Buoght a gun today.

All this is so humorous. Gun ownership is so 18th century, like slavery, which used to be a right too. You look at counties like Somalia. Little boys with guns shot down a American Helicopter on a peace mission. Or, hell even the downing of MH 17. Is this the kind of word we want? Unchecked weaponry though out the world? What, like I am a threat or something...just by questioning weapons ownership. Do we need to ARM everyone all the time period no questions asked, ever? WOW. That isn't the kind of world none of us should live in...ever.

Yeah, freedom. It's so old fashioned. Who needs it when we have enlightened politicians to tell us what we need?
 
Should the government/military stop doing background checks before awarding security clearances?

Maybe 48 years ago I should have told the OSI to save that $10K because it was just a waste of time. After all, it didn't stop Edward Snowden.

which Amendment to the Constitution confers a security clearance again? Can't say as if I'm familiar with that one....

The need for protecting the nation’s secrets has been recognized from the earliest days of established government. In the United States the authority to do so has historically been based on the inherent war powers of the President under the U.S. Constitution. Besides those general powers, Congress, by statue, has vested in the President specific powers and means for protecting national secrets, most particularly since the end of World War II. Those statutes include the National Security Act of 1947 that established the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency Act of 1959 that established NSA. More recently enacted was the National Imagery and Mapping Agency Act of 1996, creating NIMA from a number of offices scattered throughout the government. That Act recognized and formalized the existence of the National Reconnaissance Office, which, until then, had been so secret that its very name could not be mentioned.

MORE: Sheldon I. Cohen - SECURITY CLEARANCES AND THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION

It ain't rocket science, sparky...

very good genius, too bad we aren't talking about national defense matters, but rather about the 2nd Amendment. The National Security Act of 1947 also established the Air Force, of which I have been a member of for nearly 20 years. Thank you for going completely off topic & bringing up something I am also very familiar with. Just for your edification, it isn't called NIMA anymore, it's NGA (National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency). That's been the case for 11 years now....
 
which Amendment to the Constitution confers a security clearance again? Can't say as if I'm familiar with that one....

The need for protecting the nation’s secrets has been recognized from the earliest days of established government. In the United States the authority to do so has historically been based on the inherent war powers of the President under the U.S. Constitution. Besides those general powers, Congress, by statue, has vested in the President specific powers and means for protecting national secrets, most particularly since the end of World War II. Those statutes include the National Security Act of 1947 that established the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency Act of 1959 that established NSA. More recently enacted was the National Imagery and Mapping Agency Act of 1996, creating NIMA from a number of offices scattered throughout the government. That Act recognized and formalized the existence of the National Reconnaissance Office, which, until then, had been so secret that its very name could not be mentioned.

MORE: Sheldon I. Cohen - SECURITY CLEARANCES AND THE PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION

It ain't rocket science, sparky...

very good genius, too bad we aren't talking about national defense matters, but rather about the 2nd Amendment. The National Security Act of 1947 also established the Air Force, of which I have been a member of for nearly 20 years. Thank you for going completely off topic & bringing up something I am also very familiar with. Just for your edification, it isn't called NIMA anymore, it's NGA (National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency). That's been the case for 11 years now....

Well, sparky, you're obviously a world class genius - and a legend in your own mind.
 
paranoid-gun-nuts-gun-nuts-politics-1359580081.jpg
 
Springfield XD-40 sub-compact.
XD® Sub Compact .40SW | Top Polymer Pistols for Men & Women
Small, Liight, with plenty of capacity and power.

Naturally, since I bought directly from Springfield, I went thru a background check. Took about 2 minutes once I fuilled out the form.

So, I sit here at home, looking thru the manual the mags, the gun, the accessories, the case, the paperwork -- and I simply cannot find the part of the background check that now prevents me from comitting a crime.

Someone please help me out here. :dunno:

Gee, since it was so easy, why isn't everyone required to have a background check - as in "Universal Background Checks"? Thanks for proving the point.

BTW, sparky, the background check that you passed only means that you are reasonably sane and have no criminal history - that they can find.

Lets see. I bought a jig that allows me to drill out a block of aluminum and make a lower receiver for an AR 15. So I can now build my own, non registered, non traceable, assault style weapon. What do I care if a background check is required? you don't need to pass one to get a gun.
 

The NRA kicked you gun grabbers asses on a law you claimed 85% of the population was in favor of.

And you're bragging about that? That is why you retards are the greatest threat against my future gun rights.

the greatest threat against gun rights are democrats. don't vote for any and you have nothing to worry about
 
All this is so humorous. Gun ownership is so 18th century, like slavery, which used to be a right too. You look at counties like Somalia. Little boys with guns shot down a American Helicopter on a peace mission. Or, hell even the downing of MH 17. Is this the kind of word we want? Unchecked weaponry though out the world? What, like I am a threat or something...just by questioning weapons ownership. Do we need to ARM everyone all the time period no questions asked, ever? WOW. That isn't the kind of world none of us should live in...ever.
Meanwhile, in the US, during a discussion about gun control...
 
Is the Second Amendment obsolete? The wording is confusing.

actually, it's rather simple, people are just too dumb to read it correctly.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state (prefatory clause), the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed (operative clause)." Prefatory means what comes before. It's an intro basically. The operative clause defines what is the meaning. In the 2nd Amendment case, the right of the people to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed is what the Amendment means. One is not predicated on the other as the operative clause can stand on its own, whereas the prefatory can not. The issue is decided, the 2nd Amendment is about the right of the people to own/bear firearms.
The Second Amendment means whatever the Supreme Court says it means.
Too bad for you anti-gun loons, eh?
 

Forum List

Back
Top