Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: In an effort to find some common ground.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: In an effort to find some common ground. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 4:41:06 PM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A word is not a statement. The courts inescapably therefore are arguing that everybody is in the militia. There is simply no other interpretation possible without bastardizing the meaning of militia.


Fine. As you wish. As the Militia is comprised of The People, being unqualified generally and therefore includes the whole, it cannot, under any construct, be de-legitimatized as such would be an infringement. There is no argument possible to say the Militia does not exist. As an aside, because of the nature of the Militia, the Gun Control Act of 1934 and subsequent are null and void.

The Militia, whether organized or unorganized, is not a club one joins. It just is.




So wrong, Militia of the past were not just bunch of gun owners meeting, they were sanitioned by the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1862

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903

Currently there are no State sanctioned militias, just gun owners meeting some of them under questionable purposes such as the San Diego Minute Men, now defuct.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2007/summer/blunt-force

http://www.catholicleague.org/san-diego-minutemen-harass-catholics/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903


From Wiki -

... Some of the ways the term is used include:


The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

A subset of these who may be legally penalized for failing to respond to a call-up.
A subset of these who actually respond to a call-up, regardless of legal obligation.


Nothing has changed. The Militia is. Your protestations being an infringement by device.


You are using defenitions of words...not law....two different things...I am not protesting..I am proving my arguement..and done so successfully.

Now I have to go the welfare office and get my food stamps then get some T-bone steaks.....






Enjoy the taste of the people's money. I'm sure you'll find it quite sweet.

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to Nosathro)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 4:55:54 PM   
Nosathro


Posts: 3319
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: Orange County, California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A word is not a statement. The courts inescapably therefore are arguing that everybody is in the militia. There is simply no other interpretation possible without bastardizing the meaning of militia.


Fine. As you wish. As the Militia is comprised of The People, being unqualified generally and therefore includes the whole, it cannot, under any construct, be de-legitimatized as such would be an infringement. There is no argument possible to say the Militia does not exist. As an aside, because of the nature of the Militia, the Gun Control Act of 1934 and subsequent are null and void.

The Militia, whether organized or unorganized, is not a club one joins. It just is.




So wrong, Militia of the past were not just bunch of gun owners meeting, they were sanitioned by the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1862

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903

Currently there are no State sanctioned militias, just gun owners meeting some of them under questionable purposes such as the San Diego Minute Men, now defuct.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2007/summer/blunt-force

http://www.catholicleague.org/san-diego-minutemen-harass-catholics/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903


From Wiki -

... Some of the ways the term is used include:


The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

A subset of these who may be legally penalized for failing to respond to a call-up.
A subset of these who actually respond to a call-up, regardless of legal obligation.


Nothing has changed. The Militia is. Your protestations being an infringement by device.


You are using defenitions of words...not law....two different things...I am not protesting..I am proving my arguement..and done so successfully.

Now I have to go the welfare office and get my food stamps then get some T-bone steaks.....






Enjoy the taste of the people's money. I'm sure you'll find it quite sweet.


You take things too seriously

< Message edited by Nosathro -- 1/31/2013 4:56:16 PM >

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 5:14:10 PM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A word is not a statement. The courts inescapably therefore are arguing that everybody is in the militia. There is simply no other interpretation possible without bastardizing the meaning of militia.


Fine. As you wish. As the Militia is comprised of The People, being unqualified generally and therefore includes the whole, it cannot, under any construct, be de-legitimatized as such would be an infringement. There is no argument possible to say the Militia does not exist. As an aside, because of the nature of the Militia, the Gun Control Act of 1934 and subsequent are null and void.

The Militia, whether organized or unorganized, is not a club one joins. It just is.




So wrong, Militia of the past were not just bunch of gun owners meeting, they were sanitioned by the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1862

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903

Currently there are no State sanctioned militias, just gun owners meeting some of them under questionable purposes such as the San Diego Minute Men, now defuct.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2007/summer/blunt-force

http://www.catholicleague.org/san-diego-minutemen-harass-catholics/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903


From Wiki -

... Some of the ways the term is used include:


The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

A subset of these who may be legally penalized for failing to respond to a call-up.
A subset of these who actually respond to a call-up, regardless of legal obligation.


Nothing has changed. The Militia is. Your protestations being an infringement by device.


You are using defenitions of words...not law....two different things...I am not protesting..I am proving my arguement..and done so successfully.

Now I have to go the welfare office and get my food stamps then get some T-bone steaks.....






Enjoy the taste of the people's money. I'm sure you'll find it quite sweet.


You take things too seriously


You opened the door. I took the shot

_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to Nosathro)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 5:18:57 PM   
Yachtie


Posts: 3593
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Well, under the first two we are fucked.

The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

A subset of these who may be legally penalized for failing to respond to a call-up.



No draft. 


The third definition is iffy as well. 

You are hurting the fuck outta that argument, you are gonna fuck around and get us all caught, Yachtie.



Under the current manifestation that is called government we're fucked to the hilt. Doesn't change the historically/rationally based dialectic or the rhetoric in support. Just goes to show Mao was right in one regard. Power does flow from the barrel of a gun, and he was speaking politically.







_____________________________

“We all know it’s going to end badly, but in the meantime we can make some money.” - Jim Cramer, CNBC

“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 7:45:26 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

The 2nd Amendment is archaic. The US Department of Defense and the US Military have superceded the need for a militia. The whole pro gun argument is based on a useless Amendment. As archaic as Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 which empowers Congress to build post roads. FFS!!


So in other words, almost as archaic as Art III Sec. 2?

_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 7:49:57 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
Why dont we just throw away the Constitution and have the British give us Prince Harry to be the first King of America?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Powergamz1)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 7:54:58 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Why dont we just throw away the Constitution and have the British give us Prince Harry to be the first King of America?


Hmmm. How much would we have to pay you to take him?

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 7:57:46 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline
One of the Saudi Princes would be a better choice...
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Why dont we just throw away the Constitution and have the British give us Prince Harry to be the first King of America?



_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 8:00:18 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Why dont we just throw away the Constitution and have the British give us Prince Harry to be the first King of America?


Hmmm. How much would we have to pay you to take him?



Uh, how bout enough to pay off the national debt, a fleet of rolls royce cars built before the German take over of the company for government officials, and half a dozen British subbie wimins for me.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 1/31/2013 9:56:48 PM   
Nosathro


Posts: 3319
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: Orange County, California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A word is not a statement. The courts inescapably therefore are arguing that everybody is in the militia. There is simply no other interpretation possible without bastardizing the meaning of militia.


Fine. As you wish. As the Militia is comprised of The People, being unqualified generally and therefore includes the whole, it cannot, under any construct, be de-legitimatized as such would be an infringement. There is no argument possible to say the Militia does not exist. As an aside, because of the nature of the Militia, the Gun Control Act of 1934 and subsequent are null and void.

The Militia, whether organized or unorganized, is not a club one joins. It just is.




So wrong, Militia of the past were not just bunch of gun owners meeting, they were sanitioned by the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1862

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903

Currently there are no State sanctioned militias, just gun owners meeting some of them under questionable purposes such as the San Diego Minute Men, now defuct.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2007/summer/blunt-force

http://www.catholicleague.org/san-diego-minutemen-harass-catholics/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903


From Wiki -

... Some of the ways the term is used include:


The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

A subset of these who may be legally penalized for failing to respond to a call-up.
A subset of these who actually respond to a call-up, regardless of legal obligation.


Nothing has changed. The Militia is. Your protestations being an infringement by device.


You are using defenitions of words...not law....two different things...I am not protesting..I am proving my arguement..and done so successfully.

Now I have to go the welfare office and get my food stamps then get some T-bone steaks.....






Enjoy the taste of the people's money. I'm sure you'll find it quite sweet.


You take things too seriously


You opened the door. I took the shot


and sarcasm is not one of your strong points.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 7:37:22 AM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A word is not a statement. The courts inescapably therefore are arguing that everybody is in the militia. There is simply no other interpretation possible without bastardizing the meaning of militia.


Fine. As you wish. As the Militia is comprised of The People, being unqualified generally and therefore includes the whole, it cannot, under any construct, be de-legitimatized as such would be an infringement. There is no argument possible to say the Militia does not exist. As an aside, because of the nature of the Militia, the Gun Control Act of 1934 and subsequent are null and void.

The Militia, whether organized or unorganized, is not a club one joins. It just is.




So wrong, Militia of the past were not just bunch of gun owners meeting, they were sanitioned by the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1862

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903

Currently there are no State sanctioned militias, just gun owners meeting some of them under questionable purposes such as the San Diego Minute Men, now defuct.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2007/summer/blunt-force

http://www.catholicleague.org/san-diego-minutemen-harass-catholics/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903


From Wiki -

... Some of the ways the term is used include:


The entire able-bodied population of a community, town, county, or state, available to be called to arms.

A subset of these who may be legally penalized for failing to respond to a call-up.
A subset of these who actually respond to a call-up, regardless of legal obligation.


Nothing has changed. The Militia is. Your protestations being an infringement by device.


You are using defenitions of words...not law....two different things...I am not protesting..I am proving my arguement..and done so successfully.

Now I have to go the welfare office and get my food stamps then get some T-bone steaks.....






Enjoy the taste of the people's money. I'm sure you'll find it quite sweet.


You take things too seriously


You opened the door. I took the shot


and sarcasm is not one of your strong points.


I haven't got anything to say about all the above. I just wanted to see if what all the quote boxes would look like inside one another.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Nosathro)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 7:42:19 AM   
Nosathro


Posts: 3319
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: Orange County, California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Why dont we just throw away the Constitution and have the British give us Prince Harry to be the first King of America?


Hmmm. How much would we have to pay you to take him?



Uh, how bout enough to pay off the national debt, a fleet of rolls royce cars built before the German take over of the company for government officials, and half a dozen British subbie wimins for me.


Actually we can't have Harry as our leader...We owe China way to much money....

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 8:12:47 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

The 2nd Amendment is archaic. The US Department of Defense and the US Military have superceded the need for a militia. The whole pro gun argument is based on a useless Amendment. As archaic as Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 which empowers Congress to build post roads. FFS!!


So in other words, almost as archaic as Art III Sec. 2?

What is the equivalency?

(in reply to Powergamz1)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 8:51:54 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
I haven't got anything to say about all the above. I just wanted to see if what all the quote boxes would look like inside one another.


LMAO!!

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 9:29:22 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10540
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nosathro


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Why dont we just throw away the Constitution and have the British give us Prince Harry to be the first King of America?


Hmmm. How much would we have to pay you to take him?



Uh, how bout enough to pay off the national debt, a fleet of rolls royce cars built before the German take over of the company for government officials, and half a dozen British subbie wimins for me.


Actually we can't have Harry as our leader...We owe China way to much money....

But that could be the point...Harry would owe all of that money.

(in reply to Nosathro)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 9:30:22 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10540
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
I haven't got anything to say about all the above. I just wanted to see if what all the quote boxes would look like inside one another.


LMAO!!

Interesting how we know the text would be justified left but we see the boxes are also.

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 2/1/2013 9:31:20 AM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 12:30:08 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline
You might do better examining some common ideals among those that are extremely pro-gun to moderately pro-gun.

Some of the characteristics I have found would be:

1) anti-government.

2) Self reliance (this often ties into #1)

3) Self defense proponent (many other countries to not have laws such as "stand your ground")

4) More likely to support violence as a means of solution

5) Sociological factors where the local culture is made up of smaller areas of living (smaller town, cities, more rural, etc.)

6) Game hunters and fishers , through cultural doctrine.

These are the one's I have seen and note, and are not supported by any study that I have read. Examining these characteristics is likely to yield better understanding, and reveal common ground.

None of this takes into account how fictional stories (TV, Moves, books, etc.) appeal to some of these characteristics and perpetuate them.

A separate comment on the militia issue; if individuals cannot own firearms, then a local militia could never be raised. The individual right must be there first, before the militia can be addressed. These militia's were created at local levels and managed at the state level, with very little interference by the federal government. Many locals had the weapons because of hunting or vermin control in rural areas. Because of lawlessness in many rural areas from decades to centuries past, home owners would have weapons. All of this goes back to points 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 .

It is absolutely necessary to understand where many Americans have come from as a people. While we would like to say "One country" the fact of the matter is that the US is very diverse, and those not living in more rural areas will not understand those that do, when it comes to the attitude of living. The varied cultures that we have will also make it so that this debate will continue to be stated well into the future.

In closing, I would have to say anti-government to a strong dislike of the government is one of the strongest characteristics.

All of this could just be my perceptions though, and be completely off target.

Good topic, and one that seems to be presented in an effort to find solutions. I applaud you for that.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 1:05:51 PM   
Nosathro


Posts: 3319
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: Orange County, California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

You might do better examining some common ideals among those that are extremely pro-gun to moderately pro-gun.

Some of the characteristics I have found would be:

1) anti-government.

2) Self reliance (this often ties into #1)

3) Self defense proponent (many other countries to not have laws such as "stand your ground")

4) More likely to support violence as a means of solution

5) Sociological factors where the local culture is made up of smaller areas of living (smaller town, cities, more rural, etc.)

6) Game hunters and fishers , through cultural doctrine.

These are the one's I have seen and note, and are not supported by any study that I have read. Examining these characteristics is likely to yield better understanding, and reveal common ground.

None of this takes into account how fictional stories (TV, Moves, books, etc.) appeal to some of these characteristics and perpetuate them.

A separate comment on the militia issue; if individuals cannot own firearms, then a local militia could never be raised. The individual right must be there first, before the militia can be addressed. These militia's were created at local levels and managed at the state level, with very little interference by the federal government. Many locals had the weapons because of hunting or vermin control in rural areas. Because of lawlessness in many rural areas from decades to centuries past, home owners would have weapons. All of this goes back to points 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 .

It is absolutely necessary to understand where many Americans have come from as a people. While we would like to say "One country" the fact of the matter is that the US is very diverse, and those not living in more rural areas will not understand those that do, when it comes to the attitude of living. The varied cultures that we have will also make it so that this debate will continue to be stated well into the future.

In closing, I would have to say anti-government to a strong dislike of the government is one of the strongest characteristics.

All of this could just be my perceptions though, and be completely off target.

Good topic, and one that seems to be presented in an effort to find solutions. I applaud you for that.


I think you hit the nail on the head...thank you OrionTheWolf!

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 5:31:41 PM   
Focus50


Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


First, the US has the second amendment.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

I would like to know what the basic guarantee of gun ownership exists in Australia and the UK.

In Australia, there is no bill of rights per se'. But nor is it anything like a Police state, either. Like I suggested to you in Level's thread (Guns), since 9/11 we've likely got more freedoms than the US now, EXCEPT for guns.

Speaking of which, there is no "basic guarantee of gun ownership", not even pre Port Arthur gun reforms (1996). If you want to own a gun (rifle), you need a valid reason. Just to shoot at a range is enough - BUT you have to shoot there a mimimum number of times per annum to keep your licence. Don't bother applying if you've got a criminal record. And a "valid reason" will NOT include personal or home security.

If you wanna hunt, you'll need a stat/dec from a farmer or rural land owner giving his permission. Holding a licence includes all your guns being registered and securely stored.

Unless it's a requirement for your work (security, Police etc), forget about pistols. Though I think you can target shoot but only with pistols specifically designed for that purpose. There are higher levels of licence, such as a dealer's licence or for a professional shooter, which naturally bring greater requirements of the person applying.

I'm not sure about limits on gun numbers, though I'm sure there is. It seems the 3 I own is fine but....



quote:

Police Raids to arrest and confiscate illegal guns.

Again, the constitution, fourth amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Again, no 4th amend here either, but still not a Police state. There's no search & seizure "just because" or secret Police kicking doors in etc. Probably very similar to the US in that they need all the right reasons to enter/search/frisk etc as well as warrants for a dwelling.

We have freedom of speech - though you'll need to be well schooled in political correctness if you ever wanna see your "Letter to the Editor" published. Lol, speaking from experience there - thankyou Rupert...!




quote:

The particular popularity of a specific weapon type.

Dunno about "specific weapons" but it was never legal for civilians to possess full autos; semi-autos and pump action shotties were banned since Port Arthur.

And just forget about pistols....

I don't go away shooting anymore and have thus lost touch with other shooters and what guns are popular. I have an air rifle (.177), a .22 and a .243. All pretty old now.... Nuthin' like the artillery I'd imagine the average American gun owner has but they're fine for what I go after. Miss my .22 semi auto Ruger but. I also have access to my brother's rifles, which is why I haven't bothered obtaining a decent .22 bolt action.

Since Port Arthur, I also miss my old .22 lever action (16 rounds, I think) but damned if I know whatever became of it.

I find a decent .22 is just fine for popping feral cats in the bush, rabbits too - which is pretty much what I target. Of course, it's difficult to get so close to a fox or wild dog (dumb luck, more like it) so I take the .243 if I think they're about. Usually makes for a slow day (or one very dead cat or rabbit) and consequently I don't think I've fired it in a decade....



quote:

Game animals

Deer, dove, duck, geese, bear, elk, moose, quail, rabbit to name a few.

I know that the UK has deer, at least in Scotland, but I would be interested in other game in the UK and Australia.

Popular native game animals here are ducks and kangaroos. The latter always seems to stir up controversy because it is a uniquely Aussie icon and features on the national coat of arms.

That said, it's also one of those few animals to benefit from the coming of man - the clearing of many dense woodlands etc. So yeah, they do breed to plague proportions in agreeable seasonal conditions and can devestate farmlands.

Both (ducks & 'roos) require seasonal, governmental dispensation to shoot as ALL native wildlife is protected under the National Parks & Wildlife Act.



quote:

Pest animals.

Wild pigs, coyotes and various invasive species that are too numerous to list, and usually region specific.

Locally, the preferred rifle to deal with wild pigs and coyotes are various versions and configurations of the AR 15.

What are the similar problems in the UK and Australia?

As I said, there has to be some sort of common ground that we can at least understand, and hopefully go from there.

Also, name a particular game animal in your country and what you use to hunt it. Caliber and gun type.

And if anyone has any suggestions on dealing with wild hogs, I am open to hearing it. What is being done all over the US is not having much impact.

Now you're talkin' - Oz is feral heaven.

Probably No 1 pest is pigs. Due to our population difference, the problem probably isn't as visible as in the US but I doubt you have anymore of the mongrel things than here.

Friggin' rabbits certainly are visible; I even shot a kitten in my backyard the other day! They're everywhere - thankyou Brits...! lol

And we've got feral cats, dogs, foxes, goats, horses, Asian water buffalo and deer are now on the rise.

Dealing with wild hogs...? We shoot them and we trap them. It's a losing battle but the alternative is to not shoot them and trap them. Got a bit of a funny story about a job offer to shoot pigs, but that's another day....

Focus.


_____________________________

Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>

Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/1/2013 6:03:37 PM   
Nosathro


Posts: 3319
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: Orange County, California
Status: offline
Finding common ground...yeah right....

http://news.yahoo.com/background-checks-could-gun-control-deal-breaker-111608280.html

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: In an effort to find some common ground. Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.082