And that's all that matters, the opinion of 9 justices.
AND ALL THAT MATTERS TO YOU IS THE OPINION OF RIGHT WING MILITIA CRAZIES!
Yea, I will take the 9 justices, after all... that IS in the US constitution. Your Rabid Right Militia are not.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If a member of their group is apprehended by the police and is in the process of being charged with a crime... say the crime is an Illegal sawed off shotgun. Your local sheriff who is an oathcreaper can say... Um... NOPE... I know this guy... He's an OatyCreaper and a friend of mine, even though he just used this gun in a possible crime... I won't disarm him.
Now a NORMAL Sheriff (non OathCreaper) would see a crime suspect, disarm him and if appropriate, arrest him.
How many more examples do you need because I have hundreds of em.
This is exactly what Obama is doing with Obamacare. You are a large union or corporation and a friend of mine, you are not subjected to this part of the law. Now a NORMAL president would enforce the law EQUALLY, and not exempt his friends. But, I'm sure you see it differently, since Obama is part of the un-Oathkeepers, and you being a member surely support his selective enforcement.
A stop sign, like your sawed off shotgun are just metal... they do nothing. (But you already knew that.)
Traffic regulations and gun regulations can save lives... maybe YOUR LIFE, or your loved ones.
Nope you aren't getting off that easy, how is a sawed off shotgun any different then a long barreled shotgun. They both fire the same shell, they both are the same action, if anything the long barreled gun would be deadlier, it would hold a tighter pattern not to mention be more accurate, but of course you already knew that.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
This is exactly what Obama is doing with Obamacare. You are a large union or corporation and a friend of mine, you are not subjected to this part of the law. Now a NORMAL president would enforce the law EQUALLY, and not exempt his friends. But, I'm sure you see it differently, since Obama is part of the un-Oathkeepers, and you being a member surely support his selective enforcement.
Box won't answer that, he might spout off some bs which never even answers your point.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Box won't answer that, he might spout off some bs which never even answers your point.
Yes, he's been running from it. He can't acknowledge it. That's why he's on this Oathkeepers rant. Rulers can disobey laws, the little people cannot.
I guess when rulers act as vigilantes, they call their non-enforcement on a select group of people "waivers". It's certainly not vigilantism when you exempted certain people from the law and enforce it on the rest.
This is exactly what Obama is doing with Obamacare. You are a large union or corporation and a friend of mine, you are not subjected to this part of the law. Now a NORMAL president would enforce the law EQUALLY, and not exempt his friends. But, I'm sure you see it differently, since Obama is part of the un-Oathkeepers, and you being a member surely support his selective enforcement.
The law is passed and it's implementation is legal... if you disagree, then CHANGE THE LAW.
So far the GOP House has tried 43 times to LEGALLY get rid of ObamaCare and every time the bill has failed.
What do you propose??? That they vote 44 times and fail???
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
The law is passed and it's implementation is legal... if you disagree, then CHANGE THE LAW.
It's already been changed from when it was passed. Lobbyist representing big businesses and unions changed it without lobbing congress. My representative didn't have a vote to change the law. If the president wants to change the law, bring it to the LAWMAKERS and have them amend it.
BTW...There are representatives trying to change the law. You've suggested they roll over on their constituents because there is some max on how many times and ways to change the law. I never read there was a limit in the constitution.
Nope you aren't getting off that easy, how is a sawed off shotgun any different then a long barreled shotgun. They both fire the same shell, they both are the same action, if anything the long barreled gun would be deadlier, it would hold a tighter pattern not to mention be more accurate, but of course you already knew that.
WOW! For an (alleged) GunHugger your ignorance of how a shotgun works is surprising.
Why not google Shotgun chokes for a longer version of how a shotgun works.
You can buy the exact same 12ga Wingmaster 870 pump shotgun but depending on the "choke" that exact same gun will fire very different patterns.
Your choice is a 'full' a 'modified' an 'improved cylinder' etc choke at the end of the barrel.
A full choke is good for long range. It will hold it's pattern over a longer time to be more effective with a tighter pattern at long range. The Exact same shotgun... with a improved cylinder choke the gun will deliver a much wider pattern at a closer range. Likewise a sawed off shotgun (which is much shorter and easily concealed) will provide the widest pattern (hit the most of a target) at very short ranges.
Criminals who might shoot in a drug store robbery would prefer a short (sawed off) wide pattern (range of only a few feet) sawed off shotgun.
(I was certified with a similar gun while in Vietnam, but Why Am I Giving Henry ShotGun Lessons)
So Henry... your statement " if anything the long barreled gun would be deadlier," is not necessarily correct. A sawed off shotgun would hit a much wider pattern than a standard shotgun at close range.
BTW, My shotgun lessons are $25 per hour... I'll expect a check by the end of the month!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
BTW...There are representatives trying to change the law. You've suggested they roll over on their constituents because there is some max on how many times and ways to change the law. I never read there was a limit in the constitution.
No of course there is no limit... They can keep on voting for the same bill a hundred times, and fail. Or they can do their job and get on with governing this country. A GOP jobs bill would be nice in times of high unemployment. A bill to fund the govt might seem pressing, unless you're an anarchists and want the country to fail.
We pay these people to legislate... voting a hundred times on a failed bill is not legitimate legislation.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
We pay these people to legislate... voting a hundred times on a failed bill is not legitimate legislation.
Forcing legislation onto such a large number of Americans is irresponsible governing. Passing a law with ZERO bipartisan agreement was very irresponsible. Democrats didn't care that it was unpopular with tens of millions of Americans. Now, after realizing the unpopularity, Obama is unilaterally changing the law by exempting his supporters(unions). Yeah, the Democrats created a real governing mess in 2009. And they knew it. Now they are trying to blame Republican for an environment they created by passing Obamacare.
Forcing legislation onto such a large number of Americans is irresponsible governing. Passing a law with ZERO bipartisan agreement was very irresponsible. Democrats didn't care that it was unpopular with tens of millions of Americans. Now, after realizing the unpopularity, Obama is unilaterally changing the law by exempting his supporters(unions). Yeah, the Democrats created a real governing mess in 2009. And they knew it. Now they are trying to blame Republican for an environment they created by passing Obamacare.
Obama Care or some kind of Universal Health Care for America has been supported by US Presidents both Democrat and Republican:
~ President Theodore Roosevelt called for national health care in 1912. ~ President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Social Security into law in 1935, but he left out national health insurance because of opposition from organized medicine. ~ In 1945 President Harry Truman recommended a national health insurance program ~ President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Medicare and Medicaid into law in 1965. ~ President Bill Clinton proposed reworking the health care system with universal coverage in 1993 but Republicans succeeded in killing the legislation. ~ In 2003 President George W. Bush signed a law adding prescription drugs to Medicare. Others ~ Newt Gingrich: Though he reversed his position in May 2011, Gingrich had been a big supporter of the individual mandate since his early days in the House. In 1992 and 1993, when Republicans were looking for alternatives to Hillary Clinton's health care plan, many, including then-House minority whip Gingrich ~ Nixon, Reagan & Ford all promoted (but did not enact) health care reform
Interestingly it was the REPUBLICANS who first promoted the Individual Mandate, which was included in the original Obamacare but eliminated by the REPUBLICANS.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
So Henry... your statement " if anything the long barreled gun would be deadlier," is not necessarily correct. A sawed off shotgun would hit a much wider pattern than a standard shotgun at close range.
A long useless rant which in the end he again makes my point. You do not want a large spread if engaging someone, you want as many pellets to hit your target as possible, not have flyers all over the place. The more shot to hit your target the more deadlier, common sense. Not to mention accuracy which yes even with a shotgun you need to aim, would you rather be holding a sawed off one handed or have a butt stock firmly seated against your should so you can actually look down your sights.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
A long useless rant which in the end he again makes my point. You do not want a large spread if engaging someone, you want as many pellets to hit your target as possible, not have flyers all over the place. The more shot to hit your target the more deadlier, common sense. Not to mention accuracy which yes even with a shotgun you need to aim, would you rather be holding a sawed off one handed or have a butt stock firmly seated against your should so you can actually look down your sights.
I never mentioned one hand... A sawed off shotgun could be held with two and with a stock fired from the shoulder. Again you are wrong... in targets or as a criminal, a shotgun at the range of a few feet can punch a hole in the chest of one man, or it can hit 5 at a few feet range. A criminal can hit 5 people or he can shoot 1 shot for each person. The difference is the choke (or lack of one) in the case of a sawed off shotgun.
There is a reason that sawed off shotguns are illegal... The reason has nothing to do with "freedom" or with sports shooting or with hunting. The reason they are illegal is that they serve no practical purpose except for criminals.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Again you are wrong... in targets or as a criminal, a shotgun at the range of a few feet can punch a hole in the chest of one man, or it can hit 5 at a few feet range. A criminal can hit 5 people or he can shoot 1 shot for each person. The difference is the choke (or lack of one) in the case of a sawed off shotgun.
.
The rounds spread but its not like in the movies You're not going to take out 5 people at 20ft
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Logged
