Soback

And just to show you how abusive out government has become, and to prove to you that they spit in our faces every day while betting on the ignorance of US citizens, here: "No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state." ---Violated every single day, and every single hour. "No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one state, be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties in another." ---Same with this one. "No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time. " ---Go ahead and try to get those statements. "Section 10. No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. " ---Why do you think they abolished the gold standard, ILLEGALLY by the way. Because there's NO WAY that they would be able to pay for their spending if they had to back it up by silver or gold. Our corrupt government is draining this countrys strenght like the cancer that it is. "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;" ---And who would have known, the writings for patents is RIGHT there in our constitution. "Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence. " ---What form of government? Does it say democratic? Lets read it together, "...A REPUBLICAN form of government" http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/co...n.overview.html "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." ---Still thinking about this one. To me it seems like it's saying they can't make a law that will take away the first and given rights of the people. Which would mean that just by this statement ALONE, San Francisco has violated the bill of rights.

quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: quote:Originally posted by Prez: I hear what you're saying. But consider that the prevalence of private ownership was only intended to give a government with thoughts of turning to tyranny pause. Understanding that the populace is armed, and enforcement of unconstitutional power grabs and abridgement of God-given freedoms will not just be meekly accepted should be enough to prevent acts of blatant agression against the people of the U.S. Call it keeping them "honest", although honesty in the strictest sense is a dubious concept in government.Well, in my mind the only way a government would be turned from tyranny is if the public revolted. Surely they would continue down whatever path they chose until the public revolted against it. I don't think the mere threat of the public being armed keeps them honest or would prevent them from doing what they believed was in the best interest. of preserving this country. Now you could say it would never come to that because we have a democratically elected government, and if that's the case it brings into question the reasoning behind the right to bear arms in the first place. Does anyone believe that it's enough of a check to keep the government "honest" when they know full well they could crush any dissent with little effort? You see Grizzle, that's what happens when you don't know the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. The government is EXPLICITLY forbidden from using the military on it's own citizens. But because, I would even go as far as to say the MAJORITY of US citizens don't know the roots of their own country, they are allowing all these abuses to take place. Now tell me why you think this law was put in there? Also, WHY do you think the words "peoples right to bear arms should NOT be infringed upon". Can you put the two together? "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." ---Which means if the cop pulls you over, and asks you to look through your car, you SHOULD ask him on what basis and WHAT they are searching for. If he says drugs, or illicit substances, ect...you can say yes, HOWEVER if you have a gun, and he finds it, he CAN NOT charge you with illegal possesion because he wasn't searching for it in the first place. "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. " Now tell me how they HELL do they get away with a million dollars or more bail? Or $10,000 or more fines? They have thrown away our constitution decades ago. http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/...ocs/billeng.htm ""We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.ÔÇôThat to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,ÔÇôThat whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyc...entry/DeclarInd

quote:Originally posted by nomad: Feel naked without that illusion of security a gun gives you ? Pertinent insight about the cozyness of the society you live in, at least how you and a few others seem to perceive it You know what Nomad. When you were attacked that day, and those men handed you a gun (that you failed to use anyway), and protected you. I think that THEY shouldn't have had guns, and that way, we would have let nature take it's course. Sick and tired of people working to take care of those on wellfare, and then those on wellfare spit in our faces telling us they are opressed and missunderstood. Sick and tired of the strong protecting the weak, and then the weak spitting back at us, saying they don't need our protection, and as a matter of fact, we shouldn't even be able to protect ourselfs against the criminals (or rather we can, but with both hands tied behind our back). Lets just put it this way Nomad. If those men with GUNS weren't there to protect you that day, then we wouldn't have to deal with you here today.

Funny how the poor, the missunderstood and the opressed always want more. More money money in form of wellfare. More understanding in form of social benefits and services. More freedom at the cost of curtailing the freedoms of those who work to support them. The only initiative your poor take is going out to a rally, protest or riots to demand MORE. They never take the initiative to better their own lifes, and get off OUR BACKS. I came to US with LESS THAN 900 DOLLARS. So I don't even want to hear how someone is opressed. However, what you DID get right, is the opressed in France, but you got the WRONG population denomination. It's not the WELLFARE recepients who are opressed, it's those who HAVE to provide for them. Provide them with free food, free housing, free education, free medical care, free retirement, and free services. The WORKING people are opressed. And at the end of the day, they are the ones who will be picking up the tab for all the destruction, the hurt for all the injuries, and the consequences for all the damages. Your POOR will just go back to their kennels and recieve their usual allotments. If they expect others to take care of them like people take care of animals (providing them with shelter, feeding them, entertaining them, and giving them medical care, just like we would to our pets), then they behave like animals, well then, when an animal starts attacking it's keepers, it's time for them to be put down like animals.

quote:Originally posted by jamotto: and use it for what? Don't like your neighbor What you infringing on SC's right to own non leathal weapons now?

Here's a link for that page. http://www.medicinenet.com/posttraumatic_s...der/article.htm

"Not every traumatized person gets full-blown PTSD, or experiences PTSD at all. PTSD is diagnosed only if the symptoms last more than a month. In those who do develop PTSD, symptoms usually begin within 3 months of the trauma, and the course of the illness varies. Some people recover within 6 months, others have symptoms that last much longer." "PTSD affects about 5.2 million adult Americans.1 Women are more likely than men to develop PTSD.7 It can occur at any age, including childhood,8 and there is some evidence that susceptibility to PTSD may run in families.9 " http://www.nimh.nih.gov/publicat/anxiety.cfm#anx4

That traumatic experience you speak of Aperson, comes NOT from killing but from realizing how close YOU YOURSELF just came to death, and how it could be YOU lying there in a puddle of blood. For those in combat, it comes from seeing your life going through your mind, dozens of times a day. It comes from people shooting at you. Seeing others dying, realizing that it could be you. In home assault situation. It comes NOT from killing a criminal, but realizing what that criminal could have done to YOU if you failed to protect yourself. And understanding how fragile your life is. Understanding and feeling horrified at what could have happened to your wife, kids. That's the difference between feeling sad for anothers death, and having the post traumatic stress dissorder. "Post-traumatic stress disorder is defined in terms of the trauma itself and the person's response to the trauma. Trauma occurs when a person has experienced, witnessed, or been confronted with a terrible event that is an actual occurrence. Alternatively, the person may have been threatened with a terrible event, perhaps injury (physical or psychological) or death to themselves or others. Then, the person's response to the event or to the threat involves intense fear, helplessness, and/or horror. ***WHICH WOULD BE LESSENED OR NOT EVEN ENCOUNTERED IF THE PERSON EASILY GOT CONTROL OF THE SITUATION*, and what are those words again? HELPLESSNESS? FEAR, HORROR? Yeah, not having a gun to protect yourself while there's a criminal ramaging around your house, I wuold call the feelings you would encounter helplessness, fear, or horror. *** It is important to note, however, that having strong reactions to trauma is normal. What's more, there is a range (spectrum) of expected reactions depending on a person's prior exposure to trauma and even on hereditary (genetic) factors ***WHATS THAT? HEREDITARY FACTORS? MAYBE THAT'S WHAT WOULD EXPLAIN NOMADS REACTION, YOUR REACTION, OR SOMEONES LIKE KALSHIONS, JAGS, OR MY REACTION WOULD BE*** ."

What's that Nomad? You miraculously missed my posts? Kinda like when you started BS'ing that France wasn't socialist, and then when I posted links, quotes, and facts to back it up that France was socialist, you dissapeared. And then reapeared, like you haven't seen them, and forgetting the whole thing. When you make statements, back them up, or admit you were wrong. It's that easy. Second. What, you missed the post about the 10 year old? Still think he made that bomb himself? Still think that all it is is un-organized, poor youth? I guess you missed the post about the petrol bomb factory too? ROFL As far as firearms go. When your family was attacked, and you were handed a gun that you could barely lift, incompetent, and un-able to protect your family. How did that feel? Felt good? Thanks to the strong, brave people with guns, you and your family survived. Without them... well, you know what would happen. So next time you are walking in public, and a thug stops you with a knife to your wifes stomach, maybe even goes on stabbing spree at her, remember the simple truth. Nobody around you has a gun to stop him. So have fun watching your wife bleed, all the while keep repeating to yourself "I am safe from gun toting Rambos" As far as mental tests go, looks like your attitude is that of a suicidial mazohist, who instead of making it easy for everyone and taking his own life, continues going through life believing that being able to defend one self is a crime of nature, what's even worse, is that you think that government should FORCE other NORMAL people to addapt your call police, run, hide, beg for your life approach, and infringe on their right to protect themselfs. You are not Jesus, so really, instead of calling for gun owners to go through mental tests, people who believe the best way of defense is no defense at all should be the ones on a 3 year program.

You didn't answer the question. I'll ask it AGAIN. Since a terrorist is considered human (by you anyhow). Would you feel a moment of sadness seeing him gunned down before being able to blow himself up? Or how about something a little easier. If a criminal is holding a person hostage, with a gun to his head, and a sniper shoots that murderer. Would you feel a moment of sadness? Or how about this one. A criminal breaks into a home. And before he can cause any harm to it's inhabitants, the home owner kills the criminal. Would you feel sadness then? Or how about this one. A criminal breaks into YOUR home. Hits your father in the head a couple of times, knocks him out. Rapes your mother, maybe stabs your sister or brother. Then police come, and shoot him right in front of your eyes. You going to feel sad about that?

quote:Originally posted by nomad: I consult french press daily, and guess what ? There's not any criticism of conceptual politics be of the right or the left. What is in question is the integration model, who seems to be deficient independently of whoever rules. But I don't know, maybe that Soback, who doesen't seem to be able to read other things that pieces of news that someone has assessed as worth enough to be translated in english, knows better... Tonight, they arrested a 10 years old child with a petrol bomb. I guess he knew a lot about economy and politics, like the majority of the 253 youth arrested yesterday. Hey Nomad. Did your press daily tell you about this? http://www.dailypundit.com/newarchives/005705.php Or maybe it wasn't translated in French? Or Spanish? Or whatever other language you read. --Originally posted by Nomad: [*]"The point is that we are assisting to a domino-effect, where as the number of rioters increases, the civil forces are more and more stretched. It takes only 1 individual to set fire to a car. It takes more than a police officer at the right location and at the right time to catch him. Seeing Soback pretending that there's no way a child can build a petrol bomb without his parents teaching him, I guess our friend doesen't have a TV set with all these exquisite cultural films streaming all day long..." So Nomad, did that 10 year old build his own bomb? Did any of them build their own bombs? Was it a domino effect, or were they prepared for the riots, and if they were prepared, then by whom? I know, maybe 10 year olds got together, and planned all this, right? After all, 3 ten year olds is like 1 thirty year old. LOL, Who's blind now Nomad? "Police last night found a petrol bomb factory in a southern suburb of Paris, on France's tenth and worst consecutive night of violence. 1,300 vehicles were torched on France's worst night of violence so far Six youths, all aged under 18, were arrested in a raid on a building in Evry, south of Paris, where more than 100 bottles, gallons of fuel and hoods for hiding rioters' faces were found. Jean-Marie Huet, the Justice Ministry's director of criminal affairs and pardons, said the Police found: "150 bottles prepared for use as Molotov cocktails, of which 50 were ready to be used," and "tens of litres of gasoline and hoods". Saturday night's rioting was the most destructive so far as 1,300 vehicles were set alight and 349 people arrested, despite an enhanced police presence."

So do you feel momentarily passing sadness when a terrorist is shot dead before he had a chance to blow himself up at the checkpoint?

I don't know if you should be afraid, but I do know that if someone is coming along with you into that storm thinking that you will protect them, THEY should be terrified. And another thing, heading out into a storm without your gear is your thing. Liberals however, are not only throwing their gear away, they want to force others to head into that storm empty handed too. As far as lotto goes, if you don't play, you don't win. It's as simple as that. And don't try to missenterpet that as me saying you should gamble all your money away. And, about feelings of regret. Whenever I was in a fight that another person initiated, I've never felt regret about beating their sences back into them. What you fail to understand, is it's your life, your well being, and those who you care about, who depend on you to protect them who are infinetly more important than that which will hurt you or them. Notice that I say THAT. Those who initiate violence are to be treated as objects, not human, not animal. They are nothing more than a threat that needs to be neutralized. Because of people like you, France right now is burning. Because of people feeling sorry for those "youths", a woman was sprayed with gasoline and lit on fire. Can you imagine what it feels like burning alive? If that woman had friends who could prevent that by shooting the assailants to death, you would feel bad for them? This is just sick. It's like feeling bad for a child molestor. Or feeling bad for a murderer that took anothers life, getting executed. Which one needs mental services? People with your mentality, or those of Kalshions?

quote:Originally posted by Aperson: I'd pity anyone who thought I could protect their life. Should I find it humourous that you think I have or will have a social life? [/QB]What more can I say that Aperson hasn't?

As far as that 1% chance goes, my friend had lasic corrective vision surgery done. It's less than 0.3% of anything going wrong, in ONE eye. He had his BOTH eyes messed up, FOR LIFE. So keep on rolling the dice on that 1%. One day it will come up, and if you are not ready, I pity you and those who trusted you with their safety. Feeling remorse for someone who tried killing your niece? Or hurting your family? Feeling remorse for someone who broke into your house, tried killing your niece, or hurting your family, THAT is what's "not really healthy".

quote:Originally posted by nomad: To get back to this thread, I was right on policies and even got the correct day: french authorities have announced yesterday night that curfews will be imposed in critical zones and tolerance will be lowered. Oh, everybody, breaking news. I just wanted to make sure everyone saw this. The FRENCH authorities, made an announcement. Cerfews in critical zones, and TOLERANCE will be lowered. ROFL That's right, instead of getting attention by burning down a woman and 5 cars, you will now get it with only 3 cars and an infant. And authorities have LOWERED their tolerance to that new level. (Is that kinda like Orange in US? Nah, cause here it took 2 high rises and thousands dead to get it to red, so theirs must be like dark green or something.) We better watch what we say about the incompetence in France. I hear their intelligence is very good, and with lower tolerance levels, they might consider us a higher threat than those rioters, after all, they can just send spam and DOS attacks on our internet, rioters on the other hand, if they tried to control them, they might shoot back. No wonder it's been over a week, their intelligence is looking into a better way to control the situation. LOL BTW, I saw the video on the news yesterday. So much wealth wasted. So much work destroyed, and so much harm done to people. Those French authorities are USELESS. Maybe, just maybe, the French will learn that, and wake up to the notion that they alone are responsible for their government and their lives. Not the other way around, of government being responsible for them. But then again, they are socialists.

I guess France's intelligence failed completly in collecting informatin about such a huge brewing uprising. And once it has errupted, they again, are failing completly at combating it.

"They are rioting in Denmark over a cartoon that they feel disrespects their pedophile cut throat "prophet," Muhammad. " Yeah, I bet people don't know that Muhammad's brother had a 9 year old wife. Muhammad was in love with her (yeah, with a 9 year old girl), and miraculously he had a vision in which God told him that his brothers wife is to be HIS wife. So he had his brother divorce her (or however they had to separate), and has taken that 9 year old for himself. ALL of his visions are self serving. Every single one of them delivering him either some sick gratification or power. How he could ever have been named a prophet is mind boggling.

Yeah, and that's SO TRUE. Here, last year, some teenage punk was dragging a teenage girl down the street for 5 BLOCKS, that's FIVE BLOCKS, by her hair, while she was kicking and screaming for help. He ended up killing her. How many people helped? ZERO. They all stared, and some called the cops, which obviously didn't get there in time. Tell that girls parents that guns should be illegal. Or that they don't prevent crime. If at least ONE citizen had a gun, he would have interviened and at the very least scared that murderer away. And no matter, you can say how dispicable that act was, how horrible it is, and how you send your condolences to the family, YOU are the ones who wouldn't have done anything to prevent it. You can beat your chest all you want, and say that you would have intervened, your posts here however tell a different story. Here, in privacy of anonymity, you show exactly who you are. And the MOST you would have done is pull out your cell and dialed 911. Just like the rest of those incompetents did. Yeah, society is when people work together. LOL, right Grizzle, you mean work together to loot people of ability. And I don't mean just monetarily, I mean our skills, our knowledge, our competence, our courage, our bravery, and our freedoms. All you do is weaken us, make it impossible to live our lives, and destroy the country from within. Making it impossible for us to protect ourselfs. Be it from the rioting barbarians in France, to the looting legal and illegal scum in US.

If you haven't been robbed yet. Someday, chances are, you will. If your house haven't been broken into yet. Chances are, someday it will. If you haven't been a victim of violent crime. Chances are, you will be. If your wife hasn't been assaulted in your own home. Chances are, she will be. It only takes ONE time for something to happen to screw up your life. Interesting to see if you will be laughing when it does happen. I would feel sorry for your significant others, your family, kids, wife, friends, ect...because in a bad situation, you are completly incompetent in protecting them. But then again, it's their choice to trust those who can't protect them with their lives. I'm sure you can tell those French that did get assaulted, robbed, their property torched that the government will always protect them. If they were anti gun before, or had their weapons taken away from them, those that did get affected by these riots would spit in your face now if you tried telling them that.

quote:Originally posted by Aperson: Yep, and Canada has a lower crime rate, and a lower homicide rate, than America*. And yet, we don't need to bear arms. Either this proves the "Weapons decrease crime rate" philosophy wrong or Canada dosn't follow the same rules of behavior as the rest of the world (neither would be particulary surprising). Granted, the number of people who bear arms or not might only be a small factor in crime rate with other things, such as culture, have a bigger impact. * At least as far as I can judge from US goverment sites, as they make the Canadian goverment websites look good. http://www.saf.org/JFPP14ch5.htm Also, interesting to note, when Clinton was in office, crime rates sky rocketed, when Conservatives are in office, they drop. Not linking crime rates to administrations, but nevertheless it's interesting. "The drop in the criminal violence is much more dramatic in the US than it is in Canada (Gannon 2001). Over the past decade, the Canadian homicide rate has declined about 25%, but the violent crime rate has not changed. In the US during the same time period, both the homicide and the violent crime rates have plummeted by more than 40%. We can't credit gun laws entirely with this success. In both countries, the aging population has helped bring down crime rates, and, in the US, long jail sentences for violent criminals has also been effective." "Nevertheless, gun laws have played an important role in reducing crime rates in the US. Since 1986, more than 25 states have passed new laws encouraging responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. As a result, the numbers of armed Americans in malls and in their cars has grown to almost 3 million men and women. As surprising as it is to the media, these new laws have caused violent crime rates to drop, including homicide rates. In his scholarly book, More Guns, Less Crime, Professor John Lott shows how violent crime has fallen faster in those states that have introduced concealed carry laws than in the rest of the US (Lott 2000). His study is the most comprehensive analysis of American crime data ever completed. He shows that criminals are rational enough to fear being shot by armed civilians. "

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b7f78c351b6.htm Monarchist philosopher Jean Bodin, writing in 1606, denounced free speech and arms possession by commoners. Subjects must be disarmed to prevent democratic sedition, he said. The Swiss proved, Bodin wrongly averred, that arms bearing was "the cause of an infinite number of murders." The Swiss militia model, however, preserved democracy and held Europe's despots at bay. In fact, it inspired the rebellious American colonists. John Adams praised the democratic Swiss Cantons, where every man was entitled to vote on laws and to bear arms. Patrick Henry, another American Founding Father, lauded the Swiss for maintaining their independence without "a mighty and splendid President" or a standing army. The Swiss influence is clear in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which provides: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Today, it has become fashionable to hate this orphan of the Bill of Rights. However, a quick glance at history shows that tyrannical governments kill far more than do private criminals. But first, governments must disarm their victims. In 1933, the Nazis seized power via massive search-and-seizure operations for firearms against "Communists," i.e., all political opponents. In 1938, during the Night of the Broken Glass, they disarmed the Jews. When the Nazis occupied Europe in 1939-41, they proclaimed the death penalty for any person who failed to surrender all firearms within 24 hours. There may be various reasons why the Nazis did not invade Switzerland, but one of those reasons is that every Swiss man had a rifle at home. For this we have no better record than the Nazi invasion plans, which stated that, because of the Swiss shooting skills, Switzerland would be difficult to conquer and pacify.

This is what happens when you take away guns from the population. Or when you have liberal population that is allergic to guns. They can't even defend themselfs. Instead, it has been almost a week, and the riots just continue, destroying everything in sight. Waiting for the government to take care of things, as always. This is just yet ANOTHER proof, government is never the answer, and they NEVER protect the citizens, just like the police, they are there AFTER the crime, to take down the report, that is if there's any of the victims are alive to give one.

quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: quote:Originally posted by Soback: You think US was established on principles of anarchy? No. I'm speaking in broader terms, to a time when our ancestors evolved to a point when they realized that working together was a much better way to ensure the survival of our species. You know the old two heads are better than one theory. Working together. Kinda like me working at producing, and them working at collecting? Or kinda like me working at producing, and them working on giving MY money to non earners? Two heads better than one? Are they still better when one head earns food, and the other gets to eat it? Because then the other head is just a parasite that needs to be amputated.

quote:Originally posted by Aperson: You'd lose then, as politics is popular vote more or less. Well, in that case at least you are admiting that as US keeps on degenerating on it's socialist path. There will be more wellfare recepients, more leeches, more liberals, more criminals and more scum. Those are the ones who will feel threatened and will literally vote for their survival with their vote against me. Seeing as if there will be more of them, and less of the productive people, the only way it will end is collapse. In which case, look two posts up. Strong people will rise, build a new US, and get rid of the scum. Either way, it's a win/win. It's tough, but collapse would probably be better, 80% of the work to bring about a new US will be done by the socialists themselfs. And there would be no wrangling once it all goes down. It will be either you survive, or you don't.