To what extent to you support the 1st and 2nd amendment?

[vergiss]

What two actions? You just described them. You click the choice, then you click submit. Most persons double check between those actions. Even most mortal people.

Well I didn't, so boo freaking hoo. :roll:

A person must have due process of law here before their rights are removed, unlike your nation.

What?

 

[Vandeervecken]

If the US government wants your pea-shooter, their gonna take it.
Just look at Waco and Ruby Ridge.

The Weaver's and Davidian's both made the mistake of bunkering, a losing game against the federal government. I'd stay mobile and disappear into a major urban area.

Would they likely get me sooner or later? Yes. Would I make them pay the Ferryman's fee, you betcha. Enough people do that and policies change.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Vandeervecken
The Weaver's and Davidian's both made the mistake of bunkering, a losing game against the federal government. I'd stay mobile and disappear into a major urban area.

Would they likely get me sooner or later? Yes. Would I make them pay the Ferryman's fee, you betcha. Enough people do that and policies change.

Long may you wave your free-flag high.

 

[Vandeervecken]

Your gonna stop an Abrams tank? You watch too much TV.

There are many ways to stop a tank. History shows one of the best for an insurgency is to use their small arms to capture anti-armor weapons from the foe. A Molotov cocktail can work in a pinch too, drop it right into the engine louvers. An IED can do it too.

 

[Vandeervecken]

Well I didn't, so boo freaking hoo. :roll:

Well why are you trying the blame the consequences of your being sloppy and careless on us?

What?

Which word did you find confusing?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by Vandeervecken
There are many ways to stop a tank. History shows one of the best for an insurgency is to use their small arms to capture anti-armor weapons from the foe. A Molotov cocktail can work in a pinch too, drop it right into the engine louvers. An IED can do it too.

I don't want to learn how to overthrow my own government. I would rather work within the system we have now to make necessary changes and adjustments. I don't think our government is evil. We are not the great satan Bin Laden makes us out to be. We are just not acting like a great nation right now and were heading in the wrong direction.

Your comments are always welcome, though.

 

[vergiss]

Well why are you trying the blame the consequences of your being sloppy and careless on us?

Uh... how the hell am I doing that?

Which word did you find confusing?

How does Australia take its citizens' rights without due process of law?

 

[Vandeervecken]

I don't want to learn how to overthrow my own government. I would rather work within the system we have now to make necessary changes and adjustments. I don't think our government is evil. We are not the great satan Bin Laden makes us out to be. We are just not acting like a great nation right now and were heading in the wrong direction.

Your comments are always welcome, though.

That is too bad. It is one of the skills that when you need it, it is probably too late to learn in any way but the very hard way.

You asked how an insurgent would take out an Abram's tank, I gave you several. Rather than admit the point you tried to distract with this. Very predictable actually.

I do believe our government has become evil. Religious zealots with evil intent control two of the three branches of government and when Alito gets confirmed they will have a majority on the third. The time is near when we will have to fight or bend knee. It is obvious which each of us has chosen.

 

[Vandeervecken]

Uh... how the hell am I doing that??

By getting angry at those of us who point out you did not vote the way you claimed you voted.

How does Australia take its citizens' rights without due process of law?

Well for one your gun ban. For another you said that people are locked in asylums BEFORE their get a court hearing.

 

[vergiss]

By getting angry at those of us who point out you did not vote the way you claimed you voted.

Oy gevault. No, I'm not. I'm just pointing out that it's not what I actually intended, so I accidentally voted incorrectly. I've had to extend it out so long because you keep fighting the issue unnecessarily. :roll:

Well for one your gun ban. For another you said that people are locked in asylums BEFORE their get a court hearing.

Maybe you don't realise this, but Australia doesn't follow the American constitution. Guns weren't mentioned in ours, and Australians have never perceived gun ownership as a "right".

Aaaargh. Stop putting words in my mouth. In Australia, involuntary committment to a psychiatric facility (not "asylum", they haven't existed since the 60s) goes like this: if an adult is considered to be an immediate danger to themself or others (eg, about to leap off a building), then they're committed by the police for one night. The next day, they have their court hearing. Depending on their condition, the judge will set the maximum amount of time they can remain in the facility until their case is reviewed.

 

[Vandeervecken]

Oy gevault. No, I'm not. I'm just pointing out that it's not what I actually intended, so I accidentally voted incorrectly. I've had to extend it out so long because you keep fighting the issue unnecessarily. :roll:

Had you said that from the start it would have been fine. First you claimed you voted a different way, they you claimed it was somehow our fault for pointing out your mistake. A simple mea culpa from you would have ended this. I have an allergic reaction to sloppy lies and utter hypocrisy and will always point out both.

Maybe you don't realise this, but Australia doesn't follow the American constitution. Guns weren't mentioned in ours, and Australians have never perceived gun ownership as a "right".

This is exactly my point. The fact you do not recognize it as a right does not make it any less a right. The fact you restrict it means that you restrict rights. QED

Aaaargh. Stop putting words in my mouth. In Australia, involuntary committment to a psychiatric facility (not "asylum", they haven't existed since the 60s) goes like this: if an adult is considered to be an immediate danger to themself or others (eg, about to leap off a building), then they're committed by the police for one night. The next day, they have their court hearing. Depending on their condition, the judge will set the maximum amount of time they can remain in the facility until their case is reviewed.

That is not what you said earlier. When I talked of the court hearings you said they'd already be locked up in Australia. Your sloppy syntax is your worst enemy. We can only take you by what you say and how you actually vote. We cannot tell what you mean or what you meant to vote for if you say one thing and mean another.

 

[vergiss]

they you claimed it was somehow our fault for pointing out your mistake.

I did not. Show me where I did.

This is exactly my point. The fact you do not recognize it as a right does not make it any less a right. The fact you restrict it means that you restrict rights.

Americans see firearm ownership as a right. Australians don't. Australians see free healthcare for everyone as a right. Americans don't. What makes your rights more right than ours?

That is not what you said earlier. When I talked of the court hearings you said they'd already be locked up in Australia.

Well, they would be (by a day). What else are you meant to do, leave the immediately suicidal alone by themselves? It's not as if they're indefinitely shoved in a hospital without due process, which you implied.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Look, I asked my question first. You f_cking answer it!

Apparently you're too dense (or vapid) to understand that I DID answer it.

The insurgents have managed to kill more tanks than the Iraqi army did.
CLEARLY, its possible for a lightly-armed group of irregulars to take on heavy armor.

I'm not at ALL sure why you don;t understand this -- other than you you've simply decided NOT to. Jack.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Americans see firearm ownership as a right. Australians don't. Australians see free healthcare for everyone as a right. Americans don't. What makes your rights more right than ours?

Here, or there?
Here, your perception of our rights doesnt mean much.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by M14 Shooter
Apparently you're too dense (or vapid) to understand that I DID answer it.

The insurgents have managed to kill more tanks than the Iraqi army did.
CLEARLY, its possible for a lightly-armed group of irregulars to take on heavy armor.

I'm not at ALL sure why you don;t understand this -- other than you you've simply decided

No you didn't. I asked YOU how YOU were going to stop an Abrams tank. And YOU go off into this diatribe on Iraq!

 

[M14 Shooter]

No you didn't. I asked YOU how YOU were going to stop an Abrams tank. And YOU go off into this diatribe on Iraq!

No you didn't.
You asked:

Your gonna stop an Abrams tank?

And the answer is:
Yep.
As demonstrated, they can do it. Therefore, so can I.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by M14 Shooter
And the answer is:
Yep.
As demonstraded, they can do it. Therefore, so can I.

Whatever you say, tough guy. So you stop their tank (with your mouth), then they get all scared and decide to drop a tactical nuke on you, then what are you going to do? Shoot it out of the sky before it gets in range?

If a nation that has nuclear capabilty can't stop us, how's a bunch of hayseed-dickboys with pea-shooters going to do that?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Whatever you say, tough guy. So you stop their tank (with your mouth), then they get all scared and decide to drop a tactical nuke on you, then what are you going to do? Shoot it out of the sky before it gets in range?

Good news!
With your help, It's been decided that 'vapid' describes you better than 'dense'.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by M14 Shooter
Good news!
With your help, It's been decided that 'vapid' describes you better than 'dense'.

I hope its not contagious.

 

[Inuyasha]

No restrictions on semi-automatic long arms that have a magazine of 8 rounds or less. Over 8 rounds strict background check.

Severe restrictions on short arms. These are weapons that 95 percent of the time are designed to kill human beings. Therefore anyone wanting to own this type of weapon should be scrutinized very carefully. However I don't mean a total ban on ownership.

The carry law for short arms should be strictly enforced.

Total ban on fully automatic weapons.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No restrictions on semi-automatic long arms that have a magazine of 8 rounds or less. Over 8 rounds strict background check.

Severe restrictions on short arms.

The carry law for short arms should be strictly enforced.
(not sure what this means)

Total ban on fully automatic weapons.

Ok...
2 questions for all 4 counts:
-Why?
-How are these not an infringement on the right to arms?

These are weapons that 95 percent of the time are designed to kill human beings. Therefore anyone wanting to own this type of weapon should be scrutinized very carefully. However I don't mean a total ban on ownership.

I assume you mean handguns.
Given that the right to arms is all about people sometimes needing to kill other people, how is the fact that guns are designed to kill an argument against their general ownership?

 

[TurtleDude]

No restrictions on semi-automatic long arms that have a magazine of 8 rounds or less. Over 8 rounds strict background check.

Severe restrictions on short arms. These are weapons that 95 percent of the time are designed to kill human beings. Therefore anyone wanting to own this type of weapon should be scrutinized very carefully. However I don't mean a total ban on ownership.

The carry law for short arms should be strictly enforced.

Total ban on fully automatic weapons.

why a total ban? If civilian cops can own them so should other civilians./ What is the magic number with 8 rounds

HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE THINK M-14 SHOOTER NEEDS TO DITCH HIS PICTURES since it screws up the size of the board?

 

[M14 Shooter]

why a total ban? If civilian cops can own them so should other civilians./ What is the magic number with 8 rounds

Perhaps he is a Garand owner, and doesnt want the law to apply to him?

HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE THINK M-14 SHOOTER NEEDS TO DITCH HIS PICTURES since it screws up the size of the board?

:moon:

 

[Inuyasha]

Perhaps he is a Garand owner, and doesnt want the law to apply to him?



:moon:

Your right. 8 rounds is what the M-1 Garand holds. For target or hunting why does one need more rounds. If you haven't killed the bear with 8 rounds you are Teddy's dinner. If you can't hit a deer with 8 rounds you better think about eating at Burger King.
I'll address the rest of the questions about my post a little later. In the middle of something right now.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your right. 8 rounds is what the M-1 Garand holds. For target or hunting why does one need more rounds.

The Right to arms isnt about target shooting or hunting, and so any arguments to that end are meaningless.

Your perception of what I "need" in exercising my right is not a sound argument for limiting my right.