100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Las Vegas shooting | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Argo
on
Fri 10/06/17 10:26 PM
|
|
the idea that any single individual needs a full-auto
long gun to do *battle against the forces of a tyrannical government who are oppressing the citizenry is laughable.. without, at least, a third of all military personnel to defect and join the citizen resistance, provide commandeered weapons, ammunition and the know how to operate them, you have zero chance to remove the tyrants from power... the resistance to tyranny needs your body, WE will arm you, WE will organize you and WE will fight along side you... #DontBringaPopGuntoWar. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Its not against the law in Nevada. Conversion kits are sold legally there.
And I was just watching channel 7 news. They purchased a conversion kit for a assault rifle ( semi auto to full auto) yesterday and had it today. The delivery address was NYC. They purchased it from Wal- Mart.com But I agree with the hidden agendas and lobbying that is still very evident in Washington. And I agree that good ole American greed (which is evident in the case of Wal - Mart) is alive and well.... they ship a conversion kit to NYC... Ya got to be kidding me. Wow Didn't know they were legal there. What really confusing to me is the fact that this guy had no religion or political affiliation. Everything has to have a motive. Doesn't make sense. He was evil deep down or became evil overtime. maybe he had a brain tumor he had no political or religious affiliation is just the 'first reports', give it a couple weeks for more details to emerge This man had hundreds of complaints about 'suspicious' behavior and had stockpiled weapons, not likely that he was a quiet and friendly neighbor or citizen ... he had no reason to feel he had to be with that type of fire power he was not some squeaky clean citizen X who must have just snapped,, this was something they don't want to share too carelessly is all Well, this is the first I am hearing of the 100's of complaints. Nothing in the non stop news coverage states anything like that.. at all. Actually just the opposite. Who wee these complainers? Can you shed some light on this claim? its already gone.. as I said, its good to wait a few weeks for 'verified' information ... ? what do you mean " its already gone", you can't surf the T.V. without still seeing it. you claimed there were 100's of complains against this guy. which if you are correct would already been verified thru the Police because those are the entities who take and investigate the complains.. right? Every top ranking law enforcement officer in NV has already commented or given interviews to the press. from state to local. Yet, none of these people mentioned complaints lodged against this guy.. and they were grilled about it from the press. Neighbors to were interviewed.. as was his family...friends.. nothing. Now certainly all these people are not lying.. right?. I mean after all don't you think the first thing the T.V. stations did was dig thru his brush ins with the law?... nothing there. You made the claim. And I asked for back up to that claim. 10O's of complains, right? But you don't have any.. do you. the 'it' is not the shooting, the 'it' is the story on the shooters complaints I didnt say I saw it TV, first of all I read it on an internet page, second of all I cannot find the internet page any longer, third of all and I have explained that I no longer can find the page, fourth of all so, no, I can't back it up, because it came from the internet, which is my entire point when I say its best to wait for the 'verified' facts ... This man had hundreds of complaints about 'suspicious' behavior _________________________________________________________________ yes, it is prudent to wait for ... facts, and not to go by some phantom web page for ones information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So it's a God given right to own firearms in America to be treated, free of charge for a random gunshot wound is not? I'm not going to comment further on the subject Amend the Amendment! 
actually, it's our "inalienable" right... whatever that means....but it's our right... Not to be TOO picky, but I think you have a couple of documents mixed up with this. The word "inalienable" or "unalienable" does not appear in the Constitution. It's in the Declaration of Independence, which is not a legal document of the United States. Nevertheless, you're correct that in the Constitution it says that we have a right to "keep and bear arms," although that isn't quite the same as "owning" them. But we can get lost yet again, debating the very extensive challenges of the Constitution, and will get nowhere yet again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So it's a God given right to own firearms in America to be treated, free of charge for a random gunshot wound is not? I'm not going to comment further on the subject Amend the Amendment!
actually, it's our "inalienable" right... whatever that means....but it's our right... Not to be TOO picky, but I think you have a couple of documents mixed up with this. The word "inalienable" or "unalienable" does not appear in the Constitution. It's in the Declaration of Independence, which is not a legal document of the United States. Nevertheless, you're correct that in the Constitution it says that we have a right to "keep and bear arms," although that isn't quite the same as "owning" them. But we can get lost yet again, debating the very extensive challenges of the Constitution, and will get nowhere yet again. the only thing that bothers me with this and other attacks of the constitution is how hard the government tries to change/delete it... seems like they hate that piece of paper our country was founded on... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We live in a world of greed and crimes, people are dying everyday and nothing can't be changed. That's very sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So it's a God given right to own firearms in America to be treated, free of charge for a random gunshot wound is not? I'm not going to comment further on the subject Amend the Amendment!
actually, it's our "inalienable" right... whatever that means....but it's our right... Not to be TOO picky, but I think you have a couple of documents mixed up with this. The word "inalienable" or "unalienable" does not appear in the Constitution. It's in the Declaration of Independence, which is not a legal document of the United States. Nevertheless, you're correct that in the Constitution it says that we have a right to "keep and bear arms," although that isn't quite the same as "owning" them. But we can get lost yet again, debating the very extensive challenges of the Constitution, and will get nowhere yet again. the only thing that bothers me with this and other attacks of the constitution is how hard the government tries to change/delete it... seems like they hate that piece of paper our country was founded on... Well, some of that is, I'm sure, a matter of point of view. For pretty much everyone, when the Constitution seems to you to say something you like, and someone else, in or out of the government says they oppose it, it's common to think they are the one being anti-constitutional. But the Constitution was written by people who were trying to be pretty general a lot of the time, precisely to avoid fighting too much, and in lots of places, they said things in ways which even as they wrote them, was ambiguous. Often on purpose, in order to get the thing approved. In the end,they included ways to change it, precisely because they realize it would need to BE changed from time to time. Pretty smart guys, all in all, but hardly gods on earth. And of course, you can look at someone with ambitions to lead the country in new (or old) directions, in more than one way. When they are cleverly finding ways to read the Constitution so that something you like is okay (even though you and they know that you're stretching things), that might come across to you as showing brave and creative leadership; while when they do the exact same thing in ways you disagree with, you might want to demand that they be hung as traitors. The only reason why we have a nationwide system of interstate highways, among other thing that lots of people who think they are strict constructionists like, is because of people reading things into the Constitution that were never explicitly there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the idea that any single individual needs a full-auto long gun to do *battle against the forces of a tyrannical government who are oppressing the citizenry is laughable.. without, at least, a third of all military personnel to defect and join the citizen resistance, provide commandeered weapons, ammunition and the know how to operate them, you have zero chance to remove the tyrants from power... the resistance to tyranny needs your body, WE will arm you, WE will organize you and WE will fight along side you... #DontBringaPopGuntoWar. I agree, mostly it's "macho bravado" motivating the quest for the ultimate killing weapon. Most of it is harmless until one nut pulls a trigger. I heard that the "Bump Stock" is selling as fast as they can get them also heard that they frequently jam the gun too. But they gotta have one. It's crazy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We live in a world of greed and crimes, people are dying everyday and nothing can't be changed. That's very sad. It is sad, but I think some things can change right now. Starting with the easy one first Conversion kits ( semi auto to full auto) ban the sale of them. There is absolutely no need for them.. none. The news channel I watched the other day ( channel 7 NYC) had one shipped overnight from Wal - Mart.com right to their Manhattan building. I am in Manhattan every day, 100's of people on the streets at any given time. throw in 1 nut or terroist with fully automated weapons and you have the same exact scenario as Las Vegas |
|
|
|
|
