Your thoughts on Firearm Registration

RF,
I quite agree, a nationwide ban is unlikely to the
point that I have no anxiety about it.

But things do change, especially with such a dedicated enemy.

EC
 
I am surprised at some of the posts on this thread.

A legitimate question has been asked. Answers have been given. The answers have been tested. Gentlemen: This is a time tested technique in getting to the truth. You test everything, you try to argue against everything, and then in the end you find what works. It is an excellent technique, trying to argue either side of a debate.


People have gotten upset with their answers being tested. What gives with all the "hurt feelings"? Ultimately even if Breacher ends up disagreeing with you, so what? That's America Baby! :cool:
 
Range - I think we agree about unnecessary information gathering, as you can see by my earlier post.

One of the problems I see is that registration (i., the record of a certain individual purchasing a certain item) of everything seems to be going on, from toasters to computers to whatever. And the registration is often not an option...it's something that could happen automatically during the purchase process. We are such an information-compiling society that I don't know how much longer we can fool ourselves into thinking that the goverment won't be able to derive from its varous information sources a pretty good inventory of all we own. It makes it its business to gather information.

Yeah, I've heard of cash, but all it takes is one swipe with the Visa or one record of you driver's license number during the purchase. Big Brother is a reality and I'm all for not volunteering any more information than I have to, but it's scary to consider how much information there already exists on you the individual.

Don't roll over on gun registration. I think what I'm trying to say is that information=power and if we give up that information we likely weaken ourselves and this right.
Click to expand...
What I'm most surprised at is your willingness to think "it couldn't happen to you". Funny enough, you're willing to point out the Calif. plague might spread to "certain areas", but you aren't concerned, in general.

I just don't see that happening on a large scale--they have more important things to do for 1, and for 2-99% of them are just like the rest of us. It's not just going to slip across someone's desk and then it happens without question. States like California, well, that's what happens when you get too many extreme-thinking radicals in one place---Trust me, I know. I live in Utah, it's the same on a completely different topic. But does that mean the "California gun plague" is going to spread like a disease through the rest of the country? In certain areas, yes. In all areas? Not a chance.
Click to expand...
Trust YOU? HAAHAAAAAAAHAAAAHhhhhhhhhhhhhh...no
But you feel free to trust whomever/whatever you want.
 
There's a difference between "not concerned" and "not OVERLY concerned". No, I'm not by-the-book familiar with California gun laws, but it's my understanding that Claifornia has a much more strict stand on gun laws, not necessarily an out-right ban on firearms in general. So there's a difference there too. The issue, as I see it, is that it's a battle being faught by extremists at both ends. Yes, there IS such a thing as a pro-gun extremist. And the problem with those battles are that very often everything each side uses for pursuasion against the other is highly exagerated--exageration tends to follow any extreme point of view. In a lot of issues (in general) where these battles are faught, the general public, both for and against, don't really have much of an active knowledge or interest in the issue directly. Hell, I'm almost sorry to say, but a lot of people will basically just do what they're told and believe what they hear from 'someone important'. But in the case of gun owners, I see a lot more individualism, a lot more free-thinking, and a lot more general knowledge/interest in what effects us as a whole. So no, I'm not that worried that a group of anti-gun legislators are going to be successful at sneaking in a full-scale firearm ban. Too many people pay too close attention for that to happen. But yes, they will pick apart little areas here and there, and call it a victory. That's just a fact. And not one I loose much sleep over.
 
At the risk of sounding extremist, might I say that it is your tendency to use absolutes
But yes, they will pick apart little areas here and there, and call it a victory. That's just a fact.
Click to expand...
In certain areas, yes. In all areas? Not a chance.
Click to expand...
which spurred my beefy buttocks into action to urge prudence, rather than disdain for the adversary.
Ain't neither side stoopid.
 
butch50 said:
People have gotten upset with their answers being tested. What gives with all the "hurt feelings"? Ultimately even if Breacher ends up disagreeing with you, so what? That's America Baby!
Click to expand...
Breacher is arguing for a policy that violates the Constitution. The Bill of Rights was written by a bunch of rather smart people who knew that despite Breacher's assurances-to-be, government cannot be trusted.

Furthermore, it is not a matter of Breacher merely agitating for a federal policy that violates the Constitution. Breacher is a sworn LEO, and as a result his arguments for registration take on a sinister tone, even before you consider his statements that he'll enforce just about any law the SCOTUS upholds.

I would like to see an amendment restricting civil liberties of full-time government employees. It is not "just a job." It is public service, and there should be restrictions on what government employees can do, even in their private lives... joining a publically visible forum and agitating for firearms registration would be a high crime.

Of course, it wouldn't fly, because the government has way too many employees, some of which are employed by agencies whose mission statements violate the Constitution. Gee, how did that happen?
 
You're right on the money there, Mohutley. Can't argue that if I wanted to--neither side is stupid for sure. I just try to keep that in mind and hope those who represent us can keep the anti's at least at a stalemate.
 
Tyme, what caused you to crusade against me personally? WTF???
So, let's get to it on then, GD...........
It is public service, and there should be restrictions on what government employees can do, even in their private lives.
Click to expand...
You know what, you never were in the military service. B/c if you were, you'd know that your life is under a hell of a lot more scrutiny than the average citizen is. You are also not a sworn memember of the gov't. For if you were, you'd know that each and every action you perform is a direct reflection of yourself, and the organization we work for. So, yes my PERSONAL LIBERTIES have been restricted for 15 years as I serve this great nation. It is the price I chose to pay to serve. So don't BS me with your holier than thou crap. It is easy for you to sit on your ass and write stuff, but have you ever had to stand for one thing, and be in contrast to another that you also stand for. It's a sorry situation. But, you have to chose. So, don't character assasinate me w/o knowing me.
 
The Bill of Rights was written by a bunch of rather smart people who knew that despite Breacher's assurances-to-be, government cannot be trusted.
Click to expand...


I had a thought strike me when I read this.

Back when our founders were the government, they would have admonished us, the citizenry, to watch them closely at all times, and never trust them. I am certain of this. They would have said, "Trust us? Are you kidding? We're the government! You watch us like a hawk, or it's your funeral."

Nowadays, the government is quick to argue how trustworthy it is, by word and deed. The very fact that it is attempting to insinuate itself into every facet of our lives that it can is proof that it wants us to think of it as trustworthy -- and because it is government, by its nature, it never can be!

And many many people -- far too many for my comfort -- look to government as though it were a trusted friend, who's always looking out for us. It's disturbing. :(

-blackmind
 
breacherup wrote:
So, yes my PERSONAL LIBERTIES have been restricted for 15 years as I serve this great nation. It is the price I chose to pay to serve. So don't BS me with your holier than thou crap.
Click to expand...

Did you ever stop to wonder why there is a PRICE to SERVING the country? It has never made sense to me that people who offer themselves, their service, their lives, to the defense or betterment of this country have to GIVE UP RIGHTS as they do so! That is F-d up.

But I guess you have chosen your course at least in part so that you can claim to be holier-than-holier-than-thou.



It is easy for you to sit on your ass and write stuff, but have you ever had to stand for one thing, and be in contrast to another that you also stand for. It's a sorry situation. But, you have to chose. So, don't character assasinate me w/o knowing me.
Click to expand...

Was it unknown to you that when you chose to serve, you would be required to enforce laws you didn't agree with? Did they blindside you with that? I doubt it.

So you made your choice. For whatever reasons, you wanted to have this job. You could have sold insurance. You could have been an auto mechanic. What ethical problems do those jobs confront you with? You can be making more money at those than at what you're doing, to boot. But you CHOSE the job that would put you in the middle between the rights of the people and the hunger of the government. Why is that?

-blackmind
 
Reasons to oppose

1. The Federal Constitution does not grant the federal government the right to register firearms.

Or am I late to the party with that position?

My oath to the Constitution precludes me from making my own decision of what is Constitutional or not.
Click to expand...
Hmm... This one?
''I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

How does this preclude making your own decision about what is Constitutional or not?

-Morgan
 
No, what's f---ed up is people who talk about all the freedoms they feel are being infringed upon but never seem to understand what those freedoms really are, where they came from, or who might have paid the price in question to help ensure they have such freedoms to begin with.
 
Is enjoyment of my American freedoms predicated on my thinking for even one moment about the sacrifices of those who fought to secure or defend them?

Because even though that would be the polite thing to do, I don't think it's required before a person goes ahead and exercises his rights and enjoys his freedoms.

-blackmind
 
CaesarI, that is the Oath of Enlistment, not the Oath of Office. Nice try, though...

Did you ever stop to wonder why there is a PRICE to SERVING the country? It has never made sense to me that people who offer themselves, their service, their lives, to the defense or betterment of this country have to GIVE UP RIGHTS as they do so! That is F-d up.
Click to expand...
And you never will........So let better people than you do that job, and just leave them to it, already.
 
You are gravely mistaken if you think you are "better people," breacherup.

All you've shown so far is that you aspire hard to be the kind of elitist LEO that we despise, because he thinks his job and his sacrifice are more important than the people whose rights he's supposed to be protecting.

-blackmind
 
Oh, and Caesar. That Oath of Enlistment does not give you the right to chose what is constitutional or not. Only to support and defend the Constitution (which, in this time and day, is dictated by the SCOTUS). And in your case, OBEY THE ORDER OF THE POTUS, AND THE OFFICERS APPOINTED OVER ME..........Therefore, you have less leway in what you can and cannot decide (tough job isn't it?).
 
No, Blackmind. The "better people" are those that have laid down there lives to support and defend the Constitition, and this great nation. Unfortunately, that does NOT include you.
 
There's a saying that goes something like "you never really appreciate what you have until it's gone". Don't knock the people who protect the rights you have, you'd be far worse without them. If you want to dispute that, do a little traveling and see some places where the rights we're discussing aren't even a dream.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top