Free? That Is A Laugh.

[JoeB131]

[Q
No, I keep going with the testimony given. It was in at least one of the links I posted in the other thread. They did not identify themselves to the boys.

Yes, he went out there with a gun. He was not living in suburbia. He was out where you take care of yourself against either man or beast.

Yeah, most places, you don't great people with guns.

You know, I vacation in a pretty rural area. No one has ever pulled a gun on me. and we have bears, wolves and coyotes up there.

 

[Samson]

without getting into another tiresome discussion with Whinerborn about his altered reality, all society can be considered a balance between individual freedoms vs. collective good.

So this city has a regulation that everyone has to be hooked into the electrical and water grids. Are these good laws? Maybe. Should we respect the right of eccentrics to live off the grid? Maybe. Maybe not.

Were her methods to create her own electric and water annoying to her neighbors? Maybe. was she burying her poop in the backyard?

Me, I kind of like living in a city where we have purified water, consistent electric delivery, and effective sewage.

Yeah the key here is "living in a city" or town, or whatever area must include regulations designed to maintain a safe community.

If you want to live off the grid, the build your shack resplendent with goats, "okra," windmills, rain-pond, and out-house somewhere it will not destroy the property values of your neighbors and threaten the health of the community.

 

[WinterBorn]

[Q
No, I keep going with the testimony given. It was in at least one of the links I posted in the other thread. They did not identify themselves to the boys.

Yes, he went out there with a gun. He was not living in suburbia. He was out where you take care of yourself against either man or beast.

Yeah, most places, you don't great people with guns.

You know, I vacation in a pretty rural area. No one has ever pulled a gun on me. and we have bears, wolves and coyotes up there.

Next time you are vacationing in your rural area, walk around on someone else's property and see how you are greeted.

 

[WinterBorn]

[
We? LMAO!! Sorry, but people with agenda's like yours are few and far between.

And the DNC has done no better for the middle class. And if the DNC hadn't been anti-second amendment, the gun owners wouldn't have bailed. Personally, I have little respect for either party. They are both bought and paid for by corporate interests. If you do not see that you are a bigger fools than I thought. And I am pretty sure you are a huge fool.

Um, no, actually, the middle class did pretty well under Bill Clinton. My salary doubled on his watch. As opposed to dropping under Bush and Bush Jr.

And frankly, the Democrats have been kind of cowardly on gun issues. I mean, they passed the Brady Bill, but they haven't done much since.

"Well, I don't have a middle class anymore, but I gots my Gun and My Bible!!!"

Right wing retards.

They have tried to write and pass other legislation. But have been defeated. When 2/3 of the population do not want handguns to be banned, politicians will not press for bans.

My salary increased throughout my career. Other than an implosion in 2003 (which had me making less for 6 or 7 months) I have consistently increased my income. The only time it dropped significantly was in the last month when I made a choice to change careers.

 

[JoeB131]

[Q

They have tried to write and pass other legislation. But have been defeated. When 2/3 of the population do not want handguns to be banned, politicians will not press for bans.

My salary increased throughout my career. Other than an implosion in 2003 (which had me making less for 6 or 7 months) I have consistently increased my income. The only time it dropped significantly was in the last month when I made a choice to change careers.

Whatever, guy, I don't give a fuck.

For most people, Republicans fucked it up. And the gun nuts made it possible.

 

[WinterBorn]

[Q

They have tried to write and pass other legislation. But have been defeated. When 2/3 of the population do not want handguns to be banned, politicians will not press for bans.

My salary increased throughout my career. Other than an implosion in 2003 (which had me making less for 6 or 7 months) I have consistently increased my income. The only time it dropped significantly was in the last month when I made a choice to change careers.

Whatever, guy, I don't give a fuck.

For most people, Republicans fucked it up. And the gun nuts made it possible.

Your connection of the "gun nuts" and the republicans is ridiculous.

 

[WinterBorn]

[Q

They have tried to write and pass other legislation. But have been defeated. When 2/3 of the population do not want handguns to be banned, politicians will not press for bans.

My salary increased throughout my career. Other than an implosion in 2003 (which had me making less for 6 or 7 months) I have consistently increased my income. The only time it dropped significantly was in the last month when I made a choice to change careers.

Whatever, guy, I don't give a fuck.

For most people, Republicans fucked it up. And the gun nuts made it possible.

Oh, and I have no doubt you don't give a fuck. You want the world like you want it, and screw what anyone else wants. That has been made abundantly clear in various threads. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

But get the dems to make meaningful changes in banking regs, tax laws, and campaign finance. Then talk to us about what the gun nuts did or did not do.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Your connection of the "gun nuts" and the republicans is ridiculous.

No, actually, here's the thing. The Gop is made up of the Rich and the Rubes.

The rich have a goal. Undo all the Progressive policies enacted between Teddy Roosevelt to FDR. It's actually self-defeating, but the problem with the wealthy in general is they think they are better than everyone else.

The Rubes are easily manipulated by pulling their strings on sex, religion, race and fear. and they keep pulling the lever for the "R" and then keep wondering why their middle class lifestyles keep declining. Fuck, I did it for years until Bush made it so obvious even I couldn't ignore it anymore.

Now, here's the thing with the gun nuts. You have the Rubes who really think that having a gun keeps them safe from the scary darkies they think are out there. It really doesn't. A gun in home is far more likely to kill a person in the home than a bad guy.

You have the rich who want to sell guns. So they keep the Gun Show and Private Seller loopholes open so that there's just enough crime to keep the Rubes nice and scared. Scared rubes buy more guns and keep pulling that lever for the "R"'s. And then when they watch their job go to China and their consumer taxes go up so that the rich can enjoy another tax break, they stand there slackjawed wondering why.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Oh, and I have no doubt you don't give a fuck. You want the world like you want it, and screw what anyone else wants. That has been made abundantly clear in various threads. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

But get the dems to make meaningful changes in banking regs, tax laws, and campaign finance. Then talk to us about what the gun nuts did or did not do.

Um, they've done those things. And the Republicans try to undo them at every turn. Kind of like common sense gun control.

 

[WinterBorn]

[

Oh, and I have no doubt you don't give a fuck. You want the world like you want it, and screw what anyone else wants. That has been made abundantly clear in various threads. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

But get the dems to make meaningful changes in banking regs, tax laws, and campaign finance. Then talk to us about what the gun nuts did or did not do.

Um, they've done those things. And the Republicans try to undo them at every turn. Kind of like common sense gun control.

They've done those things?? LMAO!!! They had a dem in the whitehouse and a majority in congress, and didn't do a damn thing about tax reform or campaign finance. And what they did do on banking regs was so minor as to be inconsequential. They are bought and paid for just like the repubs.

 

[WinterBorn]

[

Your connection of the "gun nuts" and the republicans is ridiculous.

No, actually, here's the thing. The Gop is made up of the Rich and the Rubes.

The rich have a goal. Undo all the Progressive policies enacted between Teddy Roosevelt to FDR. It's actually self-defeating, but the problem with the wealthy in general is they think they are better than everyone else.

The Rubes are easily manipulated by pulling their strings on sex, religion, race and fear. and they keep pulling the lever for the "R" and then keep wondering why their middle class lifestyles keep declining. Fuck, I did it for years until Bush made it so obvious even I couldn't ignore it anymore.

Now, here's the thing with the gun nuts. You have the Rubes who really think that having a gun keeps them safe from the scary darkies they think are out there. It really doesn't. A gun in home is far more likely to kill a person in the home than a bad guy.

You have the rich who want to sell guns. So they keep the Gun Show and Private Seller loopholes open so that there's just enough crime to keep the Rubes nice and scared. Scared rubes buy more guns and keep pulling that lever for the "R"'s. And then when they watch their job go to China and their consumer taxes go up so that the rich can enjoy another tax break, they stand there slackjawed wondering why.

First you complain that there is too much crime, then you complain that the crime is fictional so "rubes" will buy guns.

What is abundantly clear is than hundreds of thousands of people stop crimes with privately owned guns. And that "gun in the home is more likely to kill someone in the home" nonsense is no more accurate now than it was when you first posted it.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Oh, and I have no doubt you don't give a fuck. You want the world like you want it, and screw what anyone else wants. That has been made abundantly clear in various threads. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.

But get the dems to make meaningful changes in banking regs, tax laws, and campaign finance. Then talk to us about what the gun nuts did or did not do.

Um, they've done those things. And the Republicans try to undo them at every turn. Kind of like common sense gun control.

They've done those things?? LMAO!!! They had a dem in the whitehouse and a majority in congress, and didn't do a damn thing about tax reform or campaign finance. And what they did do on banking regs was so minor as to be inconsequential. They are bought and paid for just like the repubs.

Uh, actually, they DID pass Dodd-Frank, which is a decent law. They also revoked the Bush Tax giveaways- finally- and did a few other things.

As for campaign finance reform, we had some pretty good laws, most of which got thrown out by Citizen's United.

 

[JoeB131]

[

First you complain that there is too much crime, then you complain that the crime is fictional so "rubes" will buy guns.

What is abundantly clear is than hundreds of thousands of people stop crimes with privately owned guns. And that "gun in the home is more likely to kill someone in the home" nonsense is no more accurate now than it was when you first posted it.

Uh, yeah, "I don't want Kellerman to be Right" isn't an argument.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Florida Makes Off-Grid Living Illegal 8211 Mandates All Homes Must Be Connected To An Electricity Grid Collective-Evolution

"It’s no secret that an opposition to sustainable living exists. Earlier this year, Texas state brought several SWAT teams to a sustainable community and threatened to shut it down. Each one of the community members were initially handcuffed at gunpoint. It was called “The Garden of Eden Community,” and was totally self sustainable. You can read more about that here.

This time, it’s Robin Speronis that’s come under fire. She lives off the grid in Florida, completely independent of the city’s water and electric system. A few weeks ago, officials ruled her off-grid home illegal. Officials cited the International Property Maintenance Code, which mandates that homes be connected to an electricity grid and a running water source. That’s just like saying our dependency on corporations isn’t even a choice. The battle to live without most utilities has been ongoing for Robin, the self-sufficient woman has lived for more than a year and a half using solar energy, a propane camping stove and rain water.

In the end, she was found not guilty of not having a proper sewer or electrical system; but was guilty of not being hooked up to an approved water supply."

State crackdown is easy to understand if familar with federal law enforcement priorities putting the 'soverign citizens movement' as the number one threat. Off-grid types probably share philosophies in common with such militant groups hence states passing laws requiring participation in power grids and whatnot. Absent everything else of course it seems unfair. But the laws requiring basic sanitation and such are out of concern for disease incubators as seen in locales devoid of basic sanitation, water, and power. If you have those things great, but generally off-grid is not synonymous with having those things as much as living like a 19th century colonist.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

You being psychotic is NOT news, Joey.

Let me tell you something........if Im part of law enforcement, Im keeping a real close eye on this social oddball. Its these kind of people who snap......loaners who spend 16 hours a day on a fucking internet message board. Its these type of nuts existing is EXACTLY the reason people need guns and lots of 'em with lots and lots of ammo. All of these mass shooter crazies had one thing in common: they were all social oddballs.

People who spend 16 hours a day in one spot aren't a concern to law enforcement. They know who they are, where they are, and what they're doing. It's the ones they don't know what they're doing they worry about.

 

[WinterBorn]

[

First you complain that there is too much crime, then you complain that the crime is fictional so "rubes" will buy guns.

What is abundantly clear is than hundreds of thousands of people stop crimes with privately owned guns. And that "gun in the home is more likely to kill someone in the home" nonsense is no more accurate now than it was when you first posted it.

Uh, yeah, "I don't want Kellerman to be Right" isn't an argument.

Oh, but "I don't care about those studies" is an argument?

 

[WinterBorn]

Little JoeyB, the simple fact is that around a third of the households in this country have guns. Compare that to the number of gun deaths and injuries and you have an overwhelming majority of gun owners never harming another human being.

Also, unless you can get every single person who doesn't own a gun to vote the way you want, the 2nd amendment will not be removed. And while you claim you are stacking the courts, the facts are that the SCOTUS has consistently ruled that it is an individual right. Most of the time they refuse to hear 2nd amendment cases. Even the one in the 1930s did not remove the idea that it was an individual right. It was simply a way to generate income and track the full automatic weapons.

 

[JoeB131]

Little JoeyB, the simple fact is that around a third of the households in this country have guns. Compare that to the number of gun deaths and injuries and you have an overwhelming majority of gun owners never harming another human being.

Also, unless you can get every single person who doesn't own a gun to vote the way you want, the 2nd amendment will not be removed. And while you claim you are stacking the courts, the facts are that the SCOTUS has consistently ruled that it is an individual right. Most of the time they refuse to hear 2nd amendment cases. Even the one in the 1930s did not remove the idea that it was an individual right. It was simply a way to generate income and track the full automatic weapons.

Again, you don't need to remove the Second Amendment. Just render it obsolete by judicial fiat.

The current interpretation that it protects the private right to own a gun in a modern fiction.



Many are startled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own a gun until 2008, when District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the capital’s law effectively banning handguns in the home. In fact, every other time the court had ruled previously, it had ruled otherwise. Why such a head-snapping turnaround? Don’t look for answers in dusty law books or the arcane reaches of theory.

Read more: How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - Michael Waldman - POLITICO Magazine

 

[WinterBorn]

Little JoeyB, the simple fact is that around a third of the households in this country have guns. Compare that to the number of gun deaths and injuries and you have an overwhelming majority of gun owners never harming another human being.

Also, unless you can get every single person who doesn't own a gun to vote the way you want, the 2nd amendment will not be removed. And while you claim you are stacking the courts, the facts are that the SCOTUS has consistently ruled that it is an individual right. Most of the time they refuse to hear 2nd amendment cases. Even the one in the 1930s did not remove the idea that it was an individual right. It was simply a way to generate income and track the full automatic weapons.

Again, you don't need to remove the Second Amendment. Just render it obsolete by judicial fiat.

The current interpretation that it protects the private right to own a gun in a modern fiction.



Many are startled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own a gun until 2008, when District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the capital’s law effectively banning handguns in the home. In fact, every other time the court had ruled previously, it had ruled otherwise. Why such a head-snapping turnaround? Don’t look for answers in dusty law books or the arcane reaches of theory.

Read more: How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - Michael Waldman - POLITICO Magazine

If it were not an individual right, why didn't they SCOTUS rule that individuals couldn't buy machine guns back in the 1930s?

It has not been ruled on between the 1930s and 2008. So the chances of you getting judicial fiat to work in your favor might take 75 years or so. lol

 

[JoeB131]

If it were not an individual right, why didn't they SCOTUS rule that individuals couldn't buy machine guns back in the 1930s?

It has not been ruled on between the 1930s and 2008. So the chances of you getting judicial fiat to work in your favor might take 75 years or so. lol

Actually, it will happen 10 minutes after Scalia takes a dirt nap and Hillary appoints his replacement.