Obama wants to ban weapons in Space - Page 5 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #41 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 07:42 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
jdc1244's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jun 2003
Vehicle: 1991 300 SE
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Posts: 18,534
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Bill Clinton with the Assault Weapons Ban is an example of a Democratic President confiscating legitimate weapons from law abiding citizens.
At least he used the word ‘Democratic, ‘ extra points for that.

Actually the AWB did not confiscate any weapons due to the grandfather clause; it restricted new imports and acquisitions.

Quote:
Explain again why assault weapons are "legitimate".
I don’t know about ‘legitimate’ but they are already illegal. An assault rifle is a selective-fire carbine chambered for an intermediate round. Don’t confuse NFA Title 1 non-automatic carbines like civilian AR-15's and my M70 AK - type rifle with NFA Title 2/Class III restricted assault rifles like M16's and actual AK-47's. You can’t ban what’s already banned. And it’s silly to ban something just because it has a pistol grip or a bayonet lug; my AK clone is no more dangerous that rancher Bob’s Mini-14.

Quote:
I got space for an ICBM in backyard.
Me too, but I won’t ever get to shoot it off – what fun is that?
jdc1244 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 07:43 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
Well sir, I would the same of you. Where are all the assumptions you just stated when you wrote:



If you read any of the works from Jefferson or many of the other Architects of the Constitution you will see exactly what I am referring to.
The words of Jefferson or the other architects are not relevant. I stated my thoughts based only from THE WRITTEN WORDS of the Amendment. Using your analogy of trying to glean the thoughts of Jefferson and the other Architects, they must have not held much concern or they would have written those concerns into the Amendment. Instead they provided the Congress with the full ability to regulate damned near every part of life in this country.



The envisioning observation is mine as they were not in a position to predict the future.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #43 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 07:51 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Infringe-
1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate
2. Advance beyond the limit of.

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. They used infringed as opposed to "Violate" or "Taken Away" for a very specific reason. To indicate encroachment.

I would argue, as would many others that the ATF is an infringement upon the right to bear arms.

Any government regulation or agency that limits what firearms you can have violates the second amendment. It is very simple.

Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
post #44 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 07:57 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
Infringe-
1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate
2. Advance beyond the limit of.

The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. They used infringed as opposed to "Violate" or "Taken Away" for a very specific reason. To indicate encroachment.

I would argue, as would many others that the ATF is an infringement upon the right to bear arms.

Any government regulation or agency that limits what firearms you can have violates the second amendment. It is very simple.
Please provide a citing on on this "encroachment" issue from the writings of one of the Founders, please.

As a simple test, next time you are home, go to your nearest gun shop and buy a box of 9mm shells. When they ask for your DL and ID, tell them that requirement is not in the Constitution. See how far that gets you.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #45 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 07:59 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
I would argue, as would many others that the ATF is an infringement upon the right to bear arms.

Any government regulation or agency that limits what firearms you can have violates the second amendment. It is very simple.
But the big question is, "HAVE ANY ARGUED SUCCESSFULLY?". NO is the answer.

And that is the simple truth.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #46 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 07:59 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
The words of Jefferson or the other architects are not relevant. I stated my thoughts based only from THE WRITTEN WORDS of the Amendment. Using your analogy of trying to glean the thoughts of Jefferson and the other Architects, they must have not held much concern or they would have written those concerns into the Amendment. Instead they provided the Congress with the full ability to regulate damned near every part of life in this country.



The envisioning observation is mine as they were not in a position to predict the future.
If that is true then you stated your assumptions based upon information that you are inferring. Please show where in the 2nd amendment it says "we don't predict the future so anything we don't know about is ok to be regulated or outlawed."

And the Architects did envision that there would be advancements in technology that they could not perceive that is why they wrote the 9th and 10th amendments:

Quote:
Amendment IX

Rights retained by the People

The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X

States' rights

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
So we are in a situation that we have allowed to happen through our own complacency. This is why a third party is so incredibly important to this country at this time. I would say multiple parties but at least a 3rd party. The 2 party system only breeds corruption. The ONE thing that both Democrat and Republican Partisans agree on is that they don't want a 3rd wheel gumming up the works.

Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
post #47 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 08:05 PM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
ogrenutz's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2006
Vehicle: '81 300GD Cabrio, '78 450 SEL 6.9 Rocketship, Rover HSE
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 704
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Yes there are procedures for amending. But there are also laws on the books, whose process is defined by the Constitution that provides latitude for many things that were not available to the founders.

Note, the "Clinton Assault Weapons Ban" does nothing to stop or endanger the Second Amendment. You are correct, it is quite clear "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. ". At no part does it say that the Alcohol, tobacco and Firearms folks can't restrict certain classes of weapons, just that there is a right to bear arms.

And since ATF and the legally signed Clinton act are LAW, I am not, under any circumstance "not supporting the rule of law".
Maintaining a well regulated militia has to be in proportion to the potential threat. The argument can be made that "they" have automatic weapons (whoever they may be) , so a "well regulated militia" by definition must be able to match force for force. It doesn't do much good to bring a knife to a gun fight.
ogrenutz is offline  
post #48 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 08:11 PM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
ogrenutz's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2006
Vehicle: '81 300GD Cabrio, '78 450 SEL 6.9 Rocketship, Rover HSE
Location: Virginia, USA
Posts: 704
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Kinetic bombardment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You think Obama's gonna make this retroactive? Maybe he doesn't have a need to know about tungsten rods. They're conventional. Not banned under SALT II. Tech's been around since the 50's. Do you think they're not up there?
More lip service from showboat politicians, that's all. I have a better shot at eliminating space based weapons than Obama does. Since when does the military industrial complex give a rat's ass what the CINC wants?
ogrenutz is offline  
post #49 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 08:29 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
If that is true then you stated your assumptions based upon information that you are inferring. Please show where in the 2nd amendment it says "we don't predict the future so anything we don't know about is ok to be regulated or outlawed."

And the Architects did envision that there would be advancements in technology that they could not perceive that is why they wrote the 9th and 10th amendments:



So we are in a situation that we have allowed to happen through our own complacency. This is why a third party is so incredibly important to this country at this time. I would say multiple parties but at least a 3rd party. The 2 party system only breeds corruption. The ONE thing that both Democrat and Republican Partisans agree on is that they don't want a 3rd wheel gumming up the works.
Actually, the original Democrats were the third party. Apparently the Federalists and Republicans were not cutting it. Then there were the Whigs. And then the New Republicans, and then the New Democrats and then the NeoCons. And so it goes. And folks say there is no such thing as evolution.


As for inferences to the Second Amendment, I infer nothing. I read it at face value, as written. Nothing I have seen in the Clinton Weapons Ban, the establishment of ATF or any other agency has imperiled those words. No action to disarm the population has occurred, no action to only all a certain subset of people to own weapons has occurred. Nothing has infringed on the right of "the people to keep and bear arms".

And so far every court in the nation has agreed with that thought.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #50 of 54 (permalink) Old 01-26-2009, 08:31 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ogrenutz View Post
Kinetic bombardment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You think Obama's gonna make this retroactive? Maybe he doesn't have a need to know about tungsten rods. They're conventional. Not banned under SALT II. Tech's been around since the 50's. Do you think they're not up there?
More lip service from showboat politicians, that's all. I have a better shot at eliminating space based weapons than Obama does. Since when does the military industrial complex give a rat's ass what the CINC wants?
That would depend if they are receiving funding for any projects. If not, they give a rather large rat's ass about what he wants.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    New Weapons Sighted in Iraq TNTRower Off-Topic 6 12-24-2008 07:37 AM
    Heckler und Koch Weapons? Heckler und Koch Off-Topic 92 09-21-2008 07:31 AM
    Weapons of Mass Love DP Off-Topic 40 05-28-2008 08:54 PM
    US now admits it used chemical weapons against Iraqis FeelTheLove Off-Topic 139 11-23-2005 06:29 PM
    Weapons installed 4x4rancher G-Class 14 05-19-2005 05:30 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome