|
Author
|
Topic: Nightline on Last Friday Night !
|
Mert Bargenquast
Knows what it's all about
Member # 772
|
posted November 10, 2008 05:47 PM
Did anyone watch this show and what is it telling us about our new President and gun control?
--------------------
Mert Bargenquast
Posts: 40 | From: Iowa | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted November 11, 2008 06:03 AM
I missed it Mert, do tell.....
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tim Behle
Administrator MacNeal Sector
Member # 209
|
posted November 11, 2008 07:19 AM
Here is a link to the show.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=6209255&page=1
--------------------
Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take
an ass kickin'.
Posts: 3160 | From: Five Miles East of Vic, AZ | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
TheHuntedOne
Knows what it's all about
Member # 623
|
posted November 11, 2008 08:29 AM
quote:
"One of the strangest things I've had happen in the past few weeks was that I've had people coming in here wearing Obama buttons and Obama T-shirts," Glen Parshall, owner of a local Fort Worth gun shop. "[They] tell me they're in here to buy them before he bans them."
That is just insane. With any hope, they sold them one of these
Al
--------------------
The On Line Resource For Custom Call Makers
THO Game Calls
Posts: 266 | From: New Hampshire | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jrbhunter
PAYS ATTENsION TO deTAIL
Member # 459
|
posted November 11, 2008 08:29 AM
I didn't even trust McCain on the AWB. My cabinet's been full since September.
We should probably all stock up on componants right now. All my local stores are out of rifle powder: can't afford to pay shipping on the stuff either! A $32 pound of powder plus $30 HAZMAT shipping plus a good $15 for Obama's proposed taxes could make reloading pretty pricey. Just the way they like it.
Posts: 615 | From: Indiana | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted November 11, 2008 10:08 AM
Good grief JRB, you need to move. Our stores are well stocked with powder and most of the brands I use are around 23 bucks a pound. I think that is still outrageous.
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Q-Wagoner
FREE TRIAL MEMBERSHIP
Member # 33
|
posted November 11, 2008 11:37 AM
I think that from the day Obama takes office it will be an all out war on gun owners. He has never seen a peace of gun legislation that he doesn’t like and I guarantee he will sign anything that crosses his desk. With the Dems controlling everything I wouldn’t be surprised that a year from now the sale and manufacture of semiautomatic rifles and pistols will be prohibited.
It would also not surprise me if anyone who owns a supposed “assault” rifle will have to register them with the federal government as a “Destructive Device” or some such political catch fraise. And if you don’t it will be a felony. Expect the adoption of outrageously high taxes on ammo and anything firearms related also. This and other ridiculous measures have been on the Democrats back burners for quite some time.
Be prepared to weather the storm fellas as the clouds are building.
Good hunting.
Q,
Posts: 617 | From: Nebraska | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Andy L
HI, I'M THE NEW MODERATOR OF THE CENTRAL MISSOURI FORUM, PULL MY FINGER!
Member # 642
|
posted November 11, 2008 12:00 PM
I dont know what to think. Im stocking up and not taking any chances. On one hand, I feel just like Q posted above.
On the other hand, I have a suspicion not much will happen, and that was backed up by Wayne LaPierre, (sp?), on Fox a few minutes ago. He says that between the current economic situation and world events, Obamas going to have his plate full. And, there will be a huge power struggle between the democrat bluebloods that want gun control and the rank and file union democrats that represent rural states that will keep gun control on the back burner.
Like I said, Im stocking up. Hoping for the best and preparing for the worst.
My worst regret is I havent picked up an AR yet. Ive always wanted one and procrastenated. I have plenty of rifles and elected instead to buy more brass, bullets, primers and powder instead of a black gun....
--------------------
Andy
Posts: 2645 | From: Central Missouri | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich
2,000th post PAKMAN
Member # 112
|
posted November 11, 2008 12:00 PM
Do you folks actually believe that Obama will stop with simply banning the SALE of guns? He has already stated that he intends to stop us from CARRYING guns. He doesn't even feel that we should have the right to keep a gun in our own HOME for self defense purposes. A few days ago he spoke of developing a fully funded citizens group to bolster Homeland security. This guy plans to CONFISCATE all of our guns, that's what I think! One Republican Senator feels that Obama is pushing for a National Marxist type of Government. I have been telling people for quite awhile now that Obama's REAL plan is to destroy capitalism at any cost. Do you realize that when they outlaw all guns, any gun in your home or car will be considered contraband? Get caught with a gun in your car, they confiscate the car. Get caught with a gun in your home, they confiscate your home. On top of that, you will face a 50,000 dollar fine and possible prison time. Sounds nuts don't it? The scary part is that it may well be a your worst nightmare come true.
--------------------
If you call the coyotes in close, you won't NEED a high dollar range finder.
Posts: 2854 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leonard
HMFIC
Member # 2
|
posted November 11, 2008 12:05 PM
I heard he only wants "Reasonable" restrictions on firearms? Such as those in England. And, I'm sure he'd like Canada's handgun policy.
Anytime an asshole like Obama uses a word like "reasonable", we need to be very suspicious.
Can you believe the stupidity of people wearing an Obama button buying a gun before it's too late? They need their ass kicked. It should be perfectly legal to spit on people wearing "Historic" Obama buttons. Wow, now Europe respects us! That's a relief.
Good hunting. LB
edit: Andy, the only purpose for machine guns (AR's) would be civil unrest. You certainly can't hunt with one!
[ November 11, 2008, 12:09 PM: Message edited by: Leonard ]
--------------------
EL BEE Knows It All and Done It All.
Don't piss me off!
Posts: 32361 | From: Upland, CA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Q-Wagoner
FREE TRIAL MEMBERSHIP
Member # 33
|
posted November 11, 2008 12:17 PM
LOL Andy what the hell do you think he is going to try to focus the attention on when he realizes that he doesn’t have a plan to “fix” the economy? It is going to be a crisis you know! Saving our children and all! Who wouldn’t want to save our children!!
Good hunting.
Q,
Posts: 617 | From: Nebraska | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich Higgins
unknown comic
|
posted November 11, 2008 01:33 PM
Rich, where can I find Obama's speech about the citizens militia?
IP: Logged
|
|
Rich
2,000th post PAKMAN
Member # 112
|
posted November 11, 2008 01:43 PM
Rich Higgins,
I saw and heard him say that on live television, and wish that I would have recorded it. It probably would not have helped though. There has been tons of information out there about who Obama really is, but over half of the American voters passed it off as baloney. Tell ya what Higgins, I will do a google search for a video that might be available on that "citizen militia", and I hope that others will do the same. The main stream media harped strongly during the Presidential campaign, claiming that the "economy" was the most importent issue here. I was screaming BULL on that. The number one issue should have been to keep Obama OUT.
--------------------
If you call the coyotes in close, you won't NEED a high dollar range finder.
Posts: 2854 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
TheHuntedOne
Knows what it's all about
Member # 623
|
posted November 11, 2008 02:50 PM
This comment by Obama came on July 2 2008 in a speach he gave in Colorado Srings Co.
Here is a YouTube video of that speach.
The comment is about 17 minutes into the speach.
What is interesting, is that in all the transcripts of that speach that were realeased by the campaign, the line that has caused the most controversey
"we cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the National Security objectivs we've set. We've got to have a Civilian National Security Force that's just as powerful, just as strong just as well funded"
was left out of the official transcripts.
The video - again, 17 minutes in
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df2p6867_pw
AL
[ November 11, 2008, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: TheHuntedOne ]
--------------------
The On Line Resource For Custom Call Makers
THO Game Calls
Posts: 266 | From: New Hampshire | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich Higgins
unknown comic
|
posted November 11, 2008 04:23 PM
I cannot over stress the danger inherent in that proposal. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the military for law enforcement off federal instalations. If a civilian militia were used to enforce confiscation it probably would not draw the outrage that would surely result if the military went door to door. The man is scary.
IP: Logged
|
|
3 Toes
El Guapo
Member # 1327
|
posted November 11, 2008 04:55 PM
I personally feel that if it came to the situation that the two Richs are talking about we would soon be in a civil war. I don't think he can get it done.
--------------------
Violence may not be the best option....
But it is still an option.
Posts: 1034 | From: out yonder | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Q-Wagoner
FREE TRIAL MEMBERSHIP
Member # 33
|
posted November 11, 2008 05:25 PM
I hope you are right Cal but still part of me is very concerned. History repeats it’s self. We get reminded of that time and time again. WWII vets still walk among us today and they remember the time when one man with vision and the promise of change had the world on it’s knees. Today just like in our grandfathers’ day we like to think nothing like that could ever happen. Well we have the radical child of a Moslem extremist about to take the reins of the most powerful country in the world. He has the charisma and the house and senate to accomplish anything he sets his mind too.
We have China and Russia once again rising to superpower status. The Middle East is more unsettled than it has ever been and the world economy is walking a tight rope. This doesn’t paint a very good picture.
I am usually not one to worry much about these kinds of things because in a free market the economy always seams to work its self out. When things go badly the Left and the Right point fingers and when things are going good everyone is stepping up to take the credit. I am a for the most part a single-issue voter so the pro-gun politicians always get the nod. I like my guns and I like the idea that I can buy any gun I want. I also like my money and I would like to keep more of what I earn. With Obama at the helm, pretty much everything that is close to my heart is on his chopping block. He is one scary SOB.
A sig-line I just recently read pretty well sums it up for me and it went something like this..
“Obama I will keep my God and my guns and you keep the change.”
Good hunting.
Q,
Posts: 617 | From: Nebraska | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cdog911
"There are some ideas so absurd only an intellectual could believe them."--George Orwell.
Member # 7
|
posted November 11, 2008 06:52 PM
Welcome to the Obama Youth.
Heil Obama! Heil Obama! Heil Obama!
--------------------
I am only one. But still, I am one. I cannot do everything, but still, I can do something; and, because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do something that I can do.
Posts: 5440 | From: The gun-lovin', gun-friendly wild, wild west | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich Higgins
unknown comic
|
posted November 12, 2008 06:13 AM
" I personally feel that if it came to the situation that the two Richs are talking about we would soon be in a civil war. I don't think he can get it done."
Cal, Homeland Security, under the Bush Administration, obviously prepared for civil upheaval and Posse Comitatus has been neutered.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/09/24/army/
IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Jackson
SECOND PLACE/GARTH BROOKS LOOK-A-LIKE CONTEST
Member # 977
|
posted November 12, 2008 09:14 AM
In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.
Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."
President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."
Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."
For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.
The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.
An article on "recent contract awards" in a recent issue of the slick, insider "Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International" reported that "global engineering and technical services powerhouse KBR [Kellog, Brown & Root] announced in January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division was awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency." "With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term," the report notes, "the contract is to be executed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," "for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) - in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." The report points out that "KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton." (3) So, in addition to authorizing another $532.8 billion for the Pentagon, including a $70-billion "supplemental provision" which covers the cost of the ongoing, mad military maneuvers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, the new law, signed by the president in a private White House ceremony, further collapses the historic divide between the police and the military: a tell-tale sign of a rapidly consolidating police state in America, all accomplished amidst ongoing U.S. imperial pretensions of global domination, sold to an "emergency managed" and seemingly willfully gullible public as a "global war on terrorism."
Make no mistake about it: the de-facto repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is an ominous assault on American democratic tradition and jurisprudence. The 1878 Act, which reads, "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both," is the only U.S. criminal statute that outlaws military operations directed against the American people under the cover of 'law enforcement.' As such, it has been the best protection we've had against the power-hungry intentions of an unscrupulous and reckless executive, an executive intent on using force to enforce its will.
Unfortunately, this past week, the president dealt posse comitatus, along with American democracy, a near fatal blow. Consequently, it will take an aroused citizenry to undo the damage wrought by this horrendous act, part and parcel, as we have seen, of a long train of abuses and outrages perpetrated by this authoritarian administration.
Despite the unprecedented and shocking nature of this act, there has been no outcry in the American media, and little reaction from our elected officials in Congress. On September 19th, a lone Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) noted that 2007's Defense Authorization Act contained a "widely opposed provision to allow the President more control over the National Guard [adopting] changes to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any future President to use the military to restore domestic order WITHOUT the consent of the nation's governors."
Senator Leahy went on to stress that, "we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central tenets of our democracy. One can easily envision governors and mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over their shoulders while someone who has never visited their communities gives the orders."
A few weeks later, on the 29th of September, Leahy entered into the Congressional Record that he had "grave reservations about certain provisions of the fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill Conference Report," the language of which, he said, "subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military's involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law." This had been "slipped in," Leahy said, "as a rider with little study," while "other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals."
In a telling bit of understatement, the Senator from Vermont noted that "the implications of changing the (Posse Comitatus) Act are enormous". "There is good reason," he said, "for the constructive friction in existing law when it comes to martial law declarations. Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy. We fail our Constitution, neglecting the rights of the States, when we make it easier for the President to declare martial law and trample on local and state sovereignty."
Senator Leahy's final ruminations: "Since hearing word a couple of weeks ago that this outcome was likely, I have wondered how Congress could have gotten to this point. It seems the changes to the Insurrection Act have survived the Conference because the Pentagon and the White House want it."
The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial law, is now an accomplished fact.
The Pentagon, as one might expect, plays an even more direct role in martial law operations. Title XIV of the new law, entitled, "Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions," authorizes "the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders."
In other words, the law facilitates the "transfer" of the newest in so-called "crowd control" technology and other weaponry designed to suppress dissent from the Pentagon to local militarized police units. The new law builds on and further codifies earlier "technology transfer" agreements, specifically the 1995 DOD-Justice Department memorandum of agreement achieved back during the Clinton-Reno regime.(4)
It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq, and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections, the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect, declare himself dictator.
Source:
(1) http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/091906a.html and http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/092906b.html See also, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, "The Use of Federal Troops for Disaster Assistance: Legal Issues," by Jennifer K. Elsea, Legislative Attorney, August 14, 2006
Posts: 997 | From: Comanche OK | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rich
2,000th post PAKMAN
Member # 112
|
posted November 12, 2008 10:42 AM
George Bush being a strong defender of our 2nd ammendment rights, and his obvious Pro-America stance, there was no threat to honest American citizens. It was not until the recent election of a radical muslim who wants to destroy capitolism at any cost that we have real reason to worry. Obama does not want to improve our country, and is not Pro-America by a long shot.
--------------------
If you call the coyotes in close, you won't NEED a high dollar range finder.
Posts: 2854 | From: Iowa | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Jackson
SECOND PLACE/GARTH BROOKS LOOK-A-LIKE CONTEST
Member # 977
|
posted November 12, 2008 10:47 AM
My thoughs to a T Rich.
Posts: 997 | From: Comanche OK | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
tlbradford
Rimfires are MAGIC on COYOTES! If you do your part
Member # 1232
|
posted November 12, 2008 01:27 PM
Obama's statements about a civilian militia scare me more than any other. I know that conspiracy theorist are worried about martial law being imposed at any time without warning due to the fact we are officially operating under a "State of Emergency". This means a president can declare martial law without approval of Congress. Here is a little snippet of what I am talking about.
"Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency. In fact, there are now in effect four presidentially-proclaimed states of national emergency: In addition to the national emergency declared by President Roosevelt in 1933, there are also the national emergency proclaimed by President Truman on December 16, 1950, during the Korean conflict, and the states of national emergency declared by President Nixon on March 23, 1970, and August 15, 1971.
These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes."
--------------------
"Dan Carey ain't that special" - LB
Posts: 423 | From: Spokane Valley, WA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Semp
GOLD STAR MEMBER
Member # 3074
|
posted November 12, 2008 08:20 PM
Just wait till Hussein Obama begins appointing Supreme Court justices, we will be screwed for the next 25 years.
--------------------
Always remember: That court appointed psychiatrist is not your friend.
Posts: 419 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
