[quote]jgreg5 wrote:
carld57 wrote:
All I have to say on this matter is:
"From my cold dead hands"
I agree 1000% I have way too much ammo to let anyone take my weapons!!
[/quote]
(eye roll)
“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” ~ Thomas Jefferson.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Jefferson’s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764
[quote]jgreg5 wrote:
carld57 wrote:
All I have to say on this matter is:
"From my cold dead hands"
I agree 1000% I have way too much ammo to let anyone take my weapons!!
[/quote]
Nice, is that an AR15?
Benito Mussolini: ?The measures adopted to restore public order are: First of all, the elimination of the so-called subversive elements. … They were elements of disorder and subversion. On the morrow of each conflict I gave the categorical order to confiscate the largest possible number of weapons of every sort and kind. This confiscation, which continues with the utmost energy, has given satisfactory results.? (address to the Italian Senate, 1931)
Adolf Hitler: “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
JustTheFacts wrote:
“Say GOODBYE to my little friend!”
A topic that seems suspiciously missing from the political forum. Just a little of what to expect when they declare martial law in YOUR town USA because of [fill in the blank].
New Orleans Begins Confiscating Firearms as Water Recedes
NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 8 - Waters were receding across this flood-beaten city today as police officers began confiscating weapons, including legally registered firearms, from civilians in preparation for a mass forced evacuation of the residents still living here.
No civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to carry pistols, shotguns or other firearms, said P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of police. “Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons,” he said.
Total Gun Confiscation of Law Abiding Citizens Begins
Major newspapers are reporting that in middle-class neighborhoods undamaged by floodwaters paramilitary police are going door-to-door demanding citizens’ firearms.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2005/090905gunconfiscation.htm
Protecting America, one senior citizen at a time - a FOX exclusive.
Police forcibly tackling elderly, confiscating firearms and dragging them out of their homes
http://prisonplanet.com/Pages/Sept05/100905policevid.htm
“The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (unless of course there’s a flood)
Couldn’t agree with you more on this one JTF. Very scary. This kind of shit is why I’m a proud NRA member.
Fight crime…SHOOT BACK!
http://www.nra.org/[/quote]
Very disturbing indeed. I saw an article on yahoo! news on saturday that actually said -paraphrase–" This apparently does not apply to the personal security hired to protect businesses and wealthy homeowners that are very well armed"
[quote]storey420 wrote:
This apparently does not apply to the personal security hired to protect businesses and wealthy homeowners that are very well armed"
[/quote]
PHEW!
This is dubious.
Who ordered the confiscation?
[quote]storey420 wrote:
Very disturbing indeed. I saw an article on yahoo! news on saturday that actually said -paraphrase–" This apparently does not apply to the personal security hired to protect businesses and wealthy homeowners that are very well armed"
[/quote]
I guess some people are do-it-yourselfers and others can afford to “hire out”.
This sort of gets into another issue of social hiarchy and privledge but the average middle class gun owner should in no way feel comfortable that he’ll be somehow exempt if it happens in his or her town in the future.
Mercenaries guard homes of the rich in New Orleans
Hundreds of mercenaries have descended on New Orleans to guard the property of the city’s millionaires from looters.
Asked if they had encountered many looters so far, Mr Reagan said that the sight of his heavily armed men - a pump action shotgun was propped against the wall near to where he was standing - was enough to put most people off.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/katrina/story/0%2C16441%2C1567656%2C00.html
The unfortunate reality is the “haves” will be a serious target by the “have nots” after a catastrophic event regardless of race, creed or religion.
And by “haves” I don’t necessarily mean well off or millionaire - imagine you have something as simple as five gallons of drinking water and it’s day 3 or 4 after a catastrophic event.
The neighbor across the street you wave to every morning might get some ‘crazy’ notion that HIS family is somehow more important than YOURS after 4 days without water.
To the staunch anti-gun people I say, good luck with that baseball bat. (better yet, get two)
[quote]The Mage wrote:
“Guns don’t kill people. Those little tiny bullets do.”
Criminals have been interviewed in prison, and guess what? They never register their guns, nor do they buy them at the local dealer.
Gun control only takes guns away from law abiding citizens, and actually has the reverse effect on crime.
ScienceGuy wrote:
“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” ~ Thomas Jefferson.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms. . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” – Jefferson’s “Commonplace Book,” 1774-1776, quoting from On Crimes and Punishment, by criminologist Cesare Beccaria, 1764[/quote]
For the anti-gun lurkers who may question that line of thought, here are some very good stats and info for consideration.
[15] Myths About Gun Control
National Center for Policy Analysis
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st176/s176b.html
Gun Laws do Not Reduce Criminal Violence According to New Study
Release Date: November 27, 2003
Vancouver, BC - Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper “The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales”, released today by The Fraser Institute.
Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive.
The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales
It warms my heart to see that the T-Nation appears to be well armed.
Couldn’t I hire my brother to “protect” my failing work-at-home “business”, and he can hire me for the same.
I realy can’t understand their logic in taking away registered fire arms.
I’m sure their defence is that Martial Law was declared to restore order and we need to take drastic measures to ensure everyone’s safety, yadda yadda yadda…
I kind of hope a LOT of people fight back and keep their registered firearms (though I don’t think it will happen).
Wasn’t the expected life expectancy of a democracy around 200 years?
I think the Roman Empire was the previous longest lasting democracy, which lasted around 200 years.
The government is getting out of control with their thirst for power.
People can only be pushed so far before pusing back, although Americans are much more conditioned for laziness and conformity than a couple hundred years ago which makes it much easier for our government to take advantage of us.
Because SlimJim your an idiot. Your lack of knowledge and lack seriousness in regards to the matter cleary are the reason why 2nd amendment rights are constantly being question. “why not go around the corner and get a Mac-10” go ahead and “GAT” everyone, good to go. I live in the lovely state of Kalifornia where are there are no gun rights and morons like you post these kind of remarks make people who take the 2nd amendment seriously sound like gun toting redknecks. Meanwhile a horrific thing has occured in NewOrleans and you joke about it. I bet you always keep the finger on the trigger even when racking a round in the chamber, meaning your unsafe and a liability to the people who believe in the Right To Keep and Bear Arms.
Hell, why not randomly make people supply proof of legal ownership?
At least that way the law abiding can carry the damned things around willy-nilly while the crook will have to leave his at home.
That’s the tilt you want. I can’t believe all the bullshit done to “disarm the public” when the public isn’t the problem, its the problematic people that are the problem dammit.
Hmm, something about being drunk and in posession of a handgum sounds a bit suspect though, kinda like driving while drunk perhaps.
[quote]BigRJ wrote:
Because SlimJim your an idiot. Your lack of knowledge and lack seriousness in regards to the matter cleary are the reason why 2nd amendment rights are constantly being question. “why not go around the corner and get a Mac-10” go ahead and “GAT” everyone, good to go. I live in the lovely state of Kalifornia where are there are no gun rights and morons like you post these kind of remarks make people who take the 2nd amendment seriously sound like gun toting redknecks. Meanwhile a horrific thing has occured in NewOrleans and you joke about it. I bet you always keep the finger on the trigger even when racking a round in the chamber, meaning your unsafe and a liability to the people who believe in the Right To Keep and Bear Arms. [/quote]
I made an off the cuff remark in response to how martial law was being enforced, and the way that I’m sure they’re probably removing guns from people who are not using them for ill purposes instead of those who have purchased theirs illegally and are “off the books.” So once you’ve removed that shotgun barrel that is obviously lodged so deep in your ass that you can’t recognize the difference between a remark made to accent the irony of the situation, and one that is serious, please get back to me about my stupidity. At least I know the difference between “distinction” and “extinction” jackass.
Distinction: Recognition of achievement or superiority.
Extinction: The act of extinguishing.
Sorry but no shotgunbarrel in my ass slim.
[quote]BigRJ wrote:
Distinction: Recognition of achievement or superiority.
Extinction: The act of extinguishing.
Sorry but no shotgunbarrel in my ass slim.[/quote]
Been visiting dictionary.com have we? Then explain your previous post where you claimed my ignorance was the reason the second ammendment was on the verge of distinction.
Actually, this thread is ahead of schedule!
We have broken down into name calling by the second page. It usually takes four or better.
Makes me wonder if these guys had guns if they’d shoot it out… 
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Makes me wonder if these guys had guns if they’d shoot it out…
[/quote]
You mean like a regular ol’ Zell Miller style shoot em’ up?
NRA’s Wayne LaPierre Slams Seizure of Guns in New Orleans
Newsmax | September 13 2005
National Rifle Association (NRA) leader Wayne LaPierre slammed New Orleans authorities Monday for seizing legal firearms from lawful residents.
“What we’ve seen in Louisiana - the breakdown of law and order in the aftermath of disaster - is exactly the kind of situation where the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to protect themselves,” LaPierre said.
“When law enforcement isn’t available, Americans turn to the one right that protects all the others - the right to keep and bear arms,” LaPierre added. “This attempt to repeal the Second Amendment should be condemned.”
The New York Times reported last Thursday that no civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to have guns, quoting the superintendent of police that “only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons.”
A Louisiana state statute allows the chief law enforcement officer to “regulate possession” of firearms during declared emergencies. “But regulate doesn’t mean confiscate,” said Chris W. Cox, the NRA’s chief lobbyist.
“Authorities are using that statute to do what the looters and criminals could not: disarm the law-abiding citizens of New Orleans trying to protect their homes and families,” Cox said. “The NRA will not stand idly by while guns are confiscated from law-abiding people who’re trying to defend themselves. We’re exploring every legal option available to protect the rights of lawful people in New Orleans and we’re taking steps to overturn such laws in every state where they exist.”
“Local authorities in New Orleans are turning nature’s assault on human life into man’s assault on human rights,” LaPierre said. “Four million NRA members intend to stop this unconstitutional power grab.”
Group: New Orleans Gun Seizures Ilegal
Newsmax | September 13 2005
Following low-key inquiries that were met with stony silence and official indifference, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) today is calling for a federal investigation into reports of gun seizures from law-abiding New Orleans residents, and is demanding that officials there immediately account for all confiscated firearms.
CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb is also demanding that New Orleans police officials immediately stop the seizures, disclose where those firearms are being kept, how they are secured, the type and number of firearms involved, and how those guns will be promptly returned to their rightful owners, in the condition in which they were originally taken.
“I also want to know under just what authority New Orleans officials are confiscating lawfully-owned firearms from law-abiding citizens,” Gottlieb said. “Where does it say that the state and federal Constitution can be nullified, even briefly, simply because of a hurricane? In every other natural disaster this country has ever faced, people retain their civil rights, including the right of self-defense, but New Orleans and Louisiana state officials have added the sin of arrogance to incompetence and negligence for which they must be held accountable when this is over.”
Gun rights activists have been outraged by a film clip showing a police officer tackling an elderly woman who was armed, in her own home, and later removing her from the premises.
I believe that clip of the old lady being body slammed was shown on CNN as well. I couldn’t believe my eyes.
This old lady is showing a revolver, probably explaining how she feels safe in her home…
All of a sudden you see her body slammed as if she was an Al Queda operative!
What the hell?