Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-26-2009, 08:42 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,356 posts, read 26,481,472 times
Reputation: 11348

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
Then perhaps the government should re-evaluate the militia requirements, as Switzerland does. Over there, each citizen is required to attend target practice and gets to keep their assault rifle at the end of their stint. This promotes gun safety and responsibility, and drastically reduces crime as criminals know that most citizens are comfortable and accurate with their firearms.

Until the gubmint does this, I will assume that militia refers to civilians, so I am entitled to own whatever I wish regardless of what some empty suits in DC say.
The federal Militia Acts until 1903 required all able bodied males of military age to own firearms and ammunition...and in most states were required to train regularly (though enforcement got to be very lax towards the end of the 19th century...).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-26-2009, 12:10 PM
 
1,140 posts, read 2,074,409 times
Reputation: 1672
Thank you for the link! Rejoined!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 02:57 PM
 
Location: The Circle City. Sometimes NE of Bagdad.
24,445 posts, read 25,978,821 times
Reputation: 59788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridgewalker View Post
I posted this offer in the general US forum and it got taken down and I re'cd an infraction.

Too funny...I have gotten several messages, rep points, etc. thanking me for this, even a few Mods are chiming in with their thanks. BUT...one other mod isn't so open minded, you might even say they are UN-American!
Probably taken down for "cross posting" which is against the TOS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 03:24 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,113,952 times
Reputation: 9409
I believe this is part of the NRA knowing what's coming from the Obama Administration regarding our 2nd Amendment rights, and preparing to make an all out stand for those rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 03:25 PM
 
Location: The Woods
18,356 posts, read 26,481,472 times
Reputation: 11348
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
I believe this is part of the NRA knowing what's coming from the Obama Administration regarding our 2nd Amendment rights, and preparing to make an all out stand for those rights.
+1. Gets as many people in for the upcoming fight as possible.

And, eventually many who took the free membership will renew their membership.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2009, 07:42 AM
 
1,472 posts, read 2,629,475 times
Reputation: 564
Default thanks!

Just signed up hubby!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2009, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,271,474 times
Reputation: 11416
Quote:
Originally Posted by allydriver View Post
You make an "offer like this" when the President has a verifiable history of being hostile to the Second Amendment.
Every member counts.
Once again, I'm going to ask you to provide some credible links to your assertion.
You neglected to provide them the last two times I asked, maybe you'll be able to back up your opinion statement with facts this time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2009, 08:05 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 26,996,167 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl View Post
Once again, I'm going to ask you to provide some credible links to your assertion.
You neglected to provide them the last two times I asked, maybe you'll be able to back up your opinion statement with facts this time.
The problem is "credible" as defined by who? You?
I'm guessing unless it's in Huffington,the daily kos or moveon it's not credible right? Er, I mean left?
I'll post some for you...

In March 2004, the Illinois Senate passed Senate Bill 2165, a law introduced in response to DeMar's case, with provisions designed to assert a right of citizens to protect themselves against home invasions, such that self-defense requirements would be viewed to take precedence over local ordinances against handgun possession. The measure passed the Illinois Senate by a vote of 38-20. Barack Obama was one of the 20 state senators voting against the measure.

Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, “No, my writing wasn’t on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns.”
Actually, Obama’s writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:
a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.
b. ban assault weapons? Yes.
c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama voted for a bill in the Illinois senate that allowed retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons. If there was any issue on which Obama rarely deviated, it was gun control. He was the most strident candidate when it came to enforcin and expanding gun control laws. So this vote jumped out as inconsistent.
When I queried him about the vote, he said, “I didn’t find that [vote] surprising. I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry. This was a narrow exception in an exceptional circumstance where a retired police officer might find himself vulnerable as a consequence of the work he has previously done--and had been trained extensively in the proper use of firearms.“

It wasn’t until a few weeks later that another theory came forward about the uncharacteristic vote. Obama was battling with his GOP opponent to win the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police.


Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.

Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2009, 08:22 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,862,853 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by chielgirl View Post
Once again, I'm going to ask you to provide some credible links to your assertion.
You neglected to provide them the last two times I asked, maybe you'll be able to back up your opinion statement with facts this time.
  • Opposed bill okaying illegal gun use in home invasions. (Aug 2008)
  • Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
  • FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
  • April 2008: "Bittergate" labeled Obama elitist. (Apr 2008)
  • Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
  • Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
  • 2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
  • Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
  • Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
  • Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
  • Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
  • Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
  • Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)
Barack Obama on the Issues
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-27-2009, 08:34 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,191,594 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
And not pointless since the SCOUS has determined that there is indeed an individual right exclusive of any membership in a militia.

See D.C v Heller , 554 U.S. ___ (2008)

too bad you did not quote the rest of my post.

it still stands that the "people" in all the rest of the Amendments are the same "people" in the 2nd Amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:07 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top