1) You can hardky accuse me of dismissing all with one liners. My position has been clearly stated maybe 25 times and you keep trying to make me something I am not. Typing all of this again is very tedious, so I suggest you read yesterday's posts.
2)Camp David is in Maryland. Some of the southern states have unusual laws. I am sure that the preident's retreat is exempt from many laws. another example: I can fish in a river that flows by my porperty in Virginia without a license.
3) I agree that currrent laws should be enforced. Why aren't they?
4) Why does anyone need a 30 round magazine in an assault rifle? You are surely not hunting anything but people with a rig like that. And as Bubba said - the only you need cop killer bullets is to kill cops.
5) I guess you didn't go to college. And if you can remember the 60's you weren't really there. Does the law really mean EVER or does it mean that you shouldn't have a blunt and get your gun. After all, wasn't chenely a little tipsy on his ill-fated hunting trip?
6) I will always believe that my right to life is more sacred than yours to have an arsenal in your garage. Teachers should NEVER be armed - we have the wrong mnind set to be effective security. Besides that, I don't need anything else to do during a school day. There is a Latino woman in the foyer at school and I will let her take care of what comes thru the door..after all, it's her job as a cop and as SRO.
7) There is nothing dense about my reasnableness. Ya'll think you can't change my mind. Well, enjoy your wet dream of being a hero blasting away. It ain't gonna happen. L
-----Original Message-----
From: old fashion liberal <jgg1000@hotmail.com>
To: opendebateforum <opendebateforum@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 3, 2013 5:05 pm
Subject: Re: There are people who illegally use guns and ammo
-- From: old fashion liberal <jgg1000@hotmail.com>
To: opendebateforum <opendebateforum@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 3, 2013 5:05 pm
Subject: Re: There are people who illegally use guns and ammo
No Lynn. The point is by the standard currently used under law, anyone who used illegal substances (as Obama admits to) is banned from using or owning guns or ammo... But that is the broad bush of statuary law... One could think that you tolerate what to you seems to be reasonable exception to statuary law (some call this placing Obama or whomever above the law... Should an ex-felon be allowed to shot skeet??? A man who owes money on child support??? Someone accused of domestic violence???
Do you really think by ignoring the non enforcement of current law will ensure the enforcement of new laws??? Perhaps instead of emotive badly written laws we should rewrite AND enforce current laws...
Should currents laws be enforced??? If not, which laws should we ignore by your dense of reasonableness??? And why??? That Lynn is what you should address yourself to rather than dismissive and dishonest one liners...
On Sunday, February 3, 2013 5:28:05 PM UTC-5, Lynne wrote:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebateforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to opendebateforum@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Do you really think by ignoring the non enforcement of current law will ensure the enforcement of new laws??? Perhaps instead of emotive badly written laws we should rewrite AND enforce current laws...
Should currents laws be enforced??? If not, which laws should we ignore by your dense of reasonableness??? And why??? That Lynn is what you should address yourself to rather than dismissive and dishonest one liners...
On Sunday, February 3, 2013 5:28:05 PM UTC-5, Lynne wrote:
really now - you reaLLY THINK THAT SHOOTING SKEET AND SHOOTING CHILDREN ARE THE SAME THING?--
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Talbot <larry....@hotmail.com>
To: opendebateforum <opendeb...@googlegroups.com >
Sent: Sun, Feb 3, 2013 4:17 pm
Subject: RE: There are people who illegally use guns and ammo
Poor jiggly. Mr. "Strawman" creator himself.--
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2013 11:42:35 -0800
From: jgg...@hotmail.com
To: opendeb...@googlegroups.com
Subject: There are people who illegally use guns and ammo
Under current law which is not enforced. So instead of seeking more consistent enforce, many seek new restrictions that suit their ideology... Under this law, assuming Obama did no lie in his book, Obama deliberately broke Federal guns by shooting skeet... Who on the Left will demand Obama be charged??? Who on the Left will grant others the SAME RIGHT to break the law without punishment??? If there is an exception for Obama, should it also be available to other Americans??? Under the law use of "illegal substances" bar you from gun or ammo use or ownership...
How is the Left or the NRA going to square this circle without hypocrisy???
http://ace.mu.nu/
>>>
Lets have a round of applause for 18 USC 922 (g)
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1) who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
(2) who is a fugitive from justice;
(3) who is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
(4) who has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution;
(5) who, being an alien—
(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26)));
(6) who has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;
(8) who is subject to a court order that—
(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate;
(B) restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and
(C)
(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or
(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or
(9) who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
Another point for consideration is the "unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance" language. "Unlawful user" is pretty absolutist language, it has no expiration date. It prohibits anyone who ever burned down a splif or partook in a bit of nose candy at a party. Strictly speaking, Obama broke Federal law by touching that shotgun since he's openly admitted he used illegal drugs in the past.
"Medical" marijuana aficionados? Prohibited.
Doctors who've dipped into their sample closets? Prohibited.
Anyone who's been to a rave and did some E? Prohibited.
Anyone who took some Vicodin that wasn't prescribed for them? Prohibited
etc, etc, etc
There's more in this snip of actual law worth of the "national discussion", but this should be enough to get some NO BULLSHIT dialog about started. If people want something changed, they should be able to state how the existing law should be amended. No more gauzy hand waving and BS emotional appeals.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDeb...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateFor...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebatefor...@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to opendeb...@googlegroups.com .
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out .
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDeb...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateFor...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebatefor...@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to opendeb...@googlegroups.com .
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out .
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebateforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to opendebateforum@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opendebateforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to opendebateforum@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opendebateforum?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment