- Status
I
Inisfallen
Guest
That’s true. Does that mean that a 12-year-old should be able to walk into a store and buy a shotgun? Or an AR-15? Or a handgun?
C
Cathoholic
Guest
LeafByNiggle:
So WHY challenge it Cathoholic?
Well I sensed you taking parent decisions and ASSUMING they were Government decisions that’s all.
Just a sort of, “be careful with the pre-suppositions”, especially if it begins to whittle away at parents.
But I know what you mean and I have no issue there.
Of course we don’t allow 5 year olds to have firearms in the sense of adults.
.
Now about that Consitutional issue of picking and choosing . . . Maybe I will do that one later.
But I do agree with him
I don’t think it is appropriate to pick away at one aspect of the Constitution, without opening yourself up to jettisoning potentially everything.
But again. That is going to have to be for another time.
Look LeafByNiggle. I know where you are with that and all that stuff I concur with you on. OK?
So WHY challenge it Cathoholic?
Well I sensed you taking parent decisions and ASSUMING they were Government decisions that’s all.
Just a sort of, “be careful with the pre-suppositions”, especially if it begins to whittle away at parents.
But I know what you mean and I have no issue there.
Of course we don’t allow 5 year olds to have firearms in the sense of adults.
.
Now about that Consitutional issue of picking and choosing . . . Maybe I will do that one later.
Judge Alito had a great quote I read on that awhile back and naturally I can’t find it to reference to you.
But I do agree with him
I don’t think it is appropriate to pick away at one aspect of the Constitution, without opening yourself up to jettisoning potentially everything.
But again. That is going to have to be for another time.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Inisfallen:
No but it means parents make those decisions unless there is a pretty good reason for Government to step in.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Well now all you guys that have been reassuring Constitutional supporters that “confiscation is a figment of imagination” can all come out and lend support to this citizen.
Right?
You . . . will support him right?
You mean you WON’T!!? (Surely you will not be “silent?”)
What about confiscation being “figments of imagination” and all of THAT stuff?
You are now about to apologize to the Constitutional supporters who told you this would occur and you made fun of when they warned you of this, right?
Doubtful.
OK. I’ll focus on the article.
The thing that is potentially very concerning here is there is no evidence of due process being undertaken.
(There MAY be, but I can’t see it here. Perhaps he had a lawyer present on HIS BEHALF to represent HIS interests and I missed something.).
This MAY be legit. But it MAY NOT be too.
I’m not sure WHY they take this person in “FOR TREATMENT” instead of taking this person in “FOR DIAGNOSIS”. It sounds like there was a PRE-DETERMINED outcome (unless one of this guy’s physicians was involved in this with the Government).
Admittedly maybe the guy wasn’t cooperating with his treatment etc.
But there is nothing too re-assuring in this story.
And if the number of people who are subject to things like this grow in rapidity and proportion to the “No Fly List’s” GROWTH, it may be VERY worrisome.
I pray for our Country that this power-grab does not become misapplied, as well as for safety in general for America.
www.breitbart.com
Right?
You . . . will support him right?
You mean you WON’T!!? (Surely you will not be “silent?”)
What about confiscation being “figments of imagination” and all of THAT stuff?
You are now about to apologize to the Constitutional supporters who told you this would occur and you made fun of when they warned you of this, right?
Doubtful.
OK. I’ll focus on the article.
The thing that is potentially very concerning here is there is no evidence of due process being undertaken.
(There MAY be, but I can’t see it here. Perhaps he had a lawyer present on HIS BEHALF to represent HIS interests and I missed something.).
(emphasis mine)
This MAY be legit. But it MAY NOT be too.
I’m not sure WHY they take this person in “FOR TREATMENT” instead of taking this person in “FOR DIAGNOSIS”. It sounds like there was a PRE-DETERMINED outcome (unless one of this guy’s physicians was involved in this with the Government).
Admittedly maybe the guy wasn’t cooperating with his treatment etc.
But there is nothing too re-assuring in this story.
And if the number of people who are subject to things like this grow in rapidity and proportion to the “No Fly List’s” GROWTH, it may be VERY worrisome.
I pray for our Country that this power-grab does not become misapplied, as well as for safety in general for America.
It Begins: Florida Resident's Firearms, Ammunition Confiscated Under Gun Control Law
The guns and ammunition of a 56-year-old Lighthouse Point, Florida, resident were confiscated by police in what is reportedly the first such seizure under gun control laws signed by Gov. Rick Scott (R) last week.
www.breitbart.com
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Then WHY didn’t I ever see you say that when some Constitutional supporter was warning of this?
The Second Amendment IS applicable to ALL adult law-abiding citizens of sound mind.
And when Government starts infringing upon people there needs to be due process, such as an attarney FOR THIS MAN, during the deliberation in front of the judge.
I am not convinced this is what is going on here.
And no real good reason to IGNORE him having a legal advocate was given in the article.
This SEEMS to go against the Constitutional protections that the free citizenry supposedly enjoy.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
LeafByNiggle:
By supporting this guy (more information will be found out later), you help PROTECT everyone’s rights.
This isn’t just about this guy.
And if they ARE abused, I expect to see you and other gun-grabbers who were reassuring everyone how benign this all is . . . To go out and at least lend legal vocal, and political public support to this victim. All legitimate and called for.
By supporting this guy (more information will be found out later), you help PROTECT everyone’s rights.
This isn’t just about this guy.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
C
Cathoholic
Guest
The same place all the other Amendments do.
It was pre-supposed or self-evident. The courts have ALREADY dealt with these non-issues foundationally.
These are NOT foundational issues.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
To the readers of this thread.
A week or two ago I warned readers of these threads that when new rules come into play that “infringes”, despite these guys giving lip service to the Constitution and Second Amendment, and freedom and all of that, you must believe their ACTIONS too.
This is WHY I (and others) told you WHAT I told you WHEN I did. I and many others saw this coming.
I warned how many of these guys would do what they ALWAYS DO when another layer of incremental disarmament occurs. . . .be SILENT or POM POM WAVE.
Now you get to see it.
Now you know.
Now you understand they NEVER WERE supporters of the Constitution.
Now you know they were just SAYING those platitudes to attempt to fool you that they actually SUPPORT the citizen and his or her freedoms.
Now you KNOW.
A week or two ago I warned readers of these threads that when new rules come into play that “infringes”, despite these guys giving lip service to the Constitution and Second Amendment, and freedom and all of that, you must believe their ACTIONS too.
This is WHY I (and others) told you WHAT I told you WHEN I did. I and many others saw this coming.
I warned how many of these guys would do what they ALWAYS DO when another layer of incremental disarmament occurs. . . .be SILENT or POM POM WAVE.
Now you get to see it.
Now you know.
Now you understand they NEVER WERE supporters of the Constitution.
Now you know they were just SAYING those platitudes to attempt to fool you that they actually SUPPORT the citizen and his or her freedoms.
Now you KNOW.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
I
Inisfallen
Guest
Read Heller. There’s plenty of room within the confines of the Second Amendment for regulation.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Now you know.
Never politically trust liberals with your freedom. (And be selective about “conservatives” too).
I asked earlier on a different post for ONE gun-grabber to step up and denounce the portion of Emma Gonzales’ (a High School kid from Parkland) speech where she said . . . .
. . .it was EASIER to get AUTOMATIC weapons than it was to make plans with friends for the weekend.
Everybody KNEW that was FALSE. EVERYBODY.
I asked ONE gun-grabber to step up to the plate to denounce it.
NONE did.
Why?
You would have to ask them . . . but accoding to their actions, I see it as “the ends justify the means”.
Its OK to let OBVIOUS UNTRUTHS pass by as long as it supports the cause.
(This degree of rationalization is groomed by the abortion-mindset but that discussion is for another day.)
They won’t denounce even that portion of Gonzales’ talk.
And we are now about a thousand posts afterward. And I called and re-called.
Truth gets sacrificed for “the cause”.
Its always a variation of this theme by the rebellious.
And now we see quite possibly Constitutional protections being trampled and CONFISCATION occurring.
Confiscation. Something THESE GUYS have been saying for years “COULDN’T HAPPEN” (to try to fool you).
Now that this is occurring, they are cheering this on, on the pretext of respect for the Constitution while constantly re-defining the Second Amendment.
Re-defining the Second Amendment (and pretending they respect the Constitution) by re-defining what they say is “common-sense gun legislation” despite they ALL having their own WISH LIST of what “common-sense gun legislation” REALLY means.
This reduces our Constitutional protections down to politics. This is their politics of “might makes right”. Which is WHY they so often revere the late “Che” and “Chairman Mao” or the media fawning over Kim Jong Un at the recent Olympics, etc. etc.
Now you know.
Never politically trust liberals with your freedom. (And be selective about “conservatives” too).
I asked earlier on a different post for ONE gun-grabber to step up and denounce the portion of Emma Gonzales’ (a High School kid from Parkland) speech where she said . . . .
. . .it was EASIER to get AUTOMATIC weapons than it was to make plans with friends for the weekend.
Everybody KNEW that was FALSE. EVERYBODY.
I asked ONE gun-grabber to step up to the plate to denounce it.
NONE did.
Why?
You would have to ask them . . . but accoding to their actions, I see it as “the ends justify the means”.
Its OK to let OBVIOUS UNTRUTHS pass by as long as it supports the cause.
(This degree of rationalization is groomed by the abortion-mindset but that discussion is for another day.)
They won’t denounce even that portion of Gonzales’ talk.
And we are now about a thousand posts afterward. And I called and re-called.
Truth gets sacrificed for “the cause”.
Its always a variation of this theme by the rebellious.
And now we see quite possibly Constitutional protections being trampled and CONFISCATION occurring.
Confiscation. Something THESE GUYS have been saying for years “COULDN’T HAPPEN” (to try to fool you).
Now that this is occurring, they are cheering this on, on the pretext of respect for the Constitution while constantly re-defining the Second Amendment.
Re-defining the Second Amendment (and pretending they respect the Constitution) by re-defining what they say is “common-sense gun legislation” despite they ALL having their own WISH LIST of what “common-sense gun legislation” REALLY means.
This reduces our Constitutional protections down to politics. This is their politics of “might makes right”. Which is WHY they so often revere the late “Che” and “Chairman Mao” or the media fawning over Kim Jong Un at the recent Olympics, etc. etc.
Now you know.
Last edited:
I
Inisfallen
Guest
Maybe there weren’t any gun-grabbers in the thread? I don’t see any. I’m not one.
A parent guiding a child in the proper use of firearms is a laudable thing. Show them safe habits and procedures. Teach them to enjoy but respect firearms
P
pnewton
Guest
And you have just made a good point about the use of name-calling and labeling. The word “liberal” is the most ignorantly used word in the blogosphere today. It is used far more carelessly than “Nazi.” I do not think most people would know a liberal from a turnip.
You misread so much wrong, adding so much to what I said. Rather than debate the point, these posts are still there so anyone with critical thinking skills can go up, read what I wrote, what you said I wrote. How can I respond to so many straw men?
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
pnewton:
I showed you a guy HERE who DID have training in hand-to-hand combat, and likely has had MORE training than the police (at least MANY of them).
I put up the video about how HE was denied a permit.
You are intimating that I am mischaracterizing you.
OK.
If I am wrong, I can admit that.
Now you get to criticize the New York City Government right here on this thread for NOT allowing this US military veteran his Second Amendment Rights.
Right here on this thread you can make the case how the Government wronged him and he deserves to have his permit.
Then after you support this trained veteran’s right to bear arms, even in the city, I am going to ask you how much training and what kind of training is predicated in being allowed Second Amendment RIGHTS.
pnewton. Earlier you appealed to people NOT having trained in “hand-to-hand combat” and implicitly suggested they shouldn’t have guns.
I showed you a guy HERE who DID have training in hand-to-hand combat, and likely has had MORE training than the police (at least MANY of them).
I put up the video about how HE was denied a permit.
You are intimating that I am mischaracterizing you.
OK.
If I am wrong, I can admit that.
Now you get to criticize the New York City Government right here on this thread for NOT allowing this US military veteran his Second Amendment Rights.
Right here on this thread you can make the case how the Government wronged him and he deserves to have his permit.
Then after you support this trained veteran’s right to bear arms, even in the city, I am going to ask you how much training and what kind of training is predicated in being allowed Second Amendment RIGHTS.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
pnewton:
.
I just did a search of this thread where I even mentioned “pnewton” and I didn’t even SEE the word “liberal” on THOSE posts. (I probably missed it, but I did look)
Admittedly I use the word “liberal” on other posts, but regarding what YOU are talking about you will have to clarify as I am just not sure what you are referring to.
.
You said something earlier about the people changing the law.
I rhetorically reminded you that Congress allegedly has NO POWER to abrogate the Second Amendment short of Amending the Constitution (I reminded you of this by asking about an “Obama third term” again rhetorically, not literally).
You go ahead and answer that too, and I’ll see if I can give you better follow up responses for my part.
Please clarify.
.
I just did a search of this thread where I even mentioned “pnewton” and I didn’t even SEE the word “liberal” on THOSE posts. (I probably missed it, but I did look)
Admittedly I use the word “liberal” on other posts, but regarding what YOU are talking about you will have to clarify as I am just not sure what you are referring to.
.
You said something earlier about the people changing the law.
I rhetorically reminded you that Congress allegedly has NO POWER to abrogate the Second Amendment short of Amending the Constitution (I reminded you of this by asking about an “Obama third term” again rhetorically, not literally).
You go ahead and answer that too, and I’ll see if I can give you better follow up responses for my part.
Last edited:
- Status