Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.


Posted on 02/18/2004 7:38:36 AM PST by truthfinder9

FIREARM REFRESHER COURSE ===========================

1. An armed person is a citizen. An unarmed person is a subject.

2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

3. Glock: The original point and click interface.

4. Gun control is not about guns; it is about control.

5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

8. If you do not know your rights, you do not have any.

9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights reserved.

11. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

12. The second Amendment is in place , in case they ignore the others.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

14. Guns have only two enemies: rust and liberals.

15. Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety.

16. You do not shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

17. 911 - government sponsored Dial-a-prayer.

18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

19. Criminals love gun control--it makes their jobs safer.

20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.

21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.

22. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.

23. Enforce the "gun control laws" we have, do not make more.

24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

26. "...A government of the people, by the people, for the people..."


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; bang; banglist; firearms; guns
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last
To: robertpaulsen
I know you don't like the words "Supreme Law of the Land". Neither did they. That is why the 14th was necessary. To straighten out the issue before someone got shot over it. And you continue to spout that old "State BOR" cannard.

You just never learn, do you...

41 posted on 02/18/2004 12:03:32 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
The phrase "Supreme Law of the Land" is from Article VI of the US Constitution, otherwise known as the Supremacy Clause. It says that IF a federal law conflicts with a state law, the federal law prevails.

This is what is going on in California where the state medical marijuana laws conflict with the federal Controlled Substances Act.

The 14th amendment came into being to guarantee the freedom and rights of former slaves. Ever since that time, however, the 14th has been used to centralize government power.

42 posted on 02/18/2004 12:33:58 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
And Federal Law, the BoR, says that firearms ownership is protected. Ergo, that asshat judge saying that "this means that only Congress shall make no law" was a complete moron.

Unfortunately for you as well, the FedGov only has those powers delegated to it. Regulation of substances is not one of those powers. Federal drug laws are bunk.

The 14th still has a place in a Constitutional Republic. Too bad we no longer HAVE a Constitutional Republic, but some hybrid democracy/socialist State. Repealing the 14th would only give State legislators that much more impetus to try and pass laws that violate the Rights of their citizens.

43 posted on 02/18/2004 12:44:38 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
"And Federal Law, the BoR, says that firearms ownership is protected."

Yes it is. It is protected from federal infringement.

In each state, firearms ownership is protected by that state's constitution.

"Repealing the 14th would only give State legislators that much more impetus to try and pass laws that violate the Rights of their citizens."

That is a possibility. They could try to pass such laws. And if they were successful, the citizens could leave (as they're doing in California, in droves).

44 posted on 02/18/2004 1:04:01 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Yes it is. It is protected from federal infringement.

Funny, it just says "shall not be infringed." No mention of Congress or the States. The Art 6 you mentioned earlier says the Constitution is the "Supreme Law of the Land". As for incorperation, did the States not have to vote on the Constitutional Amendmets in the BoR to get them added in the first place? There were several varients bandied about for the Second Amendment. Some were even worded as you suggest, but were shot down.

You cannot have this one both ways.

45 posted on 02/18/2004 1:14:14 PM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LauraJean
I know that (at least in some parts of IL) you can go shooting at a range with a friend if just the friend has a FOID. In other words, you don't need one if you go with a friend who has one. Freepmail me if you want the name of the range I went to where you can do this.
46 posted on 02/18/2004 2:01:29 PM PST by elisabeth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
"Free men do not ask permission to bear arms."

Text of the Second Amendment
"A well regulated Militia
being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Anyone who actually reads AND understands the 2nd Amendment will see that there is no need or authority for any type of gun registration and there is no need for anyone to have to apply for a license to carry a gun.
Any political party, politician, judge (etc), organization or individual who trys to convince you that:
1) you must register a firearm
2) you must pass a background check
3) you must wait (x) amount of days before you can get your firearm
4) you need to have a license to carry a gun
is either uneducated about OUR rights as citizens
OR is actively working to undermine OUR country.

How Did the Founders Understand the Second Amendment?

The Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment right to keep and bear firearms,
originated in the United States Congress in 1789 before being ratified by the States.
On three occasions since then--in 1866, 1941, and 1986--
Congress enacted statutes to reaffirm this guarantee of personal freedom
and to adopt specific safeguards to enforce it.

ON THE DAY BEFORE Thanksgiving 1993,
the 103d US Congress brought forth a constitutional turkey.
The 103d Congress decided that the Second Amendment did not mean what it said
("...shall not be infringed") and passed the Brady bill.

How the Brady Bill Passed (and subsequently - "Instant Check")
When the Brady Bill was passed into law on November 24, 1993,
the Senate voted on the Conference Report
and passed the Brady Bill by UNANIMOUS CONSENT.

47 posted on 02/18/2004 2:39:43 PM PST by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub (Want better gun control? Try eating more carrotts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oyez
The police do protect & serve . It's just that the folks that get protected & served are not you but the members of the political class that views you as a peasant who has the duty to kiss their backsides & suck something else whenever they want .
48 posted on 02/18/2004 4:14:01 PM PST by Nebr FAL owner (.308 reach out & thump someone .50 cal. Browning reach out & crush someone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9; DMZFrank; CHICAGOFARMER; RedWing9; BillyBoy; endthematrix; sistergoldenhair; ...
Consider your self re-educated and refreshed!
49 posted on 02/18/2004 5:45:01 PM PST by chicagolady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chicagolady
The one and only FIREARM I am fearful of, is the one that points itself at me. I can control all of the others.
50 posted on 02/18/2004 6:47:41 PM PST by B4Ranch ( Dear Mr. President, Sir, Are you listening to the voters?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Sounds good to me.
51 posted on 02/18/2004 6:52:13 PM PST by TYVets ("An armed society is a polite society." - Robert A. Heinlein & me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Nebr FAL owner
"The police do protect & serve ."

I believe that the courts already ruled that the police DO NOT have an obligation to protect citizens even if they see a crime being committed.

The fact is though that they are not here to protect, only to give the feeling that you are "safe". Protection is up to each of us on our own.
52 posted on 02/18/2004 9:41:06 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
I agree with you on the 17th amendment but I would definitely repeal the 16th amendment.
53 posted on 02/18/2004 10:25:11 PM PST by dts32041 ( "Always make sure someone has a P-38.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: JSteff
You are correct in your statement that the police DO NOT have an obligation to protect any particular John/Jane Q.Citizen ,however that does not mean that my statement that they are primarily interested in the protection of the POLITICAL CLASS is in error.
54 posted on 02/19/2004 7:33:06 AM PST by Nebr FAL owner (.308 REACH OUT & THUMP SOMEONE .50BMG REACH OUT & CRUSH SOMEONE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: dts32041
Goes without saying. Amazing how we were able to survive without it for 125 years.
55 posted on 02/19/2004 8:03:28 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: truthfinder9
Thanks these will be useful in may when Sarah Brady and her merry minions come to town.
56 posted on 02/19/2004 8:19:54 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine's brother ("Never trust a RAT with anything" - Angelwood)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
If the BOR applied to the states there would have been no need for the 14th amendment. It didn't. The BOR only applied to the federal government.

"Art 6 ... says the Constitution is the "Supreme Law of the Land"."

Not quite. Article VI says, in part,

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

IF there is a federal law that conflicts with a state law, the federal law prevails.

"did the States not have to vote on the Constitutional Amendmets in the BoR to get them added in the first place?"

Yes they did. But that's not the process of incorporation to which I'm referring.

Prior to the 14th amendment, a state could abolish freedom of speech, establish a tax-supported church, or do away with jury trials in state courts without violating the Bill of Rights. After the 14th amendment was passed, the Supreme Court "incorporated" some, not all, of the BOR into the 14th amendment under the due process clause.

"While such rights as freedom of speech were clearly "fundamental," according to Justice Cardozo and the Supreme Court majority, others were not. Thus, the Supreme Court established the principle of "partial incorporation": Only certain "fundamental rights," not the entire Bill of Rights, apply to the states through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. [Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319 (1937)]."

"By 1972, the Supreme Court had "incorporated" into the 14th Amendment all but five rights named in the Bill of Rights. Those rights still not deemed "fundamental" include the Second Amendment right to bear arms, the Third Amendment protection against quartering troops in private homes, the Fifth Amendment right of grand jury indictment, the Seventh Amendment right of trial by jury in civil cases, and the Eighth Amendment guarantee against excessive bail and fines. (The Ninth and Tenth amendments do not name specific personal rights.)"

57 posted on 02/19/2004 8:29:06 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Jimmy Valentine's brother
These may be of use to you when Sarah's Bunch arrive.

40 Reasons For Gun Control

Significant portions of this article are excerpted from Michael Z. Williamson's excellent and witty piece, "It's amazing what one has to believe to believe in gun control"

1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need guns.

2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."

4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.

5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense -- give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p.125).

10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns, just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

13. The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally owned weapons, vehicles, buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a "state" militia.

14. These phrases: "right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people" all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arm" refers to the state.

15. "The Constitution is strong and will never change." But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.

16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.

17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they aren't "military weapons", but private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles", because they are military weapons.

18. In spite of waiting periods, background checks, finger printing, government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940's, 1950's and1960's, anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.

19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.

20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."

23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

26. Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."

27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

28. The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self- defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self-defense only justifies bare hands.

30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

31. Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA is a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

34. Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self-protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.

37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.

39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

40. Handgun Control, Inc. says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands." Guess what? You have the wrong hands.
58 posted on 02/19/2004 9:48:04 AM PST by Gunner Mike (Ready on the right? Ready on the left? All ready on the firing line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
That was my point. The whole "incorperation" bullsh*t thought up by an activist court is bunk.

That the BoR didn't apply to the States is a convenient legal fiction for those looking to get around the strictures contained therein.

The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added. Pre-amble to the Bill or Rights

So now you have no less than FOUR different spots in the US Constitution giving it primacy in the areas specifically mentioned. The State governments are clearly LESSER and bound by the same stricture as far as the ennumerated Rights are concerned.

The very argument you are making is the same one the gun grabbers are using to justify thier actions. You aren't a gun grabber are you Bobby?

59 posted on 02/19/2004 11:44:37 AM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
"You aren't a gun grabber are you Bobby?"


60 posted on 02/19/2004 12:06:25 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson