International gun control

[Michelle]

The civil war ended in 1865. That a LONG time ago. And has no bearing on any 2nd amendment issue.

You are really hung up on the Civil War and the south aren't you? Take your own advice...get over it already...most of us have.

[danielost]

Yes, it was humor when I stated Go take the guns the government is not taking away from you and chill...

That's why I put in the disclaimer, so some folks would not take that humor to mean literally go grab yourself a gun.

apparently my CMA wasn't covering enough.

But so long as second amendment has been brought up:

Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

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

Not slamming any gun owners, but a lot of gun people I know do not own their firearm for the sake of any militia action. Several people I know when asked if they can get called into service as militia as the responsibility that goes along with the right... Some say- hell no, they can't draft me into service (especially as just a civilian!), they can't make me go anywhere.

I also have to say I know of a handful of gun people that do belong to clubs or ranges, and when asked about militia answer with, yes I know I might have to be militia because that's part of the responsibility, the government can come on over and ask my whole club to help out, we will be happy to. Usually it's followed with the statement- I hope to goodness that it never happens.

Here's a frightening notion... What would happen if the U.S. government decides to act on the second amendment, and calls for state militia to form up as being necessary to the security of the southern border? It wouldn't be a military draft per se, it's militia. What if any of the border states decides to use the second amendment that way?

we have state militias. we just call them the national guard. the states do not need the president's permission to call them to active duty,

Edited June 1, 2010 by danielost

[joshsluss]

Some people should get an alarm system.

Anything CANNOT happen. That's muddled thinking.

The civil war ended in 1865. That a LONG time ago. And has no bearing on any 2nd amendment issue.

I forgot to mention your quote: "Anything CANNOT happen. That's muddled thinking."

I think 9/11 would fall into the "anything can happen" category...

Get real.

Edited June 1, 2010 by joshsluss

[ninjadude]

You are really hung up on the Civil War and the south aren't you? Take your own advice...get over it already...most of us have.

Why quote me?!! Joshless and others are the ones that keep bringing up the Civil war. He just quoted how it was less than 200 years ago. If they don't use it as a justification for the 2nd amendment, I wouldn't respond with it.

[ninjadude]

Pffff. Dude, it's less than 200 years. I don't know if you noticed but there are still WARS going on in this time and era, what a complete illogical train of thought when it comes to the second amendment. The founding fathers put that in there so that citizens could PROTECT themselves against others and their own people.

alrightly then. Less than 200 years. seriously? You want to stick with that as a justification? You want to use the Iraq and Afghan wars on the other side of the planet as a justification? Really?

I hope that alarm system saves you from an economic collapse and the people who would try anything to get into your house to feed themselves or their family.

Ok now you've gone into crazy conspiracy theories.

[joshsluss]

alrightly then. Less than 200 years. seriously? You want to stick with that as a justification? You want to use the Iraq and Afghan wars on the other side of the planet as a justification? Really?

Ok now you've gone into crazy conspiracy theories.

Seriously, look it up bud. History has a tendency to repeat itself I don't know if your familiar. Would you have ever predicted 9/11? No of course not, how are you going to sit there and tell me something CAN'T happen? Ridiculous.

The economy was brought to its knees, we are simply prolonging the inevitable. Do some research on our spending and GDP. Look at this oil spill, look at the fall of worldwide currencies such as the Euro, look at Greece, look at our manufacturing to consumption ratio, look at the jobless rates, look at Isreal, look at political divisiveness, look at immigration, look at your ridiculous comments.

There is no conspiracy, there are just simple economics that don't support this fiat monetary system in which people are scammed and the rich get the bailout leaving us footing the bill. I'm not talking about some dumb NWO conspiracy, I'm talking about the economic collapse that will occur within the next ten years.

There's a guy named Peter Schiff who essentially used common sense and told people an economic collapse of the housing market and banks was on the way. EVERY major media channel ridiculed him, it happened... We were once the worlds largest lender nation, we now stand above all as the worlds largest debter nation.

I'll tell you one thing, it's better to be safe than sorry.

[J.B.]

Keeping in mind which state Ninja lives in - it's in his sidebar here, so everyone can see it - it's not surprising where his views stand. It's also irritating, thinking of that same state, that he doesn't think home invasion is a serious issue for him. [/personal attack - if this is one]

The only real militia still in existence is the National Guard, because a big part of the definition of a militia is that it has to have damn near close to military level weaponry. I wouldn't trust a beer swaggling "redneck" with such gear, but I bet there are plenty of stable folks who would gladly learn those weapons and put in service. Heh, look at NG recruitment, then you'll see just how many good people are in that service already. Militias will always exist in the states, the first ten amendments are the rock solid ones, whether that's accepted by the Libs or not. You start messing with the Bill of Rights, you will get backlash. Now, we do need to keep tabs on and tamp down against exporting our weapons. They're OURS and shouldn't be crossing borders.

I understand this article is nothing like what the Op said it was, that was more a rant against those who wish to ban all guns.

[ninjadude]

Would you have ever predicted 9/11?

It's not my job but the CIA did.

The rest of your rant is a conspiracy theory.

[J.B.]

It'll be a conspiracy theory in ten years when it's proven wrong, until then it's a wait and see thing. The dollar ain't strong, and it isn't going to recover fast, so there's plenty of time for it to do a nosedive and our country to fail.

[ninjadude]

Keeping in mind which state Ninja lives in - it's in his sidebar here, so everyone can see it - it's not surprising where his views stand. It's also irritating, thinking of that same state, that he doesn't think home invasion is a serious issue for him. [/personal attack - if this is one]

The only real militia still in existence is the National Guard, because a big part of the definition of a militia is that it has to have damn near close to military level weaponry.

I'm not sure what being currently in Illinois has anything to do with my "views". I grew up in a state that's completely red. But aside from that Illinois has die hard republican districts, I live in one, and die hard democratic districts. I guess I deserve this because of my views on the south.

Be that as it may, home invasion is simply not a defense for the 2nd amendment. You are more likely to shoot and kill your family or neighbor.

I don't have a problem with the National Guard. You seem to be making the argument against other militias because they can't get military level weaponry so are not "real" militias.

[joshsluss]

It's not my job but the CIA did.

The rest of your rant is a conspiracy theory.

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's ECONOMICS.

How is it a conspiracy theory if it already happened? HELLO, we had a collapse in 08 smart stuff. NEWS FLASH. lol

Any more brain busters?

Wow, I didn't realize you know nothing about anything. You've pretty much lost my respect after calling my common sense, factual events a conspiracy theory.

[ninjadude]

It'll be a conspiracy theory in ten years when it's proven wrong, until then it's a wait and see thing. The dollar ain't strong, and it isn't going to recover fast, so there's plenty of time for it to do a nosedive and our country to fail.

so you're cheerleading for the failure of our country. nice.

the dollar rises and falls. That's the nature of our money. No real surprise.

[ninjadude]

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's ECONOMICS.

How is it a conspiracy theory if it already happened? HELLO, we had a collapse in 08 smart stuff. NEWS FLASH. lol

"collapse"? we had a economic downturn/recession/crisis/panic. Collapse did not occur. That would include a depression. source

You gotta stop listening to crackpots.

[joshsluss]

"collapse"? we had a economic downturn/recession/crisis/panic. Collapse did not occur. That would include a depression. source

You gotta stop listening to crackpots.

It wasn't a collapse because.... WE BACKED IT UP WITH FIAT MONEY PRINTED OUT OF THIN AIR.

lol

Do you know anything about economics?

[J.B.]

All nations fall, it's the nature of rising in the first place. Am I cheerleading it? No, just being a little less optimistic that we'll bounce out of everything. The political scene in the world isn't really safer than it was before the war, so there's plenty of room for something to push us over the edge.

[ninjadude]

It wasn't a collapse because.... WE BACKED IT UP WITH FIAT MONEY PRINTED OUT OF THIN AIR.

You act like that's a bad thing. It's not.

[Doc Socks Junior]

Want to explain, in your own words, why it's not a bad thing? I'm not saying it is a bad thing, I just want your explanation.

[joshsluss]

You act like that's a bad thing. It's not.

Yeah I'd also say that's a pretty VAGUE way of responding. Please, by all means, explain your position. Who knows, you might blow me out of the water.

[Lord Umbarger]

Well, good on him!, is my spontaneous reaction. Americans are crazy with regards to gun laws and I still can't understand how you can fail to see that more guns means more violence, not more protection. It's staring you in the face.

Perhaps it DOES work that way where you are but, here in the US, we have seen evidence to the contrary. When the D.C. gun ban when into effect, the crime level increased, even though it went down in the rest of the country. When the ban was lifted, crime rates dropped. In a town right here in my own home state, they passed a City Ordinance REQUIRING home owners to have a legal firearm. The crime rate bottomed out. This really isn't a matter of opinion or feelings. It's a simple fact.

Try this thought experiment: Assume that you are a burglar and there are two houses. One you KNOW to be unarmed. No guns. In the second one, you KNOW that there is an armed home owner. Which house would YOU be more comfortable breaking into? The one where you'll have a good chance of stealing the property and getting away scott free or the one where you stand a good chance of getting killed? Now, extrapolate that out to any other violent crime you choose and the answer is pretty much the same. Criminals want to commit the crime, not risk getting killed. They are cowards and will, like water, seek out the path of least resistance.

There is nothing that scares a violent criminal more than a potential victim who may be armed.

But anyhow, I doubt very much that it would be as easy as the OP wants to make you believe. Although I wish it were so.

All it takes is the stroke of a pen and the agreement of the majority of Congress. As for wishing it we so; why would you want crime to go up?

Just a lot of hype, I'd say.

We can only hope but, there IS a push in the UN to limit and eventually outlaw private ownership of firearms. Edited June 3, 2010 by Lord Umbarger

[ninjadude]

Yeah I'd also say that's a pretty VAGUE way of responding. Please, by all means, explain your position. Who knows, you might blow me out of the water.

Fiat money's value

is set by the supply and demand for money and the supply and demand for other goods and services in the economy. The prices for those goods and services, including gold and silver, are allowed to fluctuate based on market forces.

While using a gold standard can be more stable.

The stability caused by the gold standard is also the biggest drawback in having one. Exchange rates are not allowed to respond to changing circumstances in countries. A gold standard severely limits the stabilization policies the Federal Reserve can use. Because of these factors, countries with gold standards tend to have severe economic shocks.

You can read more about it here: source

There is no intrinsic virtue to the gold standard. The true basis of any currency is the productive capacity of the economy where it is printed. This has nothing to do with the quantity of gold held by the country. Your credit card issuing bank creates money when it gives you credit. The real issue is when the money supply goes out of kilter with the supply of goods and services in the economy. Right now, inflation is not a problem. Deflation is the threat facing the developed world. The US is tackling that by loosening money supply.

and here source

[joshsluss]

Watch and learn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbMH1DcEGh4&NR=1

[ninjadude]

glenn beck tV? are you even serious?! LOL

[joshsluss]

glenn beck tV? are you even serious?! LOL

The documentary is broken up into parts by that dude or "Glenn BeckTV". The actual documentary does not have anything to do with Glenn Beck and actually doesn't even really mention the Obama administration at all for the most part. It can be seen in its whole form on youtube I just picked that clip because it had to do with what I was speaking about.

In fact, people who watch this documentary don't tend to like Glenn Beck as he wanted the bailouts to happen.

So forget the poster, it has nothing to do with Glenn Beck but of course I wouldn't expect you to actually figure that out. The clip speaks for itself and pretty much proves the monetary system has been hijacked by the FED and corrupt banks and is no longer a true monetary system.

Now be a little more intelligent before you post.

Edited June 4, 2010 by joshsluss

[J.B.]

Be that as it may, home invasion is simply not a defense for the 2nd amendment. You are more likely to shoot and kill your family or neighbor.

I don't have a problem with the National Guard. You seem to be making the argument against other militias because they can't get military level weaponry so are not "real" militias.

Forgetting that location issue for a moment, If you're properly educated, I see no reason that you're more likely to pull fire between friends than you are to kill the bad guys. If you're properly educated, you're not going to be pulling your firearm out to show it to neighbors and familymembers much to begin with, it'll be placed in a safe spot where children won't get it and it won't accidentally fall.

Also, yes, part of a militia is that it has to have paramilitary equipnment. It DOES NOT COUNT as a Militia if it's just a bunch of rednecks with pea shooters - or any weapon that the military can easily defend itself from with standard equipment. So yes, the National Guard is the only full-on MILITIA in existence here in the States, unless someone is selling black market rocket launchers and working last-generation tanks to civilians. To be a militia you have to be well regulated, you must have an armory where your weapons are safely stored, you must have gear comparable to the military, you must have officers. A militia has to be able to stand toe to toe with the military for at least a little while. Not just to stand against the government, since quite honestly, I figure we're not going to be taking the government out by force. It's to help the police, and in the case of invasions which are not beyond the realm of possibility, the Militia is supposed to hold on long enough for the military to get to the scene.

I am all for tightening the qualifications for getting a gun liscense. Last month the Daily Show looked into someone who was burgled, someone stole his pistols. The Daily Show asked him how the people broke into his gun safe and the guy happily outright admitted he kept a bag full of ****ing pistols right next to the safe, not in it. And he was gloating that he still had a gun liscense. If it were legal, and I were there, I would have beat his head in for that and revoked his liscense myself. I know about gun safety, I was properly trained, and if you're properly trained, you can judge when to use one, when not to use one, even if you're qualified to own any. I would say that man was not.

Edited June 4, 2010 by J.B.

[ninjadude]

Forgetting that location issue for a moment, If you're properly educated,

something increasingly less likely.