test777777
Sergeant

Posts: 322
Likes: 79
Console: Xbox 360/One & PS4
Preferred server: West
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Dec 7, 2018 9:38:56 GMT
|
Post by test777777 on May 16, 2019 5:07:57 GMT
I hope you guys don't mind me getting involved here. The specifics don't apply to me, I've never travelled to the US and am not impacted directly by any US govt goings on. With that in mind, I realise that Huawei technology while it was, will not be forming the backbone of network based on US govt advice. Different things I suppose. One thing though that is common to both our countries are these inquisitions and administrative tribunals. The Hillary Clinton Email thing, Even LewinskiGate or whatever it's known as when her husband was president. The Donald Trump Russian collusion thing. It's supposed to be about protecting the integrity of the system and enforcing accountability on those who subvert the integrity of the system and the law so that we only have uncorrupt people in office. In my opinion every successful senior politician has skirted the boundaries of the system for their own agenda and/or made mistakes/done something against the rules/operated outside of the system to get where they are today. That involves to some degree elements of stretching the truth or manipulating and covering up. The Bush's the Clinton's the Obamas and the Trumps and even that Mitt Romney bloke have at some stage in my opinion throughout their political career used their positions of power and actioned things in underhand ways to provide for a political or personal advantage. In an ideal world they should be held accountable but I very much question the cost benefit to the people and wonder if the money and sheer amount of resources spent on these witchhunts could be put to better use elsewhere.
|
|
El Materdor43
Lieutenant

Perpetual Potato
Posts: 552
Likes: 425
Console: Xbox One
Preferred server: East
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:47 GMT
|
Post by El Materdor43 on May 16, 2019 16:54:43 GMT
Test
The biggest issue in play here is that the entire hoax, that Russia and Trump colluded to steal an election, was shade for the Obama DOJ/Intelligence apparatus to try to overturn the results of the 2016 election. The Russians didn’t change the ballots or alter vote counts, therefore there is no collusion to change/alter the results of the election. The collusion that took place was actually between Obama DOJ/CIA/NIA and the mainstream media in the US to rig an investigation to produce contrived evidence with the express purpose of forcing Trump to resign or to initiate impeachment proceedings. The Christopher Steele dossier was s bought and paid for opposition research document from the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Obama DOJ then presented this dossier to the FISA court as evidence to obtain a surveillance warrant on the Trump campaign/transition team. The dossier is not verified, not even by its author. It’s all fictional yet it is the source document for the original FISA warrant and the subsequent renewals. The Obama regime knew the dossier was false and contrived yet they presented it as factual. Comey, James Clapper and John Brennan, people at the very top of the intelligence agencies, all knew it was false. The hate Trump and that is their motive for all of this. This is a coup and there isn’t any other word that describes it.
That is what is wrong with this. It is an attempt to oust a sitting, constitutionally elected president by people inside the intelligence agencies and those people abusing their investigative powers to attempt to affect that result
|
|
test777777
Sergeant

Posts: 322
Likes: 79
Console: Xbox 360/One & PS4
Preferred server: West
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Dec 7, 2018 9:38:56 GMT
|
Post by test777777 on May 17, 2019 8:10:28 GMT
Test The biggest issue in play here is that the entire hoax, that Russia and Trump colluded to steal an election, was shade for the Obama DOJ/Intelligence apparatus to try to overturn the results of the 2016 election. It is an attempt to oust a sitting, constitutionally elected president by people inside the intelligence agencies and those people abusing their investigative powers to attempt to affect that result Trump's big enough to handle it. One might suggest Trump's campaign promise of building a wall and making the Mexicans pay for it was an attempt to deceive the American people. Plenty of BS on all sides during the campaigns and it doesn't matter who it is. The power struggles, false claims, media blow ups and white anting at the top end of corporate and government have this stuff going on all of the time. The whole system is corrupt because people are corrupt. Enough powerful people have an agenda to make something happen and they will make it happen. Truth is created when an idea becomes popular and people will believe just about anything if enough "influencial" people collaborate and corroborate. It's all very criminal and I don't know how one fixes it but it pisses me off that taxes are spent on these biased and pointless inquisitions but that's politics today. If they manage through deceit to force Trump out, Mike Pence presumably takes over before the polls are opened up and a new President is elected or something similar.
|
|
El Materdor43
Lieutenant

Perpetual Potato
Posts: 552
Likes: 425
Console: Xbox One
Preferred server: East
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:47 GMT
|
Post by El Materdor43 on May 17, 2019 14:57:36 GMT
Test The biggest issue in play here is that the entire hoax, that Russia and Trump colluded to steal an election, was shade for the Obama DOJ/Intelligence apparatus to try to overturn the results of the 2016 election. It is an attempt to oust a sitting, constitutionally elected president by people inside the intelligence agencies and those people abusing their investigative powers to attempt to affect that result Trump's big enough to handle it. One might suggest Trump's campaign promise of building a wall and making the Mexicans pay for it was an attempt to deceive the American people. Plenty of BS on all sides during the campaigns and it doesn't matter who it is. The power struggles, false claims, media blow ups and white anting at the top end of corporate and government have this stuff going on all of the time. The whole system is corrupt because people are corrupt. Enough powerful people have an agenda to make something happen and they will make it happen. Truth is created when an idea becomes popular and people will believe just about anything if enough "influencial" people collaborate and corroborate. It's all very criminal and I don't know how one fixes it but it pisses me off that taxes are spent on these biased and pointless inquisitions but that's politics today. If they manage through deceit to force Trump out, Mike Pence presumably takes over before the polls are opened up and a new President is elected or something similar. Comparing the wall and a coup to oust a sitting president is an apples to oranges comparison. Trump, in his statement about making Mexico pay for the wall, didn’t use/abuse the government intelligence/surveillance machine to attempt to achieve this. Also, making that statement isn’t an abuse of those powers and you can’t draw a moral equalivence of the two. They are completely different. One is against the law, the other is not. Also, infighting at corporations doesn’t affect or call in to question the integrity of the top law enforcement agencies of the US. They are to be blind to political parties and they are to uphold the laws of this country without bias. Also, truth is truth. Just look at the entire Russia hoax. The mainstream media presented the Steele dossier as the truth without any attempt to verify any aspect of it. They did it out of their irrational hatred for Trump, period. Most of them knew that it was made up but in order to advance their narrative they pushed it as factual and to question its validity made you a denier. Now, as AG Barr has investigations ongoing about the beginnings of this, the truth is coming out and the Obama DOJ is now throwing each other under the bus. The truth is coming out. It isn’t one sided version of truth compared to the other, it is verifiable and has a trail that can be followed. The problem, for the left and the Obama folks, is that they believed that they could remove Trump inside of 6 months and never have to worry about giving an explanation to anyone. The truth always lurks somewhere, it just has to be uncovered
|
|
Atom Priest
Captain
 
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 389
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 0:04:53 GMT
|
Post by Atom Priest on May 17, 2019 17:57:55 GMT
Trumps calling the actions of the FBI treason now. Slowly but surely he keeps on winning. I think I might overdose on winning at this point.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on May 17, 2019 18:35:55 GMT
Test The biggest issue in play here is that the entire hoax, that Russia and Trump colluded to steal an election, was shade for the Obama DOJ/Intelligence apparatus to try to overturn the results of the 2016 election. It is an attempt to oust a sitting, constitutionally elected president by people inside the intelligence agencies and those people abusing their investigative powers to attempt to affect that result Trump's big enough to handle it. One might suggest Trump's campaign promise of building a wall and making the Mexicans pay for it was an attempt to deceive the American people. Plenty of BS on all sides during the campaigns and it doesn't matter who it is. The power struggles, false claims, media blow ups and white anting at the top end of corporate and government have this stuff going on all of the time. The whole system is corrupt because people are corrupt. Enough powerful people have an agenda to make something happen and they will make it happen. Truth is created when an idea becomes popular and people will believe just about anything if enough "influencial" people collaborate and corroborate. It's all very criminal and I don't know how one fixes it but it pisses me off that taxes are spent on these biased and pointless inquisitions but that's politics today. If they manage through deceit to force Trump out, Mike Pence presumably takes over before the polls are opened up and a new President is elected or something similar. TEST...first off, I agree with you regarding the fact that many, if not most politicians exploited the system for their own gain. It goes without saying. I also agree that these boondoggles cost citizens millions of dollars that could certainly be spent in better places.
However, the examples you cite are two entirely different things. One is a campaign promise (the wall), which is also tied in many cases to politicians from both parties working together; something not very common these days. The other is a group unelected bureaucrats who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and the Law subverting the very Justice system that is supposed to be both "blind to politics, religion, race, origin or creed" and one of the key pillars of our Republic. The thought of unelected people weaponizing the Justice System to destroy any American Citizen, regardless of whether they were the President or "John Smith" is utterly terrifying to me, as it is to millions of Americans. It is the stuff of George Orwell and in this case rises very close IMO to a coup in the way they have tried to delegitimize an entire election result.
I think that when the dust settles from all of this there will be some very large systemic changes to how our law enforcement and intelligence agencies collect information on US citizens, and it is very possible that some people will go to jail for foisting this scam on the US population.
|
|
Atom Priest
Captain
 
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 389
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 0:04:53 GMT
|
Post by Atom Priest on May 17, 2019 18:53:59 GMT
Trump's big enough to handle it. One might suggest Trump's campaign promise of building a wall and making the Mexicans pay for it was an attempt to deceive the American people. Plenty of BS on all sides during the campaigns and it doesn't matter who it is. The power struggles, false claims, media blow ups and white anting at the top end of corporate and government have this stuff going on all of the time. The whole system is corrupt because people are corrupt. Enough powerful people have an agenda to make something happen and they will make it happen. Truth is created when an idea becomes popular and people will believe just about anything if enough "influencial" people collaborate and corroborate. It's all very criminal and I don't know how one fixes it but it pisses me off that taxes are spent on these biased and pointless inquisitions but that's politics today. If they manage through deceit to force Trump out, Mike Pence presumably takes over before the polls are opened up and a new President is elected or something similar. TEST...first off, I agree with you regarding the fact that many, if not most politicians exploited the system for their own gain. It goes without saying. I also agree that these boondoggles cost citizens millions of dollars that could certainly be spent in better places.
However, the examples you cite are two entirely different things. One is a campaign promise (the wall), which is also tied in many cases to politicians from both parties working together; something not very common these days. The other is a group unelected bureaucrats who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and the Law subverting the very Justice system that is supposed to be both "blind to politics, religion, race, origin or creed" and one of the key pillars of our Republic. The thought of unelected people weaponizing the Justice System to destroy any American Citizen, regardless of whether they were the President or "John Smith" is utterly terrifying to me, as it is to millions of Americans. It is the stuff of George Orwell and in this case rises very close IMO to a coup in the way they have tried to delegitimize an entire election result.
I think that when the dust settles from all of this there will be some very large systemic changes to how our law enforcement and intelligence agencies collect information on US citizens, and it is very possible that some people will go to jail for foisting this scam on the US population.
The only justice you'll get snore is at the end of a barrel when it comes to these sorts.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on May 17, 2019 19:09:47 GMT
TEST...first off, I agree with you regarding the fact that many, if not most politicians exploited the system for their own gain. It goes without saying. I also agree that these boondoggles cost citizens millions of dollars that could certainly be spent in better places.
However, the examples you cite are two entirely different things. One is a campaign promise (the wall), which is also tied in many cases to politicians from both parties working together; something not very common these days. The other is a group unelected bureaucrats who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and the Law subverting the very Justice system that is supposed to be both "blind to politics, religion, race, origin or creed" and one of the key pillars of our Republic. The thought of unelected people weaponizing the Justice System to destroy any American Citizen, regardless of whether they were the President or "John Smith" is utterly terrifying to me, as it is to millions of Americans. It is the stuff of George Orwell and in this case rises very close IMO to a coup in the way they have tried to delegitimize an entire election result.
I think that when the dust settles from all of this there will be some very large systemic changes to how our law enforcement and intelligence agencies collect information on US citizens, and it is very possible that some people will go to jail for foisting this scam on the US population.
The only justice you'll get snore is at the end of a barrel when it comes to these sorts. Yeah...well I don't think that'd happen, but it'd be extremely righteous to see them haul Clapper in front of a judge and have the Pentagon retroactively strip is military pension and rank....it has been done. He and Brennan are absolute weasels.
|
|
El Materdor43
Lieutenant

Perpetual Potato
Posts: 552
Likes: 425
Console: Xbox One
Preferred server: East
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:47 GMT
|
Post by El Materdor43 on May 17, 2019 19:51:16 GMT
^^^^^^^^ Preach it brother. Clapper and Brennan and Comey are corrupt people. They were only too willing to lie and subvert the facts to fit the narrative that Trump was beholding to the Russians and that they colluded together to help get Trump elected. The 2 1/2 year, 440+ page report verify that there was no collusion. Additionally, the majority of commentary in the report are opinions of the anti Trump cadre of pseudo-investigators, it’s not fact based
|
|
CatSnipah
Lieutenant

Catnip Commander
Posts: 532
Likes: 314
Console: Xbox one
Preferred server: East
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: Yes
Mini-Profile Name Color: 096ab1
Mini-Profile Text Color: 096ab1
Date registered: Feb 23, 2016 13:13:03 GMT
|
Post by CatSnipah on May 17, 2019 21:19:42 GMT
IF the government does this within their own ranks, imagine what they are capable of doing to us regular Joe Citizens. Exactly WHY we need things like the 2nd Amendment.
|
|
Atom Priest
Captain
 
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 389
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 0:04:53 GMT
|
Post by Atom Priest on May 17, 2019 21:29:04 GMT
IF the government does this within their own ranks, imagine what they are capable of doing to us regular Joe Citizens. Exactly WHY we need things like the 2nd Amendment. B-but here in the UK we can boo the police! Sometimes!
|
|
CatSnipah
Lieutenant

Catnip Commander
Posts: 532
Likes: 314
Console: Xbox one
Preferred server: East
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: Yes
Mini-Profile Name Color: 096ab1
Mini-Profile Text Color: 096ab1
Date registered: Feb 23, 2016 13:13:03 GMT
|
Post by CatSnipah on May 17, 2019 21:49:30 GMT
IF the government does this within their own ranks, imagine what they are capable of doing to us regular Joe Citizens. Exactly WHY we need things like the 2nd Amendment. B-but here in the UK we can boo the police! Sometimes! Soon, you'll be down to defending yourselves with plastic butter knives and lip balm.
|
|
test777777
Sergeant

Posts: 322
Likes: 79
Console: Xbox 360/One & PS4
Preferred server: West
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Dec 7, 2018 9:38:56 GMT
|
Post by test777777 on May 20, 2019 4:05:01 GMT
Trump's big enough to handle it. One might suggest Trump's campaign promise of building a wall and making the Mexicans pay for it was an attempt to deceive the American people. Plenty of BS on all sides during the campaigns and it doesn't matter who it is. The power struggles, false claims, media blow ups and white anting at the top end of corporate and government have this stuff going on all of the time. The whole system is corrupt because people are corrupt. Enough powerful people have an agenda to make something happen and they will make it happen. Truth is created when an idea becomes popular and people will believe just about anything if enough "influencial" people collaborate and corroborate. It's all very criminal and I don't know how one fixes it but it pisses me off that taxes are spent on these biased and pointless inquisitions but that's politics today. If they manage through deceit to force Trump out, Mike Pence presumably takes over before the polls are opened up and a new President is elected or something similar. Comparing the wall and a coup to oust a sitting president is an apples to oranges comparison. Trump, in his statement about making Mexico pay for the wall, didn’t use/abuse the government intelligence/surveillance machine to attempt to achieve this. Also, making that statement isn’t an abuse of those powers and you can’t draw a moral equalivence of the two. They are completely different. One is against the law, the other is not. Also, infighting at corporations doesn’t affect or call in to question the integrity of the top law enforcement agencies of the US. They are to be blind to political parties and they are to uphold the laws of this country without bias. Also, truth is truth. Just look at the entire Russia hoax. The mainstream media presented the Steele dossier as the truth without any attempt to verify any aspect of it. They did it out of their irrational hatred for Trump, period. Most of them knew that it was made up but in order to advance their narrative they pushed it as factual and to question its validity made you a denier. Now, as AG Barr has investigations ongoing about the beginnings of this, the truth is coming out and the Obama DOJ is now throwing each other under the bus. The truth is coming out. It isn’t one sided version of truth compared to the other, it is verifiable and has a trail that can be followed. The problem, for the left and the Obama folks, is that they believed that they could remove Trump inside of 6 months and never have to worry about giving an explanation to anyone. The truth always lurks somewhere, it just has to be uncovered You are correct in relation to the two examples. It wasn't my intention to suggest an equivalency with the examples. Trumps campaign promises to be fair, in my honest opinion weren't lies and were made with the best of intention but unrealistic in my opinion. Nevertheless, if it was a lie, I do think there is moral equivalency. A lie is a lie whether there's collusion involved or whether it's said under oath or not from a moral standpoint in my opinion. Lawfully they are different things. I have absolutely no faith in the integrity of the system itself when it comes to truth. We will never know all of the truths and I also believe that even if we did, knowing it wouldn't serve our interests any better than not knowing it. Is Trump or his subordinates guilty of subverting the course of justice or even of perjury prior or during his time in office? Probably in my opinion. That opinion though, I hold for essentially all in office. What will come out of this one? Who knows? I don't believe the whole Truth will be known nor Justice will be done. It will be expensive mind you.
|
|
test777777
Sergeant

Posts: 322
Likes: 79
Console: Xbox 360/One & PS4
Preferred server: West
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Dec 7, 2018 9:38:56 GMT
|
Post by test777777 on May 20, 2019 5:37:28 GMT
I think that when the dust settles from all of this there will be some very large systemic changes to how our law enforcement and intelligence agencies collect information on US citizens, and it is very possible that some people will go to jail for foisting this scam on the US population.
I accept the lack of equivalency with the examples. I was attempting to suggest that all of them lie. I don't know enough about the Federal Justice system but there are very different justice outcomes for the rich and famous relative to poor and down trodden when the same crime is considered. Quality legal counsel is ridiculously expensive. Some people may well go to Jail, some people may well kill themselves, some peoples kids will suffer but like in most things, the people at the top of the food chain will somehow manage to wrangle their way out of it and keep on doing what they've always done. Based on the information at hand with so many powerful people allegedly involved, I'm surprised that Mr Trump has not been assassinated.
|
|
test777777
Sergeant

Posts: 322
Likes: 79
Console: Xbox 360/One & PS4
Preferred server: West
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Dec 7, 2018 9:38:56 GMT
|
Post by test777777 on May 20, 2019 8:26:43 GMT
IF the government does this within their own ranks, imagine what they are capable of doing to us regular Joe Citizens. Exactly WHY we need things like the 2nd Amendment. The 10 amendments to the bill of rights as far as I am aware are supposed to guarantee certain freedoms which can't be taken away at the congressional level. They can be further amended I think but very difficult to do. The president certainly can't on his own. The freedoms expressed in the first amendment and congresses ability to alter is fantastic in principle but A citizen's right to speak or act freely in practice is limited by the social consequence of doing so or their ability to enforce their right. I don't truly understand the laws but Missouri executive order 44 wasn't really legal yet that hardly mattered in that instance. The 2nd Amendment allows the citizens to bare arms but doesn't do much to protect anyone in my opinion. With the 2nd Ammendment specifically it's very open to interpretation and while I'm not sure what precedents have been set in regard to it but each state probably interprets the law differently and there's various restrictions imposed at the state level I would expect. There's likely regulation with what arms are allowed, how they are allowed to be carried, where citizens can go while armed as well. Then there is the right to discharge a loaded weapon and where that can be done and under what circumstance. There's also the possible risk involved with having a registered firearm stolen and used and lots of requirements in relation to storage of and usage of firearms and ammunition I would expect too. This is purely speculative. I would not think a US citizen would have the right to walk into their local watering hole in the USA with a couple of loaded 6 shooter irons on his hips and a 30/30 lever action strapped to his back? Apart from the mockery of looking like he's stepped off the set of a wild west film set, my gut says his 2nd amendment right to do so might be infringed upon by more local laws. I suppose it depends on where he or she might live. I don't lawfully own a weapon in Australia and don't know the extent of the laws in the USA so - I don't know. but the 2nd Amendment won't protect the citizens from a militant government.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on May 20, 2019 14:17:58 GMT
IF the government does this within their own ranks, imagine what they are capable of doing to us regular Joe Citizens. Exactly WHY we need things like the 2nd Amendment. The 10 amendments to the bill of rights as far as I am aware are supposed to guarantee certain freedoms which can't be taken away at the congressional level. They can be further amended I think but very difficult to do. The president certainly can't on his own. The freedoms expressed in the first amendment and congresses ability to alter is fantastic in principle but A citizen's right to speak or act freely in practice is limited by the social consequence of doing so or their ability to enforce their right. I don't truly understand the laws but Missouri executive order 44 wasn't really legal yet that hardly mattered in that instance. The 2nd Amendment allows the citizens to bare arms but doesn't do much to protect anyone in my opinion. With the 2nd Ammendment specifically it's very open to interpretation and while I'm not sure what precedents have been set in regard to it but each state probably interprets the law differently and there's various restrictions imposed at the state level I would expect. There's likely regulation with what arms are allowed, how they are allowed to be carried, where citizens can go while armed as well. Then there is the right to discharge a loaded weapon and where that can be done and under what circumstance. There's also the possible risk involved with having a registered firearm stolen and used and lots of requirements in relation to storage of and usage of firearms and ammunition I would expect too. This is purely speculative. I would not think a US citizen would have the right to walk into their local watering hole in the USA with a couple of loaded 6 shooter irons on his hips and a 30/30 lever action strapped to his back? Apart from the mockery of looking like he's stepped off the set of a wild west film set, my gut says his 2nd amendment right to do so might be infringed upon by more local laws. I suppose it depends on where he or she might live. I don't lawfully own a weapon in Australia and don't know the extent of the laws in the USA so - I don't know. but the 2nd Amendment won't protect the citizens from a militant government. Test...I see Australia just had a not insignificant election result.
I sincerely applaud your effort to look into our current politics.
I'll just note a couple observations, and I'm sure Cat will chime in as well.
1) The "Bill of Rights" 10 amendments you speak of are actually the first "Ten Amendments" to our Constitution. The First Ten Amendments are part of a total of 33 Amendments that have been added since 1789 and they were added very soon after the Constitution was adopted that year. They are specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights, clear limitations on the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and explicit declarations that all powers not specifically granted to the U.S. Congress by the Constitution are reserved for the states or the people.
2) 2nd Amendment- The Supreme Court has been very consistent with this just like the other 9 Bill of Rights. In our system, states have the right to pass their local laws and many have tried to place severe restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. thankfully, the Supreme Court declared our Second Amendment rights to be “fundamental” to liberty and therefore binding on the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, which bars any state from denying liberty to any person without due process of law.
3) Once again, states have the right to pass local laws and many have passed laws requiring citizens to pass a course in order to carry their weapon in public. There are currently 24 states that allow a citizen to carry a weapon in plain view in public, and 11 of those don't require any license at all...so in fact...yes you can walk into a "local watering hole" with two six shooters strapped to your hip if you so choose...and of course order a Coca-Cola because alcohol and firearms don't mix. You can even "strap" an AR-15 to your back in many states and walk into a bank to do business if you so choose.
That said many states have laws/statutes that prevent the carrying of weapons in certain areas, primarily schools, Libraries, movie theatres, sporting events, etc. Carrying a weapon on school grounds in my state is a serious offense, but in the case of places of business that post "no guns allowed" they can only ask you to leave if they discover you are carrying a weapon. As long as you leave when they ask there are no issues. I carry concealed so it's never an issue.
Of course you can't carry a weapon into Federal offices such as a Post Office. Hope this clarifies a few things.
|
|
|
Post by JesterUSMC on May 20, 2019 14:31:17 GMT
IF the government does this within their own ranks, imagine what they are capable of doing to us regular Joe Citizens. Exactly WHY we need things like the 2nd Amendment. The 10 amendments to the bill of rights as far as I am aware are supposed to guarantee certain freedoms which can't be taken away at the congressional level. They can be further amended I think but very difficult to do. The president certainly can't on his own. The freedoms expressed in the first amendment and congresses ability to alter is fantastic in principle but A citizen's right to speak or act freely in practice is limited by the social consequence of doing so or their ability to enforce their right. I don't truly understand the laws but Missouri executive order 44 wasn't really legal yet that hardly mattered in that instance. The 2nd Amendment allows the citizens to bare arms but doesn't do much to protect anyone in my opinion. With the 2nd Ammendment specifically it's very open to interpretation and while I'm not sure what precedents have been set in regard to it but each state probably interprets the law differently and there's various restrictions imposed at the state level I would expect. There's likely regulation with what arms are allowed, how they are allowed to be carried, where citizens can go while armed as well. Then there is the right to discharge a loaded weapon and where that can be done and under what circumstance. There's also the possible risk involved with having a registered firearm stolen and used and lots of requirements in relation to storage of and usage of firearms and ammunition I would expect too. This is purely speculative. I would not think a US citizen would have the right to walk into their local watering hole in the USA with a couple of loaded 6 shooter irons on his hips and a 30/30 lever action strapped to his back? Apart from the mockery of looking like he's stepped off the set of a wild west film set, my gut says his 2nd amendment right to do so might be infringed upon by more local laws. I suppose it depends on where he or she might live. I don't lawfully own a weapon in Australia and don't know the extent of the laws in the USA so - I don't know. but the 2nd Amendment won't protect the citizens from a militant government. "Doesn't do much to protect anyone..." - Explain further, please? "With the 2nd Ammendment specifically it's very open to interpretation and while I'm not sure what precedents have been set in regard to it but each state probably interprets the law differently and there's various restrictions imposed at the state level I would expect.
There's likely regulation with what arms are allowed, how they are allowed to be carried, where citizens can go while armed as well. Then there is the right to discharge a loaded weapon and where that can be done and under what circumstance. There's also the possible risk involved with having a registered firearm stolen and used and lots of requirements in relation to storage of and usage of firearms and ammunition I would expect too. This is purely speculative."Unfortunately some people can't understand the '...shall not be infringed.' part of the 2nd. They then point out 'But it says the militia can bear arms!' Let's just forget that 'right of the people' part of the 2nd.... Tell me, why does the militia need to have a codified rule telling them that they can bear arms, in a document that outlines freedoms for all citizens? If the citizens are defined as the militia, then why are they not allowed to use the same small arms as the regular army? That's the definition of 'well regulated' in context of that time - in proper working order. Can't have a properly working militia if the people can't use the same arms as the military. Yes, machineguns are included in that list. If it can be carried by a single infantryman, it should be allowed for civilian possession. There has already been legal precedent in the Supreme Court that states that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, unconnected to service in the militia. (DC v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)). Not to mention numerous other legal decisions outlining people's right to carry, which are typically ignored by the larger Liberal cities/states. Also see: McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) / Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)
It's funny that the 2nd seems to be the only right that is so heavily regulated, in current terms and not back then, when it comes to exercising that right. You don't have to pay $200 if you want to preach on a sidewalk; You don't have to carry your permit excusing you from housing soldiers without your consent; You don't need to have a background check prior to a search of your belongings; You don't need to pass a test to keep your right to due process for a year, etc. etc. I believe that Constitutional carry is how the 2nd was intended, that citizens have the absolute right to carry what they feel best protects their families lives, as well as their own. If a person is considered too dangerous to have a firearm, why are they walking free in the first place? "but the 2nd Amendment won't protect the citizens from a militant government."Pure unadulterated horseshit. The 2nd is the roadblock against that type of government even being established. A government that knows it's people are armed, far in excess of the government's own military, will not attempt to control the populace by force. There will be millions killed if that's attempted here, and I'm willing to bet there are far more patriots in the military and civilian populace than those that would be against them. "bUt MuH dRoNeS!" - When you kill the drone operator and his family, do you think the other drone pilots would be willing to continue to fly missions against the citizens? If it got to the point where government bombs were dropping on families in that type of war, do you think women and children would be off limits? That is what our country would face if a tyrannical government attempted to pull that kind of shit.
|
|
Snorelacks
Captain
 
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 1,255
Console: Xbox one
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 14, 2016 15:32:33 GMT
|
Post by Snorelacks on May 20, 2019 15:50:32 GMT
The 10 amendments to the bill of rights as far as I am aware are supposed to guarantee certain freedoms which can't be taken away at the congressional level. They can be further amended I think but very difficult to do. The president certainly can't on his own. The freedoms expressed in the first amendment and congresses ability to alter is fantastic in principle but A citizen's right to speak or act freely in practice is limited by the social consequence of doing so or their ability to enforce their right. I don't truly understand the laws but Missouri executive order 44 wasn't really legal yet that hardly mattered in that instance. The 2nd Amendment allows the citizens to bare arms but doesn't do much to protect anyone in my opinion. With the 2nd Ammendment specifically it's very open to interpretation and while I'm not sure what precedents have been set in regard to it but each state probably interprets the law differently and there's various restrictions imposed at the state level I would expect. There's likely regulation with what arms are allowed, how they are allowed to be carried, where citizens can go while armed as well. Then there is the right to discharge a loaded weapon and where that can be done and under what circumstance. There's also the possible risk involved with having a registered firearm stolen and used and lots of requirements in relation to storage of and usage of firearms and ammunition I would expect too. This is purely speculative. I would not think a US citizen would have the right to walk into their local watering hole in the USA with a couple of loaded 6 shooter irons on his hips and a 30/30 lever action strapped to his back? Apart from the mockery of looking like he's stepped off the set of a wild west film set, my gut says his 2nd amendment right to do so might be infringed upon by more local laws. I suppose it depends on where he or she might live. I don't lawfully own a weapon in Australia and don't know the extent of the laws in the USA so - I don't know. but the 2nd Amendment won't protect the citizens from a militant government. "Doesn't do much to protect anyone..." - Explain further, please? "With the 2nd Ammendment specifically it's very open to interpretation and while I'm not sure what precedents have been set in regard to it but each state probably interprets the law differently and there's various restrictions imposed at the state level I would expect.
There's likely regulation with what arms are allowed, how they are allowed to be carried, where citizens can go while armed as well. Then there is the right to discharge a loaded weapon and where that can be done and under what circumstance. There's also the possible risk involved with having a registered firearm stolen and used and lots of requirements in relation to storage of and usage of firearms and ammunition I would expect too. This is purely speculative."Unfortunately some people can't understand the '...shall not be infringed.' part of the 2nd. They then point out 'But it says the militia can bear arms!' Let's just forget that 'right of the people' part of the 2nd.... Tell me, why does the militia need to have a codified rule telling them that they can bear arms, in a document that outlines freedoms for all citizens? If the citizens are defined as the militia, then why are they not allowed to use the same small arms as the regular army? That's the definition of 'well regulated' in context of that time - in proper working order. Can't have a properly working militia if the people can't use the same arms as the military. Yes, machineguns are included in that list. If it can be carried by a single infantryman, it should be allowed for civilian possession. There has already been legal precedent in the Supreme Court that states that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, unconnected to service in the militia. (DC v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)). Not to mention numerous other legal decisions outlining people's right to carry, which are typically ignored by the larger Liberal cities/states. Also see: McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) / Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)
It's funny that the 2nd seems to be the only right that is so heavily regulated, in current terms and not back then, when it comes to exercising that right. You don't have to pay $200 if you want to preach on a sidewalk; You don't have to carry your permit excusing you from housing soldiers without your consent; You don't need to have a background check prior to a search of your belongings; You don't need to pass a test to keep your right to due process for a year, etc. etc. I believe that Constitutional carry is how the 2nd was intended, that citizens have the absolute right to carry what they feel best protects their families lives, as well as their own. If a person is considered too dangerous to have a firearm, why are they walking free in the first place? "but the 2nd Amendment won't protect the citizens from a militant government."Pure unadulterated horseshit. The 2nd is the roadblock against that type of government even being established. A government that knows it's people are armed, far in excess of the government's own military, will not attempt to control the populace by force. There will be millions killed if that's attempted here, and I'm willing to bet there are far more patriots in the military and civilian populace than those that would be against them. "bUt MuH dRoNeS!" - When you kill the drone operator and his family, do you think the other drone pilots would be willing to continue to fly missions against the citizens? If it got to the point where government bombs were dropping on families in that type of war, do you think women and children would be off limits? That is what our country would face if a tyrannical government attempted to pull that kind of shit. I do respect Test's effort to understand our politics, our laws and our Constitution. However, as someone who lived in Spain for 7 years and has been to 55 countries, it's extremely difficult to fully understand the context behind the rationale for a nation's mores, founding principles and overall fabric of society. Most nations have a complex construct and the US is no different.
Our Country was founded on an individual freedom from an overbearing ruler or government and it's foundation is built on six basic principles 1) our government is created by and subject to the will of the people, 2) limited government (Thomas Jefferson said, "A govt big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have), 3) separation of powers (Executive, Legislative, Judicial), 4) checks and balances (3 co-equal branches of government), 5) Judicial review (No government official is above the law of the citizens), 6) Federalism- in our case a federal government and individual state governments.
|
|
El Materdor43
Lieutenant

Perpetual Potato
Posts: 552
Likes: 425
Console: Xbox One
Preferred server: East
Is R35T a Skreb?: No
Date registered: Feb 13, 2016 17:12:47 GMT
|
Post by El Materdor43 on May 20, 2019 17:22:22 GMT
Comparing the wall and a coup to oust a sitting president is an apples to oranges comparison. Trump, in his statement about making Mexico pay for the wall, didn’t use/abuse the government intelligence/surveillance machine to attempt to achieve this. Also, making that statement isn’t an abuse of those powers and you can’t draw a moral equalivence of the two. They are completely different. One is against the law, the other is not. Also, infighting at corporations doesn’t affect or call in to question the integrity of the top law enforcement agencies of the US. They are to be blind to political parties and they are to uphold the laws of this country without bias. Also, truth is truth. Just look at the entire Russia hoax. The mainstream media presented the Steele dossier as the truth without any attempt to verify any aspect of it. They did it out of their irrational hatred for Trump, period. Most of them knew that it was made up but in order to advance their narrative they pushed it as factual and to question its validity made you a denier. Now, as AG Barr has investigations ongoing about the beginnings of this, the truth is coming out and the Obama DOJ is now throwing each other under the bus. The truth is coming out. It isn’t one sided version of truth compared to the other, it is verifiable and has a trail that can be followed. The problem, for the left and the Obama folks, is that they believed that they could remove Trump inside of 6 months and never have to worry about giving an explanation to anyone. The truth always lurks somewhere, it just has to be uncovered You are correct in relation to the two examples. It wasn't my intention to suggest an equivalency with the examples. Trumps campaign promises to be fair, in my honest opinion weren't lies and were made with the best of intention but unrealistic in my opinion. Nevertheless, if it was a lie, I do think there is moral equivalency. A lie is a lie whether there's collusion involved or whether it's said under oath or not from a moral standpoint in my opinion. Lawfully they are different things. I have absolutely no faith in the integrity of the system itself when it comes to truth. We will never know all of the truths and I also believe that even if we did, knowing it wouldn't serve our interests any better than not knowing it. Is Trump or his subordinates guilty of subverting the course of justice or even of perjury prior or during his time in office? Probably in my opinion. That opinion though, I hold for essentially all in office. What will come out of this one? Who knows? I don't believe the whole Truth will be known nor Justice will be done. It will be expensive mind you. Let’s look at each statement. You say that if Trump’s statement about the wall was a lie then there is equivalency between that and the attempted coup? I’m sorry, I can’t go along with that in any way, shape or form. Assuming that it was a lie, he didn’t use the powers of the federal government to advance that lie, which was the case in the Mueller hoax. The wall, mostly, remains unbuilt. It may in fact get paid for in the form of a level playing field with Mexico in the form of increased revenues that result from a more equitable deal, tariff wise The integrity of the system is affirmed when the constitution is enforced by those entrusted to do so. That integrity is earned and so far, I haven’t seen any abuses of power by the Trump administration. An example of what the mainstream media in this country calls obstruction, Trump wanting to fire Mueller, is not obstruction. If there was a crime committed, the evidence and facts are there regardless of who investigates. Therefore the president is well within his powers as assigned to the Executive branch. Obstruction takes place when the evidence is withheld, tampered with or destroyed. Firing the person running that show does not indicate obstruction. Trump or his subordinates subverting Justice or even committing perjury? If that would have happened, it would have been all over the media, complete with examples. There is a legal trick used by many prosecutors and jurisdictions in this country. It is called a Perjury Trap. It’s where you get interrogated one day with a set of questions and then are brought back in at a later time and interrogated again, except the questions are often asked in a different way. If any answer is different, even as simple as times given about events, it is considered Perjury. That is why so many in the mainstream media here wanted the president to sit down and give sworn testimony. Just a single different answer would give them the Perjury crime that they so desperately seek. Again, the truth is out there. It will eventually come out.
|
|
CatSnipah
Lieutenant

Catnip Commander
Posts: 532
Likes: 314
Console: Xbox one
Preferred server: East
Clan tag: [BNKR]
Is R35T a Skreb?: Yes
Mini-Profile Name Color: 096ab1
Mini-Profile Text Color: 096ab1
Date registered: Feb 23, 2016 13:13:03 GMT
|
Post by CatSnipah on May 21, 2019 1:32:13 GMT
Test, I could tell you how you simply don't truly understand the 2nd Amendment, but Snore and Jester have pointed it out very clearly. I also appreciate you taking the time to put in writing what you perceive or understand, so that others closer to it here in the US can clarify or explain further.
In my experience, most people outside of the US - and way too many within - can't necessarily relate to our 2A because it is just such a foreign concept to them. You have to truly understand the root of the 1st and 2nd Amendments - our Founding Fathers (and MANY Patriots along side of them), were thinking from the perspective of a restrictive government who taxed unfairly and allowed little to no representation of the everyday citizen. You also have to keep in mind how our country really came into being - fighting for our freedom from said oppressive rulers. The foundation of America is rooted in a simple aversion to authority - no one is gonna tell us what to do....not even a domestic oppressive government body. The Gadsden Flag embodies that spirit, even today. So does the saying and visuals regarding the Tree of Liberty.
To expand more on state's rights, as referenced by Snore and Jester, in South Carolina, where I live, hold my CWP (concealed weapons permit) and am an NRA and state certified firearms instructor, you do not have to have a CWP in order to purchase a firearm, but you can open carry. Now, as you note, there are potential social and personal risks associated with it. Why make yourself a target in downtown Charleston? That's a personal choice.
To LEGALLY carry concealed, you must pass a course of material including written and shooting qualifications that is designated and designed by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division. There is some leeway on how an instructor may deliver the material, but the base material must be delivered. SLED has been known to audit instructors, particularly if there is an inkling that they might be short-circuiting the education and demonstration processes.
Here, like elsewhere, you must complete a form 4473 in order to drive a background check to purchase a firearm. It is very comprehensive, but in at least 2 recent cases of public shootings, the government screwed up on performing said background check and the individuals, who should have been screened out as a potential problem, ended up with a firearm through the legal process. That's a tactical execution failure, not a system-wide process failure. In any event, if you have your CWP, your background check takes a few minutes, since you have passed several rigorous background checks in your application process (CWP approval process can take up to 90 days). If you do not have your CWP, you can expect the check to take anywhere from 30 minutes to 3 days, depending on complexity of your background info (i.e., aliases, name changes, number of different residences in recent time, etc.). This is all in reference to sales from a dealer holding a Federal Firearms License. Private sales (party to party) are also allowed, and are less regulated. But, in some cases, the burden to prove a sale can come back on the selling party, should the buyer do something nefarious at a later date.
For the individuals who say that "the Founding Fathers wrote the 2A talking about muskets. There's no way they could have known what would be developed." To anyone saying that, I simply ask if the 1A applies to TV, radio, internet blogs, etc. They inevitably say "yeah, of course". That makes it all too easy - how did the FF know what would be developed in the ways of written and heard word? Gets their panties in a bunch literally every single time.
And in closing, to your comment to the effect of not being able to stand up against the military, I would ask you to take a look at any number of insurgencies across the globe. When you're done researching those, take a look at countries that banned firearms from possession by citizens, then look at how many of those citizens were then murdered in their defenseless state.
Hitler in Germany. Pol Pot in Cambodia. Stalin in the former Soviet Union.
And for something more modern, look at what is happening in the EU. Specifically places like the UK and Sweden, where citizens are in a heavily-restricted state when it comes to firearms ownership and personal protection. Combine that with the insurgency of immigrants from dramatically different religious, ethic and socio-economic backgrounds. They aren't exactly in a harmonious and homogeneous environment right now.
Heck, look what is going on right here in the US in Minnesota. A large immigrant population of Somalis have settled in a section of Minneapolis, and between gang violence and outright blatant attacks on whites and other people on non-Somali heritage, it is getting ridiculous. Of course, then these people vote in a rabid anti-Semite, anti-American, pro-Sharia law political representative. That kind of Alinsky, Fahrenheit 451 crap on my home soil is pretty damn disturbing.
|
|