Feds demand gun store owner turn over customer list. He refuses

The Patriots of 1776 had proper representation in Parliament before the Revolution? Did their guns suddenly appear from thin air during that year?

The Jury System is the protector of our rights. It takes a UNANIMOUS vote of the People to convict you during a trial.

Voting does not protect any of our rights, as noted in Athens, Tennessee. It was the guaranteed ACQUITTALS of the Patriots in Athens, Tennessee, that [peacefully] protected their rights. That why they never went to trial.

People needed guns back then. They don't now.

I am talking about countries. What the heck does something happening in Athens, TN have to do with that? Nothing.
Would it ALARM you to know that States in the United States are their own soverigns? See the Ninth And Tenth Amendments.
See: Civil War.

How'd that all work out?
 
That's from the Daily Kos, that's hardly a scientific study like the DoJ's.

In fact, it's not even a study, it's just an article with some of the author's opinons based ona few figures. He even admits that:

Well your link is to one that says 108,000. I've not disputed that. Which one do you want to discuss?

My link also shows that the DoJ respected the integrity of the studies showing millions of crimes being deterred annually by firearms. It's not even that far a stretch of the imagination either. If even one-half of 1% of the population had to draw their firearms each year, millions of crimes would be prevented.

The 108,000 figure demonstrates that 6% of the 1/2 of 1% of the United States population actually has to commit to using their firearm to prevent the crime.

No it is a huge stretch. You posted one that has 108,000, that's a huge difference from 2.5million. One of them is messed up. And since I've never known anyone who defended themselves with a gun I believe the 108,000. Is your half of 1% accounting for everyone not owning guns? So are you arguing against your own link and saying 108,000 isn't accurate?
 
The Patriots of 1776 had proper representation in Parliament before the Revolution? Did their guns suddenly appear from thin air during that year?

The Jury System is the protector of our rights. It takes a UNANIMOUS vote of the People to convict you during a trial.

Voting does not protect any of our rights, as noted in Athens, Tennessee. It was the guaranteed ACQUITTALS of the Patriots in Athens, Tennessee, that [peacefully] protected their rights. That why they never went to trial.

People needed guns back then. They don't now.

I am talking about countries. What the heck does something happening in Athens, TN have to do with that? Nothing.
Would it ALARM you to know that States in the United States are their own soverigns? See the Ninth And Tenth Amendments.

Nope
 
Well I did specify long standing. Sure forced democracies that we create have problems. Can you name some country with long standing voting rights that ever had a revolution?
Iraq had elections on a regular basis the entire time Saadam was in power....like clockwork.

So you can't name one? Everyone knows Saddam was a dictator. Name a country with real long standing voting rights that has ever had a revolution.

Liberals love Democracy until it goes against their Liberal agenda:
Full Definition of DEMOCRACY

1
a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

The Affordable Care Act has never had a majority of the people supporting it.

You Lefties are so disingenuous, you're just disgusting!
 
Every thread is a seamless discussion (like a book). It cannot be assumed that you've isolated/segregated your posts from the General Body of the thread in its entirety, unless you have declared so.

To any outside viewer, who is reading this thread (like a book), it appears that you have permitted Paperview to use a certain definition to support your claim, but you have prohibited me from using the same definition to deny your claim.

That's called Double-speak, and you Progressives excel at it.

So I should speak against him if he is supporting my claim? :cuckoo: Isn't that what your doing? I'm defending my claims, he can defend his own.

What kind of response is that?

If you cannot accept my example of citing a city to deny your claim, then you cannot accept his example of citing a city to support your claim.


:eusa_hand:
 
Iraq had elections on a regular basis the entire time Saadam was in power....like clockwork.

So you can't name one? Everyone knows Saddam was a dictator. Name a country with real long standing voting rights that has ever had a revolution.

Liberals love Democracy until it goes against their Liberal agenda:
Full Definition of DEMOCRACY

1
a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

The Affordable Care Act has never had a majority of the people supporting it.

You Lefties are so disingenuous, you're just disgusting!

I have never supported the ACA.
 
Every thread is a seamless discussion (like a book). It cannot be assumed that you've isolated/segregated your posts from the General Body of the thread in its entirety, unless you have declared so.

To any outside viewer, who is reading this thread (like a book), it appears that you have permitted Paperview to use a certain definition to support your claim, but you have prohibited me from using the same definition to deny your claim.

That's called Double-speak, and you Progressives excel at it.

So I should speak against him if he is supporting my claim? :cuckoo: Isn't that what your doing? I'm defending my claims, he can defend his own.

What kind of response is that?

If you cannot accept my example of citing a city to deny your claim, then you cannot accept his example of citing a city to support your claim.


:eusa_hand:

When have I accepted his claim?
 
The Patriots of 1776 had proper representation in Parliament before the Revolution? Did their guns suddenly appear from thin air during that year?

The Jury System is the protector of our rights. It takes a UNANIMOUS vote of the People to convict you during a trial.

Voting does not protect any of our rights, as noted in Athens, Tennessee. It was the guaranteed ACQUITTALS of the Patriots in Athens, Tennessee, that [peacefully] protected their rights. That why they never went to trial.

People needed guns back then. They don't now.

I am talking about countries. What the heck does something happening in Athens, TN have to do with that? Nothing.
Would it ALARM you to know that States in the United States are their own soverigns? See the Ninth And Tenth Amendments.
Ultimately, this is correct as the states can dissolve the Federal goverment w/o any possible legal way for the federal government to stop them.
 
Then why don't you apply the same standard to [MENTION=20155]paperview[/MENTION] ???

Why is he allowed to mention a city, but I am not? That is DOUBLESPEAK.
Hey doof: One more time: Each poster speaks for himself -- and the Whiskey Rebellion --- in which a strong Federal government corralled the militia to put down the uprising, which Washington leading the charge -- was about more than....a city.

The question to be asked, as George put it: Is our children learning?

Most people who know and understand history, recognize the importance of the Whiskey rebellion in our fledgling and young country.

Most people have never even heard of the Athens "battle."


BTW: After they "won" in Athens -- the corrupt powers were simply replaced by a more powerful machine. It was a brave stance, but they didn't really accomplish as much as you think they did.

Most people never heard of it, today, because its not taught in Government Public School. You can rest assured that the newspapers of the day went wild for weeks over the event, and veteran groups all around the south were primed and ready to take up arms to end voter fraud by the Democrats. In fact, your statement proves that Public Schools are either abysmally failing in their mission to educate our youth about American History, or that Public Schools have a political mission to omit such instances in our history.

One would think that our Public Schools would teach about the only successful revolution in the United States during the 20th Century, wouldn't you?

The Battle of Athens was also about "more than a city," it was a response to the political machine corruption of the Democrats all around the South, and it worked. Those regimes fell all over the place in the ensuing decade.

Then blacks learned from it, and armed themselves (Deacons for Defense and Justice) and marched right alongside Martin Luther King during the Civil Rights era, also opposed by Lydon B Johns and the Democrats. Listen to the opening lines of this video:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwueChZUgf8]NO GUNS FOR NEGROES 2of2 THE RACIST ROOTS OF GUN CONTROL - YouTube[/ame]

When the Democrats realized that armed citizens (black and white) had finally destroyed them in the South, they suddenly embraced the Civil Rights movement (I"ll have these ******* voting Democrat for the 200 years" -- LBJ), but simultaneously took a major stance AGAINST GUNS

WOAH WOAH WOAH
The Democrats became anti-gun after guns defeated them!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EfhAFA2yFE]WOAH-OH-OH-AH-AH-AH-AAAA-HA-AH-AH-AH - YouTube[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Tell me why I should care? I'll care if they are taken away.
Why YOU should care indeed? Good GOD...:eusa_hand:

Well please explain why you ask the question. I don't see how it has anything to do with anything else we have been discussing.

Just as you've segregated your posts from the entirely of the tread, now you've isolated/segregated firearms from the entirety of the Constitution and American Law.

Not only have you widened the boundaries of this discussion, but you widened them so much then you're in an entirely different and inaccessible place.

It's like the Cosmological Horizon, the universe is expanding it's boundaries so fast that it can no longer be considered part of the observable universe.

A cosmological horizon is a measure of the distance from which one could possibly retrieve information. This observable constraint is due to various properties of general relativity, the expanding universe, and the physics of Big Bang cosmology. Beyond this limit, no useful information can be obtained.
 
Last edited:
When have I accepted his claim?

By acquiescence, you have not revoked Paperview's claim. You are a part of this thread, whether you like it or not.

Acquiesce: to accept, comply, or submit tacitly or passively

Acquiesce - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

There are a lot of posts I haven't commented on. Now I'm required to comment on everything am I?

And there are many that I haven't commented on either, and it is assumed that any piece of information (confined to this THREAD) that conforms to your ideology and or to my ideology, that is not revoked by either of us, is, by default, accepted by us through acquiescence.

We only know what you have read, or should have read, not what you haven't read. We are not you, and thus we, and outside readers, assume that you have read and accepted those terms and definitions.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top