And So It Begins: the Begining of the End for the Second Amendment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

Federal troops were called in for law enforcement (and rarely used I understand) during the riots to back up the NG and civillian authorities. But I'm not aware of martial law being declared or habeas corpus being suspended. You could argue that the President violated the Posse Comitatus act though by deploying troops without congressional authority, I guess.

---

Your close - the general in charge refused to do some missions because of the Posse Comitatus act. The President placed him in a dangerous position declaring an emergency and giving him authority - but not getting Congress to declare it so.

Quote:

---

But then, I never studied the LA riots in depth so maybe you have more information.

---

The similiarities between the two conditions are amazing - in regrads to looting and restoring order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

It most certainly implies that the property must be taken in order to help the police cope the disaster. Nowhere in there does it talk about consfication or commandeering to prevent use of objects by looters. Cope in this sense means using something to help you get the job done. The police are not using the guns to help cope witht the disaster.

---

Then we have a difference in opinion - cope to me in the military sense of the word - is to do what you believe necessary to get the task accomplished. Not necessary use the equipment but also prevent others from using it.

Quote:

---

Here you go: Morton Grove IL, where you are not allowed to posess a gun:
http://www.vpc.org/press/9503mg.htm

---

Okay one city that bans the possession of handguns - and the law is being questioned like it should through the courts for its constitutionality. Good it should be questioned.

Quote:

---

You don't think anti-gunners are wtting themselves with excitement over the possibility this brings? The NOPD may not be actively trying to dismantle the 2nd amendment, but antis are going to use it as best they can. They'll scream about public safety, the need to keep guns out of criminal's hands during a disaster, etc.

---

And they would be guilty of the same hyperbole you were in declaring it the beginning of the end. If I heard an anti-weapon screaming in that way and using the crisis to futher their agenda - I would have the same sort of conservation with them. That they are using hyperbole to futher their political point and then I would point out the aspects of the constitution and the law that allows the government to do such a thing, and argue that the government can only do this type of activity under spefic conditions spelled out state by state. The Federal Constitution allows you to keep and bear arms - the Constitution allows the government to establish limited controls via the same amendment.

Quote:

---

Seeing as registration has next to nil value for bringing in criminals, and that it provides an easy way for the government to find out who has guns, and that some figures in government (Janet Reno) have said that registration is just a step to consfication, and that registration and then consfication has occured in CA and NY, I'd say the only result of registration is making it easier to consficate guns. And the military? Its not like someone is going to advocate disarming them.

---

You missed the point - the 2nd Amendment also allows the government to set condtions about accountablity of weapons. Its within the wording of the amendment - a well regulated militia.

Quote:

---

If anything, I'm the frog who jumps out when the temp increases one degree.

---

I wait until I see a pattern of problems - New Orleans is already being used by both groups to promote their cause concerning weapons - and in my opinion both are wrong because they are ignoring the why to promote their own agenda's on the issue.

Quote:

---

Have you seen the video of the old woman being tackled to the floor by police for holding a revolver by the barrel?

Crazed Rabbit

---

Nope I normally stay away from television media - to much hyperbole used to make whatever point the so called journalist is trying to make.

Quote:

---

Then we have a difference in opinion - cope to me in the military sense of the word - is to do what you believe necessary to get the task accomplished. Not necessary use the equipment but also prevent others from using it.

---

That is a valid interpretation of the word, but seeing as the laws do not pertain to a military operation so much as a police action, in which they siphon gas if they need to but don't take cars if they fear people are going to misuse them. The fact is, the relief effort is unlike a military operation in that the soldiers aren't fighting combatants, but trying to help people. Thinking in terms of denying these people access to guns or other things is wrong.

Quote:

---

Okay one city that bans the possession of handguns - and the law is being questioned like it should through the courts for its constitutionality. Good it should be questioned.

---

Unfortunately both state and federal courts found it to be constitutional.

Quote:

---

You missed the point - the 2nd Amendment also allows the government to set condtions about accountablity of weapons. Its within the wording of the amendment - a well regulated militia.

---

I am skeptical of how much controls the 2nd amendment allows, due to the 'shall not be infringed'. A lot of this is infringement. Not only that, one must realize the concept that anti-gunners are just going to use one small control as an excuse for more controls, as I have shown.

Quote:

---

I wait until I see a pattern of problems - New Orleans is already being used by both groups to promote their cause concerning weapons - and in my opinion both are wrong because they are ignoring the why to promote their own agenda's on the issue.

---

I see an ongoing effort by many people, governmental and private groups, to destroy the 2nd amendment. I need not point them out to you.

I'll concede that this alone would not be the end. But it is the culmination of events that is the problem.

Quote:

---

Nope I normally stay away from television media - to much hyperbole used to make whatever point the so called journalist is trying to make.

---

Not a bad idea. But it is worth viewing, just to get an idea of the outrageousness of it all.

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Not a bad idea. But it is worth viewing, just to get an idea of the outrageousness of it all.

Crazed Rabbit

---

Why when I can come here and hear it from the patrons of the .Org. No need to experience it for myself anymore. The crap done by all the media sources about the Invasion of Iraq has turned me off completely on Broadcast Media. I rather read about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Redleg

Why when I can come here and hear it from the patrons of the .Org. No need to experience it for myself anymore. The crap done by all the media sources about the Invasion of Iraq has turned me off completely on Broadcast Media. I rather read about it.

---

Hear hear!

I kicked the 'habit' for two whole years. I just couldn't bother to replace the old TV when it broke down. Put it out with the garbage. Didn't miss the live footage, the hypes, the uninformed comment, the commercials and all the other junk for one second. The box is back since two years, but I hardly watch tv nowadays, my kids get 1/2 hour max and everybody is a lot more relaxed for it. Our Saturday nights are spent slooooowly cooking and eating, playing games, telling jokes and stories, relating experiences, all without some rectal aperture in the background telling us where it's at. I know the world is going to hell in a handcart, but my family sure isn't, not if I can help it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

Hear hear!

I kicked the 'habit' for two whole years. I just couldn't bother to replace the old TV when it broke down. Put it out with the garbage. Didn't miss the live footage, the hypes, the uninformed comment, the commercials and all the other junk for one second. The box is back since two years, but I hardly watch tv nowadays, my kids get 1/2 hour max and everybody is a lot more relaxed for it. Our Saturday nights are spent slooooowly cooking and eating, playing games, telling jokes and stories, relating experiences, all without some rectal aperture in the background telling us where it's at. I know the world is going to hell in a handcart, but my family sure isn't, not if I can help it.

---

Well I am not that far yet. I still enjoy the History Channel, The Soprano's and now Rome on HBO, Law and Order on any of the cable networks and The SciFi channel when I have the chance. Other then that I am normally playing a computer game, swimmng with my son, or just relaxing doing absolutely nothing. Except when I am at work that is. Been working 50+ hours a week for ever.

I rarely watch TV. Hardly ever even watched it when we had it. Just the very rare news, the occasional movie (free HBO in college-so no commercials now!), or the simpsons.

Now...back to the topic(or at least it's cousin, twice removed); the reason America is so violent.

Some contenders:
1) The drug war
2) gang turf wars and the like
3) the culture (I'm against it, seems like an easy way to cop out without getting to the reason).

Anyone have any ideas?

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

I rarely watch TV. Hardly ever even watched it when we had it. Just the very rare news, the occasional movie (free HBO in college-so no commercials now!), or the simpsons.

Now...back to the topic(or at least it's cousin, twice removed); the reason America is so violent.

Some contenders:
1) The drug war
2) gang turf wars and the like
3) the culture (I'm against it, seems like an easy way to cop out without getting to the reason).

Anyone have any ideas?

Crazed Rabbit

---

The War on Drugs and the Gang Turf Wars are really part of the culture I think. One would have to go futher back then that. One of the main reasons for violence in the United States is our desire and ingrained philosophy of rugged individualism.

I read (or is it red) a book about the Scot-Irish influence on the culture of the United States - and this was one of groups that had a lot of influence on our culture. The rugged individualism is one of the traits the author wanted to place as a benefit of the Scots-Irish immigrants. If its true or not is for each one of us to decide.

Then if one takes a good look at our history - American's have always associated themselve with figures that shapped from that mold for the most part - even if its not completely true of the individual in question.

The United States was also a nation founded on opposition to oppressive government - which would lead one to question the government in everything it does, however the culture of the United States also instilled into us that its okay to use violence to solve our disputes. How many times growing up do you hear your father say its okay to fight as long as you did not start it?

Hell I learned how to pick a fight without throwing the first punch just for that reason alone.

Violence is shown to us everyday - in our media, in our writings, and yes even in our everyday life. When you live in a society that likes violent entertainment - some of its bound to wear off into how the society functions.

Kind of rambling I know - but the thought has only begin to gain formulation in my head - and it takes many monthes of thinking before I could come up with a rational and coherient thought on the magnitude of the question. What is amazing is that no one will ever actually agree on why the American Culture has a tendency to violence - I guess there are just to many factors to agree on any one or even two main reasons for it.

But what the hell its easy to blame Hollywood for pumping us the entertainment that we want to buy. (Hows that for blaming Hollywood and pointing out ourselves at the same time.)

i'm so relieved to be living in a country where no one carries firearms except police. it's so much safer here in Australia, i would never want to travel to the USA.

Wow! How did you guys convince the criminals to not carry firearms?

Quote:

---

i'm so relieved to be living in a country where no one carries firearms except police. it's so much safer here in Australia, i would never want to travel to the USA.

---

Really? I heard murders went up 300% in Queensland after the ban. Seems like the opposite of safety.

Crazed Rabbit

They did go up rabbit.


Wouldn't you feel safer packing Claudius the God