Knockout "Game" Not New, Media Cover Up Not Either

[bigarrow]

Quote from bigarrow:

What is your OPINION on what the founders would say about private ownership of nuclear weapons today ?

How about you leap you can answer the question. Try to answer just the question without any personal attacks.

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from bigarrow:

How about you leap you can answer the question. Try to answer just the question without any personal attacks.

Our Founding Fathers left a tyrannical government behind, and risked their asses (literally!), to form a truly free country. At the time the Constitution was written, our Founders intended the people be armed with the same weaponry used by a military to defend the country. Then, that meant muskets, pistols, and cannons... For the last 100yrs, our government has grown further from the Constitution than ever, and to date (thanks Onazi, and sheep), is no better than the tyrannical government our Founders left. Nukes were created during the last 100yrs. I don't agree with nukes, so I wouldn't agree a free American should have nukes. I will say, however, a free American should be able to own small arms, meaning machine guns, m67 grenades, etc., with no regulations. Why? To protect the Country from a tyrannical government while using similar weapons that the tyrannical government would order it's military to use against the people.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigarrow:

They were simple ideas in the quotes. I understood completely. It is you who fails to read what I wrote without bias.

Look again, my response was to this specific portion of your post.

Quote from bigarrow:
11-23-13 11:35 AM
It looks like that view is conjecture. We don't know what the writers of the constitution would say about gun permits in today's society...

What is your OPINION on what the founders would say about private ownership of nuclear weapons today ?

Other than when an anti gun drone brings it up. As they do occasionally. I honestly haven't given it much thought. Mostly because I'm not aware of any US citizens wanting to own or trying to acquire nuclear weapons. To me it's something of a red herring.

I'm certainly not opposed to law abiding responsible citizens owning certain surplus/obsolete military equipment. If terrorists and governments (rogue and otherwise) can have them why not responsible individuals? Particularly when it's guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. The primary impetus of the 2nd IS protection from a tyrannical government after all. If there is too big a difference between their arms and ours then the protections afforded by the second are indisputably minimized.

 

[PiggyBank]

Quote from LEAPup:

Our Founding Fathers left a tyrannical government behind, and risked their asses (literally!), to form a truly free country. At the time the Constitution was written, our Founders intended the people be armed with the same weaponry used by a military to defend the country. Then, that meant muskets, pistols, and cannons... For the last 100yrs, our government has grown further from the Constitution than ever, and to date (thanks Onazi, and sheep), is no better than the tyrannical government our Founders left. Nukes were created during the last 100yrs. I don't agree with nukes, so I wouldn't agree a free American should have nukes. I will say, however, a free American should be able to own small arms, meaning machine guns, m67 grenades, etc., with no regulations. Why? To protect the Country from a tyrannical government while using similar weapons that the tyrannical government would order it's military to use against the people.

The 'infantry rule' = balance imo too. And if not, then at a bare minimum, whatever CIVILIAN agents are allowed to bear needs to be available to private CIVILIANS as well.

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from LEAPup:

Our Founding Fathers left a tyrannical government behind, and risked their asses (literally!), to form a truly free country. At the time the Constitution was written, our Founders intended the people be armed with the same weaponry used by a military to defend the country. Then, that meant muskets, pistols, and cannons... For the last 100yrs, our government has grown further from the Constitution than ever, and to date (thanks Onazi, and sheep), is no better than the tyrannical government our Founders left. Nukes were created during the last 100yrs. I don't agree with nukes, so I wouldn't agree a free American should have nukes. I will say, however, a free American should be able to own small arms, meaning machine guns, m67 grenades, etc., with no regulations. Why? To protect the Country from a tyrannical government while using similar weapons that the tyrannical government would order it's military to use against the people.

Jesus Christ that's a needlessly long damn paragraph. So I take it you are for some arms control. Like I said it's just a matter of degree.

 

[LEAPup]

Quote from bigarrow:

Jesus Christ that's a needlessly long damn paragraph. So I take it you are for some arms control. Like I said it's just a matter of degree.

I'm not for arms control. Our Founders didn't have nukes to deal with. How do you compare a nuke to a handgun requiring a ccw? Really?

 

[Fractals 'R Us]

Quote from gwb-trading:



Perhaps the victims need to arm themselves and play the "Zimmerman Game".

+1 LOL

 

[Fractals 'R Us]

Quote from bigarrow:

We do not know what the framers would think about gun permits or background checks today. Hell if you lived three hundred years from now you wouldn't know all the thoughts even yourself would have. Of course it's completely conjecture on my thinking that the founders would be against individuals owning nuclear weapons just like it would be conjecture to think they would be for individuals owning nuclear weapons. It's a silly argument anyway. Like I've said before for most reasonable Americans it's a discussion of degree.

anybody for some red herring?

 

[Scataphagos]

Quote from LEAPup:

Our Founding Fathers left a tyrannical government behind, and risked their asses (literally!), to form a truly free country. At the time the Constitution was written, our Founders intended the people be armed with the same weaponry used by a military to defend the country. Then, that meant muskets, pistols, and cannons... For the last 100yrs, our government has grown further from the Constitution than ever, and to date (thanks Onazi, and sheep), is no better than the tyrannical government our Founders left. Nukes were created during the last 100yrs. I don't agree with nukes, so I wouldn't agree a free American should have nukes. I will say, however, a free American should be able to own small arms, meaning machine guns, m67 grenades, etc., with no regulations. Why? To protect the Country from a tyrannical government while using similar weapons that the tyrannical government would order it's military to use against the people.

Anyone who does not understand this is not a patriot... and doesn't deserve to live in this country.... what's left of it anyway.

America needs a cleansing. May I suggest shipping all of the Leftist politicos and their parasite minions to Venezuela and Europe?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigarrow:

Jesus Christ that's a needlessly long damn paragraph....

All seven lines of it huh?

Here's "some" gun control you and your ilk can be proud of:


Washington DC’s new gun regulations are set to take effect on January 1, and they are brazenly unconstitutional.

from Washington Times:

The 1,800 or so criminals who have killed, robbed or assaulted innocent people with guns in the District of Columbia so far this year were hauled into the police station to be fingerprinted, photographed and to undergo a criminal-background check.

Now, legal gun owners who have committed no crime are getting the exact same treatment. That is neither constitutional, nor fair.

The latest gun-control scheme that starts on Jan. 1 will force every legal firearm owner in the nation’s capital to go in person to police headquarters to renew their registration certificates.

The Metropolitan Police Department filed proposed rules last week to enact this absurd law, and citizens have until Dec. 15 to comment on the regulations.

To avoid becoming a felon, anyone with a gun registered before 2011 will have to go to police headquarters to be fingerprinted, photographed, provide proof of address, pay a fee and confirm they may still legally possess the firearm. The Firearms Registration Section will then create a new registration certificate — now in the form of an ID card — for each gun...