RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 A clause in the patriot act states (in laymans terms) that the president can declare marshal law for something as minute as "a threat to America's infrastructure". Which is quite disturbing, since violation of the Constitution itself is a threat to America's infrastructure. I would assume that in pdqgp's world such things as the Kent State shooting didn't occur. The Waco Seige didn't happen, and the Patriot Act really doesn't exist. pdqgp, ever see the movie Equillibrium? You'd fit perfect as one of the citizens, it's your perfect life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Well let's see, that would depend on why he declared marshal law put the US into a police state don't you think? What you're implying that it would have something to do with the Gov't setting out to squash the ordinary law obiding people of this land in some far-out there Waco, TX thought out story where we're all going to become slaves for some strange reason. That's ain't happening. Besides, in time of extreme crisis like what happened to the folks in New Orleans, I think my trusty 9mm, .38 cal. and 12 gauge would do just fine. If I can't protect my family with that, then so be it. I sure as hell don't need the boys in the hood or the Darylls of the world trouncing around with full M16 autos thinking they are the self appointed police. If next week Bush delcared marshal law and turned the U.S. into a police state, your views would change. Don't think fascism could happen? Read a history book, the military has and will be used to control the public at some point... Wouldn't you like to have a fighting chance? Or will you just fall in line and become a slave? A clause in the patriot act states (in laymans terms) that the president can declare marshal law for something as minute as "a threat to America's infrastructure". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 We as a group of citizens hardly need to worry about fighting our own gov't with guns. Such a threat no longer exists and even if it did, you're all fucked and then you say Besides, in time of extreme crisis like what happened to the folks in New Orleans, I think my trusty 9mm, .38 cal. and 12 gauge would do just fine. You're so caught up in your own liberal faults you don't even see how contradictive you are with your own statements. I sure as hell don't need the boys in the hood or the Darylls of the world trouncing around with full M16 autos thinking they are the self appointed police. Uh, that isn't happening now with Semi auto 'assualt weapons', so what would magically change if the ban on FA's was lifted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 The Kent state shooting was a tragedy for sure. However, you're solution is far from a solution. Let's just go add in a bunch of rednecks with guns to the situation and have them take matters into their own hands. Yeah, that's a much better solution than actually maintaining law and order The Waco Seige.....David Koresh was a fucking nut and cult leader. I could care less what happened to him and his following. Myself and those I hang with don't live the life he and his following were trying to lead, so such a response isn't applicable to my life. I say put fuck-nuts like that on Liberal Island and knock down the bridge to it. I would assume that in pdqgp's world such things as the Kent State shooting didn't occur. The Waco Seige didn't happen, and the Patriot Act really doesn't exist. pdqgp, ever see the movie Equillibrium? You'd fit perfect as one of the citizens, it's your perfect life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Let's just go add in a bunch of rednecks with guns to the situation and have them take matters into their own hands Typical of a liberal minded gun grabbing closet case socialist. This is the second time you've made such a statement in this thread. Please, again, tell me how and why this would magically happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 I hardly think I am being contradictive. The folks in New Orleans weren't fighting our gov't and certainly didn't need FA weapons to protect themselves. They were fighting themselves and the inbred looters in the area that are among the worthless trolls of life that I don't need to be giving rights to carry any weapons to. and then you say You're so caught up in your own liberal faults you don't even see how contradictive you are with your own statements. So then by default they don't need FA weapons. Again, no ordinary citizen does. Even most of the Semi-Auto weapons that the lunatics of the world want to have rights for aren't necessary. Uh, that isn't happening now with Semi auto 'assualt weapons', so what would magically change if the ban on FA's was lifted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 In fact, your whole previous statement of the Waco Seige stinks 100% of your socialistic view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 why don't you explain to me what useful purpose you would have owning a fully auto M16? do you use this type of weapon in your daily contributions to the world around you? we can make a lot of things in this country that are currently illegal, legal, but if there's no constructive reason, why do it and jeapordize the citizens just to appease the Waco/Whacko few that feel they have a right? Typical of a liberal minded gun grabbing closet case socialist. This is the second time you've made such a statement in this thread. Please, again, tell me how and why this would magically happen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 I hardly think I am being contradictive. The folks in New Orleans weren't fighting our gov't and certainly didn't need FA weapons to protect themselves. A) They were fighting themselves and the inbred looters in the area that are among the worthless trolls of life that I don't need to be giving rights to carry any weapons to. B) So then by default they don't need FA weapons. Again, no ordinary citizen does. Even most of the Semi-Auto weapons that the lunatics of the world want to have rights for aren't necessary. A) Wrong, local government was also going house to house confiscating any and all guns they could find. AND, RIGHTs are not given by you, and especially not by the government. They are a guarantee by God. I love how you keep showing your true anit American colors. B) No, by default would be "if there is no law against it, then it is legal". Since the laws themselves are uncostitutional, then they themselves are illegal. Making default be that FA's are legal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 David Koresh was a psyco fuck-tard that contibuted nothing good to the world. The Branch Davidians are a sect of religious freaks too and even they never accepted his fucked up role as leader. So in other words, the crazy fucks on one side even said he was a dumb ass. I feel bad for all those weak minded folks that he called students....but hey, Darwin rules. In fact, your whole previous statement of the Waco Seige stinks 100% of your socialistic view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 I'm sorry, I thought as an American he had the freedom to form his own religion. Yes his 'cult' is a religion for him and his followers. It's apparent in this thread however how you blatantly don't care much for America. Just yourself, and if other don't agree with you, damn them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Do you have any clue as to the demographics and education level the folks who remained in New Orleans measured up? Dude, they took the weapons because those that stayed make Daryll and his brothers look smart. Like the national gaurd needed a bunch of the poorest of the poor with near zero education or net worth caring guns around while they looted the nighborhoods. In that case, I support what they did. Supporting anything else would have been putting our National Gaurd and others there to help in harms way. Again, if you're one of them, maybe you should worry about such things.....but I'm not one of them, nor a member of a cult, nor am I out protesting in the streets. I have better ways of dealing with such situations, and I don't need a gun on my belt to make things happen. A) Wrong, local government was also going house to house confiscating any and all guns they could find. AND, RIGHTs are not given by you, and especially not by the government. They are a guarantee by God. I love how you keep showing your true anit American colors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 What DK. taught wasn't religion. Koresh brainwashed his "followers" that the U.S. government was the enemy and that they would have to defend themselves. I was older than age nine when it happened dude. I watched the whole thing unfold. Koresh stated "he'd been told by God" to procreate with the women in the groups to establish a "House of David" How fucked up is that. Yeah, why don't we just protect his little fantasy land and give him guns too. You're right, I do care more about myself and those around me than to support drivel from the Koresh minded folks living in recluse and forming a cult where they can rape children and declare their right to marry umpteen women and force them all to die fighting "big brother" with guns a blazing. I'm sorry, I thought as an American he had the freedom to form his own religion. Yes his 'cult' is a religion for him and his followers. It's apparent in this thread however how you blatantly don't care much for America. Just yourself, and if other don't agree with you, damn them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Do you have any clue as to the demographics and education level the folks who remained in New Orleans measured up? Dude, they took the weapons because those that stayed make Daryll and his brothers look smart. Like the national gaurd needed a bunch of the poorest of the poor with near zero education or net worth caring guns around while they looted the nighborhoods. So you support only the Educated, Wealthy, and Connected to own guns, especially in times of disaster. Very draconian of you Stalin. In that case, I support what they did.Of course you would, you've made this clear in all your posting's that you're against anyone but you and your like minded to have rights. Supporting anything else would have been putting our National Gaurd and others there to help in harms way. Again, if you're one of them, maybe you should worry about such things.....but I'm not one of them, nor a member of a cult, nor am I out all of those groups. .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 What DK. taught wasn't religion. Koresh brainwashed his "followers" that the U.S. government was the enemy and that they would have to defend themselves. I was older than age nine when it happened dude. I watched the whole thing unfold. Koresh stated "he'd been told by God" to procreate with the women in the groups to establish a "House of David" How fucked up is that. Yeah, why don't we just protect his little fantasy land and give him guns too. You're right, I do care more about myself and those around me than to support drivel from the Koresh minded folks living in recluse and forming a cult. It could be argued that all religions are brain washing, what's your point? I bet you support all that's happening with the Texas LDS members right now too don't you? We are supposed to have a seperation of church and state. Not the government sticking their dick in everyone's business telling what they can and can't do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 When a religion is as harmful to people as the Waco nuts, they are not safe to continue proliferating among those of us that practice a religion with true values and morals. Honestly, I've not followed the LDS situation that closely. Smells wrong on the side of taking the kids away, but then, I have kids and even if it's not 100% proven, they took the kids to protect them against harm. I suppose if it were my kid I may feel differently, but at what percentage of certainty does one leave a child in what could be a very harmful environment. The parents will get over it, even if they are innocent...however, the kids on the other hand if left exposed to harm will be done a much greater amount of harm than spending a few weeks in care of the state. Either way, at least in this case they didn't go out the way DK and his followers did. I blame him for what happened at Waco. If given that choice, yes, I would choose to live and fight another day vs. seeing my family and supposidly "friends" and fellow members die. It could be argued that all religions are brain washing, what's your point? I bet you support all that's happening with the Texas LDS members right now too don't you? We are supposed to have a seperation of church and state. Not the government sticking their dick in everyone's business telling what they can and can't do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimmer95 Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Hate to break this to you, but full auto guns registered with the ATF before 6/86 are completely legal to own. They're just more regulated then semi auto weapons. As a civilian, to legal own a full auto gun, you must: 1) Live in a state that allows them (like Ohio) 2) Pass a background check (just can't be a felon, non-citizen, insane, etc) 3) Pay a $200 transfer tax 4) Be able to afford the exaggerated prices due to the 6/86 manufacturing ban Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 I don't think you meant it that way, but either way, it's not going to ruin my day. Hate to break this to you, but full auto guns registered with the ATF before 6/86 are completely legal to own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 No, he's right. What other way do you think he meant that? Look up full auto shoots on youtube. You'll find a lot of video's of these organized shoots that are completely legal, because they are using guns that are grandfathered into the ban's. Here's a vid : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25352876#25352876 No violent killing of people. No Daryll and Cletus shooting up the place acting in place of the police, and no mass hysteria because someone is shooting a FA machine gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Let's just say, the folks down there to help, including the nationa gaurd had enough challenges to deal with and putting guns in the hands of the citizens dumb enought to stay wasn't another risk worth exposing them to. Good call for what they did.....and I'm sure some of them thought just like you...all for the people and their God Given rights you claim are so absolute....but I didn't see one single soldier give a civilian a pistol and say "now go be safe man." Not one. Rules have to be applied differently based on the situation. Had that happened in an affluent area where crime and what not wasn't as much of an issue.....things likely would have been different....as it should be. Those that had to stay becuase they had no way out or couldn't leave for other extreme reasons, likely didn't need a gun anyway....they should have just been working to get the fuck out and not worry about what little shit they did have that was sitting in sewage. ..So you support only the Educated, Wealthy, and Connected to own guns, especially in times of disaster. Very draconian of you Stalin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 So if God gave us rights, and i dont believe in God, does that mean i dont have rights? Better still, who gives me the right not to believe in God? And even better, when did God decide what everyone COULD do? Arent all or most of the comandments about what you CANT do? Churches have been at war longer than anyone and i havent seen any lighting bolts or lakes of fire lately... You see, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are like the SCCA rule book... It tells you the rules and you CANT venture beyond them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Wonderful, so I'll put my vote for the bill that allows my nieghbor to go get his rocks off firing a machine gun at a secure facilty , but I wont' support his ass removing such a weapon outside of that area. Again, he has no business having one in the burbs...unless your zip-code is in the middle East. Just because one can, doesn't mean they should. You'll find a lot of video's of these organized shoots that are completely legal, because they are using guns that are grandfathered into the ban's. Here's a vid : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25352876#25352876 No violent killing of people. No Daryll and Cletus shooting up the place acting in place of the police, and no mass hysteria because someone is shooting a FA machine gun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Let's just say, the folks down there to help, including the nationa gaurd had enough challenges to deal with and putting guns in the hands of the citizens dumb enought to stay wasn't another risk worth exposing them to. Good call for what they did.....and I'm sure some of them thought just like you...all for the people and their God Given rights....but I didn't see one single soldier give a civilian a pistol and say "now go be safe man." Not one. Hah, you missed the entire point. It was illegal search and seisure, no other way to put it. Your irrelavent spin about a G.I. just handing out guns isn't what we are even talking about anyhow. Just cause I own guns doesn't mean I'm going to give them out freely if the SHTF either. The right to bear arms isn't about arming your fellow man, it's about the right to keep arms yourself. Don't misconstrue the issue. Rules have to be applied differently based on the situation. Had that happened in an affluent area where crime and what not wasn't as much of an issue.....things likely would have been different....as it should be.So, Rich and White, we won't take your guns. Black and Poor, you have no rights. Got it! I also like your 'play down' of the words 'as much of an issue'. Its either an issue or not. If there is even a little bit of crime in an 'affluent community' the same precautions should be taken regardless. But not at the expense of one's rights until they are proven in a court of law to be stricken of those rights. You know, due process and all. You do believe in due process... right? Those that had to stay becuase they had no way out or couldn't leave for other extreme reasons, likely didn't need a gun anyway I'd say, that if the whole country were to experience a break down such as that, then that would be the EXACT time self protection and preservation requiring one's guns would be ....they should have just been working to get the fuck out and not worry about what little shit they did have that was sitting in sewage. .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 You see, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are like the SCCA rule book... It tells you the rules and you CANT venture beyond them. No, laws define what you can't venture beyond. Rights are guarantee's of what you CAN do. But, to use your perspective, infringing on rights with laws is doing EXACTLY what you say, going beyond them. Wonderful, so I'll put my vote for the bill that allows my nieghbor to go get his rocks off firing a machine gun at a secure facilty , but I wont' support his ass removing such a weapon outside of that area. Again, he has no business having one in the burbs...unless your zip-code is in the middle East. Just because one can, doesn't mean they should. You, or one of your ilk, made the comment about STi's and EVO's earlier and compared them to FA's. And then went to say that even some semi-auto's are out of hand, and no one but the military should have them. Well, to use your comparison. Since you drive a GXP, you shouldn't be allowed to own an engine so big. And only limited to 3 cylinder GEO metro's. Same principal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTurbo Posted June 26, 2008 Report Share Posted June 26, 2008 Wonderful, so I'll put my vote for the bill that allows my nieghbor to go get his rocks off firing a machine gun at a secure facilty , but I wont' support his ass removing such a weapon outside of that area. Again, he has no business having one in the burbs...unless your zip-code is in the middle East. Just because one can, doesn't mean they should. I also ask, again, since you can't answer the question the first two times. What about his location makes any difference to having a FA? Once he hits the 'burbs' he automatically goes ape shit and starts involuntarily shooting up the kids and creating rivers of blood in the streets? Since you're using cliche's (Just because one can, doesn't mean they should), more people will be killed this year by drunk drivers using a car than there will be by someone using a gun. Let's ban all cars shall we, cause you know, drunk driving is illegal and works as a law already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.