This is why gun registration should be opposed. You don't have to ban weapons - just certain features, and then confiscate them. Ever so handy to have a registry showing you where all those newly created felons are living.
Their not taking your guns away, they want you to deliver them. That way they don't have to get off their fat a**** to come and get them. Laws written to keep the sheep in line and their hands in your pockets. Another thing to think about is the ending of land lines, they want everyone to use cell phones. Why? They can track everywhere you are and can tap and listen in any time they want. Land lines require a court order. Repeat after me Bah bah bah.
Originally posted by TK: When I see NY confirm that specific letter is real, I will believe it.
Will the governor need to tell you in person? Any source could be faked. Actually, the governor could be lying, so you'd better not believe it even if he does tell you. Problem solved.
Will the governor need to tell you in person? Any source could be faked. Actually, the governor could be lying, so you'd better not believe it even if he does tell you. Problem solved.
You posted the letter. It looks fake. Do your own homework for once.
Let me guess... If you lived about 70 years ago and were one of those deemed to be of an "undesirable race", and were forcibly marched into a room that you were told was a shower - would you still not believe you were going to be killed by gas coming out of those nozzles in the ceiling UNTIL YOU WERE CHOKING ON YOUR OWN BLOOD?
I guess I just don't understand how people can be so blind to what is going on around them (and happening to them) - especially when the tyrants of the day are not shy about explaining exactly what it is they intend on doing.
[This message has been edited by Darth Fiero (edited 12-01-2013).]
What part of Not to be infringed upon do they not understand.
A few years ago, I realized how naïve I was to believe that a piece of paper could hold back the spread of government indefinitely. It is the nature of the state to continue to grow into bureaucracy, arbitrariness, and violence.
Government, as we have attempted to show, is merely a tool. Man, the maker of government, is, in the final analysis, the master of government. Yet man has made government to perform the opposite function and to master man. And while all governments begin with the premise that they will protect the many peaceful from the few who are belligerent, it is in the nature of governments that the rules will be extended and expanded until the state itself becomes man's mortal foe.
We cannot blame a lever if, in our exercise of it across a fulcrum, it slips from our grasp and smashes a toe. We cannot blame a shovel if, in the hands of the wielder, it plunges into an ancient tomb and permanently damages a priceless relic.
The tool is blameless. And thus, the government, within itself, is blameless. It is simply a ravening monster, naturally, and will continue to grow, to expand, to pounce upon its victims and devour them in the normal course of its activity. That is the kind of tool it is. Man made the tool to perform in that fashion.
It is an instrument of force and coercion. And there can never be an instrument of force and coercion which will consciously restrain itself. It must be restrained. Yet there is no tool capable of such restraint. For any type of tool, whatever its nature, which is allegedly formed to restrain and contain government, would, by its own nature, simply become a government's government.
In other words, the restraining tool for a compulsive instrument would have to contain a greater accumulation of power than the compulsive instrument or it would be ineffective. But this, in essence, would also be a government. It would simply be a larger, more compulsive, more dangerous and more mischievous tool and less subject to restraint than the original instrument of coercion.
~Robert LeFevre
A lady accepts to wear a chastity belt to reassure her lord during his prolonged absence from home. (A government may likewise adopt constitutional limits to gain the confidence of its subjects). However, the key to the belt's padlock is within reach, and thus the belt can occasion delay, but cannot stop Nature from ultimately having its way. A padlock whose key has been thrown away is a metaphor for a constitution that cannot legally be amended . . . Meanwhile, we must not forget that if there is no key, there is always the locksmith.
What part of Not to be infringed upon do they not understand.
What part of well regulated can't gun cultists understand? Allowing anyone, even the mentally imbalanced, to own as many weapons of any kind as they can beg, borrow or steal isn't well regulated. Its UN regulated.
Fact is if you're going to be shot, it'll most likely be a family member or a friend who pulls the trigger. That scary looking kid in the hoodie that sells you your illegal drugs doesn't want to kill a valuable customer!
Same can be said about you, confiscation of guns by legal gun owners doesn't get the ones off the streets that are already in the possession by people who shouldn't have them anyway now does it?
I fail to see how taking guns away from people who have a legal right to own them, even have passed all those regulations that are now in place will not protect anyone from those who already have them illegally, they aren't going to turn them in. Creating an even less safe citizenry. hey you have every right to not own a gun, don't try and take everyone else's away. you want to wait the 5 or 10 min, hey even if you are out in front of a police station it may only take 5 or 10 seconds for the police to respond. just how long does it take the person who has a gun on you to pull the trigger? less than one second, still feel safe?
Let me guess... If you lived about 70 years ago and were one of those deemed to be of an "undesirable race", and were forcibly marched into a room that you were told was a shower - would you still not believe you were going to be killed by gas coming out of those nozzles in the ceiling UNTIL YOU WERE CHOKING ON YOUR OWN BLOOD?
I guess I just don't understand how people can be so blind to what is going on around them (and happening to them) - especially when the tyrants of the day are not shy about explaining exactly what it is they intend on doing.
It's still fake. I never said it wouldn't happen, only that the letter is fake. The question is if F88 knew it was fake but decided to lie anyway. The rest of your post has little to do with that fact. I am pro gun ownership but not lying for my cause.
[This message has been edited by TK (edited 12-01-2013).]
What part of well regulated can't gun cultists understand? Allowing anyone, even the mentally imbalanced, to own as many weapons of any kind as they can beg, borrow or steal isn't well regulated. Its UN regulated.
You must be either stupid or just evil, I think you have bad intent because I do not think you are dumb.
Well Regulated
The Random House College Dictionary (1980) gives four definitions for the word "regulate," which were all in use during the Colonial period and one more definition dating from 1690 (Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1989). They are:
1) To control or direct by a rule, principle, method, etc. 2) To adjust to some standard or requirement as for amount, degree, etc.
3) To adjust so as to ensure accuracy of operation.
4) To put in good order.
[obsolete sense] b. Of troops: Properly disciplined. Obs. rare-1.
1690 Lond. Gaz. No. 2568/3 We hear likewise that the French are in a great Allarm in Dauphine and Bresse, not having at present 1500 Men of regulated Troops on that side.
We can begin to deduce what well-regulated meant from Alexander Hamilton's words in Federalist Paper No. 29:
The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss. --- The Federalist Papers, No. 29.
Hamilton indicates a well-regulated militia is a state of preparedness obtained after rigorous and persistent training. Note the use of 'disciplining' which indicates discipline could be synonymous with well-trained.
You posted the letter. It looks fake. Do your own homework for once.
I also posted the actual laws and documents involved. Pay attention for once.
quote
Originally posted by TK:
It's still fake. I never said it wouldn't happen, only that the letter is fake. The question is if F88 knew it was fake but decided to lie anyway. The rest of your post has little to do with that fact. I am pro gun ownership but not lying for my cause.
Are you going to also argue Neptune's post that "debunks" the article by pointing out this letter and law have been long standing policy in NYC? Do you still say it's fake? Or did you know it's real but decided to lie anyway?
[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 12-01-2013).]
Its easier and more fun to follow the herd than it is to check for truthiness.
Thank you for posting that. From your link...
quote
Actually the letter enforces a 22-year-old city statute banning rifles holding more that 5 rounds.
Thank you for providing a source that says this is real. It appears this has been going on for some time according to your source, so I stand corrected on this being something new.
What part of well regulated can't gun cultists understand? Allowing anyone, even the mentally imbalanced, to own as many weapons of any kind as they can beg, borrow or steal isn't well regulated. Its UN regulated.
The 2nd Amendment has 2 parts separated by a comma. The 1st part explains the right of the states to have a well regulated militia. The 2nd part explains the citizens' right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
If the authors of the Constitution had not put that comma in there, the 2nd Amendment would mean something entirely different than what is actually does.
So quit trying to rewrite the Constitution. Quit trying to redefine what is said in it to fit your liberal agenda.
This is a dangerous road you libs are trying to take us down. Why? Because if you can redefine one right, what is stopping others from being redefined?
Fact is if you're going to be shot, it'll most likely be a family member or a friend who pulls the trigger. That scary looking kid in the hoodie that sells you your illegal drugs doesn't want to kill a valuable customer!
You think it's safer to be around drug dealers than family. Dude, your family is messed up.
The 2nd Amendment has 2 parts separated by a comma. The 1st part explains the right of the states to have a well regulated militia. The 2nd part explains the citizens' right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
If the authors of the Constitution had not put that comma in there, the 2nd Amendment would mean something entirely different than what is actually does.
So quit trying to rewrite the Constitution. Quit trying to redefine what is said in it to fit your liberal agenda.
This is a dangerous road you libs are trying to take us down. Why? Because if you can redefine one right, what is stopping others from being redefined?
Maybe this will help?
The people are the militia, and separate from the civilian police or standing military.
It's still fake. I never said it wouldn't happen, only that the letter is fake. The question is if F88 knew it was fake but decided to lie anyway. The rest of your post has little to do with that fact. I am pro gun ownership but not lying for my cause.
I would be embarrassed to post this as a fact if I could not even prove immediately that this letter is in fact not a fake, regardless of whether it stands on the side of some political belief that may be right or wrong that f88 identifies with. The issue is, is this letter a fake? Can anyone produce real evidence this actual letter is legitimate? it does not look real to me, either.
And why block out the investigator's information?
There are phone numbers on the sheet, perhaps a phone call is in order for the truth. Or a version of it.
[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 12-01-2013).]
I would be embarrassed to post this as a fact if I could not even prove immediately that this letter is in fact not a fake, regardless of whether it stands on the side of some political belief that may be right or wrong that f88 identifies with. The issue is, is this letter a fake? Can anyone produce real evidence this actual letter is legitimate? it does not look real to me, either.
And why block out the investigator's information?
There are phone numbers on the sheet, perhaps a phone call is in order for the truth. Or a version of it.
I don't have another source for the letter itself, but I've already provided links to the Disposition Report/Registration Certificate, PD Form 641-121, and the NYC Administrative Code 10-306 referenced in the letter.
Thank you for providing a source that says this is real. It appears this has been going on for some time according to your source, so I stand corrected on this being something new.
Actually, it pointed out that the screed you posted originally that was written by a self styled high priest of the gun cult was using a NEW YORK CITY old law that passed in 1991, well before Obama came for your guns (He hasn't.) Its all about a New YorkCITY law, not a state law as was intimated by the propagandist who authored it. And seconded by you At best, it's HALF TRUE. Was the actual letter real or fake? Were you aware of this, or were you duped too? You haven't been able to prove that the letter wasn't made up by the writer, so until proven otherwise, I'll continue to be skeptical. Considering the source. Oh, BTW, I actually own firearms, and have for about 50 years. The current cult like behavior of the NRA and their gullible followers makes me very very sad.
[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 12-01-2013).]
Actually, it pointed out that the screed you posted originally that was written by a self styled high priest of the gun cult was using an old law that passed before Obama came for your guns (He hasn't.) Its all about a New YorkCITY law, not a state law as was intimated by the propagandist who authored it. And seconded by you At best, it's HALF TRUE. Was the actual letter real or fake? Were you aware of this, or were you duped too? You haven't been able to prove that the letter wasn't made up by the writer, so until proven otherwise, I'll continue to be skeptical. Considering the source. Oh, BTW, I actually own firearms, and have for about 50 years. The current cult like behavior of the NRA and their gullible followers makes me very very sad.
Yes, I agree with you that it's real, but not new. I've said as much already. At no time in this thread have I mentioned President 0. My original post was to illustrate why registration leads to confiscation. The fact that this has been going on for a while instead of a new development doesn't change that.
You were in such a big hurry to prove me wrong you didn't pay attention to what I actually posted.
Are you going to also argue Neptune's post that "debunks" the article by pointing out this letter and law have been long standing policy in NYC? Do you still say it's fake? Or did you know it's real but decided to lie anyway?
I read the links and it still appears the letter has been modified by someone other than the original sender. So it's either 100% complete and unaltered or it's not. If it hasn't and someone can post a valid link to the original I will withdraw my statement. I still think it's altered. I did some research and both claims are being made without any conclusive evidence or which one is correct. Even if a 1990's letter, if it's totally unaltered then I consider it real. The fact that it's being purported to be a recent letter is a secondary issue but not outside SOP.
I am against this law but we don't need misinformation being circulated that "something has started" when it started a long time ago. There are enough battles to fight now around gun ownership without more noise confusing the goal.
[This message has been edited by TK (edited 12-02-2013).]
What part of well regulated can't gun cultists understand? Allowing anyone, even the mentally imbalanced, to own as many weapons of any kind as they can beg, borrow or steal isn't well regulated. Its UN regulated.
funny how It says nothing about gun regulation in the constitution seeing as how those rights are birth given to every person born onto American soil.
And regulation is only going to affect those bound to regulation... do you think someone breaking into my house (if I lived in NY) is going to care about a piece of paper saying his gun can only hold 5 rounds?
[This message has been edited by pontiackid86 (edited 12-02-2013).]
