I Need Permission?

[DarkFury]

I'm granted a national right at birth and I need permission? If its a national right I don't need a damn thing. And they want you to register and pay for that national right. Nothing in that right says I have to register and there is nothing that says government can extort money to "allow" a right.

That argument came to the forefront the other day when one of this sites liberals INSISTED that states have the right to REMOVE national rights. How truly stupid can one get? As a state, any state joins the United States that state AGREES to ANY and ALL national rights. There is no question and there is no exception.

That is what prevents state leaders from becoming dictators. Now in most liberals cities you can't get one. So they are in fact trying to DENY your right. Yet in other liberal cities you can get one but it costs you money. So in fact your national right is being extorted for money. We don't have those issues here in Arizona. You DON'T beg for a right or buy it, it's yours.

If we were to look at the subject in total truth then Baltimore/Detroit and St. Louis ARE violating Federal LAW JUST as much if not more then Sanctuary Cities. Why are we fighting a modern day "civilized" government for a national right? Seems to me we would be throwing those traitors out of office as fast as we could find them.

Governments JOB is to protect our rights and our Sovereignty. Seems to me they are taking one illegally and NOT doing the other! Who is this government working for? It sure as hell does not seem like me. Lets see, you take guns and the rule of law out and put criminals in and you expect me to build and prosper?

What the hell am I building and what's it worth? Show me where the safety and Sovereignty is in that. The two base things ANY nation needs to survive and to grow. And you want me to build without either?

You folks better keep your guns because the ones WITH guns will be the SAME folks running the country.

Fury

 

[asaratis]

Just as the government of Obama and Company chooses to ignore whatever laws they see fit to ignore, I will ignore any law regarding the diminishing or removal of my right to own and carry firearms. I choose to be shot dead before giving up my gun rights.

 

[OldLady]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

 

[DarkFury]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

If a state or city government can require that you buy a right. Which ones can you afford and for how long?

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

 

[OldLady]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

If a state or city government can require that you buy a right. Which ones can you afford and for how long?

How do we make it harder for violent criminals and violently mentally ill people from buying guns otherwise? Okay, get the registration done by some centralized, independent bureau and have the cost of it absorbed in the cost of the weapon? So people just don't realize they're paying for it?

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

If a state or city government can require that you buy a right. Which ones can you afford and for how long?

Gun ownership is no different than voting....the democrats used Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from being able to vote....the calls for registration, licensing, and training requirements are simply Poll Taxes and Literacy tests for guns.....

The problem is we have not pushed this aspect into the courts.....each one violates the 2nd amendment....but also violates the 5th Amendment and the 14th Amendment....

If hilary is not elected we need to take these things to the courts on that basis.

 

[OldLady]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.
How does the kid at WalMart know the guy is a felon when he comes in to buy his semi automatic and a trunk full of bullets? That's what I mean by "registered." Do you mean something different?

 

[koshergrl]

Our rights are natural, not national. They are not granted to us by the govt...it is the duty of govt to.protect them. When the govt ceases to do so, it is our duty to eliminate the acting govt and re- establish a constitutional one.

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

If a state or city government can require that you buy a right. Which ones can you afford and for how long?

How do we make it harder for violent criminals and violently mentally ill people from buying guns otherwise? Okay, get the registration done by some centralized, independent bureau and have the cost of it absorbed in the cost of the weapon? So people just don't realize they're paying for it?

Nope....Canada tried to register just their long guns.....about 15 million....it failed miserably......the cost and the manpower increased to the point it was impossible to do......

And again...registration is only wanted so that they can ban or confiscate guns in the future.....Britain, Australia and Germany show this......

And you already have background checks to keep criminals from buying guns...and if you catch them they can be arrested....

We already have those laws on the books...

Do you realize that under the ruling in Hayes v. United States....criminals do not have to register their illegal guns? So the only people who would be required to register their guns would be law abiding people...who don't commit crimes with guns...

And that makes sense to you?

 

[OldLady]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons
I could have sworn that yesterday you said it was 80% of the shooters. Who's being true and accurate?

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.
How does the kid at WalMart know the guy is a felon when he comes in to buy his semi automatic and a trunk full of bullets? That's what I mean by "registered." Do you mean something different?

Any licensed gun seller has to do a background check.....if you buy a gun at Walmart, they have to do a background check.

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons
I could have sworn that yesterday you said it was 80% of the shooters. Who's being true and accurate?

No....80% of the gun victims also have felony convictions........

 

[DarkFury]

Our rights are natural, not national. They are not granted to us by the govt...it is the duty of govt to.protect them. When the govt ceases to do so, it is our duty to eliminate the acting govt and re- establish a constitutional one.

Our rights are national in the sense that every one born in this nation has those rights. And no state or city has a right to remove that nation wide right.

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

If a state or city government can require that you buy a right. Which ones can you afford and for how long?

How do we make it harder for violent criminals and violently mentally ill people from buying guns otherwise? Okay, get the registration done by some centralized, independent bureau and have the cost of it absorbed in the cost of the weapon? So people just don't realize they're paying for it?

I have posted this before...this is the disaster that Canada experienced trying to register just long guns....and we have 357,000,000 guns...

What's wrong with a registry?

But gun registries have a number of problems. For one, they don’t solve crimes.

Canada’s experience with a long-gun registry illustrates this. After having spent some two billion dollars, the program was found to be ineffective at solving crimes or keeping people safe.

The State of Maryland has had a similar experience with its ballistic fingerprint records, finding that in fifteen years, only twenty-six cases were aided by the registry, and in those cases, law enforcement already knew which guns were involved.

All of this, of course, is in addition to the major question of how we would register American guns in the first place, considering the hundreds of millions here presently and our porous borders.

What registries do allow is confiscation. The experience in Britain of gun control worsening over time illustrates this. The same is true for Australia. And we’ve seen attempts to do the same thing in New York and California.

And then there’s the more basic question of privacy.

This is a concern that goes broader and deeper than just gun rights. Whether we’re talking about the NSA’s spying on our e-mail and telephone calls or the FBI’s desire to have a door opened for them into iPhones, it is abundantly clear that government wants easy access to our personal lives, in spite of and in contradiction to the protection of the Fourth Amendment.

A gun registry would simply be yet another example of this.

I’m sure that all of these points are a case of preaching to the choir, but as I was told once, even the choir needs to hear a good sermon now and then. In the battles over gun control, we risk letting some things slip through when confronted with a flurry of demands, and it’s up to us to make sure bad ideas are not converted into laws.

 

[koshergrl]

Our rights are natural, not national. They are not granted to us by the govt...it is the duty of govt to.protect them. When the govt ceases to do so, it is our duty to eliminate the acting govt and re- establish a constitutional one.

Our rights are national in the sense that every one born in this nation has those rights. And no state or city has a right to remove that nation wide right.

Every person in the world is born with those rights, they come from God. Our government as established recognizes that..they are NOT national rights. Our government is just the only one that acknowledges that these are natural rights we're born with, and no gov't has the authority to deny them.

 

[OldLady]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

If a state or city government can require that you buy a right. Which ones can you afford and for how long?

How do we make it harder for violent criminals and violently mentally ill people from buying guns otherwise? Okay, get the registration done by some centralized, independent bureau and have the cost of it absorbed in the cost of the weapon? So people just don't realize they're paying for it?

Nope....Canada tried to register just their long guns.....about 15 million....it failed miserably......the cost and the manpower increased to the point it was impossible to do......

And again...registration is only wanted so that they can ban or confiscate guns in the future.....Britain, Australia and Germany show this......

And you already have background checks to keep criminals from buying guns...and if you catch them they can be arrested....

We already have those laws on the books...

Do you realize that under the ruling in Hayes v. United States....criminals do not have to register their illegal guns? So the only people who would be required to register their guns would be law abiding people...who don't commit crimes with guns...

And that makes sense to you?

And again...registration is only wanted so that they can ban or confiscate guns in the future.....Britain, Australia and Germany show this.....
You just began a thread noting that 800,000 individuals in Australia own guns. They seem to have missed some in their confiscation? It seems to me that perhaps they just got gun ownership down to a more reasonable level so p-o'd S.O.B.'s like Tordil won't grab their legally owned firearm from tThe nightstand and murder three innocent people, wound 3 more. Sure he could have killed his wife with a knife or a baseball bat, but it would have been a lot of effort to attack those folks in the parking lots of the shopping centers. Not so hard with a gun. Guns are how you can murder people without getting crap on your shoes.

 

[OldLady]

Our rights are natural, not national. They are not granted to us by the govt...it is the duty of govt to.protect them. When the govt ceases to do so, it is our duty to eliminate the acting govt and re- establish a constitutional one.

Our rights are national in the sense that every one born in this nation has those rights. And no state or city has a right to remove that nation wide right.

Every person in the world is born with those rights, they come from God. Our government as established recognizes that..they are NOT national rights. Our government is just the only one that acknowledges that these are natural rights we're born with, and no gov't has the authority to deny them.

Off topic, but I've been wanting to ask you--can you smell the smoke from the Alberta fires?

 

[2aguy]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons
I could have sworn that yesterday you said it was 80% of the shooters. Who's being true and accurate?

And here you go......

Public Health Pot Shots


These and other studies funded by the CDC focus on the presence or absence of guns, rather than the characteristics of the people who use them. Indeed, the CDC's Rosenberg claims in the journalEducational Horizons that murderers are "ourselves--ordinary citizens, professionals, even health care workers": people who kill only because a gun happens to be available. Yet if there is one fact that has been incontestably established by homicide studies, it's that murderers are not ordinary gun owners but extreme aberrants whose life histories include drug abuse, serious accidents, felonies, and irrational violence.



Unlike "ourselves," roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have significant criminal records, averaging an adult criminal career of six or more years with four major felonies.

Access to juvenile records would almost certainly show that the criminal careers of murderers stretch back into their adolescence. In Murder in America (1994), the criminologists Ronald W. Holmes and Stephen T. Holmes report that murderers generally "have histories of committing personal violence in childhood, against other children, siblings, and small animals." Murderers who don't have criminal records usually have histories of psychiatric treatment or domestic violence that did not lead to arrest.

Contrary to the impression fostered by Rosenberg and other opponents of gun ownership, the term "acquaintance homicide" does not mean killings that stem from ordinary family or neighborhood arguments. Typical acquaintance homicides include: an abusive man eventually killing a woman he has repeatedly assaulted; a drug user killing a dealer (or vice versa) in a robbery attempt; and gang members, drug dealers, and other criminals killing each other for reasons of economic rivalry or personal pique.



According to a 1993 article in the Journal of Trauma, 80 percent of murders in Washington, D.C., are related to the drug trade, while "84% of [Philadelphia murder] victims in 1990 had antemortem drug use or criminal history."

A 1994 article in The New England Journal of Medicinereported that 71 percent of Los Angeles children and adolescents injured in drive-by shootings "were documented members of violent street gangs." And University of North Carolina-Charlotte criminal justice scholars Richard Lumb and Paul C. Friday report that 71 percent of adult gunshot wound victims in Charlotte have criminal records.

 

[OldLady]

If it's unconstitutional, why don't you take it to the Supreme Court? Probably someone has already tried. Personally, I have run into quite a few people I hope to hell don't have a "right" any longer to a gun. You may be born with that right, but some people's actions deserve taking that right away. How does that get monitored except by registration, which requires time and money, necessitating a fee?
It isn't the law abiding gun owners who screw things up for the rest of us, but screw it up they do. And we pay for it. I don't see any way around it.

Sorry....registration does not work....they tried it in Canada.....and in every country where they have done it, all it does is set up the next step...confiscation.

We already have laws against using guns to commit crimes....and felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.

You register the criminal...not the law abiding gun owner......

The law abiding gun owners own 356,991876 million guns that are not used to commit gun murder......actually slightly more since many murders are multiple with the same gun....so less than 8,124 guns are used to commit murder....

In what sane universe is 356,991,876 million guns that are not used by law abiding people to commit crimes, "screwing it up?"

Since, of the 8,124 gun murders......90% of the shooters are already convicted felons who already cannot legally own or carry a gun....and they are already registered with law enforcement as criminals.........

Again....nothing you say about gun ownership in the United States is true or accurate...

felons are already "registered" because of previous crimes....when they are caught with a gun they can already be arrested.
How does the kid at WalMart know the guy is a felon when he comes in to buy his semi automatic and a trunk full of bullets? That's what I mean by "registered." Do you mean something different?

Any licensed gun seller has to do a background check.....if you buy a gun at Walmart, they have to do a background check.

On all the cop shows, when they find a firearm at a crime scene, they trace it back to ownership. Isn't that registration? It is already being done, as well as the background check, isn't it?