Gun laws ~ Gun Control

Gun control is having a steady hand and having a CCW cause you CAN! Talk about: Guns - Knives - Self Defense - Survival
WE DON'T NEED GUN CONTROL, WE NEED CRIMINAL/VIOLENCE CONTROL.

Re: Gun laws

Postby andysbeef » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:03 am

Remember... four boxes keep us free: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box.
DON'T LIKE GUNS? DON'T BUY ONE! There, now wasn't that easy?
Background Checks? Good idea Barack'O, let's start with you!
Attachments
My Family.jpg
My Family.jpg (15.96 KiB) Viewed 9266 times
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Re: Gun laws

Postby andysbeef » Mon Oct 07, 2013 3:22 pm

Efficient Gun Control that makes sense.
In 1863 a Democrat shot and killed Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States .
In 1881 a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield, President of the United States , who later died from the wound.
In 1963 a radical left wing socialist shot and killed John F. Kennedy, President of the United States .
In 1975 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at Gerald Ford, President of the United States .
In 1983 a registered Democrat shot and wounded Ronald Reagan, President of the United States .
In 1984 James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonalds restaurant.
In 1986 Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
In 1990 James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
In 1991 George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby's cafeteria.
In 1995 James Daniel Simpson, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 5 coworkers in a Texas laboratory.
In 1999 Larry Asbrook, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 8 people at a church service.
In 2001 a left wing radical Democrat fired shots at the White House in a failed attempt to kill George W. Bush, President of the US .
In 2003 Douglas Williams, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people at a Lockheed Martin plant.
In 2007 a registered Democrat named Seung - Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
In 2010 a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
In 2011 a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
In 2012 Andrew Engeldinger, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 7 people in Minneapolis .
In 2013 a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school.
In 2013 (Sept.) an angry Democrat shoots 12 at a Navy ship yard.
One could go on, but you get the point, even if the media does not. Clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns.

No NRA member, Tea Party member, or Republican conservatives are involved.

SOLUTION: It should be illegal for Democrats to own guns.

Best idea I've heard to date....remember, it's the Democrats that are making all the fuss about 'Gun Control'.
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Re: Gun laws ~ Gun Control

Postby andysbeef » Wed Oct 09, 2013 5:20 pm

I love it when a plan comes together!!!!
Interesting! Plus each of the 4 cities shown below are probably 75% Black....a connection?
J & A.jpg
J & A.jpg (43.79 KiB) Viewed 10534 times

Think about this:
The United States ranks 3rd in Murders throughout the World.

But if you take out Chicago, Detroit, Washington DC, and New Orleans, the United States is 4th from the bottom (per capita) for Murders.

These 4 Cities also have the toughest Gun Control Laws in the United States.

All 4 are also controlled by Democrats.

It would be absurd to draw any conclusions from this data........right?
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Re: Gun laws ~ Gun Control

Postby andysbeef » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:53 am

A Tale of Two Cities
Chicago, IL............ Houston, TX
Population:
2.7 million..............2.15 million

Median HH Income:
$38,600.................$37,000

% African-American:
38.9%....................24%

% Hispanic:
29.9%....................44%

% Asian;
5.5%......................6%

% Non-Hispanic White:
28.7%.....................26%

Pretty similar until you compare the following:

Concealed Carry gun law:
no.........................yes

# of Gun Stores:
0..........................184 Dedicated gun stores plus 1500 legal places to buy guns; Walmart, K-mart, sporting goods, etc.

Homicides, 2012:
1,806.....................207

Homicides per 100K:
38.4.......................9.6

Avg. January high temperature (F):
31..........................63

Conclusion: Cold weather causes murder in the 'liberal' way of thinking....thinking? SORRY

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Re: Gun laws ~ Gun Control

Postby andysbeef » Fri Jan 24, 2014 10:22 am

Subject: Places not to go. MURDERS/GUNS The liberals HATE FACTS!

Subject: Places not to go.
I HOPE THIS HELPS STOP THE GUN PROTEST PEOPLE.
Places not to go....I was surprised at how Violent the US Virgin Islands and other Caribbean tourist destinations are!! But if you’re in a hurry just scroll down because it takes a whole minute to read this. BUT TRUST ME ! YOU SHOULD READ THIS !

WORLD MURDER STATISTICS From the World Health Organization: The latest Murder Statistics for the world:
Murders per 100,000 citizens.
Honduras 91.6
El Salvador 69.2
Cote d'lvoire 56.9
Jamaica 52.2
Venezuela 45.1
Belize 41.4
US Virgin Islands 39.2
Guatemala 38.5
Saint Kits and Nevis 38.2
Zambia 38.0
Uganda 36.3
Malawi 36.0
Lesotho 35.2
Trinidad and Tobago 35.2
Colombia 33.4
South Africa 31.8
Congo 30.8
Central African Republic 29.3
Bahamas 27.4
Puerto Rico 26.2
Saint Lucia 25.2
Dominican Republic 25.0
Tanzania 24.5
Sudan 24.2
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 22.9
Ethiopia 22.5
Guinea 22.5
Dominica 22.1
Burundi 21.7
Democratic Republic of the Congo 21.7
Panama 21.6
Brazil 21.0
Equatorial Guinea 20.7
Guinea-Bissau 20.2
Kenya 20.1
Kyrgyzstan 20.1
Cameroon 19.7
Montserrat 19.7
Greenland 19.2
Angola 19.0
Guyana 18.6
Burkina Faso 18.0
Eritrea 17.8
Namibia 17.2
Rwanda 17.1
Mexico 16.9
Chad 15.8
Ghana 15.7
Ecuador 15.2
North Korea 15.2
Benin 15.1
Sierra Leone 14.9
Mauritania 14.7
Botswana 14.5
Zimbabwe 14.3
Gabon 13.8
Nicaragua 13.6
French Guiana 13.3
Papua New Guinea 13.0
Swaziland 12.9
Bermuda 12.3
Comoros 12.2
Nigeria 12.2
Cape Verde 11.6
Grenada 11.5
Paraguay 11.5
Barbados 11.3
Togo 10.9
Gambia 10.8
Peru 10.8
Myanmar 10.2
Russia 10.2
Liberia 10.1
Costa Rica 10.0
Nauru 9.8
Bolivia 8.9
Mozambique 8.8
Kazakhstan 8.8
Senegal 8.7
Turks and Caicos Islands 8.7
Mongolia 8.7
British Virgin Islands 8.6
Cayman Islands 8.4
Seychelles 8.3
Madagascar 8.1
Indonesia 8.1
Mali 8.0
Pakistan 7.8
Moldova 7.5
Kiribati 7.3
Guadeloupe 7.0
Haiti 6.9
Timor-Leste 6.9
Anguilla 6.8
Antigua and Barbuda 6.8
Lithuania 6.6
Uruguay 5.9
Philippines 5.4
Ukraine 5.2
Estonia 5.2
Cuba 5.0
Belarus 4.9
Thailand 4.8
Suriname 4.6
Laos 4.6
Georgia 4.3
Martinique 4.2
And .............................................

The United States 4.2 !!!!!!!!!!!! ALL (109) of the countries above America have 100% gun bans.

It might be of interest to note that SWITZERLAND (not shown on this list) has NO MURDER OCCURRENCE!
However, SWITZERLAND'S law requires that EVERYONE:
1. Own a Gun.
2. Maintain Marksman qualifications....regularly.

Why do we never hear about this?....our beloved media and corrupt politicians.


GUN CONTROL, ANYBODY?
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Re: Gun laws ~ Gun Control

Postby andysbeef » Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:26 pm

Hey all you liberals out there....pay attention!
THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU MIGHT THINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wonder who in Washington is supposed to keep up with all the laws that have been passed (and ignored) throughout the years?

The BILL was passed back in 1902 and grants full rights to anyone who wants to own as many guns as they can afford. Any movement to limit guns or magazines will be in direct violation of this law. Pass it around.

The DICK ACT OF 1902! (BY CHARLES WILLIAM FREDERICK DICK)

ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS LAW?

The DICK ACT OF 1902 - CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) - PROTECTION AGAINST TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT.

IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS COUNTING ON THE FACT THAT THE AMERICAN CITIZENS DON'T KNOW THIS, THEIR RIGHTS AND THE CONSTITUTION. DON'T PROVE THEM RIGHT.

THE DICK ACT OF 1902 ALSO KNOWN AS THE EFFICIENCY OF MILITIA BILL H.R. 11654 OF JUNE 28, 1902 and INVALIDATES ALL SO-CALLED GUN-CONTROL LAWS.

It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the:
The organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia.
The unorganized militia.
And the regular army.

The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45.
All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type and as many as they can afford to buy.

The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion).
These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

Source...
http://www.civilrightstaskforce.info/gu ... bidden.htm

NOW, you have a contradiction....so which one is correct????
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2013/ ... mythma.php

It's time to learn about your rights.

Thus making all California, Colorado & others, gun & magazine limiting laws illegal!!!

I'm not so sure the current administration KNOWS what the laws, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence say. But it doesn't matter to them anyway. He and his minions certainly don't have any respect for them or us and will continue to do whatever they can get away with to further their cause of gaining complete control

Charles William Frederick Dick (November 3, 1858 - March 13, 1945) was a Republican politician from Ohio. He served in the United States House of Representatives and U.S. Senate.

I was curious as to who he was of the the Dick act of 1902.
http://www.fourwinds10.net/siterun_data ... 1237163642

Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."
The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country. The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA , and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.

Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States ." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it."

"This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and
maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and
puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."
The Honorable William Gordon
Congressional Record, House, Page 640 - 1917

I checked this out. It ACTUALLY IS the law of the land

Obama was put in office by the elite for a reason and the court case is here for a reason. This is all a script because the elite have an agenda. Watch as this continues to unfold and divide the nation and keep in mind that it was scripted this way.
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Re: Gun laws ~ Gun Control

Postby andysbeef » Wed Feb 11, 2015 1:28 pm

As the Supreme Court heard arguments for and against the Chicago, IL Gun Ban, this man offered you another stellar example of a letter (written by a Marine), that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized society.

Interesting take and one you don't hear much. . . . . .

Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the letter....

"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception.

Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on an equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunken guys with baseball bats.

The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat. It has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks or stones don't constitute lethal force, watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)
User avatar
andysbeef
 
Posts: 1182
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:43 am
Location: S/E, Michigan

Previous

Return to Gun Control - Warrior's Wisdom - Self Defense

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron