- Joined
- Jan 24, 2013
- Messages
- 8,834
- Reaction score
- 2,812
- Location
- Alabama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
I think more the more likely scenario is a government is going to run into somebody that so seriously out guns the police that the cost of making said somebody comply would be ludicrous at best and at that point the genie leaves the bottle. This is especially so if said somebody is mostly harmless and just prefers to be left alone. What's been going one is that the statists have been trying their damnedest to stuff the toothpaste back into the tube. With not very much success. Right now its just contained eventually that goes the way of the dodo bird, because somebody is going to be able to bring enough hurt that for intents and purposes they become self sovereign. Therein lies our countries evolutionary past and future. The choice we have before us is that of self sovereignty or to revert back to subjects of whatever. Our experiment which makes us unique has been flirting with self sovereignty. So are we going to take the final steps to eventual self sovereignty? Unknown for certain.
We started out as a state sovereign republic, but we are now mostly subjects of DC and the courts that continue to expand its powers...
I disagree. I know what sort of training Air Marshals and Flight Deck officers go through. people who service airlines are not millionaires and can be bribed.
"Shall not be infringed" was not intended to prevent "infringements"
It's not hyperbole to point out the truth.
Sorry but just because you disagree with the ideology of the left doesn't mean they are all interested in tyranny. Your blanket statement fails.
Sorry, but the leftist agenda seeks to control every facet of our lives. The modern liberal / progressive cannot divorce themselves from those policies, which they support.
I understand the point you are trying to make. I am generally not a fan of blanket statements either, but I do not see any liberals standing up for the cause of liberty and freedom these days. I can no longer give any of them the benefit of the doubt.
On the other hand, does "shall not be infringed" mean you get to privately purchase nuclear warheads with no background check?
so no firearms have ever been smuggled onto a plane?I doubt you can cite an example of that. Anyway, no guns on airplanes.
Are you familiar with the Patriot Act and the NDAA?
Here's FOX news of all places exposing the unconstitutional aspects of the USPA.
When the government demands silence -- the ugliness of the Patriot Act
When the government demands silence -- the ugliness of the Patriot Act | Fox News
https://www.aclu.org/national-security/surveillance-under-usa-patriot-act
I cannot even find one Founder who even used the word INFRINGEMENTS. Can you?
So if WE ALL KNOW why then can truly decent people not agree?
so no firearms have ever been smuggled onto a plane?
Just because the GOP does stupid ****, doesn't absolve liberals from their tyrannical positions.
Good gawd dude! Do you understand what tyranny is. Do you realize that the two men that could have shut the patriot act down, had reservations about the USA PATRIOT ACT and both had there offices anthraxed!!
Cite an example where airline service employees have been bribed to allow terrorists to stash a gun on a plane.
Of course I know what tyranny is. What do you take me for, a lib? Lol.
Why did you ignore what I pointed out to you with regards to the group of democrats fighting for the second amendment, and the restrictive gun policies of Chris Christy, a republican, or the second half of my post you just quoted?
5 Airline Employees Busted In Alleged Cash Smuggling Operation At Logan Airport « CBS Boston
Aside from drug money, Vick allegedly offered at one point to smuggle a firearm past TSA.
Feds: Bag Of Guns Smuggled Onto Plane - CBS News
Feds: Virginia woman used baby seat to try to smuggle guns onto plane | WashingtonExaminer.com
its enough of a possibility to justify air marshals
yes, some Dems are pro second amendment and some republicans are scum bags on gun rights but overall
DEMOCRAT=GUN RESTRICTIONIST
EVERY federal gun restriction passed into the United States CODE was the action of DEMOCRATS
House Republicans Vote to Deny Second Amendment Rights to Millions
June 4, 2014 11:05 am·27 comments
House Republicans Vote to Deny Second Amendment Rights to Millions | Mississippi Gun News, LLC
NASHVILLE, March 18, 2014- Senate Republicans in Tennessee voted to kill a pro-Second Amendment bill that would have protected Tennessee citizens from unconstitutional federal gun laws on Tuesday.
Republicans kill pro-Second Amendment bill in Tennessee | Ben Swann Truth In Media
GOP House Decides 2nd Amendment Has Limits, Approves Gun Control Measure
As long as you can still own a loin-cloth then taking things from you isn't stealingyes, we have seen that silliness argued before. as I noted it is like saying THOU SHALL NOT STEAL does not prevent STEALING because STEALING is not mentioned
As long as you can still own a loin-cloth then taking things from you isn't stealing
For one thing, I was posting while driving.Why did you ignore what I pointed out to you with regards to the group of democrats fighting for the second amendment, and the restrictive gun policies of Chris Christy, a republican, or the second half of my post you just quoted?
1) what part of federal do you not understand
2) what federal gun restriction was the creation of a GOP politician: do you understand that if the DEMS had not passed the GCA of 68, what you rant about could not have taken place
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?