It is currently Tue Sep 23, 2014 8:17 am

All times are UTC - 4 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 12  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:17 pm 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:22 pm
Posts: 765
I don't care for Bill Mahar, but he's right about this. We have been sinking into a 1984 surveillance state much to my dismay since the last MAJOR false flag attack. Even earlier most likely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xod1ZuRc3rk


_________________
Closed minds STOP thought crimes!


Top
 Profile  
 

 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:16 pm 
Offline
Novice
Novice
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:59 pm
Posts: 91
Distractions distractions distractions, let's start with the easy one. Stony, how many more presidents until you stop blaming Bush? Patriot Act passed because way more than a super majority in the House and the entire Senate, except one vote passed it. Bush signed it. He could have vetoed it and it would have gone right back and passed. Plus remember, the MSM had you all hypnotized with fear and still does. Could you imagine, after watching the towers fall 8 million times and seeing Osamas picture an equal number of times that someone would stand up and say, "we went over the line trying to protect our people?" Hell NO!! It was a well programmed plan, the people responded as planned, the law went through as planned. Where was the outcry?

It was HUGE!! You could not hear it because MSM was not covering it and what little they did cover would just demonize any ACLU or other rights group into being those "crazy liberals." Always wanting something special. Like yeah, our rights, OK? But they were marginalized, silenced and quickly shoved to the side. Because, no one can be against fear right. Osama, Osama, Osama!! Are you peeing yet?

So thank God they put sundown clauses in there. And last year or so, the Patriot Act provisions would expire without further legislative review. Buuuuuttt nNNNOOOooo. No. Our King stepped forward and signed the Executive Action that allowed the provisions of the Patriot Act to extend until Feb 28th of this year. Then they will have to be reconsidered. Face it. Obama owns it now. It is his turn. He didn't sign an action to abolish it. He signed on. It is fully his. Lose the whole Bush bullshit on that part.

Then, oh wait, we forgot. After reviewing the Patriot Act, we discovered that we forgot to abolish some amendments. TA DA!! The NDAA. Oh yes. The bastard child from Kenya decided he would help our congress tighten the thumb screws on freedom. This time with a Democratic Senate and Republican controlled house. Lots of blame to go around. We cannot assign it to one party. But Obama signed it. He owns that too. And he has issued several executive actions to tighten the provisions of that act.

And there is again outcry. Bills are being introduced finally to eliminate some of the most grievious provisions such as the indeterminate detention without charge and rendition at undisclosed locations.

So that was a fun distraction, now on to fireworks and their irrelevance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:29 pm 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 6:22 pm
Posts: 765
Thank you Zenrider! The dichotomy of false choices, provided to keep the people under the impression that they are still in control. I like the speech that citizen just posted under "local politicians". JFK knew...

_________________
Closed minds STOP thought crimes!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:34 pm 
Offline
Novice
Novice
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:59 pm
Posts: 91
So the fireworks distraction was fun. I investigated quite a bit on commerce laws. So here is what I found on fireworks that might have some remote link to the subject.

PA classifies fireworks into 2 classes, Consumer and Display. NY has similar classifications.

Both PA and NY require a permit to purchase, possess or use the Display type fireworks.

PA requires PA residents to produce the permit to purchase the Display types.

PA does NOT require non-residents to have a permit to purchase and transport fireworks back to their own state. They need to show proof they are not PA residents.

So, this law regulates commerce of fireworks. It has nothing to do with commerce of firearms, eggs, milk or tires.

But the only remote link I might draw is that commerce laws are designed to control the business in your state. And the AWB in NYS adds controls to the commerce of firearms in NYS. These commerce controls have nothing to do with ensuring safety and only have to do with maximizing profit. And to that end. I have decided I fully support NYS right to export dangerous items to any state that will accept them, no matter if the state they are being sent to allows their citizens to have them or not. The AWB seems to be exactly as we saw it. It is a chance to make money off the blood of children. Being first to act gives NYS a lead. There is nothing that adds protection to schools by banning the standard capacity magazines. It is all about bringing money into NYS through sales and transfer fees.

Now onto the part about the logical disconnect.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:44 pm 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:11 pm
Posts: 4547
Pretty good clip from Mahar.

_________________
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" JFK


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:58 pm 
Offline
Novice
Novice
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:59 pm
Posts: 91
The logical disconnect of the NY State AWB.

Why was the AWB implemented? Was it just to regulate commerce? Let us read from the Bill. This section is called JUSTIFICATION. This is the reason and purpose for the bill directly from the bill:

JUSTIFICATION:
On Monday December 24, 2012, William Spengler, Jr., reported a fire to
the local fire department in Webster, NY. Then he waited with three
guns, one of which was an assault rifle,
for the firefighters to arrive. He killed two and seriously wounded
two others. Mr. Spengler was a convicted felon, and as such, was
prohibited by law from owning firearms. Somehow, he
managed to obtain them anyway. This horrendous incident, the massacre
at Sandy Hook
Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut ten days earlier, in which
20 six and seven year-olds and 6 faculty and staff were murdered
execution-style, and other mass shootings that have occurred -
Columbine High School, where 12 students and one teacher were killed
and 21 injured, the Clackamas Town Center Mall in Oregon, where 2
people were killed and 1 wounded, the Sikh Temple in Oak Creek,
Wisconsin where 6 people were killed and 4 wounded, the Century Movie
Theater in Aurora, Colorado, where 12 people were killed and 58
wounded, and in broad daylight, Tucson. Arizona where six people were
killed and 11 wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords,
who was severely wounded - clearly point to the need to ban
assault-style weapons, for stricter gun control laws and increased
criminal sanctions.
This legislation: updates and improves the description of an assault
weapon; prohibits large capacity ammunition feeding devices
regardless of when they were manufactured; increases the criminal
sanction for possession of an assault weapon or large capacity
ammunition feeder from a D felony to a B felony, increases criminal
sanctions for other gun-related crimes by one felony degree, and
creates the new crime of unlawful possession of a firearm upon school
grounds in the first and second degrees.


So, the bill has a purpose to justify actions taken. The justification includes violent incidents in New York, Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado and Arizona. One of the remedial actions to alleviate these incidents is to ban "large capacity ammunition feeder devices."

So, how does the law achieve the goal of eliminating or reducing gun violence in the states mentioned by allowing New York to sell the large capacity ammunition feeder devices to states where they have been used for violent purposes?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:10 pm 
Offline
4 Stars
4 Stars
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:37 am
Posts: 8809
Maybe it's not really about wanting to join a well regulated militia to protect America, or killing zombies to protect your family ......... It's all about "barrel length"! ..... or an embarrassing lack of!


Attachment:
Penisenvy.jpg
Penisenvy.jpg [ 54.05 KiB | Viewed 582 times ]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:20 pm 
Offline
Novice
Novice
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:59 pm
Posts: 91
check
check
check

I got 100!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:23 pm 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:56 pm
Posts: 1353
zenrider wrote:
The logical disconnect of the NY State AWB.

Why was the AWB implemented? Was it just to regulate commerce? Let us read from the Bill. This section is called JUSTIFICATION. This is the reason and purpose for the bill directly from the bill:

JUSTIFICATION:
On Monday December 24, 2012, William Spengler, Jr., reported a fire to
the local fire department in Webster, NY. Then he waited with three
guns, one of which was an assault rifle,
for the firefighters to arrive. He killed two and seriously wounded
two others. Mr. Spengler was a convicted felon, and as such, was
prohibited by law from owning firearms. Somehow, he
managed to obtain them anyway. This horrendous incident, the massacre
at Sandy Hook
Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut ten days earlier, in which
20 six and seven year-olds and 6 faculty and staff were murdered
execution-style, and other mass shootings that have occurred -
Columbine High School, where 12 students and one teacher were killed
and 21 injured, the Clackamas Town Center Mall in Oregon, where 2
people were killed and 1 wounded, the Sikh Temple in Oak Creek,
Wisconsin where 6 people were killed and 4 wounded, the Century Movie
Theater in Aurora, Colorado, where 12 people were killed and 58
wounded, and in broad daylight, Tucson. Arizona where six people were
killed and 11 wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords,
who was severely wounded - clearly point to the need to ban
assault-style weapons, for stricter gun control laws and increased
criminal sanctions.
This legislation: updates and improves the description of an assault
weapon; prohibits large capacity ammunition feeding devices
regardless of when they were manufactured; increases the criminal
sanction for possession of an assault weapon or large capacity
ammunition feeder from a D felony to a B felony, increases criminal
sanctions for other gun-related crimes by one felony degree, and
creates the new crime of unlawful possession of a firearm upon school
grounds in the first and second degrees.


So, the bill has a purpose to justify actions taken. The justification includes violent incidents in New York, Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado and Arizona. One of the remedial actions to alleviate these incidents is to ban "large capacity ammunition feeder devices."

So, how does the law achieve the goal of eliminating or reducing gun violence in the states mentioned by allowing New York to sell the large capacity ammunition feeder devices to states where they have been used for violent purposes?


Their new laws do nothing to stop criminals from killing people, nothing.

A summary of the New York Safe Act:
1) Bans possession of any high-capacity magazines regardless of when they were made or sold. The maximum capacity for a detachable magazine is reduced from ten rounds to seven. Magazines owned before passage of the Safe Act able to hold seven to ten rounds can be possessed, but cannot be loaded with more than seven rounds. The magazine limit takes effect April 15, 2013.
2) Ammunition dealers are required to do background checks, similar to those for gun buyers. Dealers are required to report all sales, including amounts, to the state. Internet sales of ammunition are allowed, but the ammunition will have to be shipped to a licensed dealer in New York state for pickup.
3) Requires creation of a registry of assault weapons. Those New Yorkers who already own such weapons would be required to register their guns with the state.
4) Requires any therapist who believes a mental health patient made a credible threat of harming others to report the threat to a mental health director, who would then have to report serious threats to the state Department of Criminal Justice Services. A patient's gun could be taken from him or her.
5) Stolen guns are required be reported within 24 hours. Failure to report can result in a misdemeanor.
6) Reduces definition of "assault weapon" from two identified features to one.
7) Requires background checks for all gun sales, including by private sellers - except for sales to members of the seller's immediate family.
8) Makes the unsafe storage of assault weapons a misdemeanor.
9) Bans the Internet sale of assault weapons.
10) Increases sentences for gun crimes including for taking a gun on school property.
11) Increases penalties for shooting first responders (Webster provision) to life in prison without parole.
12) Limits the state records law to protect handgun owners from being identified publicly.
13) Requires pistol permit holders or owners of registered assault weapons to have them renewed at least every five years.

Let's look at a few of them.

1) Bans possession of any high-capacity magazines regardless of when they were made or sold. The maximum capacity for a detachable magazine is reduced from ten rounds to seven. Magazines owned before passage of the Safe Act able to hold seven to ten rounds can be possessed, but cannot be loaded with more than seven rounds. The magazine limit takes effect April 15, 2013.
What criminal is going to follow the law? What deranged maniac intent on killing people is going to follow the law. Based on the magazine ban in the new NY law they did nothing but put limits on the law abiding citizens of their states.

2) Ammunition dealers are required to do background checks, similar to those for gun buyers. Dealers are required to report all sales, including amounts, to the state. Internet sales of ammunition are allowed, but the ammunition will have to be shipped to a licensed dealer in New York state for pickup.
Walmart doing background checks on customers purchasing ammunition? I'd rather have Walmart do background checks on their employees.

6) Reduces definition of "assault weapon" from two identified features to one.
(further added)
NY state law defines an "assault weapon" as:
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and one or more of the following: Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and one or more of the following: Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with one or more of the following: Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
Detachable magazine.

"Large Capacity Feeding Device" is any belt, drum, strip, magazine, or similar instrument used to feed ammunition into a firearm that has a capability of holding more than seven rounds.
Take any of those things off any weapon that has them and you have done nothing to reduce the effective killing capacity of the weapon, NOTHING. Those things do not in any way enhance the firepower of the weapon. Oh but they 'look' scary so we have to outlaw them. A bayonet lug? Really? How any killers ran out of rounds and hollered out 'Fix bayonets.' Idiots.

5) Stolen guns are required be reported within 24 hours. Failure to report can result in a misdemeanor.
Nothing like making criminals out of law abiding citizens.

Nothing in the law does a single thing to stop criminals from killing. Nothing in the law stops deranged homocidal maniacs from going to a school and kill kids. Nothing in the law does anything to limit crimes. All it does is put further restrictions on law abiding citizens. Oh and raises the fees to follow the law. Until common sense and serious debate about the issue happen, nothing will change.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:42 pm 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:56 pm
Posts: 1353
Their justifications are false also.

Columbine Eric Harris carried 13 10 round magazines which reports state that the magazines discarded by the him most often held more than 3 rounds remaining. They were 10 round magazines.

The Oregon mall shooting where two armed citizens are credited by police and other authorities of saving countless lives by pulling and using in one case and not using in the other, their weapons and confronting the killer.

Wade Micheal Page, Jared Loughner, James Eagan Holmes all passed federal background checks and legally purchased their weapons.

Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, Adam Lanza all stole their weapons.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:39 am 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:19 pm
Posts: 542
Stony wrote:
Maybe it's not really about wanting to join a well regulated militia to protect America, or killing zombies to protect your family ......... It's all about "barrel length"! ..... or an embarrassing lack of!


I guess it's a good thing that your graphic refers to assault rifles which have been banned for decades. I thought you were talking about modern rifles with cosmetic features, referred to as assault weapons by the liberal media to make them sound scary and intentionally confuse you sheep as to the difference between a semi automatic, weak, AR15.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Dont have to worry about the feds taking guns, states wi
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:43 am 
Offline
BT Regular
BT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 1:19 pm
Posts: 542
oh, and I guess since your graphic and it's reference to penis size and the title that you gave it, that this picture is also allowable and appropriate for this site.


Attachments:
550459_270752803053841_676218995_n.png
550459_270752803053841_676218995_n.png [ 97.47 KiB | Viewed 417 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 142 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 12  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
ADVERTISEMENT






LIKE US
EMAIL SUBSCRIBE

Enter your email address:

DONATE

© 2004-2014 Bradford PA Today. News & Information. All rights reserved.

Bradford PA Portal | PennsNews | BigFree Information | Free Web Hosting