TexasCHLforum.com

This guy does sound crazy, but he also echos a lot of the twisted thinking of people who truly believe we just need to get rid of the guns and all would be well in Mayberry.

With the way our census shows an expected increase in populations more likely to vote democrat and a decrease in populations more likely to vote Republican, this is not a problem that is going away. While not every democrat wants to see an end to gun ownership, the party as a whole seems to come under too much power from the extreme left. We need lots more democrats who love guns and are willing to tell their legislators to keep their hands off of them.

We are just one more anti gun SCOTUS Justice away from some form of curtailing of gun rights. If the Supreme Court entered a long period of leftist anti gun rulings, it wouldn't be pretty. Then it would be up the the states to try to exercise resistance if they were willing to.

Guys like this are the best reason to take someone new to guns and teach them, get them involved. Every new gun owner and CHL is someone who now cares what happens to their gun rights.

canvasbck wrote:

Poldark wrote:Obama aide: Gun legislation in 'near future'

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... csp=34news" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I'm willing to bet that responsible, law-abiding gun owners agree that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few -- dangerous criminals and fugitives, for example -- from getting their hands on a gun in the first place."

Finally I agree with someone in the Obama administration! I have an idea of a way to keep the irresponsible, law breaking few, such as dangerous criminals and fugitives from getting their hands on a gun in the first place..........................put them in prison where it's almost impossible to purchase a firearm. Then you can quit worrying about the rest of us.

How's that for common sense gun control?

Or maybe we could find a large island somewhere mid-ocean like the French used to do only equip it with automatic track-destroy computer controled weaponry around the coast line. Nobody gets in; nobody gets out except at the entry pier, including aircraft. Access at the pier could be remotely controled from say Dept. Of Justice, in D.C. and everything else runs on auto. The inmates would have to learn to get along in a civilization of their own making or perish; their choice.

Just an idle thought.

Gerry

Gyrogearhead wrote:
Or maybe we could find a large island somewhere mid-ocean like the French used to do only equip it with automatic track-destroy computer controled weaponry around the coast line. Nobody gets in; nobody gets out except at the entry pier, including aircraft. Access at the pier could be remotely controled from say Dept. Of Justice, in D.C. and everything else runs on auto. The inmates would have to learn to get along in a civilization of their own making or perish; their choice.

Just an idle thought.

Gerry

Umm, "Escape from L.A."?

Snake Plissken is once again called in by the United States government to recover a potential doomsday device from Los Angeles, now an autonomous island where undesirables are deported.

Banishing criminals was a common punishment in many pre-industrial societies and it's also in the bible. I think it's a good solution for repeat offenders. Kick them out and revoke their citizenship. Let them feed themselves, build their own shelter, sew their own clothes, etc. It's much more efficient than the current system where the productive members of society have to work harder to provide for the career criminals.

We would also need effective border security to make sure they can't come back to hurt any members of this society again. However, there's no political will to keep out Mexican rapists or Saudi terrorists, much less home grown dirt bags.

Attempting to calculate the hypothetical number of people that would fight in this situation is pointless. It would not just be people with firearms that would stand up and fight something like this. It would also be people that have their houses searched with no warrant or warning. It would be ordinary people that could see where this would lead. Your neighbor might be asking to buy one of your guns.

How many soldiers and police would “cross over” with their weapons?

This is just the rambling of some nitwit, with toys in his head.

This is the United States not Russia or Nazi Germany where the people have been taught to fear and submit to authority.

Good point!! As one politician dryly observed a year or so ago when asked about the possibility of a total gun ban, " Heck, there are enough machine shops in the garrages of Texas that if the Bubbas wanted to arm a nation the size of Iraq they could in a matter of weeks."

Gerry

chasfm11 wrote: I do realize that with today's modern warfare, it would be hard for a small bunch of civilians to take on a combat trained army. Wait, wasn't that what happened in Iraq? My guess is that the use of the US military against US civilians would up the anty above the 2% range among the civilians. That's just a guess.

Not to hijack this thread, but I do want to correct this incorrect interpretation of what happened in Iraq - and is happening in Afghanistan.

Roughly 80% of the enemy killed or captured early on in Iraq turned out to be regular Syrian army troops out of uniform. The local civilian insurgency in Iraq, while present, was extremely small, but these insurgents - along with members of al-Qaida who were almost all non-Iraqi - were mostly trained and armed by Iranian Republican Guard forces. The fighting that occurred was largely between the Coalition and Syrian regular army in the north/northwest portions of Iraq and Iranian trained and armed forces in the south and east.

Syrian army advisors are currently present in Afghanistan arming and training the Taliban on weapons proficiency and bomb making skills, much as our CIA assisted the Afghans during the Soviet occupation.

So, no, it wasn't a small bunch of civilians taking on a combat trained army in Iraq. It was members of a combat trained army, in civilian clothes, engaging another combat trained army, with the elite members of a second combat trained army arming and training secondary guerrilla groups.

Poldark wrote:Patrick Ferguson killed at Kings Mountain his Breach loading rifle. Sure didn't pay to upset those Overmountain men , I just wonder how many would get out of their comfy sofa's watching America Idol or ball game to defend the Constitution,most seem to struggle to get to a voting booth ?

http://johno.myiglou.com/ferguson.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A very good book to get hold of , Kings Mountain and its Heroes by Draper. I managed to purchase my copy during one of our visits to KM. Ferguson is burried under a rock pile with his lady friend Virginia Sal also killed at the battle.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cg ... GRid=10227" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Excellent link to the Battle of Kings Mountain.

http://www.tngenweb.org/revwar/kingsmountain.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I "had" that book, and may have to get a new copy.

Supposedly a distant ancestor was a participant, but I have yet to find a positive match.

When are we going to start asking these leftists what they want to do to us that makes them afraid for us to have guns. Or, perhaps, we should ask them if they really believe that all civilians act like the gang bangers and drug dealers who are responsible for most of the murders in this country.

Whatever they want to do to us, I would bet my last dollar that it has to do with some form of leftist totalitarianism. And, these bozos don't have a "liberal" bone in their bodies. They just co-opted an honorable term as a way of masking their true intentions. <Rant mode off>

I don't know of any 'liberals' who would agree with this. Sounds like a right wing conservitive scare tactic.

MMac wrote:I don't know of any 'liberals' who would agree with this. Sounds like a right wing conservitive scare tactic.

You're sounding like the Washington Post trying to blame "Fast and Furious" on the NRA!

MMac wrote:I don't know of any 'liberals' who would agree with this.

It depends on your definitions. There are socialists who claim the "liberal" label but are diametrically opposed to liberals like Jefferson (and other anti-federalists) or Jean-Baptiste Say.

MMac wrote:I don't know of any 'liberals' who would agree with this.

I do, unfortunately. They are in my own family. I don't know if liberal is a good description so much as "crazy" but they self identify as liberals.

tacticool wrote:Banishing criminals was a common punishment in many pre-industrial societies and it's also in the bible. I think it's a good solution for repeat offenders. Kick them out and revoke their citizenship. Let them feed themselves, build their own shelter, sew their own clothes, etc. It's much more efficient than the current system where the productive members of society have to work harder to provide for the career criminals.

The British tried this - it's called Australia, where private ownership of guns is going the way of the dodo bird.

SIA

I am afraid that Obama will do something with "gun rights" and get it done by circumventing Congress. Then again I do believe
that normal law abiding citizens have no need for a 30 shot mag. for his Glock. The question about how that Arizona shooter got his
gun to do those things is a valid question. I think that everyone here should question exactly what does the 2nd Amendment mean?

Does anyone here think that a totally unstable person should get a handgun? Do we need fully automatic weapons?

Back when the 2nd Amendment was drafted they could not imagine the weaponry available today. I strongly believe
in the "right to bear arms" but I also think we have no right to bear tanks, howitzers etc etc.

Then again the far left would like nothing better than to remove all gun ownership and make it against the law to own a gun of
any type. Will that keep the guns out of the hands of criminals, no?

I know that it is difficult to come to a compromise regarding this issue but each and every time something like Arizona happens
the far left comes out of the woodwork. Unless we have our existing laws enforced and tweaked, sometime I may live to see the day
when we lose all rights of gun ownership of any type.