NRA Spy Infiltrates Highest Level of Gun Control Lobby for 10 Years

[NeoV]

"Originally posted by: NeoV
I'm really sick and tired of the pro-gun crowd leaning on the crutch of the 2nd amendment, which has ZERO relevance in today's world. Not a single one of you bought a gun thinking "boy, if the US government ever goes apeshit, I'm ready to join the local militia".

You want a gun for hunting? Fine.

You want a gun for self defense? Fine. Concealed carry? There are pro's and con's to that one.

You want to collect guns? Fine.

You want a gun(s) to protect yourselves from your own government? Give me a F'ing break - it's complete and utter BS.

The amendment should be thrown out and re-written, and the crappy laws we have in place for selling guns need to be re-written and actually enforced as well.

note - even though plenty of you are going to come charging in saying ridiculous things - I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to own guns as long as you are a law-abiding citizen.


Not true. That is the reason for my owning certain types of weapons."

Then you are even more clueless than I thought...

 

[manowar821]

"You want a gun(s) to protect yourselves from your own government? Give me a F'ing break - it's complete and utter BS."

Then enjoy choking down that despot dong, in however many years. Moron.

 

[NeoV]

yah - I'm the moron on this one....

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Craig234
So your answer to my question is that you think the history of laws banning military weapons like RPG's, machine guns, tanks for that matter, is the Congress and the Courts behaving in violation of the constitution, and you predict that we'll those restrictions relaxed in the next decade?

The issue was never really brought to the Supreme Court before (the individual right bit.) And the government flat out lost the case to regulate machine guns under the NFA in Illinois. They chose not to appeal it beyond the Federal District Court because the judges reasoning was a bulletproof gaurantee of sinking the machine gun ban nationwide. Look up United States vs. Rock Island Armory. To quote from Wiki:
""...since enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), the Secretary has refused to accept any tax payments to make or transfer a machine gun made after May 19, 1986, to approve any such making or transfer, or to register any such machine gun. As applied to machine guns made and possessed after May 19, 1986, the registration and other requirements of the National Firearms Act, Chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code, no longer serve any revenue purpose, and are impliedly repealed or are unconstitutional." "

The NFA is still unenforcable in the jurisdiction of that court to this day.

I wasn't asking you for the court information, though, but for your position. Did I summarize *your* views accurately? Thanks for the additional comments, though.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: Craig234
So your answer to my question is that you think the history of laws banning military weapons like RPG's, machine guns, tanks for that matter, is the Congress and the Courts behaving in violation of the constitution, and you predict that we'll those restrictions relaxed in the next decade?

The issue was never really brought to the Supreme Court before (the individual right bit.) And the government flat out lost the case to regulate machine guns under the NFA in Illinois. They chose not to appeal it beyond the Federal District Court because the judges reasoning was a bulletproof gaurantee of sinking the machine gun ban nationwide. Look up United States vs. Rock Island Armory. To quote from Wiki:
""...since enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), the Secretary has refused to accept any tax payments to make or transfer a machine gun made after May 19, 1986, to approve any such making or transfer, or to register any such machine gun. As applied to machine guns made and possessed after May 19, 1986, the registration and other requirements of the National Firearms Act, Chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code, no longer serve any revenue purpose, and are impliedly repealed or are unconstitutional." "

The NFA is still unenforcable in the jurisdiction of that court to this day.

I wasn't asking you for the court information, though, but for your position. Did I summarize *your* views accurately? Thanks for the additional comments, though.

Yes, you did summarize my view accurately. The government has been acting in an unconstitutional manner to restrict access to arms for some time now. It all started when they thought there was going to be a revolution during the depression, so they de facto banned the weapons of war from civilian hands.

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah - I'm the moron on this one....

More of a pre-emptive defeatist, I'd say. Any French blood in you? :laugh:

I think you're just grossly underestimating the power and efficiency of a modern insurgency. One guy with one rifle who knows what he's doing can disable an M1 Abrams tank (the instructions for doing so were briefly posted on AR15.com a couple weeks ago.) It's not as if the .gov could carpet bomb American cities, then they would cease to be the government (they would no longer be chosen to rule) and would be a hostile invading force of some sort. That defeats the purpose of trying to govern. Even if they didn't give up at that point, there would be massive defections, plus foreign powers would rush in to stop them (Good ol' Canada.)

 

[AAjax]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah - I'm the moron on this one....

I agree, you are

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: NeoV
yah - I'm the moron on this one....

Okay, we all agree with that; but the topic of the thread is guns.