Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 3 votes

Confiscate, Confiscate, Confiscate


  • Please log in to reply
296 replies to this topic

#1    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:13 PM

Maybe they can't ATM but please quit telling US they don't want to.

Quote

Audio captured after a New Jersey Senate session on Thursday possibly features several Democrats mocking gun owners and talking about gun “confiscation,” Frank Jack Fiamingo, president of the New Jersey Second Amendment Society, told TheBlaze on Friday.
The hot-mic recording opens with what seems to be a female senator or staff member saying, “We need a bill that is going to confiscate, confiscate, confiscate.” Because of the low-quality of the audio, there is a possibility that she is saying something slightly different, however, the words “confiscate” are very clear.
“They want to keep guns out of the hands of bad guys but they don’t have any regulations…to do it,” another woman says, identified possibly as Democrat state Sen. Loretta Weinberg by the Star-Ledger.
“They don’t care about the bad guys,” yet another female voice chimes in. “All they want to do is to have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.” The Star-Ledger reports that those comments sound like they came from another Democrat, Sandra Cunningham.
“That’s the line they’ve developed,” a woman who sounds like Democrat state Sen. Linda Greenstein says, according to the Star-Ledger.
Fiamingo said he is nearly positive that one of the voices heard in the audio is that of Greenstein.
“She has a very discernible accent,” he told TheBlaze. However, he did admit that without video it’s still difficult to prove it beyond any doubt.
“It is disturbing audio regardless,” Fiamingo added.
Listen below (Editor’s note: The audio below has been enhanced for clarity but has not been altered):



more... http://www.theblaze....ate-confiscate/


Posted Image

#2    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:26 PM

Wow. Just wow. Who voted for these idiots?


Quote

“All they want to do is to have their little guns and do whatever they want with them.”

Nice to know what these guys think of our Constitutional Rights....


#3    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:41 PM

View PostKowalski, on 11 May 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

Wow. Just wow. Who voted for these idiots?




Nice to know what these guys think of our Constitutional Rights....

That's what.
Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

#4    danielost

danielost

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,341 posts
  • Joined:26 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:the only known inhabited planet in the universe

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:42 PM

View PostKowalski, on 11 May 2013 - 02:26 PM, said:

Wow. Just wow. Who voted for these idiots?




Nice to know what these guys think of our Constitutional Rights....

The people of nj voted for them.

The democrats don't want to confiscate our guns.  They want to confiscate our rights and money.  That is your money, I don't have any.

I am a Mormon.  If I don't use Mormons believe, those my beliefs only.
I do not go to church haven't for thirty years.
There are other Mormons on this site. So if I have misspoken about the beliefs. I welcome their input.
I am not perfect and never will be. I do strive to be true to myself. I do my best to stay true to the Mormon faith. Thanks for caring and if you don't peace be with you.

#5    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 11 May 2013 - 02:47 PM

View PostF3SS, on 11 May 2013 - 02:41 PM, said:

That's what.
Posted Image

Posted Image

:tu:

Kind of like this:
Posted Image


#6    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,402 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 11 May 2013 - 03:59 PM

From afar, this attitude to a two century old document seems quaint.  It has endured only because it put things in itself like a court that can adjust to changing times.  As it is, it has provisions that reflect out-of-touch notions, such as the provision that the President must be native born and the President and Vice President must be "from" different states, as though such a thing would be a problem today.

If the Supreme Court hadn't twisted the Commerce Clause all out of recognizability, the US could not be a major economic power today; if it hadn't twisted the tenth Amendment almost out of existence, the US would never have been able to solve its racial problems.  

Now we have the gun issue, derived from a clause that has long outlived its purpose and which eventually the court will have to dispense with in some way or another in order to bring the States into line with the rest of the civilized world.

Well, at least the States has an abundance of lawyers.  They are good at finding ways to achieve these things.


#7    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 11 May 2013 - 04:06 PM

Quote

"They don't care about the bad guys. All they want to do is have their little guns and do whatever they want with them."

Pro-gun advocates angry...  ----> When are these people not ever angry?

Great point in the quote!

The Second Amendment if understood to be that a group of guys with guns can match their government on the battle field made sense in the 1700s when everyone had muskets but today there are drones, jets, missiles, and all kinds of things the average citizen would not be able to obtain.

One soution is allow citizens to have all these awesome weapons to insure if the government steps out of bounds they can be checked but that is not going to happen.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!, 11 May 2013 - 04:21 PM.


#8    rashore

rashore

    Telekinetic

  • 7,065 posts
  • Joined:26 Feb 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 11 May 2013 - 04:22 PM

Just sayin, this line in the article cracked me up...

Quote

Listen below (Editor’s note: The audio below has been enhanced for clarity but has not been altered):
It's like when you are in the ghost forum, and someone with an EVP makes a statement like that. Duh, enhancing is altering. Sorry that does not really have anything to do with the thread. I just found it funny.
Some of the commentary under the video was kind of interesting though. Thanks for the share F3SS :)


#9    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 11 May 2013 - 04:28 PM

Enhancing is altering! So true, so true.

Ranger1965 has some interesting commentary there under that Blaze article.


#10    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,254 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 11 May 2013 - 04:37 PM

Corprate America controls government so there is no left or right aka dems or repub`s in politics anymore. The White House is but a stage that actors perform.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#11    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 11 May 2013 - 04:45 PM

^

Those who believe that shoud stop voting so my vote will count more.


#12    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 11 May 2013 - 05:32 PM

View PostFrank Merton, on 11 May 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

From afar, this attitude to a two century old document seems quaint.  It has endured only because it put things in itself like a court that can adjust to changing times.  As it is, it has provisions that reflect out-of-touch notions, such as the provision that the President must be native born and the President and Vice President must be "from" different states, as though such a thing would be a problem today.

If the Supreme Court hadn't twisted the Commerce Clause all out of recognizability, the US could not be a major economic power today; if it hadn't twisted the tenth Amendment almost out of existence, the US would never have been able to solve its racial problems.  

Now we have the gun issue, derived from a clause that has long outlived its purpose and which eventually the court will have to dispense with in some way or another in order to bring the States into line with the rest of the civilized world.

Well, at least the States has an abundance of lawyers.  They are good at finding ways to achieve these things.

Aside from the gun issue I really like you Frank. You're one of the most insightful intelligent posters I've ever seen but there are some things you just don't get. One of them is thinking that America needs/wants to be in line with the rest of the world. The progressives have a big mouth but they really dont represent US as a whole. We are great and unique and will be only mediocre if we aren't.

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 11 May 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

Pro-gun advocates angry...  ----> When are these people not ever angry?

Great point in the quote!

The Second Amendment if understood to be that a group of guys with guns can match their government on the battle field made sense in the 1700s when everyone had muskets but today there are drones, jets, missiles, and all kinds of things the average citizen would not be able to obtain.

One soution is allow citizens to have all these awesome weapons to insure if the government steps out of bounds they can be checked but that is not going to happen.

We're only angry when people and government try to impose themselves on US. Leave US alone and you'll never hear a peep. Btw, that's truly the pot calling the kettle black. Liberals and progressives are always angry and if they aren't they go out of their way to find a reason to be and it mostly consists of crowbarring their ways onto others and when others say back off you're ilk screams of outrage and regression. Again, leave US alone and we'll do just fine for ourselves and we'll do right by others. We don't need or want your policies and that makes you angry.

As for a modern fire fight with our government... Yes, in full scale war the people would die. However the mere posession of guns by the masses does still keep the elected at bay somewhat. Without guns they'd run all over US and we'd be helpless. With guns they still could run on US but they can't go too far because they really don't want a fire fight of any kind and as long as we have guns they have to consider that. Then you have to consider wether or not the military would fight against the people. I'm talking about full scale revolt, not Waco. Seriously, in that event how would the gov fight everybody effectively? They'd have to carpet bomb the entire nation. We are everywhere and they couldn't do that. You would die too and their loyal base like you would soon turn on them as soon as innocent people start getting killed. Then you have to consider wether the rest of the world would sit back and just let the gov kill all its citizens. I doubt it.
So just the mere thought of an armed citizenry is enough to hold back and slow down tyranny. Just because they technically could beat US doesn't mean it's in their best interest to even entertain the thought. In full scale revolt the government would definitely not end up looking good and likely wouldn't exist as is anymore either so it would be all for nothing for those in power when it happens.

Edited by F3SS, 11 May 2013 - 05:34 PM.

Posted Image

#13    Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,355 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:17 PM

View PostF3SS, on 11 May 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

As for a modern fire fight with our government... Yes, in full scale war the people would die. However the mere posession of guns by the masses does still keep the elected at bay somewhat. Without guns they'd run all over US and we'd be helpless. With guns they still could run on US but they can't go too far because they really don't want a fire fight of any kind and as long as we have guns they have to consider that. Then you have to consider wether or not the military would fight against the people. I'm talking about full scale revolt, not Waco. Seriously, in that event how would the gov fight everybody effectively? They'd have to carpet bomb the entire nation. We are everywhere and they couldn't do that. You would die too and their loyal base like you would soon turn on them as soon as innocent people start getting killed. Then you have to consider wether the rest of the world would sit back and just let the gov kill all its citizens. I doubt it.
So just the mere thought of an armed citizenry is enough to hold back and slow down tyranny. Just because they technically could beat US doesn't mean it's in their best interest to even entertain the thought. In full scale revolt the government would definitely not end up looking good and likely wouldn't exist as is anymore either so it would be all for nothing for those in power when it happens.

Well said, I been stating this for years and I am glad someone understands it besides me.

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. - Albert Einstein

#14    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:17 PM

A few don't want America in line with the rest of the world.

The rest of us vote otherwise.

Most of us do not want bloodshed here. The extremist view is marginalized to the lunatic fringe the more speak of rebellion. Those are the ones who want a domestic war. It is not going to happen.

The rest of us prefer the rule of law.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!, 11 May 2013 - 06:20 PM.


#15    Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,355 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

Posted 11 May 2013 - 06:19 PM

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 11 May 2013 - 06:17 PM, said:

A few don't want America in line with the rest of the world.

The rest of us vote otherwise.

Most of us do not want bloodshed here. The extremist view is marginalized to the lunatic fringe. Those are the ones who want a domestic war. It is not going to happen.

The rest of us prefer the rule of law.

You really don't get it... America is suppose to be the people vs. government. We are suppose to keep a watchful eye and keep the government in check so it doesn't turn into a tyranny. Without citizens armed and prepared to revolt if the government starts taking away freedoms, we are left with a government that will do with us what it pleases. Rather it be place us all into work camps like North Korea or walk all over us like kings, we need to be armed and prepared to fight a revolution if we must.

Edited by Uncle Sam, 11 May 2013 - 06:21 PM.

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. - Albert Einstein




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users