NRA Never Again

[9thIDdoc]

I think it was a good thing that she was assaulted and robbed by police instead of gangbangers??

The site has rules against plagerism I hope you know, now you can ask me what I mean by something, and then quote me in my original works, but what this was (IMHO), was complete plagerism and a cheap shot in hopes that others would read this interp before I could get you back on the right track to the truth.

Chill. Look again at what i wrote. My words in blue; your's are in black italics and please note the ?? used to make sure you understood that I was asking a question.

After reading your explaination I see that I was correct as to your position except you seem to think that the police were acting within the law where it seems obvious to me that their actions were just as criminal as they would have been if done by a gangbanger.

 

[earlycuyler]

One thing they all had in common. They were all wandering about with guns after a natural disaster. All but the old lady that is. All of those guys were and most likely still are pretty stupid. NRA stopped getting my money years ago when they continuously supported and still support retards for political office.

 

[beagle9]

I think it was a good thing that she was assaulted and robbed by police instead of gangbangers??

The site has rules against plagerism I hope you know, now you can ask me what I mean by something, and then quote me in my original works, but what this was (IMHO), was complete plagerism and a cheap shot in hopes that others would read this interp before I could get you back on the right track to the truth.

Chill. Look again at what i wrote. My words in blue; your's are in black italics and please note the ?? used to make sure you understood that I was asking a question.

After reading your explaination I see that I was correct as to your position except you seem to think that the police were acting within the law where it seems obvious to me that their actions were just as criminal as they would have been if done by a gangbanger.

Yes from the video, it apears that their actions were conducted outside of the ethics of what law officers are supposed to be when ever they are on the scene to help, but still my position is that the lady didnot need the gun she was carrying in her hand in that specific Katrina situation, because in her situation it would have been a disaster if the gangs or thugs would have gained this weapon from her. The police had the right idea about this, but they just went about it all the wrong way as was shown in the video. They should have also forced her to evacuate, regardless of her food, dogs and especially with that gun in which she had in the situation. People are hard headed, especially when they get her age in life, but it should always be understandable and delt with in a compassionate way as well.

 

[earlycuyler]

The site has rules against plagerism I hope you know, now you can ask me what I mean by something, and then quote me in my original works, but what this was (IMHO), was complete plagerism and a cheap shot in hopes that others would read this interp before I could get you back on the right track to the truth.

Chill. Look again at what i wrote. My words in blue; your's are in black italics and please note the ?? used to make sure you understood that I was asking a question.

After reading your explaination I see that I was correct as to your position except you seem to think that the police were acting within the law where it seems obvious to me that their actions were just as criminal as they would have been if done by a gangbanger.

Yes from the video, it apears that their actions were conducted outside of the ethics of what law officers are supposed to be when ever they are on the scene to help, but still my position is that the lady didnot need the gun she was carrying in her hand in that specific Katrina situation, because in her situation it would have been a disaster if the gangs or thugs would have gained this weapon from her. The police had the right idea about this, but they just went about it all the wrong way as was shown in the video. They should have also forced her to evacuate, regardless of her food, dogs and especially with that gun in which she had in the situation. People are hard headed, especially when they get her age in life, but it should always be understandable and delt with in a compassionate way as well.

Until some one gets shot. None of the people in any of thos videos had any business being out and about with guns. They were stupid.

 

[uscitizen]

Dude I know more about this issue than someone dick wade trying to defend the government.
My second amendment violation status update April 2012 - YouTube

(No more Prepping for Me ) video made before viewer support - YouTube

Yep MR. Knowitall

btw those survivalist sites are full of extrememly wierd super paranoid people.

Don't be an ass hole. I am aware of most issues dealing with firearms, I have to be, to be able to protect my rights.

btw those survivalist sites are full of extrememly wierd super paranoid people.

Life is full of weirdos. I think liberals are very wired, I think anyone who can support obama is extremely weird. I think if you depend on other to protect you, you're a useless piece of shit.

so you agree we should cut the military budget?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yep MR. Knowitall

btw those survivalist sites are full of extrememly wierd super paranoid people.

Don't be an ass hole. I am aware of most issues dealing with firearms, I have to be, to be able to protect my rights.

btw those survivalist sites are full of extrememly wierd super paranoid people.

Life is full of weirdos. I think liberals are very wired, I think anyone who can support obama is extremely weird. I think if you depend on other to protect you, you're a useless piece of shit.

so you agree we should cut the military budget?

If you agree to kill welfare

 

[uscitizen]

Don't be an ass hole. I am aware of most issues dealing with firearms, I have to be, to be able to protect my rights.



Life is full of weirdos. I think liberals are very wired, I think anyone who can support obama is extremely weird. I think if you depend on other to protect you, you're a useless piece of shit.

so you agree we should cut the military budget?

If you agree to kill welfare

but if you agree to kill the military I will agree to kill welfare.


Nonsequiter though, and I said cut not kill.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Some did not, nevertheless that matters not they should never had their firearms taken away period.

I can agree, but for the saftey of some in various situations (like the little ole lady for example), but not in the unmanored way in which it was done to her in that video, but even so I think it was a good thing.


I mean what would she had done if threatened by criminals who wanted to take her food in that situation ? Nothing is what she would have done, that would have been safe and good for her to do. Lets say that maybe she could have shot a round off or two (you know to scare the perps), but then the others would have heard these shots, and thought to themselves a vulnerable little ole lady with a gun? Then they would have went there not for her food or for her dogs, but for that gun, in order to commit bigger crimes as a team found in gangs roaming the communities in that situiation. Once an area was come upon by law enforcement for clearing, then the gun owners who were in that area, should have been able to leave with their guns to a safe zone, and if they were uncertain about taking their weapons with them, then there should have been provisions provided them by the law, to store their weapons until they chose to pick them back up at a later date. Somewhere in this nation, trust has to be formed between the law and the good citizens again, because this is the huge problem this nation is having in all of this to date. NO TRUST ANYMORE!

Your words in red, and my words in blue, in which you have asked me about.. I went all the way back to the uncut and/or unpasted version of my post before used by members or the site, where as this is the words as they were written originally. Now I ask you this, how did you get what you have written as a total plagerism or rather that someone else has added without my knowledge of, this rewritten interpretation of my words in this way?

Here is the interpretation of my words as they were written by me - I can agree, but for the saftey of some in various situations (like the little ole lady for example), ((Yet - for a better word )) not in the unmanored way in which it was done to her ((by the law when taking her gun)) in that video, but even so I think it was a good thing (((that they had taken her gun, before the gun got her into trouble or even caused her to kill somebody by accident))). Add - She should have been forced to evacuate in the situation, because she didn't realize the extreme dangers, but rather they did understand the dangers, but went about it the wrong way in concerns of her and her safety.

You just keep digging and making it worse. My grand mother lived by her self and could take care of herself, she would have shot one of those cops if they had done her that way. She was known as pistol packing Mama. And yes she has shot two people. No one needs the government to protect them from their own good. She died in her sleep at age 88 healthy as could be.

 

[uscitizen]

died in her sleep at 88 healthy as can be...

But she died, that is not too healthy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

died in her sleep at 88 healthy as can be...

But she died, that is not too healthy.

She died of old age, she never stopped working in her yard cutting trees down when needed. Old age got her.

 

[uscitizen]

Old age is unhealthy apparently if it kills ya.

 

[AnonymousIV]

Taking ownership I think it all revolves around the Republican governors. Something they need to do is own their problems, take ownership, and realize that the Present Administration is laying down policy and they are ignoring it. It's not at the federal level its at the state level. A lot of our rights would be restored if you remain loyal to standing policy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Old age is unhealthy apparently if it kills ya.

you're an idiot.

 

[Polk]

I think I'll throw this video in for chits and grins

Military Checkpoints in U.S.A - Wake Up America - YouTube

"Military" checkpoints, noting these were not active duty soldiers, but National Guardsmen on state patrol. Without getting in to the selective editing throughout the video.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I think I'll throw this video in for chits and grins

Military Checkpoints in U.S.A - Wake Up America - YouTube

"Military" checkpoints, noting these were not active duty soldiers, but National Guardsmen on state patrol. Without getting in to the selective editing throughout the video.

As I roll my eyes.
What does MP stand for?
What emergency did the state have?
Would U.S. Army have any meaning?

 

[Polk]

I think I'll throw this video in for chits and grins

Military Checkpoints in U.S.A - Wake Up America - YouTube

"Military" checkpoints, noting these were not active duty soldiers, but National Guardsmen on state patrol. Without getting in to the selective editing throughout the video.

As I roll my eyes.
What does MP stand for?
What emergency did the state have?
Would U.S. Army have any meaning?

National Guard units don't keep a secondary set of uniforms for when they've been called up by the state.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

"Military" checkpoints, noting these were not active duty soldiers, but National Guardsmen on state patrol. Without getting in to the selective editing throughout the video.

As I roll my eyes.
What does MP stand for?
What emergency did the state have?
Would U.S. Army have any meaning?

National Guard units don't keep a secondary set of uniforms for when they've been called up by the state.

National guard would be connected with the federal government correct?
What emergency was there that they were needed?
Posse Comitatus Act
Sec. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress ; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section and any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment

AND DON'T COME BACK WITH BLATHER COME BACK WITH FACTS.

 

[Polk]

Posse Comitatus only applies to National Guard units called to active duty. Otherwise, they're under the control of the government of the respective state.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Posse Comitatus only applies to National Guard units called to active duty. Otherwise, they're under the control of the government of the respective state.

WTF????? You're confusing the old state guard with the national guard.
Governors Oppose Federal Control of Guard

The nation's governors, protesting what they call an unprecedented shift in authority from the states to the federal government, will urge Congress today to block legislation that would allow the president to take control of National Guard forces in the event of a natural disaster or a threat to homeland security.

There is not state controlled guard anymore.

Posse Comitatus Act
Sec. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress ; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section and any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment

 

[Polk]

You highlighted the wrong part. The problem for your argument is that they're not part of the "Army of the United States". That's only the case when the units have been activated in to federal service. They're still under state control otherwise. The article you posted was about a bill that, even if passed (not sure it did, article doesn't say), would expand the ability of the President to call Guard units into federal service, not make them permanently activated.