Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
It's about political freedom Jingy.
Not hunting.
Not defense.
This:
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
 Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
Hope that helps.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
I no longer have the political freedom to tell jokes about bombs in airports or other public places... and my jokes don't have the potential to kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes. Thomas Jefferson never even saw a gun that could fire more than one shot without reloading. While I can appreciate his taste for French whores and such, his views about gun control are completely outdated and irrelevant.
So you can take your political freedom and stuff it!
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
That was a GREAT video!
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
Not all gun owners want to carry a concealed weapon. I have no interest at all in carrying in urban areas or shopping malls etc. I prefer to be a bit selective about where I go, and the odds of being in a shootout in a public place are near zero despite the publicity such events generate. When I lived in NYC I got mugged a couple times. I am quite certain that my odds of walking away from those incidents would have been greatly reduced had I been carrying.
My brother earned his ccw living in a Boston suburb. He had to work very hard for it, and he had to jump through a lot of hoops. He actually saw it as a challenge and enjoyed the process and succeeding at it. Nevertheless he virtually never carries a weapon. Occasionally his business takes him to funky places sometime he'll carry then but usually not. He is an tactical instructor and practices a lot.
|
|
monolith
climber
albany,ca
|
|
Americans getting killed in foreign terrorist training camps?
What a shocking loss of political freedom.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
You might not be aware that you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater either
What about in a theater with only 1 or 2... or 10 people?
Yeah mono, crazy isn't it? I don't mind my right to tell bomb jokes in airports being stripped for the good of society. I do mind idiots pretending Jefferson has some kind of relevant insight into the perceived "right" for everyone to have unfettered access to assault rifles.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
You might not be aware that you can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater either, and in fact, political discourse or merely having an irresponsible parent can now get you murdered/executed based on President Obama's desire and without due process these days as well. No judicial review. You might think that's a good thing. I don't.
Couchmaster, you are too cute by a mile.
You are saying, that when you embark on a program to kill Americans in a terrorist program, if you are also an American, and you flee the country to a country where you can avoid extradition.....
You are home free? You can continue to take part in your activities designed to kill innocent (or even non-innocent, by which I mean military) Americans, and are thereby untouchable?
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
This section of an excellent NDAA summary seems pertinent on this thread:
Does anyone dispute the "facts" below?
Summary
The 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is the yearly bill to provide funding for the military and defense related items. The 2012 version of this legislation was controversial due to provisions dealing with arrest and detention of terrorists and those affiliated with al-Qaeda.
The legislation affirms that the President has the authority to detain enemy combatants captured on the battlefield under the 2001 authorization for the use of force against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. It then defines those who can be detained as "covered persons" and establishes this group as anyone affiliated with al-Qaeda or the Taliban. The legislation also states that those people can be held until the end of hostilities, until a tribunal with proper authority is established, or until those people are transferred to the proper authority.
Prior to this legislation, a US citizen accused of being allied with al Qaeda or plotting terrorist activity was considered to have committed a crime. Being accused of a crime, these people had civil rights relating to access to a lawyer and the right to remain silent. Floor statements made by Senators indicate that the legislation is intended to change this so that anyone accused of terrorist activity has not committed a crime, but has committed an act of war. In doing this, they do not have the right to remain silent or access a lawyer. In this manner, they can be held indefinitely without the right end this questioning.
This change in classification is accomplished by classifying the US as a battlefield in the war on terror. The legislation uses the phrase "affirms" when discussing the executive power because the power of the President to arrest and detain enemy combatants on a battlefield is already established. In the case of Jose Padilla and in previous cases during WWII, it was shown that the President can indeed arrest and detain US citizens captured on US soil aiding the enemy in a time of war. However, in the Padilla case, the courts held that since the US is not a battlefield in the war on terror, Padilla must be granted habaes corpus rights and tried as a criminal in the civilian courts. Eventually, Padilla was sentenced to 17 years for his actions.
One section of the legislation states that nothing in the bill is intended to change existing laws with respect to the arrest and detention of US citizens. This has led to a belief that the bill states that it does not apply to US citizens. This is not the case. That section states that current law is not changed by the legislation, but current law already holds that the President already has the power to arrest and indefinitely detain unlawful enemy combatants captured on the battlefield. This legislation merely adds the US homeland as a battlefield and affirms the Presidents authority under that law. Therefore the effect of the law on US citizens is changed without changing the law itself.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
I'm with Norton on this one. I'm unaware of any authorization for premeditated killing of American citizens on American soil without due process in the Act.
John
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Regardless, nothing you can buy at Walmart would ever protect you against a drone strike. The notion of needing guns to defend yourself against a tyrannical government is silly. There is nothing silly about the fact that those guns can kill dozens of people in a matter of minutes and they are regulated less than cars.
|
|
michaeld
Sport climber
Sacramento
|
|
That video was great! I'm gonna sell all my guns, cancel my ccw, and just use my cell phone to phone the police in case of emergency.
|
|
michaeld
Sport climber
Sacramento
|
|
So don't make yourself a target.
Don't be a threat.
Easy.
Just because you own a firearm doesn't mean you're a threat.
Look at ELF. Or Weibo Ludwig. No firearms there.
|
|
Dropline
Mountain climber
Somewhere Up There
|
|
That was a GREAT video!
It's a silly video choreographed to make the "trainees" fail.
When trained the trainees were wearing neither helmets nor gloves.
Just before the "assailants" entered the room the trainees were instructed to don helmets which prevented them from seeing their firearms, and gloves which prevented from feeling their firearms.
They were required to wear a long shirt which covered and clung to their firearms.
The assailants focused their fire on the trainees to the exclusion of everyone else in the room.
I'm not underestimating or understating the difficulty of returning accurate and effective fire in a real life scenario, just pointing out that this is a foolish film and the trainees were manipulated to ensure failure.
|
|
michaeld
Sport climber
Sacramento
|
|
It was also a joke in that video, that immediately after the "teacher" was killed, the gunmen aimed directly at the "CCW" holder. Not at any of the students running directly by him. Kind of a bunk report.
Put that CCW somewhere where the shooter doesn't know, and don't put a beginner in there, and the odds will change drastically.
F*cking bullsh*t one sided report.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
blahblahblah... and the "shooter" was moving pretty slowly... totally unrealistic... IRL any CCW permittee totally would have saved the day. Remember the CCW permittee that was there when Gabby was shot? Yeah, he did nothing... except almost shoot the guy who wrestled the gun away from the dickhole.
We definitely need more guns in schools and other public places.
|
|
michaeld
Sport climber
Sacramento
|
|
Or that teacher can lock the door like any other college. Preventing any students from coming in after the class begins.
LOLLIBERALTW#TS.
|
|
monolith
climber
albany,ca
|
|
Then the shooter will just wait for class change, or go in at beginning of class. Or outdoor PE class, cafeteria, lecture halls, etc,.......
Such worthless suggestions from gun nuts.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!