Poll

What is your opinion on the United States' gun laws at present?

They are far too restrictive.
8 (44.4%)
They are a little restrictive.
1 (5.6%)
They are fine as it is.
2 (11.1%)
They are a little relaxed.
1 (5.6%)
They are far too relaxed.
5 (27.8%)
None of the above (please specify)
1 (5.6%)

Total Members Voted: 18

Gun Violence in the United States

  • 407 Replies
  • 28879 Views
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #180 on: November 28, 2015, 03:10:50 AM »

What is Mr. Bloomington talking about.

I pray Mr. Bloomington's point is properly reflected here, so i shall try. What he say's is true, it is law.
(A preface), Sovereign = Human (You, Mr. Scroto Gaggins)  Straw man = Legal fiction (MR. SCROTO GAGGINS)
2 concepts are put forth, 1, Ownership (Slavery)     2, Contracts (Permissions)
Registration is  a certificate of ownership. For people it is their birth certificate. (Notice all CAPs)
For property (As we would call it)  it is the registration. (It will be in all CAP's)
(Sidebar- A license is permission to do something that is, in fact, illegal.) (It will be in all CAP's)
These are all contracts, in the eyes of the law. You are asking for permission to have and use them.
You think you are a man, you are in fact, in the eyes of the law "A human resource"
As soon as you register, in this case, your gun, you are entering into a contract, that gives you the "right" to use it (Possess it), at the governments discretion.
Citizens are forced, (by threat of violence) to pay taxes. We pay license fees, registration fees, property taxes, sales taxes etc. Failure to pay will revoke any rights you think you have.
Question is are you really free? What do you really own?
Don't pay your taxes and you will find your self destitute, with not so much as the shirt on your back.
Perhaps even in a cage.
(Money is a whole other concept we shan't touch on.)
Be prudent and take care when entering into a contract, which most don't understand.
I pray Charles correct me where I am wrong.
But bearing in mind that it is both a choice and luxury to have a firearm, isn't registration of it reasonable?
Theres  no bearing in mind .
Its not a choice.As your inalienable rights provides , that no contract needs to be entered in to unless you wish to give up that right. Theres no choice for there is no requirement for  anything to be chosen . Its your own " personal preference  & no ones else's business " & its certainly not a luxury, because that would constatute  an  implied contract . You haven't entered in to .


In Australian scrotum Gaggins . Its clear in the trade practices act 1974 section 80 . No one has to do business with a company or corporation if they do not wish to . Last I checked a  fiat government is a corporation I can chose not to do business with on any  agreement proposed & put forward  ,I wish not to contract to.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2015, 03:27:16 AM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #181 on: November 28, 2015, 04:58:31 AM »

Basically, though, in response to Mr. Lee's post also, the ownership of a gun is a luxury.
It is non-essential (if it was essential, then explain places like Japan).



I understand how one could say it is a luxury to own a gun. In the strictest sense, perhaps it is.
I will be forced to add that locks on your car and house, ignition keys to start a vehicle, security cameras,
alarm systems are all luxury's.
Perhaps this is true in a sense, but, with the world being less than perfect, I do hold it to be a form of
protection, and quite a bit more than a luxury.
To the contrary, protection is a luxury, and should only be used if needed.
i.e. if you live in the middle of nowhere, then you don't need locks on your door.


Quote
If one were to live in a very rural area, where few people are, it would be much more of a luxury perhaps,
but then, you would need to take into account, that it could be used as a tool to hunt food, if eating
flesh is your thing.
Also to the contrary, lots of my friends who grew up on farms used rifles all the damn time.
For pests, etc.

Quote
I can not wait till swords and spears are beat into plows and pruning hooks. That is the only realistic
model you could offer that I believe will be possible.
I cannot wait until that day as well, my friend.
But in the meantime, there should be restrictions on weapons being available to the public.

Quote
About Japan. Many differences, and things are changing.
Just a snip it. (From NationMaster Blog)

What are most disturbing are however arguments that the low crime is partially a result of a police culture that are obsessed with keeping crime statistics low. Former detectives claim that police is unwilling to investigate homicides unless there is a clear suspects and frequently labels unnatural deaths as suicides without performing autopsies. Coincidentally, Japan has one of the highest suicide rates in the world.
The United States's suicide rate is 2/3 of Japan's.
Not as high, but still fairly high.
Meanwhile, the United States's murder rate is ten times as high as that of Japan.
Just saying.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Frank Lee

  • 318
  • Truth has no agenda. Science does.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #182 on: November 28, 2015, 06:14:44 AM »

To the contrary, protection is a luxury, and should only be used if needed.


Here I must say nay.
It can only be a luxury if you rely on someone else for your full protection.
To defend myself is a right. A lion in captivity needs no teeth. But not being a prisoner, it's teeth are no luxury. Example "There is never a cop around when you need one"
As people are not animals (for the most part). People will only protect themselves when endangered. (Or one of his own). Or am I a prisoner and slave?
If a human is an animal, (Probably a result of a society that foments unrest and insecurity), I will also ask
for the right to protect myself from such an one.
'Tis fun conversing with you!
I wonder why you referred to the "damn gun" in this rant though?

"Also to the contrary, lots of my friends who grew up on farms used rifles all the damn time.
For pests, etc."
Science is religion for people who will not be subject to a supreme Creator. Free choice is love.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #183 on: November 28, 2015, 04:01:19 PM »

To the contrary, protection is a luxury, and should only be used if needed.


Here I must say nay.
It can only be a luxury if you rely on someone else for your full protection.
To defend myself is a right. A lion in captivity needs no teeth. But not being a prisoner, it's teeth are no luxury. Example "There is never a cop around when you need one"
As people are not animals (for the most part). People will only protect themselves when endangered. (Or one of his own). Or am I a prisoner and slave?
If a human is an animal, (Probably a result of a society that foments unrest and insecurity), I will also ask
for the right to protect myself from such an one.
Sure, in my model, if you pass the evaluations and are properly trained, then you can protect yourself all you like.

Quote
'Tis fun conversing with you!
My feelings exactly, good sir.

Quote
I wonder why you referred to the "damn gun" in this rant though?

"Also to the contrary, lots of my friends who grew up on farms used rifles all the damn time.
For pests, etc."
No, I think you'll find that i referred to guns being used "all the damn time"
Pardon my mannerisms, being the colonial frontiersmen that we Australians are, it is inevitable that a certain rough quality permeates into our writing.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #184 on: November 28, 2015, 09:20:26 PM »

To the contrary, protection is a luxury, and should only be used if needed.


Here I must say nay.
It can only be a luxury if you rely on someone else for your full protection.
To defend myself is a right. A lion in captivity needs no teeth. But not being a prisoner, it's teeth are no luxury. Example "There is never a cop around when you need one"
As people are not animals (for the most part). People will only protect themselves when endangered. (Or one of his own). Or am I a prisoner and slave?
If a human is an animal, (Probably a result of a society that foments unrest and insecurity), I will also ask
for the right to protect myself from such an one.
Sure, in my model, if you pass the evaluations and are properly trained, then you can protect yourself all you like.

Quote
'Tis fun conversing with you!
My feelings exactly, good sir.

Quote
I wonder why you referred to the "damn gun" in this rant though?

"Also to the contrary, lots of my friends who grew up on farms used rifles all the damn time.
For pests, etc."
No, I think you'll find that i referred to guns being used "all the damn time"
Pardon my mannerisms, being the colonial frontiersmen that we Australians are, it is inevitable that a certain rough quality permeates into our writing.
Sure, in my model, if you pass the evaluations and are properly trained, then you can protect yourself all you like.
Who will be doing the evaluations ? So if you are properly trained , then you can protect yourself all you like. So then what your saying is , if you dont pass some fiat coperations evaluation & training , you have lost your right to protect yourself. Sounds like this evaluation & training is a process of being  rail roaded .
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #185 on: November 29, 2015, 12:42:36 AM »
Charles, are you saying that there should be anarchy?
Because unless there is a hierarchy of power, then that's what it will be.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #186 on: November 29, 2015, 01:44:24 AM »
Charles, are you saying that there should be anarchy?
Because unless there is a hierarchy of power, then that's what it will be.
Anarchy no, "honesty" yes. Being forced to consent to a system run on lies & dishonest manipulation. Exstorting exploiting , useing & abusing peoples trust . Is not hierarchy of power. Its nothing more then manipulated fraud & corruption by dishonest elitists. Persons I would never want to see ever  having any say in who gets to own a firearm.

« Last Edit: November 29, 2015, 01:58:48 AM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #187 on: November 29, 2015, 02:22:32 AM »
Charles, are you saying that there should be anarchy?
Because unless there is a hierarchy of power, then that's what it will be.
Anarchy no, "honesty" yes. Being forced to consent to a system run on lies & dishonest manipulation. Exstorting exploiting , useing & abusing peoples trust . Is not hierarchy of power. Its nothing more then manipulated fraud & corruption by dishonest elitists. Persons I would never want to see ever  having any say in who gets to own a firearm.
Name me any society that existed in history, and I will name you the person(s) in charge.
If you can see this manipulation in today's society, then you should see it in all societies.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Frank Lee

  • 318
  • Truth has no agenda. Science does.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #188 on: November 29, 2015, 02:30:29 AM »
Charles, are you saying that there should be anarchy?
Because unless there is a hierarchy of power, then that's what it will be.

Oops, you've draw me back! Good day, good sirs.
Clearly here, a truly marvelous concept has been skewed. I speak of this concept of anarchy. The word has been used for decades now to be thought of as chaos. It is by no means chaos.
The word anarchy actually come from the term anti-archon. It means against the ruler or ruling class.
Chaos means the lack of order. Anarchy means no ruling elite. Here we must break the shackles of brainwashing.
The states in the US had this vision in mind i believe. Once the Federal government was formed, the ruling class got right to work. They established the Federal reserve, (A private cabal of international banks).
Began calling our republic a "democracy", removed from congress the power to select senators and now
"elects" them by popular vote. It is a shame and a crime. Money will buy power. Who controls the money?
An anarchy will always have a steering and guidance body. of the people, by the people and for the people.
Truth be told, I believe men's fears will return them to this idea of centralized power.
So my point is just to clarify that anarchy is not chaos.
Science is religion for people who will not be subject to a supreme Creator. Free choice is love.

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #189 on: November 29, 2015, 04:16:42 AM »
Charles, are you saying that there should be anarchy?
Because unless there is a hierarchy of power, then that's what it will be.

Oops, you've draw me back! Good day, good sirs.
Clearly here, a truly marvelous concept has been skewed. I speak of this concept of anarchy. The word has been used for decades now to be thought of as chaos. It is by no means chaos.
The word anarchy actually come from the term anti-archon. It means against the ruler or ruling class.
Chaos means the lack of order. Anarchy means no ruling elite. Here we must break the shackles of brainwashing.
The states in the US had this vision in mind i believe. Once the Federal government was formed, the ruling class got right to work. They established the Federal reserve, (A private cabal of international banks).
Began calling our republic a "democracy", removed from congress the power to select senators and now
"elects" them by popular vote. It is a shame and a crime. Money will buy power. Who controls the money?
An anarchy will always have a steering and guidance body. of the people, by the people and for the people.
Truth be told, I believe men's fears will return them to this idea of centralized power.
So my point is just to clarify that anarchy is not chaos.
True, but never once did I compare anarchy to chaos.
It is just that in an anarchic society, there will be inevitable bloodshed and misery caused by our reverting to primitive societal hierarchies.
In nature, the physically strong (usually males) are in control.
In our current system, like it or not, one can't deny that our quality of life is quite good.

Need I also remind old Charlie that there are always going to be laws that have to be obeyed.
Laws of motion, etc.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Frank Lee

  • 318
  • Truth has no agenda. Science does.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #190 on: November 29, 2015, 04:36:23 AM »

In our current system, like it or not, one can't deny that our quality of life is quite good.


As long as the leaders are held accountable for their actions. This is clearly going the way of the dodo.
National security, denial of freedom of information, and political double speak along with undeniable
secret societies (openly admitted by John Kerry and G.W. Bush on mainstream T.V.). I fear that this good life
may soon become quite an unpleasant experience. I do pray I am wrong. Not as much for my sake,
but for the sake of future generations. It seems we have lived beyond our means at the cost of our future generations. My apologies to them for my apathy.
Science is religion for people who will not be subject to a supreme Creator. Free choice is love.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #191 on: November 29, 2015, 12:39:12 PM »
Charles, are you saying that there should be anarchy?
Because unless there is a hierarchy of power, then that's what it will be.

Oops, you've draw me back! Good day, good sirs.
Clearly here, a truly marvelous concept has been skewed. I speak of this concept of anarchy. The word has been used for decades now to be thought of as chaos. It is by no means chaos.
The word anarchy actually come from the term anti-archon. It means against the ruler or ruling class.
Chaos means the lack of order. Anarchy means no ruling elite. Here we must break the shackles of brainwashing.
The states in the US had this vision in mind i believe. Once the Federal government was formed, the ruling class got right to work. They established the Federal reserve, (A private cabal of international banks).
Began calling our republic a "democracy", removed from congress the power to select senators and now
"elects" them by popular vote. It is a shame and a crime. Money will buy power. Who controls the money?
An anarchy will always have a steering and guidance body. of the people, by the people and for the people.
Truth be told, I believe men's fears will return them to this idea of centralized power.
So my point is just to clarify that anarchy is not chaos.
True, but never once did I compare anarchy to chaos.
It is just that in an anarchic society, there will be inevitable bloodshed and misery caused by our reverting to primitive societal hierarchies.
In nature, the physically strong (usually males) are in control.
In our current system, like it or not, one can't deny that our quality of life is quite good.

Need I also remind old Charlie that there are always going to be laws that have to be obeyed.
Laws of motion, etc.
Lets talk about theses laws & lets talk about the misconceptions of what is law & what is not law , but code rules & privet coperations constatution that apply only to their employees & shareholders. Before giving up the right to own & use a firearm. 
Something that is lawful or unlawful is law. Something that is legal is legislation (company policy) , it applies only to the corporations employees & shareholders Or those holding a policy with the corporation & or a contract binding them  to that company policy .
« Last Edit: November 29, 2015, 12:42:55 PM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #192 on: November 29, 2015, 02:40:11 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #193 on: November 30, 2015, 12:03:17 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2015, 02:31:20 PM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #194 on: November 30, 2015, 02:56:02 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #195 on: December 01, 2015, 12:46:20 AM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2015, 02:08:42 AM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #196 on: December 01, 2015, 04:01:56 AM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
Can I just ask some questions?
Do you think that all governments that have ever existed have been corrupt at some level?
Do you think that any governments that exist right now are not corrupt?
Do you think that a government can ever exist without corruption of some kind?
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #197 on: December 01, 2015, 12:56:23 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
Can I just ask some questions?
Do you think that all governments that have ever existed have been corrupt at some level?
Do you think that any governments that exist right now are not corrupt?
Do you think that a government can ever exist without corruption of some kind?
Joining the shitstorm now:
Yes
No
Yes

I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #198 on: December 01, 2015, 01:07:06 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
Can I just ask some questions?
Do you think that all governments that have ever existed have been corrupt at some level?
Do you think that any governments that exist right now are not corrupt?
Do you think that a government can ever exist without corruption of some kind?
Governments only function with honesty & integrity , when there is separation of powers .The executive .The legislature. The judiciary.  Bound to the provisions set down  in a lawful constitution document of that country.
That constatution being the lawful document to operate under by agreement of its public citizens.
Do we have that anymore ? Or do we have privet political parties running their own agenda.?
« Last Edit: December 01, 2015, 01:14:12 PM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

TheEarthIsASphere.

  • 867
  • who fucking cares what shape the earth is lol
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #199 on: December 01, 2015, 01:13:51 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
Can I just ask some questions?
Do you think that all governments that have ever existed have been corrupt at some level?
Do you think that any governments that exist right now are not corrupt?
Do you think that a government can ever exist without corruption of some kind?
Governments only function with honesty & integrity , when there is separation of powers .The executive .The legislature. The judiciary.  Bound to the provisions set down  in a lawful constitution document of that country.
That constatution being the lawful document to operate under by agreement of its public citizens.

Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.
Quā ratiōne nōn redimus ad senectēs societātēs sapientium patrum? Quā ratiōne relinquimus eārum sapientiam?

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #200 on: December 01, 2015, 01:32:32 PM »
[Uote author=TheEarthIsRound. link=topic=64592.msg1734250#msg1734250 date=1449004431]
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
Can I just ask some questions?
Do you think that all governments that have ever existed have been corrupt at some level?
Do you think that any governments that exist right now are not corrupt?
Do you think that a government can ever exist without corruption of some kind?
Governments only function with honesty & integrity , when there is separation of powers .The executive .The legislature. The judiciary.  Bound to the provisions set down  in a lawful constitution document of that country.
That constatution being the lawful document to operate under by agreement of its public citizens.

Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.

Security of a free state , implies just that . No taxes or charges on privet owned land.
That is the USA constatution . Not to confuse it with the constatution of the privet coperation US.
So which constitution is opperating. Who is pushing for the gun controls .
« Last Edit: December 01, 2015, 01:42:22 PM by charles bloomington »
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

TheEarthIsASphere.

  • 867
  • who fucking cares what shape the earth is lol
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #201 on: December 01, 2015, 01:39:35 PM »
This thread is being derailed by discussions on the validity of laws and governments both.
If you want to make another thread about this, then do so.
This thread is about gun control, and all discussions thereof are predicated on the assumption that democracy exists and governments are benign.
Running from the truth ,I rest my case.
Dont give up your rights , dont give up your guns. Till & when  you know who your contracting with. Demand to know who your contracting with , never just assume. If you dont like the contract proposed & its terms . Then dont contract.
No, I'm not running from the truth.
I'm merely saying that this discussion is between sane people, who don't make grand claims of governmental evil from their comfortable armchairs.
You may believe that all governments are evil, that's fine.
It's just that if that is your standpoint, then any contributions you make to this particular thread will be rather off-topic and counter-productive.
Listen here ya pharken sock puppet. Why don't you provide some evidence  they are public constatuted Governments . Seen as you claim they are &   are making grand claims anyone questioning  their validity to enact firearm controling laws is not sane. 
There are plentiful links to documents on the net that evidence them as fiat. Lets see what you can provide to change those heavly evidenced observations.
Can I just ask some questions?
Do you think that all governments that have ever existed have been corrupt at some level?
Do you think that any governments that exist right now are not corrupt?
Do you think that a government can ever exist without corruption of some kind?
Governments only function with honesty & integrity , when there is separation of powers .The executive .The legislature. The judiciary.  Bound to the provisions set down  in a lawful constitution document of that country.
That constatution being the lawful document to operate under by agreement of its public citizens.

Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.
Security of a free state , implies just that . No taxes or charges on privet owned land.
That is the USA constatution . Not to confuse it with the constatution of the privet coperation US

How are taxes on land relevant here? There is no "constitution of the private corporations" in the U.S. either. Just give up. You've been defeated by the very amendment you're trying to "defend".

Also, spell things correctly.
Quā ratiōne nōn redimus ad senectēs societātēs sapientium patrum? Quā ratiōne relinquimus eārum sapientiam?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #202 on: December 01, 2015, 01:52:30 PM »
Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.

"Well regulated" applies to Militias in that sentence, not the ownership of firearms.  Basically, it is saying that citizens should be allowed to own and master firearms so that if they are ever needed to be part of a Militia, they will already be armed and trained in the use of firearms.  How could you possibly misinterpret that to mean that the firearms should be regulated?  This is the worst argument I have ever heard. 

*

TheEarthIsASphere.

  • 867
  • who fucking cares what shape the earth is lol
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #203 on: December 01, 2015, 02:00:51 PM »
Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.

"Well regulated" applies to Militias in that sentence, not the ownership of firearms.  Basically, it is saying that citizens should be allowed to own and master firearms so that if they are ever needed to be part of a Militia, they will already be armed and trained in the use of firearms.  How could you possibly misinterpret that to mean that the firearms should be regulated?  This is the worst argument I have ever heard.

[citation needed]
Quā ratiōne nōn redimus ad senectēs societātēs sapientium patrum? Quā ratiōne relinquimus eārum sapientiam?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #204 on: December 01, 2015, 02:07:43 PM »
Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.

"Well regulated" applies to Militias in that sentence, not the ownership of firearms.  Basically, it is saying that citizens should be allowed to own and master firearms so that if they are ever needed to be part of a Militia, they will already be armed and trained in the use of firearms.  How could you possibly misinterpret that to mean that the firearms should be regulated?  This is the worst argument I have ever heard.

[citation needed]

I cite the Constitution of the United States of America. 

*

TheEarthIsASphere.

  • 867
  • who fucking cares what shape the earth is lol
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #205 on: December 01, 2015, 02:09:35 PM »
Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.

"Well regulated" applies to Militias in that sentence, not the ownership of firearms.  Basically, it is saying that citizens should be allowed to own and master firearms so that if they are ever needed to be part of a Militia, they will already be armed and trained in the use of firearms.  How could you possibly misinterpret that to mean that the firearms should be regulated?  This is the worst argument I have ever heard.

[citation needed]

I cite the Constitution of the United States of America.

Not good enough. You weren't there when they wrote it. You can't read the minds of dead people. Just because it's written that way, it doesn't mean that it was intended to be conveyed that way. Try again.
Quā ratiōne nōn redimus ad senectēs societātēs sapientium patrum? Quā ratiōne relinquimus eārum sapientiam?

Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #206 on: December 01, 2015, 02:10:52 PM »
U.S is a private corporation. USA is not the same corporation.  All corporation have a constitution . A well regulated militia , means  a well trained  lawfully acting militia.  What it must be like  to be a pathetic lying  agenda21 sock puppet. :'(
When it comes to Jane's standards .I'm lower then an old stove she has in her garage.
Shannon Noll and Natalie Bassingthwaighte - Don'tů:

*

TheEarthIsASphere.

  • 867
  • who fucking cares what shape the earth is lol
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #207 on: December 01, 2015, 02:12:32 PM »
U.S is a private corporation. USA is not the same corporation.  All corporation have a constitution . A well regulated militia , means  a well trained  lawfully acting militia.  Whats it must be like  to be a pathetic lying  agenda21 sock puppet. :'(

What's it like to be a shitty, poor, idiotic, uneducated, retarded, gun-toting redneck with no concept of common sense?
Quā ratiōne nōn redimus ad senectēs societātēs sapientium patrum? Quā ratiōne relinquimus eārum sapientiam?

*

Scroto Gaggins

  • 671
  • Hobbiton represent
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #208 on: December 01, 2015, 02:19:42 PM »
Funny enough that you mention that the government should follow the constitution. You anti-gun control freaks seem to have missed the "well-regulated" part of the 2nd Amendment, which implies gun control:

Quote
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.

"Well regulated" applies to Militias in that sentence, not the ownership of firearms.  Basically, it is saying that citizens should be allowed to own and master firearms so that if they are ever needed to be part of a Militia, they will already be armed and trained in the use of firearms.  How could you possibly misinterpret that to mean that the firearms should be regulated?  This is the worst argument I have ever heard.
Militia means armed citizenry.
The second amendment says that the armed citizenry should be well-regulated.
Now, seeing as regulations of some form are sanctioned by the second amendment, why are anti-gun control people always so against regulations of any kind?
Also, the amendment is wrong.
A militia, well-regulated or otherwise, is not necessary to the security of any state, free or otherwise.
They are taking the hobbits to Isengard.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37820
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gun Violence in the United States
« Reply #209 on: December 01, 2015, 02:21:21 PM »
I cite the Constitution of the United States of America.

Not good enough. You weren't there when they wrote it. You can't read the minds of dead people. Just because it's written that way, it doesn't mean that it was intended to be conveyed that way. Try again.

The Constitution is not good enough for you?  It is the supreme law of the land.  It even says so in the Constitution.  Why do you liberals constantly feel the need to change its meaning?