6.8 SPC Forums banner
81 - 95 of 95 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
291 Posts
I'm in agreement with Ozarkpugs. What MO is doing isn't rebellion against the feds. They obviously adhere to all other federal law from medical programs to subsidy handouts and everything in between. They have taken a stand on this issue where a rogue federal agency has usurped the law creating powers from congress to infringe on citizens constitutional rights. His comparison to EPA is appropriate. That's another rogue agency that was making law when they had no authority to do so and the Supreme Court rightly judged against them. The fight for our rights starts in our home states and then carries on to the the national level.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
I'm in agreement with Ozarkpugs. What MO is doing isn't rebellion against the feds. They obviously adhere to all other federal law from medical programs to subsidy handouts and everything in between. They have taken a stand on this issue where a rogue federal agency has usurped the law creating powers from congress to infringe on citizens constitutional rights. His comparison to EPA is appropriate. That's another rogue agency that was making law when they had no authority to do so and the Supreme Court rightly judged against them. The fight for our rights starts in our home states and then carries on the the national level.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk
And the SCOTUS is the Branch of the US Government who's job it is to set them straight. Our rights begin at the voting booth not at pitting state governments against federal governments. They are all made up of US Citizens. If we don't remember history we are doomed to repeat it.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
I'm not really understanding why this thread derailed into who's the best/worst for "our" cause. Seems like poster's posts depend on personal opinions, "news" sources, "anecdotal evidence from govt employees", etc. and not facts.

Everybody has opinions but having one doesn't make you right.
Facts are subjective, at least internet facts are. One of the points I have been trying to make. If you rely on the internet for your facts then you are sadly misinformed most of the time. Youtube is the worst place to look for real answers on any subject that has any political undertones. As I said, even the so called 2A advocates for the most part could care less about the truth. They only care about monetization.
Fortunately we here at 6.8 forums are pretty good about having discussions and keeping them civil. Nothing wrong with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
And the SCOTUS is the Branch of the US Government who's job it is to set them straight. Our rights begin at the voting booth not at pitting state governments against federal governments. They are all made up of US Citizens. If we don't remember history we are doomed to repeat it.
So you are saying if the same people who put Biden in pack the Supreme Court and make laws that outlaw AR15s - concealed carry and over 5 round magazines and the packed court says it’s constitutional all 50 states should fall in line . I guess that means we should all fall in line too . If that is the way it is then we don’t have a Republic we have a dictatorship . The 2nd amendment says shall not be infringed not shall not be infringed unless it’s done by executive order or new laws . As far as Georgia voting in constitutional carry , that’s great , but according to what you seem to be saying if the president says by executive order no one in the us can concealed carry then Georgia cops should follow fed laws and arrest them . Remember Hitler was voted in . Yes we should vote but when those who we vote for become tyrants and say get in the boxcar we have an obligation to stand against them . That’s what the second amendment is about .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
So you are saying if the same people who put Biden in pack the Supreme Court and make laws that outlaw AR15s - concealed carry and over 5 round magazines and the packed court says it’s constitutional all 50 states should fall in line . I guess that means we should all fall in line too . If that is the way it is then we don’t have a Republic we have a dictatorship . The 2nd amendment says shall not be infringed not shall not be infringed unless it’s done by executive order or new laws . As far as Georgia voting in constitutional carry , that’s great , but according to what you seem to be saying if the president says by executive order no one in the us can concealed carry then Georgia cops should follow fed laws and arrest them . Remember Hitler was voted in . Yes we should vote but when those who we vote for become tyrants and say get in the boxcar we have an obligation to stand against them . That’s what the second amendment is about .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think you know that none of that is what I am saying. For one, the President does not have the authority to make executive orders which go against the constitution and before you throw up the bump stock, let's get it straight. Nothing about a bump stock was constitutionally protected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
I think you know that none of that is what I am saying. For one, the President does not have the authority to make executive orders which go against the constitution and before you throw up the bump stock, let's get it straight. Nothing about a bump stock was constitutionally protected.
I agree the president doesn’t have the legal power but they do it anyway . If bump stocks , which Trump demanded be considered machine gun ,is not covered as you say then you are saying no auto weapon is constitutionally protected . Where does suppressors , vertical grips , flash “ hiders “ and “ extended mag “fit in your assessment of what is covered ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
I agree the president doesn’t have the legal power but they do it anyway . If bump stocks , which Trump demanded be considered machine gun ,is not covered as you say then you are saying no auto weapon is constitutionally protected . Where does suppressors , vertical grips , flash “ hiders “ and “ extended mag “fit in your assessment of what is covered ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No, not saying that at all. I never once heard Donald Trump say a bump stock was a machine gun. Please, pretend I am from MO and show me. It was nothing but an accessory, not a firearm and therefore not protected. He did that in an attempt to appease the left, basically give them something in hopes of getting them to be more cooperative. He was naive in thinking that would work but he had good intentions. Suppressors do not even fit the same category as the other items you have listed since NFA has already classified them. Please do not try and twist my words or put words in my mouth. This is not Arfcom and we will not sink to that level.
A 30 round mag for an AR is not an extended mag. It is a standard piece of equipment for that gun as is the flash suppressor. Using the left's terminology is just helping their cause.
What President and what EO directly infringed on one of your constitutional rights?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
No, not saying that at all. I never once heard Donald Trump say a bump stock was a machine gun. Please, pretend I am from MO and show me. It was nothing but an accessory, not a firearm and therefore not protected. He did that in an attempt to appease the left, basically give them something in hopes of getting them to be more cooperative. He was naive in thinking that would work but he had good intentions. Suppressors do not even fit the same category as the other items you have listed since NFA has already classified them. Please do not try and twist my words or put words in my mouth. This is not Arfcom and we will not sink to that level.
A 30 round mag for an AR is not an extended mag. It is a standard piece of equipment for that gun as is the flash suppressor. Using the left's terminology is just helping their cause.
What President and what EO directly infringed on one of your constitutional rights?
No, not saying that at all. I never once heard Donald Trump say a bump stock was a machine gun. Please, pretend I am from MO and show me. It was nothing but an accessory, not a firearm and therefore not protected. He did that in an attempt to appease the left, basically give them something in hopes of getting them to be more cooperative. He was naive in thinking that would work but he had good intentions. Suppressors do not even fit the same category as the other items you have listed since NFA has already classified them. Please do not try and twist my words or put words in my mouth. This is not Arfcom and we will not sink to that level.
A 30 round mag for an AR is not an extended mag. It is a standard piece of equipment for that gun as is the flash suppressor. Using the left's terminology is just helping their cause.
What President and what EO directly infringed on one of your constitutional rights?
Have you forgotten Biden and Clinton’s 94 bs ? Are you saying Trump did not request the ATF to classify an accessory known as a bump stock as a machine gun ? If the classification of one accessory can be changed so can any of them. If you will notice I put the mag and flash suppressor in quotation implying it was not me saying they were not standard equipment . While we are on that subject of the 30 or 40 rd is standard as is flash suppressor for AR s so they are protected what are they on other guns which did not originally come with them ? If they didn’t come standard on a gun then they must be an accessory . As far as NFA classification goes the ATF had already decided on the legality of bump stocks and pistol braces too . If one accessory can be reclassified so can they all . With all due respect claiming no EO or president has stepped on my rights so soon after the resent gun bill was signed and ignoring all the attempts that have been made and proposed by EOs and presidents sounds like left wing talking points . It’s like saying “your honor my client is not a threat to his accuser because he never once shot him , “all the while knowing full well he had shot and missed on many occasions . To me and most gun owners attempted infringement is as serious as actual infringement .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
Have you forgotten Biden and Clinton’s 94 bs ? Are you saying Trump did not request the ATF to classify an accessory known as a bump stock as a machine gun ? If the classification of one accessory can be changed so can any of them. If you will notice I put the mag and flash suppressor in quotation implying it was not me saying they were not standard equipment . While we are on that subject of the 30 or 40 rd is standard as is flash suppressor for AR s so they are protected what are they on other guns which did not originally come with them ? If they didn’t come standard on a gun then they must be an accessory . As far as NFA classification goes the ATF had already decided on the legality of bump stocks and pistol braces too . If one accessory can be reclassified so can they all . With all due respect claiming no EO or president has stepped on my rights so soon after the resent gun bill was signed and ignoring all the attempts that have been made and proposed by EOs and presidents sounds like left wing talking points . It’s like saying “your honor my client is not a threat to his accuser because he never once shot him , “all the while knowing full well he had shot and missed on many occasions . To me and most gun owners attempted infringement is as serious as actual infringement .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You said that Trump said bumpstocks were machine guns. I asked you to show me where or when he said that. You have failed. None of the rest of that rhetoric has anything to do with the question I asked.
Also, I have never heard the AWB 94 called Biden's ban. What did Biden have to do with it? He was chairman of the Judiciary committee in 94.
I think it is time I drop out of this conversation. I wish I had never got involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
You said that Trump said bumpstocks were machine guns. I asked you to show me where or when he said that. You have failed. None of the rest of that rhetoric has anything to do with the question I asked.
Also, I have never heard the AWB 94 called Biden's ban. What did Biden have to do with it? He was chairman of the Judiciary committee in 94.
I think it is time I drop out of this conversation. I wish I had never got involved.
. I’m sorry ,I thought everyone knew Trump pushed for bump stocks to be called machine gun and outlawed ,it was very publicized . I’m also surprised you didn’t know about Bidens involvement and pushing of the 94 bill he himself sponsored .If it’s like you said and it wasn’t the president nor elected officials who passed the 94 bill who did ? Or did you not consider it infringement.?Biden has always tried to camouflage anti gun bills as crime bills . I’m sorry if trying to have a conversation about our rights and who has or has not tried to infringe on them has upset you . I believe it is beneficial to debate amongst ourselves not for the sake of being right but so everyone can see things from a different point of view . If you research Bidens crime bill and Trumps directive to the ATF about bump stocks you will see for yourself. That’s on thing that really bothers me , too many people refuse to research and would rather say something someone said is incorrect than to research it for themselves . Maybe they are afraid they will find out it was true and they were mistaken or maybe they are too lazy . I’m sorry you chose to tap out without answering the questions about accessories and if the 94 bill was infringement as is the 2022 bill but that is your choice .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,035 Posts
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
12,713 Posts
. I’m sorry ,I thought everyone knew Trump pushed for bump stocks to be called machine gun and outlawed ,it was very publicized . I’m also surprised you didn’t know about Bidens involvement and pushing of the 94 bill he himself sponsored .If it’s like you said and it wasn’t the president nor elected officials who passed the 94 bill who did ? Or did you not consider it infringement.?Biden has always tried to camouflage anti gun bills as crime bills . I’m sorry if trying to have a conversation about our rights and who has or has not tried to infringe on them has upset you . I believe it is beneficial to debate amongst ourselves not for the sake of being right but so everyone can see things from a different point of view . If you research Bidens crime bill and Trumps directive to the ATF about bump stocks you will see for yourself. That’s on thing that really bothers me , too many people refuse to research and would rather say something someone said is incorrect than to research it for themselves . Maybe they are afraid they will find out it was true and they were mistaken or maybe they are too lazy . I’m sorry you chose to tap out without answering the questions about accessories and if the 94 bill was infringement as is the 2022 bill but that is your choice .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I thought that Trump issued an EO banning bumpstocks. I didn't know that he advised ATF to reclassify them. My mistake.
( "If it’s like you said and it wasn’t the president nor elected officials who passed the 94 bill who did ?").
Again, you continue to attempt to put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't the president or elected officials. I have no idea where you came up with that. I said I had never heard of Biden's involvement and asked why you called it that. Again, I got ridicule in return. You refuse to answer questions when asked. How can someone have a conversation about anything when you make a blanket statement and when asked for sources you ridicule the person asking instead of just doing what Strawdawg did and post a link? I dropped out because I do not feel like this is accomplishing anything. I ask a question and you make accusations or ridicule me for not knowing something instead of just giving an answer. Nothing here to be gained. I am surprised as we have usually agreed on most things in the past. Not upset, don't really care. I just have better things to do with my time than argue with people who are never going to see anything but their own side of an argument.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
I thought that Trump issued an EO banning bumpstocks. I didn't know that he advised ATF to reclassify them. My mistake.
( "If it’s like you said and it wasn’t the president nor elected officials who passed the 94 bill who did ?").
Again, you continue to attempt to put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't the president or elected officials. I have no idea where you came up with that. I said I had never heard of Biden's involvement and asked why you called it that. Again, I got ridicule in return. You refuse to answer questions when asked. How can someone have a conversation about anything when you make a blanket statement and when asked for sources you ridicule the person asking instead of just doing what Strawdawg did and post a link? I dropped out because I do not feel like this is accomplishing anything. I ask a question and you make accusations or ridicule me for not knowing something instead of just giving an answer. Nothing here to be gained. I am surprised as we have usually agreed on most things in the past. Not upset, don't really care. I just have better things to do with my time than argue with people who are never going to see anything but their own side of an argument.
It’s all good brother . We both agree on the important things we just don’t completely agree on how to get there . I’m not for a civil war and know you are correct in that the best weapon we have is our right to vote . I believe if we don’t let them know we are willing to go to war against tyranny we will continue to loose in the fight for free and honest elections . I believe we have been closer to put up or shut up time more than people realize and that we don’t need to be fooled into believing we are in charge of our Republic . I may be wrong and honestly hope I am . I agree we are at an impasse here so let’s shake hands ,so to speak , and agree to disagree .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to state that the rights identified are natural and come from a higher power as a result of our humanity, and they are not granted by any other person or government and cannot be taken away by any other person or government. This is why we are a Constitutional Republic and not a pure democracy. Even a majority of the people cannot take away those rights. At least up until the point where a majority or government deigns to use force to take them away. This is really the fundamental difference between democrats and conservatives (I hesitate to say Republicans these days). Democrats believe in a tyranny by majority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,976 Posts
The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to state that the rights identified are natural and come from a higher power as a result of our humanity, and they are not granted by any other person or overnment and cannot be taken away by any other person or government. This is why we are a Constitutional Republic and not a pure democracy. Even a majority of the people cannot take away those rights. At least up until the point where a majority or government deigns to use force to take them away. This is really the fundamental difference between democrats and conservatives (I hesitate to say Republicans these days). Democrats believe in a tyranny by majority.
The purpose of the Bill of Rights was to state that the rights identified are natural and come from a higher power as a result of our humanity, and they are not granted by any other person or overnment and cannot be taken away by any other person or government. This is why we are a Constitutional Republic and not a pure democracy. Even a majority of the people cannot take away those rights. At least up until the point where a majority or government deigns to use force to take them away. This is really the fundamental difference between democrats and conservatives (I hesitate to say Republicans these days). Democrats believe in a tyranny by majority.
The name Democrat lends credence to your statement describing their taking over by force if they are a majority . I believe that is the driving force behind the left trying to take god out of everything . If they can convince people there is no god then people will have no God given rights . I believe it’s time to let them know we don’t care if 75% of the people vote at the polls or through representation to strip us of our God given rights we ain’t gonna give them up .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
81 - 95 of 95 Posts
Top