What firearms are protected by the 2nd Amendment

[bigrebnc1775]

The Senate continued the act. They did not increase its provisions, despite bigreb's continual lie to the contrary. However, since biggie is a big statist type guy when it comes to oppressing his enemies, I am sure that he would support such an extension if it does happen.

I'm not sure if the bill has been submitted or proposed to Congress yet, however, it is something that the Obama adminstration is seeking to expand upon. It's called the Communications Assistance for (or To) Law Enforcement Act. There's numerous articles on the subject from 2010 in which they report that the bill is supposed to be proposed during 2011. This may be precisely the reason why the Senate extended the Patriot Act.

of course the defender of everything liberal jake atarkey will disagree with you.

 

[BrianH]

The Senate continued the act. They did not increase its provisions, despite bigreb's continual lie to the contrary. However, since biggie is a big statist type guy when it comes to oppressing his enemies, I am sure that he would support such an extension if it does happen.

I'm not sure if the bill has been submitted or proposed to Congress yet, however, it is something that the Obama adminstration is seeking to expand upon. It's called the Communications Assistance for (or To) Law Enforcement Act. There's numerous articles on the subject from 2010 in which they report that the bill is supposed to be proposed during 2011. This may be precisely the reason why the Senate extended the Patriot Act.

of course the defender of everything liberal jake atarkey will disagree with you.

I don't know why....it's easily "googleable"...lol. You type in Obama and the name of the Act come up with articles from every major newspaper.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

jake you're being laughed at. You been booted 3 stories down. Unless you have some facts and sources to go along with your liberal statist opinion, you have nothing.

 

[BrianH]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

It's obvious you haven't read any of the articles. They specifically state that provisions of the Act will be expanded. In the first paragraph it says it "seeking new regulations." They're specifically concerened with being able to do the same thing with the internet and internet capable devices as they have done with the phone system. Quit posting in the blind and actually READ.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

It's obvious you haven't read any of the articles. They specifically state that provisions of the Act will be expanded. In the first paragraph it says it "seeking new regulations." They're specifically concerened with being able to do the same thing with the internet and internet capable devices as they have done with the phone system. Quit posting in the blind and actually READ.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html

He won't he never does.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

 

[JakeStarkey]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

jake you're being laughed at. You been booted 3 stories down. Unless you have some facts and sources to go along with your liberal statist opinion, you have nothing.

You made the assertion, never evidence directly that we can look at, and you are being laughed at.

 

[BrianH]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

jake you're being laughed at. You been booted 3 stories down. Unless you have some facts and sources to go along with your liberal statist opinion, you have nothing.

You made the assertion, never evidence directly that we can look at, and you are being laughed at.

Your screen name needs to be changed to JakeMalarkey. I've posted you a link that says specifically what is involved with establishing changes to the Act. The adminstration is not set on completley changing the provisions, but seek to extened the reach of the "wiretapping" to cover interent usage via computer and/or any other interenet accessing device. If you choose to ignore it then you're

 

[JakeStarkey]

But the powers are not "expanded" in the sense that bigrebnc is insisting, in that greater powers than before have been granted. Same Act, kiddos.

 

[BrianH]

But the powers are not "expanded" in the sense that bigrebnc is insisting, in that greater powers than before have been granted. Same Act, kiddos.

How exactly is he "insisting" and what does "expand" mean to you? They are expanding the power to cover more methods of communications. That's an expansion to the Act. When you add new things to an act, you're expanding and widening it's powers.

 

[Douger]

If the Egyptian kids were well armed that movie would have been nothing more than a commercial.
If you morons used your rights, all problems would be over in a couple of daze.
Pussies.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

But the powers are not "expanded" in the sense that bigrebnc is insisting, in that greater powers than before have been granted. Same Act, kiddos.

How exactly is he "insisting" and what does "expand" mean to you? They are expanding the power to cover more methods of communications. That's an expansion to the Act. When you add new things to an act, you're expanding and widening it's powers.

Jakes a liberal defender of obama, according to jake obama has done nothing.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And none of that says the Act expanded its powers, that's the point, but biggie the statist would have you think it did. He's wrong; what's new?

jake you're being laughed at. You been booted 3 stories down. Unless you have some facts and sources to go along with your liberal statist opinion, you have nothing.

You made the assertion, never evidence directly that we can look at, and you are being laughed at.

Come on jake stop using your opinion. Give some evidence to support your opinion. I sure if you had some by now you would have produced it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Senate just extended it....

So the Republicans in the house blocked it, but the democrats in the Senate extended it?

So clearly this is the fault of George Bush!

 

[Big Fitz]

*shrug*

The second doesn't specify what kind of arms.

I'm fine with a lot of stuff, but I draw the line at anything that has to take a ballistic trajectory or fires ammunition that is meant to explode. In other words, no howitzers or bazookas. Sorry guys.

And anyone with common sense knows it would not cover those things. Of course those on the left would like you to believe that a 30-30 deer rifle is the same thing as a nuclear bomb though when it comes to why they would like to restrict firearms, but that is neither here nor there.

Firearms are generally weapons that throw a slug or some other NON EXPLOSIVE projectile. Slugs, arrows, buckshot, quarrels, sling stones... The like.

Generally they must be hand or shoulder fired in primary configuration, although they can be bipod or tripod mounted.

This means Bazookas, flamethrowers, grenade launchers, recoilless rifles, shoulder launched rockets or missiles, mortars, and miniguns (with maybe the exception of the M-214, OY!) could be regulated and still remain constitutional.

Of course, if you have a neighbor who has a penchant for USING his belt fed M-60 in the neighborhood to chase away stray dogs on his property, I'm sure you'll be realistically go after him for reckless endangerment, and at least civil zoning ordinances.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The Senate just extended it....

So the Republicans in the house blocked it, but the democrats in the Senate extended it?

So clearly this is the fault of George Bush!

Bush started obama extended and expanded it. Bsh is gone time to place the blame else where.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Common sense dictates that Skull Pilot does not get a guided missile frigate, mdn2000 does not get a gunship, uncensored 2008 does not a tank, and bigreb does not get a sling shot.

The liberal "all or nothing" straw man argument.
Hey, jakey....an intruder breaks into your home and grabs for your wife with the intent of doing sexual battery would you....A) have gun handy and shoot this POS in the gonads?...B) use harsh language to stop the battery?

 

[JakeStarkey]

brianh, the act is not expanded in power. Show exactly where the Act gives more power. You can't.

Let's thank bigreb above for the perfect example of a straw man argument. I will demonstrate now just how witless the above statement. bigrebnc, I will shoot the intruder in the face with my 1911 .45. Don't need a guided missile frigate, a gunship, a tank, or a sling shot to do that.

Don't confuse personal protection against intruders, such as you, with taking on the National Guard.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

brianh, the act is not expanded in power. Show exactly where the Act gives more power. You can't.

Let's thank bigreb above for the perfect example of a straw man argument. I will demonstrate now just how witless the above statement. bigrebnc, I will shoot the intruder in the face with my 1911 .45. Don't need a guided missile frigate, a gunship, a tank, or a sling shot to do that.

Don't confuse personal protection against intruders, such as you, with taking on the National Guard.

the act is not expanded in power. Show exactly where the Act gives more power. You can't.

The title of the link I used should give it away. the patriot act was not intended for domestic to domestic use. Now it is and obama wants to reinforce it.