The end of our Republic

General General Discussion
1

http://www.tampabays10.com/news/national/article.aspx?storyid=41875

Does anyone think the original sponsors of the 1930’s narcotics legislation would have foresaw asset seizures for merely having too much cash in a bag?

Does anyone think the original sponsors of the 1934 NFA would have foresaw the 10-round magazine limit or the attempt to ban “ugly” rifles?

Does anyone think that the definition of “terrorist” will not be expanding over the next 10 years to include anyone the Government doesn’t feel like giving a trial?

A truly sad day for us all.

M_P

2

I have not decided about the third item. But I would say no to the first item and yes to the second. I believe that the orignial NFA signers would have banned more if they had the chance. The key problem here is that agencies have been given the power of the legislature for starters. That is why I think we need to get rid of all excise tax, and thus the ATF. Let the FBI worry about crime and let’s stop regulating guns all together. I am sure that the definition of terrorist will change over time. Actually, I would be surprised if I am not called one for being a gun owner or hunter in the next 20 years. The UN already is pushing that idea. After all, who would have thought that the arrogant Surpreme Court would have said that it is OK for the government to sieze your home so that they can build something more profitable.

3

Have you even read the Military Commissions Act? It sounds like you are taking your talking points from the questionable quotes of the ACLU and media talking heads?

I for one say good… now I have a vested interest in this matter, having been an active defender of our Republic or training the young men and women that are stepping up to the plate now – since 1979.

There are just over a dozen “detainees” that have to worry about the new Act… I have not had a chance to read it fully yet, but I know it will be on the required reading list at work any day, and I am sure that it will make our job much easier! Those nice, poor, misunderstood freedom fighters being held in Gitmo are at war with us… they want us dead, they want you dead, they want everyone but them dead – feeling all boo-boo for them, siding with them or imposing some misguided pitty party to try to hide who they are, what is going on and why we are doing what we do will not change their one and only driving motivation, their hate, their lust to see through to the end the war that they started. They are enemy combatants of the United States and I think it is deplorable that they are even given trials under the protections afforded the very citizens that they came here and killed in our streets!

Did you ever notice that the only people making any real noise about them being here are the self appointed, cowardly, socialist, enemies of our Country that reside right here in the U.S. and hide behind the Amendments that they like, while ignoring those that they do not?

Trust me, it is not that easy to fight a war when a large chunk of the citizens do not recognize that we are at war… or even a percentage of our leaders refuse to say that we are? The MSM sugar coats it, so that it is not offensive material stuffed between Law and Order and some TV movie about adulterous packs of 40somethings roaming 5th Avenue – but to take the most notorious of our enemy and afford them the protections of a society and system of beliefs that they want to destroy? I know, I know… “if we do that, we are no better than them” – well, here’s the deal, there is no better or worse… there are winners and losers and some of the things that need to happen, need to happen. If we ask brave men and women to defend the underbelly of our Nation, then by God (yes God) we can not tolerate anyone that will kowtow to the whims of our enemies and roll over to expose that soft belly.

And if we are subject to the guilt of our ways… well, it washes off pretty well with the blood of our enemies.

Deal with it.

4

Don’t worry, the Government is here to protect you:

http://www.givethemback.com/pages/never

M_P

5

Civil rights have already suffered in the war on drugs and will suffer even more in the war on terror. I fear that, under a new president, all those diffuse formulated anti-terror laws could turn around to hit the American gunowners. Suddenly a terrorist is a guy who refuses to give up his assault weapon… Remember Ruby Ridge and Waco?

It was the same in “Great” Britain (chapter IX): http://www.guncite.com/journals/okslip.html

6

The only question we should concern ourselves with, is how much will we let the governement get away with before we say enough is enough?:confused:

Will it be when the next AWB is passed?

Will it be when new mags with capacities of greater than 20 rounds are banned?

Will it be when “arsenal” laws are passed, limiting you to owning two, perhaps three guns? (consider yourself lucky at three, afterall, you can’t hunt with three guns at once:rolleyes: )

Will it be when “ammo dumps” of greater than 500 rounds are outlawed?

Will it be when new mags with capacities of greater than 10 rounds are banned?

Will it be when all semi-auto centerfire rifles are required to be licensed?

Will it be when all semi-auto handguns are required to be licensed?

Will it be when any rifle with a pistol grip is banned?

Will it be when any rifle with a threaded barrel is banned?

Will it be when all the semi-auto centerfire rifles that were licensed for “crime scene ID” purposes are confiscated?

Will it be when all centerfire rifles, even bolt actions, are banned? (For being “long distance sniper rifles” of course)

Will it be when all semi-auto handguns are banned?

Will it be when all handguns are banned?

Will it be when all rimfire guns are banned?

Will it be when muzzle laoding guns are banned?

Will it be when BB guns are banned?

Will it be when toy guns are banned?

Will it be when knives are banned?

Or will it be when Baseball bats are banned?

If we don’t make a stand (politically or otherwise) eventually we will have nothing left to make a stand with.:mad:

7

I am with you. I am wondering why we kept them alive as prisoners at all. They are not soldiers, nor ad-hoc fighters as described by the Hague or Geneva Conventions. So why are they still alive? I am mistified how we treat terrorists like soldiers. During WWII I think we would have used them as parachute testers over the atlantic. Civilian combatants were called spies, and they were hung for spying, ect…

8

Let’s just say that Hillary gets elected President.

Let’s just say that a real or managed terrorist incident occurs shortly after she is sworn in.

Let’s just say that she issues a sweeping Executive Order banning public demonstrations or muzzles the press.

Let’s just say that a second incident (real or managed) occurs and the “public safety” requires her to declare marshall law and suspend constitutional protections.

Now who do you think will be the first ones she puts into concentration camps?

M_P

9

Now who do you think will be the first ones she puts into concentration camps?

No one is putting ME in a concentration camp.