle of the night to a group of young thugs strongarming you out of your goods or freedom.

The second is as much an individual right as any other.

But zarkov... what are "sensible" gun laws to you and what would they accomplish? Given that right to carry has put handguns concealed on millions of Americans and that has proven to be a good thing.... what guns, or people with them are evil?

My only gun law would be... only citizens are allowed to have em and any time you use one in a crime then the penalty goes way up.

lazs

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #50 on:** January 14, 2007, 10:55:56 AM »

Anytime you use them in a crime? That's like the Hate Crime laws.

Murder is murder, but if it's a white guy killing a black guy it's suddenly worse?

Assault is assault, robbery is robbery. The tools don't make it any worse of a crime.

lukster · « **Reply #51 on:** January 14, 2007, 11:03:50 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Anytime you use them in a crime? That's like the Hate Crime laws.

Murder is murder, but if it's a white guy killing a black guy it's suddenly worse?

Assault is assault, robbery is robbery. The tools don't make it any worse of a crime.

Punching some guy in the nose and shooting him in the belly are both assault but hardly the same.

lazs2 · « **Reply #52 on:** January 14, 2007, 11:08:26 AM »

exactly... add to the fact that you have absolute power over life and death when you use a firearm to commit a crime. The level of stress and "crime" against the victim is increased. It is much different than a "hate crime" because it is very easy to judge.

The only "gray" area would be what is a crime? Having the gun itself is not a crime. Using it to defend is not a crime or not having the right paperwork is not a crime.

I am talking felonies only here.

lazs