Obama encourages his minions to spead his lies and get in people's faces

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

You would lose that bet-- send him an email with that bet - i dare you

An email? What? So he can have a staffer go look it all up for him?

[Slamfire]

How about I bet you to answer them? Give it your best shot.

Here's a good one for ya Hornet,

The failed 2007 Assault Weapons Ban bill was sponsored by Representative Carolyn McCarthy of New York - it was basically a repeat of Biden's now expired Assault Weapon Ban (poison pilled inside the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994).

When interviewed by MSNBC's Tucker Carlson, she was asked to explain the need to regulate barrel shrouds (one of the many provisions of the Act).

She responded that "more importantly the legislation would ban large capacity clips used in the Virginia Tech massacre and that the class of guns chosen were those used by gangs and police killers". After admitting that she did not know what a barrel shroud was, she ventured a guess, "I believe it is a shoulder thing that goes up".

 

[Hornet33]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. They want to ban all these things and they don't even know what it is they are trying to ban.

Idiots the lot of them.

I'll bet Nwbie is googling his butt off right now trying to find the answers because he doesn't know.

[Slamfire]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. They want to ban all these things and they don't even know what it is they are trying to ban.

Idiots the lot of them.

I'll bet Nwbie is googling his butt off right now trying to find the answers because he doesn't know.

And because Nwbie will almost certainly not believe the above anecdote, here it is on video for all to see :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGpykAX1fo

Here's another one on "heat seeking bullets"   
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRQqieimwLQ&feature=related

[lazs2]

newbie.. lets get to the heart of it... You claim that gun control is just a minor issue that is not in the least important and just gets in the way of us hicks making a good decision on soooooooo many more important issues.

Ok... Lets come together on this.. lets all unite and come together and get rid of most of the gun control laws we have now and have your party stop attacking our second amendment rights.

Once they stop doing that..  we can move on to other issues but for most of us... that is the most important.. right up there with freedom of speech..  which would include not making some words "hate" words.

As for me "threatening" to kill people... well..  I would ask you to quote me accurately and if you did you would see that I was correct and that stopping someone, even to the point (if needed) of killing that someone to retain your human, god given individual rights is simply a moral way to be.

To simply role over is immoral.

lazs

[bustr]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/

well since as a far right wing republican you have no problem with this one being totally abused right now ... how far down the road do you think it will be before the one you are currently obsessing about will be justified under the abuses being used right now

No.. Republicans need you

they don't want you... they want thinkers ...not sheeple and foot stompers

you just don't get it

And this is why the 2nd far out weighs the 4th because the government abuses the 4th by declairing special needs or superior interest in violating your property(confiscating your guns during a search). Seems the Mayor of New Orelaens and the Governor of LA used this as their rational in the Katrina gun confiscations which were subsiquently found ilegal by the courts. Some numbers of states amended their statutes to keep their own government from being able to disarm their citizens in a state of emergency. Or for "special needs".

Special needs has been the unspoken silent tool the Liberals\Democrats have been quietly trying to use at the state and local levels to ban and confiscate all firearms. Remember kalifornias assault wheapon registration then overnight ban and confiscation? Ultimently the california Liberal\Democrat controled state government decalired a "special need" and "superior interest" to the rights of We the People. Now they are using it to target ammunition and technical design specifications for semiauto handguns.

Below is from FindLaw a discussion about why and how the government superceeds your 4thA rights with impunity. The Patriot Act is no worse then in the past the government declairing a "special need" or "superior interest". The Patriot Act just dressed the process up like a San Fran drag queen so you could feel better about taking one in the kester.

Property Subject to Seizure .

--There has never been any doubt that search warrants could be issued for the seizure of contraband and the fruits and instrumentalities of crime. 126 But in Gouled v. United States, 127 a unanimous Court limited the classes of property subject to seizures to these three and refused to permit a seizure of ''mere evidence,'' in this instance defendant's papers which were to be used as evidence against him at trial.

The Court recognized that there was ''no special sanctity in papers, as distinguished from other forms of property, to render them immune from search and seizure,'' 128 but their character as evidence rendered them immune. This immunity ''was based upon the dual, related premises that historically the right to search for and seize property depended upon the assertion by the Government of a valid claim of superior interest, and that it was not enough that the purpose of the search and seizure was to obtain evidence to use in apprehending and convicting criminals.''

129 More evaded than followed, the ''mere evidence'' rule was overturned in 1967. 130 It is now settled that such evidentiary items as fingerprints, 131 blood, 132 urine samples, 133 fingernail and skin scrapings, 134 voice and handwriting exemplars, 135 conversations, 136 and other demonstrative evidence may be obtained through the warrant process or without a warrant where ''special needs'' of government are shown.

[Nwbie]

How about I bet you to answer them? Give it your best shot.

"Easy questions, and I would bet a months pay Obama couldn't answer a single one correctly"

why?
are you backing away from your statement?

[Nwbie]

newbie.. lets get to the heart of it... You claim that gun control is just a minor issue that is not in the least important and just gets in the way of us hicks making a good decision on soooooooo many more important issues.

Ok... Lets come together on this.. lets all unite and come together and get rid of most of the gun control laws we have now and have your party stop attacking our second amendment rights.
Once they stop doing that..  we can move on to other issues but for most of us... that is the most important.. right up there with freedom of speech..  which would include not making some words "hate" words.

As for me "threatening" to kill people... well..  I would ask you to quote me accurately and if you did you would see that I was correct and that stopping someone, even to the point (if needed) of killing that someone to retain your human, god given individual rights is simply a moral way to be.

To simply role over is immoral.

lazs

And what is my party?

Gun control laws? Registration? why is that a problem?  restricting non licensed gun dealers - such as at gun shows?--wait program to make sure already known convicted felons do not have access to weapons easily...? why is that a problem?...most regular republicans do not have a problem with any of that...  its not a party / party difference... it is a need a well armed militia problem... but there ...who is attacking your sovereign borders that you need a well armed militia?.. the resulting perception then is that it is your federal government that you are afraid of...the guy you want to vote for is going to be the federal government if he wins...now what happens? 
And if you think the problems going on right now with the financial markets ...is not more important for your grandchild and your grandchild's children...then whether or not you have something to make your own bullets for...well all I can say is ...hope those guns sell well in the garage sale...but probably not..no one will be able to buy them...
The base republican party member does not have the concerns you have...they are worried about the quality of life and the life they can pass on to their children... if you want to lock yourself up in the forest and shoot all comers ...have at it.... it is your choice...The base republican member hopes you do and stays away from his family

And I know there will be the finger pointing and stomping that it is run by a liberal...Obama run web site..yada yada...total crap..but I think this is a very good interpretation of the facts...
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html

And last but not least
"bongboy..  I am all for polite debate but.. the minute you think you can vote for someone to take away my right to own firearms..  it is no longer debate.. you are the enemy.   If killing you would end the attack on my second amendment rights I would do it without hesitation.   It would be a sad thing but it would be necessary.

You can't say that you want someone in that wants to take away my rights and not expect such a reaction.

lazs"

so you think it is "logical" and morally right to kill someone because they would vote for someone you don't agree with?
Especially because you believe all the bs that is mailed to you?
I quoted it exactly - actualy copied and pasted it...heck why don't you copy it and take it to the priest at the school where you send your grandchild and discuss it with him..don't bring your gun...he may disagree with you...and heck you know where that has to lead..its your non hesitation belief...

[Hornet33]

"Easy questions, and I would bet a months pay Obama couldn't answer a single one correctly"

why?
are you backing away from your statement?

Not at all, however you seem to think he could, so how about you give it a try as well to answer those 8 simple little questions. You've been pretty vocal in this thread. More along the lines of gun control is a good thing and those of us opposed to the idea of gun control are weak minded and out of touch. So how about impressing us with your knowledge of the subject and answer those questions that I know Obama couldn't answer. Your post you made right after this one shows you don't know what the issues are regarding the 2nd since you started talking about the entire militia thing. Heller vs DC already ended that debate. The 2nd isn't about militias, it's an individual right. My right. Your right. Everyones right to own a firearm, that is unless you've had your rights taken away by being convicted of a crime through due proccess and that's allowed in the Constitution so in those cases I have no problems. The problems come in when the anti gun nuts start trying to legislate new laws to prevent me, a law abiding citizen, from being able to own a firearm without due proccess with regards to the Constitution, and that's what laws like the Assult Weapons Ban, and all the others do. Those strip me of my rights without due proccess and are un Constitutional.

Lets see if you actually know what it is your talking about or if your just spewing the party line like you boy does all the time. Take a shot at those questions.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

The "average" Republican is staunchly pro Second Amendment. Just because someone is hard core in support of the Second Amendment does not mean they want to live in the woods and shoot everyone. The only people making statements like that are arrogant fools. We have all the "sane gun regulation" we need and then some, most of it unenforced by idiots demanding we pass more laws.


There is no such thing as a "non licensed gun dealer", either. If you believe that they exist, you have never been to a gun show, and you know NOTHING of the BATFE. And I mean NOTHING. Before you go spouting off the stupidity you keep tossing out, I DARE you to TRY to become a gun dealer. Better yet, I DARE you to come to a gun show and TRY to set up as an "unlicensed gun dealer". I'll see you in 20 years. Because the BATFE will keep the case tied up while you sit in jail for 2-3 years. Then they'll drag it out some more while they have every other agency take your life apart. THEN you go to trial. AFTER they take everything you own.

Become a licensed gun dealer. Then the BATFE can come to your HOME, at 2AM, and completely destroy it looking for ANYTHING they dream up, and even if they find NOTHING, you are responsible for any and all damages and clean up, they leave, and YOU pick up the pieces. If they shoot your dog, and traumatize your wife and children, you have NO RECOURSE. And since you claim are a big supporter of the FOURTH Amendment, you might note that they do not even need a warrant, because they have your dealer license. Know what they have to find to take your license, your home, your business, and everything you own? And send you to prison? ONE improperly recorded transfer. It does not have to be actually improper by itself, just improperly recorded. They can just TAKE all of your records, and any gun you may have in your possession, and go to their office and examine them, they do not even have to sign for them. How about that for "sane gun regulation"?

I don't think you have the slightest idea of the gun laws already on the books, and how they can be enforced, at the whim of ANY government official, at ANY time.

Show me ONE pro gun vote by Obama. Show me ONE pro gun amicus brief written by Obama.

The truth is, you have no idea what an "average" Republican is. You have no idea who the Republican base is. You'd just like to THINK you do. I AM an average Republican. I own my own business. I own my own home. I am a moderate conservative. I am a fiscal conservative. And I support the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, as it is WRITTEN.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

The "average" Republican is staunchly pro Second Amendment. Just because someone is hard core in support of the Second Amendment does not mean they want to live in the woods and shoot everyone. The only people making statements like that are arrogant fools. We have all the "sane gun regulation" we need and then some, most of it unenforced by idiots demanding we pass more laws.


There is no such thing as a "non licensed gun dealer", either. If you believe that they exist, you have never been to a gun show, and you know NOTHING of the BATFE. And I mean NOTHING. Before you go spouting off the stupidity you keep tossing out, I DARE you to TRY to become a gun dealer. Better yet, I DARE you to come to a gun show and TRY to set up as an "unlicensed gun dealer". I'll see you in 20 years. Because the BATFE will keep the case tied up while you sit in jail for 2-3 years. Then they'll drag it out some more while they have every other agency take your life apart. THEN you go to trial. AFTER they take everything you own.

Become a licensed gun dealer. Then the BATFE can come to your HOME, at 2AM, and completely destroy it looking for ANYTHING they dream up, and even if they find NOTHING, you are responsible for any and all damages and clean up, they leave, and YOU pick up the pieces. If they shoot your dog, and traumatize your wife and children, you have NO RECOURSE. And since you claim are a big supporter of the FOURTH Amendment, you might note that they do not even need a warrant, because they have your dealer license. Know what they have to find to take your license, your home, your business, and everything you own? And send you to prison? ONE improperly recorded transfer. It does not have to be actually improper by itself, just improperly recorded. They can just TAKE all of your records, and any gun you may have in your possession, and go to their office and examine them, they do not even have to sign for them. How about that for "sane gun regulation"?

I don't think you have the slightest idea of the gun laws already on the books, and how they can be enforced, at the whim of ANY government official, at ANY time.

By the way, I doubt you are aware that the BATFE can re-write the rules and regulations on gun sales, gun manufacturing, and even gun repair or modification, without Congressional or judicial approval or oversight. They can change their own enforcement policy and practices as well.

Show me ONE pro gun vote by Obama. Show me ONE pro gun amicus brief written by Obama.

The truth is, you have no idea what an "average" Republican is. You have no idea who the Republican base is. You'd just like to THINK you do. I AM an average Republican. I own my own business. I own my own home. I am a moderate conservative. I am a fiscal conservative. And I support the WHOLE CONSTITUTION, as it is WRITTEN.

[lazs2]

newbie.. yes.. if you had the guts to come and try to take my guns away I would tell you no..  if you tried to do it by force I would use force.. unto death.. to stop you.   You have a strange idea of freedom.. it is classic democracy I guess where no individual rights are sacred so long as you can get enough people to vote to take them away.

The second amedment is part of our bill of rights.   It says nothing about hunting nor does it say that it is there only for guard duty at the border..   It is an individual right and, as the supreme court has said.. it is for us to use to protect ourselves and others. 

If you try to take that right, the ability to defend myself and mine (and others) from me then you are a threat unto death to me.   All means of force are appropriate to stop you and are exactly what the founders felt was the right way to be.

You do not get to vote individual rights away.. that is the whole point of our government.   

But what is most telling is you feeling threatened.. If you tried to take my means of defense then it is you who are the attacker.. leave me alone and you have nothing to worry about..  I am not threat to you until you initiate the attack.

That is the whole  problem with the blue and red state country we live in.. the blue state metrosexuals and taxi riders won't... can't.. leave us alone..

lazs

[Toad]

leave me alone and you have nothing to worry about..  I am not threat to you until you initiate the attack.
lazs

You are a threat at all times because you will not agree, conform and submit. He must attack you.

[Nwbie]

newbie.. yes.. if you had the guts to come and try to take my guns away I would tell you no..  if you tried to do it by force I would use force.. unto death.. to stop you.   You have a strange idea of freedom.. it is classic democracy I guess where no individual rights are sacred so long as you can get enough people to vote to take them away.

The second amedment is part of our bill of rights.   It says nothing about hunting nor does it say that it is there only for guard duty at the border..   It is an individual right and, as the supreme court has said.. it is for us to use to protect ourselves and others. 

If you try to take that right, the ability to defend myself and mine (and others) from me then you are a threat unto death to me.   All means of force are appropriate to stop you and are exactly what the founders felt was the right way to be.

You do not get to vote individual rights away.. that is the whole point of our government.   

But what is most telling is you feeling threatened.. If you tried to take my means of defense then it is you who are the attacker.. leave me alone and you have nothing to worry about..  I am not threat to you until you initiate the attack.

That is the whole  problem with the blue and red state country we live in.. the blue state metrosexuals and taxi riders won't... can't.. leave us alone..

lazs

lol

you talk to that priest yet?

[Hornet33]

Questions need answers, you going to take a shot at them or not?

I'm asking you Nwbie to answer those questions.

Can you?

Yes or No is all I need back from you.