Government WILL Ban Guns Soon....

[gaiusmarius]

ROFLMAO check out the interview thats embedded. i love this old guy. he knows that when seconds count the police are at least minutes away. thats a real man. i'd hope i'd be as calm and collected in such a situation, specially at his age.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/92-year-old-shoots-and-kills-burglar.html

 

[GetUpStandUp]

Anyone else having their threads held in 'limbo' before they show up... or don't?

Just started this thread a few minutes ago in the den... where is it?
Do a search for "icmag.com Be careful who your kids" on google and it's the first link.

Stay Safe!

Ive noticed a drop in activity on IC, but it may be due to harvest time, but I would think that would bring lots more pix. IDK just dont see too many post anymore.

 

[Hydro-Soil]

It's the new form of censorship on icmag...

If they don't bin your thread... they hold onto it and then post it, without it hitting the "new threads" section. Therefore it never gets any traffic.

The thread in question was binned without any notification to me.

Stay Safe!

 

[187020]

Rex Kwon-Do, then walk away...

Rex Kwon-Do, then walk away...

Just started this thread a few minutes ago in the den... where is it?
Do a search for "icmag.com Be careful who your kids"

Hydro-soil started a thread about kids...oh boy! Use the buddy system homies!

 

[mrwags]

That's an interesting definition of republic and I'm not sure "natural rights" is a defense in civil or criminal court.

When it comes to the US, republic means no royalty. England was a royal monarchy and didn't have free elections. America established a republic and with it, free elections.

You 2 bring up some very interesting points BUT with the second approval of the Patriot Act (by Obama) some of these said rights no longer apply if they see fit. You can be held for any amount of time and your rights terribly trampled all because you are an accused terrorist.

ter·ror·ist
   [ter-er-ist]
noun
1.a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2.a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
3.(formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.
4.an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.


I don't know about you all but #2 has been done by me for years each and every Halloween.

I laugh when I hear them say they need automatic weapons to go hunting. The idea of spraying Bambi with a barrage of bullets kinda makes me giggle a bit for the Indians used sticks and bows or rocks on a stick and did just fine until we came along that is.

I say make the guns cheap but make the ammo cost 5,000 a bullet that way real men get dinner and these damn punk ass pussy kids won't be able to afford their stupid punk ass drive by's and fight it like the men before them used to.


Good Luck
Mr Wags

 

[MummyCat]

All I heard was people screaming Obama was going to take my guns. But since he took office there are now less gun laws. You people are nuts. No one is taking your guns, the poeple have more guns than the government and the government knows it would be all out civil war to try and take most people's guns. Too many guns are already out there, nobody is taking anything without massive bloodshed, find some other more legit thing to bash Obama on.

^ This guy has the wool tightly pulled over his eyes

 

[Letsbe]

Rockford, thanks for injecting some of that element that is so woefully missing from the
gun nut arguments - common sense.

 

[MummyCat]

You 2 bring up some very interesting points BUT with the second approval of the Patriot Act (by Obama) some of these said rights no longer apply if they see fit. You can be held for any amount of time and your rights terribly trampled all because you are an accused terrorist.

ter·ror·ist
   [ter-er-ist]
noun
1.a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.
2.a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
3.(formerly) a member of a political group in Russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.
4.an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.


I don't know about you all but #2 has been done by me for years each and every Halloween.

I laugh when I hear them say they need automatic weapons to go hunting. The idea of spraying Bambi with a barrage of bullets kinda makes me giggle a bit for the Indians used sticks and bows or rocks on a stick and did just fine until we came along that is.

I say make the guns cheap but make the ammo cost 5,000 a bullet that way real men get dinner and these damn punk ass pussy kids won't be able to afford their stupid punk ass drive by's and fight it like the men before them used to.


Good Luck
Mr Wags

I suppose you would vote to make reloading your own ammo illegal then? This punk kid right here started loading his own ammo at age 11.

Freedom.

Liberty.

pretty please

 

[mrwags]

I suppose you would vote to make reloading your own ammo illegal then? This punk kid right here started loading his own ammo at age 11.

Freedom.

Liberty.

pretty please

Of course not Mummy and if you are shooting at targets or game instead of innocent kids on the street your not a punk but a sportsman.


Be Well
Mr.Wags

 

[MummyCat]

well then this sportsman is glad that ammo was cheap and available enough when he was a kid to properly enjoy the sport of shooting and hunting.

If my kids don't get the same opportunity, I'm gonna be pissed

 

[Hydrosun]

Agreed, except the "any arms" part. They could not have conceived of the weapons that exist today. Were they cognizant of weapons of mass destruction? Of course not. Also, the "regulated" part implies a military type militia, not the clusterfuck of random killings we have by and against our own citizens in our inner cities today, at least here in the U.S. The violence is totally out of hand when it's more dangerous in Chicago than in the Iraq or Afghanistan wars.

You are kidding right?

How can your definition of control by government fags be consistent with the plain language of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?

These men had British ships of war bombarding their cities with cannon. I am pretty sure they understood that weapons were dangerous and the science of weaponry was ever growing.

It is very arrogant of you to now say that you know what MY natural rights should be, and even more arrogant of you to claim to hold the ideals of the constitution while you violate its plain language.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

do you prefer the term constitutional rights? to me they are my natural rights, i just have them, they are not bestowed and can't be taken away in a just system. self defense, free speech, privacy etc, once those are taken away the system is no longer a just system.

you are right about the royalty aspect. i think the US system has things that stem back to the Roman republic. having no king was a huge part of that. what a shame that today's presidents can act like kings and start wars without congressional approval or the majority of the people being in favor. be it the war on drugs or the many wars on various peoples all over the world.

I wasn't trying to say you're wrong, I was just pointing out the whole idea of democracy and majority rule seems to turn some folks off, in some cases suggesting we're not a democracy and 'republic' means Jeremiah Johnson.

I'm just juggin'. I'm also mindful that Ben Franklin mused that literal interpretation (of freedom) would be our national undoing.

Have a nice w/e, all.

 

[dizzze]

Dont have enough posts to give out rep, but hydrosun, gaismarus, and mummycat all have some coming.

I think making ammo expensive defeats the purpose of guns, there one in the same. Make it expensive only hurts people who enjoy shooting, i love making it to the range and keeping my skills up so i can make clean ethical shots.

The punk kids doing drivebys probably only have 1 full clip, thats all they might need, atleast untill they dump it and end up in jail.

Disco i dont think your quite getting it.

 

[GetUpStandUp]

Dont have enough posts to give out rep, but hydrosun, gaismarus, and mummycat all have some coming.

I think making ammo expensive defeats the purpose of guns, there one in the same. Make it expensive only hurts people who enjoy shooting, i love making it to the range and keeping my skills up so i can make clean ethical shots.

The punk kids doing drivebys probably only have 1 full clip, thats all they might need, atleast untill they dump it and end up in jail.

Disco i dont think your quite getting it.

The only thing I find not cool of this is the punk kids dumping the clip, and end up in jail. I find that yes they are punks, yes kids, but the innocent victims of their shots, even the punk police shoots innocents, I find a problem for not accounting for them or this real situation of KIDS getting guns KILLING KIDS, and INNOCENT people. Not starting shite, I and understand where your other arguments stand, but this fact is a doozie of a truth, that should not be ignored, matter of fact is the main reason for gun control I think?

 

[GetUpStandUp]

I mean this thing has gone it rounds, and its gotten the whole Heman, GI joe ethics, the old school founded this country rights, and a occasion a I just want to own a gun cuz its cool, all very relivant, and true, BUT the two victims, no 3 victims in my family from guns, yeah that holds more clout in me, I just dont believe in guns personally, use to, but no more. I even do not support the banning of gun either, but many people who have love ones dead who hate anything, and everyone with guns, I am just saying.

I think there are two kinds of gun holders, ones that do knowing evil with them, and one yet to expierence the fact they can bring this evil to ther lives. We all remember that student in high school who accidently shot him or his best friend on accident, yeah we all fear the ones left with the guns, but then that brings Bruce Lee to a higher light, and all the years of combat before guns. Just saying, dont hear much on any points that has this even an issue.

 

[dizzze]

In Canada there are no handguns allowed, yet every punk ass kid has one? I was there on vacation for a week years ago and would buy weed from kids at the park, it seemed every damn kid had a pistol in toronto. I think more people had handguns there than in my hick town in the states. So apparentlly gun controll there only kept handguns from law abiding citizens and every punk ass kid was stil able to get one, why would gun controll go over any different here in the us?

 

[dizzze]

The genie is out of the bottle and cant be put back in. I agree that if there were no guns around murder rates would change drastically. Everyone says knifes would just take over but i disagree stabing someone is much more personal than just pulling a trigger in anger.

BUT the genie is out of the bottle so any gun controll at this point will only effect law abiding citizens, and the criminals will still have them. It just wouldnt work

The people who think the goverment is going to go door to door taking guns are wrong imo dont get me wrong the gov IS trying to take your guns.

They start with shit like in CA... mag limits nationwide, then pretty soon no assault rifles, then background checks for buying ammo, then 5 day waiting period for buying ammo, so on and so on, untill we are just like canada with only shotguns and rifles... then that will change to 1 shot rifles and shotguns, then next thing ya kno firearms have basically been taken from every law abiding citizen, and only the armed punk ass kids remain.

It will take years for this to happen, but imo it will happen and is happening. Next thing ya know a speeding ticket disqualifys one of gun ownership.

 

[RetroGrow]

You are kidding right?

How can your definition of control by government fags be consistent with the plain language of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?

These men had British ships of war bombarding their cities with cannon. I am pretty sure they understood that weapons were dangerous and the science of weaponry was ever growing.

It is very arrogant of you to now say that you know what MY natural rights should be, and even more arrogant of you to claim to hold the ideals of the constitution while you violate its plain language.

I am not kidding, and I am not violating anything. Your interpretation of the language in the amendment differs from what some others believe. This has already been posted and referenced. I believe you should have the right to bear arms. But where do you draw the line? I think it's clear we have a gun problem here which is evidenced by the fact that it is more dangerous in Chicago than Afghanistan or Iraq war zones. The killings of innocent people in the streets is out of control. Crazy people, insane people, can get their hands on an AK47 and light up the neighborhood, as recently happened in Finland and here in the Batman movie shootings. Do you think the founding fathers had that in mind?
I think not. I'm not trying to take your guns away bro. Just think we need some common sense here when tens of thousands of Americans are being shot dead in the streets by punks with AKs or other assault rifles. I don't think that's unreasonable, and certainly not arrogant.
There are two sides to this discussion, and each has good points. But the interpretation of the second amendment is NOT cut and dried, as you imply. This has already been referenced, so go back and check it out. Maybe you need to read the amendment again and you will note that the language is not so "plain". It's open to different interpretations, some of which you just don't want to hear about. So enjoy your guns. I support your right to "carry", so I don't know what your beef is.

Peace.

 

[Infinitesimal]

I am not kidding, and I am not violating anything. Your interpretation of the language in the amendment differs from what some others believe. This has already been posted and referenced. I believe you should have the right to bear arms. But where do you draw the line?

Peace.

thats exactly the point, where do you draw the line... where does the constitution give anyone else including the government the right to draw my lines for me.

I think it's clear we have a gun problem here which is evidenced by the fact that it is more dangerous in Chicago than Afghanistan or Iraq war zones. The killings of innocent people in the streets is out of control. Crazy people, insane people, can get their hands on an AK47 and light up the neighborhood, as recently happened in Finland and here in the Batman movie shootings. Do you think the founding fathers had that in mind?

I don't know if the founding fathers would have thought of the batman shooting or not, but I am sure there were murders back then, and I am sure that they would have hung to death such a convicted felon at a very affordable price to the tax payers. and one less crazy in society and one less crazy to procreate... it works perfect... let people take responsibility for their actions and people will think a bit harder before doing dumb shit or making rash decisions. and if not they get removed from society through prison or death.

I think not. I'm not trying to take your guns away bro. Just think we need some common sense here when tens of thousands of Americans are being shot dead in the streets by punks with AKs or other assault rifles.

Common Sense: doesn't exist, because for it to be common all or most people would have to posses it, sense, which obviously many many many are seriously lacking.

Common Sense, when used in a sentence: you cannot regulate safety, nor does the constitution give that power or responsibility to the government... to keep the public safe. thats a responsibility you owe to yourself.

Common Sense????:
where are you getting this "tens of thousands of americans shot dead in streets by punks with assault rifles"... seriously WTF?... can you post a link or at least describe from where you are getting these stats?

again, why the need to try and make others more safe... especially by creating more laws?

I assume you likely drive somewhere on nearly a day to day basis... and you do realize how freaking dangerous that is and the odds of you dying in a painful auto accident far out ways the odd and frequency in which you are likely going to be shot by some assault rifle or automatic weapon in public by some nut job. YOU cannot save the world, especially with liberal big government "big brother knows best" type laws, give people true freedom to provide for themselves and be happy and most will be able to take care of themselves just fine with out your regulatory help.

and if someone is convicted of killing anyone... they should be sentenced to death, no insanity plea. that will take care of that problem.

There are two sides to this discussion, and each has good points. But the interpretation of the second amendment is NOT cut and dried, as you imply. This has already been referenced, so go back and check it out. Maybe you need to read the amendment again and you will note that the language is not so "plain". It's open to different interpretations, some of which you just don't want to hear about.

I (as well as every other human being) am responsible for my own actions plain and simple, you cannot prevent crimes with laws you can only establish law as a means to lawfully punish convicted criminals... so let the people be free and sort out the criminals along the way.

Peace,
Infi

 

[Hydrosun]

Maybe you need to read the amendment again and you will note that the language is not so "plain". It's open to different interpretations, some of which you just don't want to hear about.

Peace.

Wait for it....

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/second_amendment

HERE IS 100% of the WORDS::::

AMENDMENT II

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.

Now that I have re-read it for the millionth time. Which words am I misinterpreting when I claim the right to own a stinger missile or fully operational tank? Which WORDS allow ANY limitation?