Arms Locker banner

1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
with guns until the 1968 Gun Control Act. The law used to have to give a paroled man a horse, tackle, gun, ammo, and a $20 gold pc. So you punks that claim that anyone who's done what YOU'VE done shouldn't have a gun. you shouldn't have touched that girl in high school. That's "frottage". You shouldn't have copied that tape.You shouldn't listen to Napster. YOu shouldn't have used bootlegged software. You shouldn't have made a bet, you shouldn't have "forgetten" to declare that $ to the IRS, you shouldn't have oral sex with your wife, etc, etc, ad nauseum. ALL are felonies, punk, and you're ALL guilty. So by your own BS "logic', YOU shouldn't have guns, either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
andy said:
with guns until the 1968 Gun Control Act. The law used to have to give a paroled man a horse, tackle, gun, ammo, and a $20 gold pc. So you punks that claim that anyone who's done what YOU'VE done shouldn't have a gun. you shouldn't have touched that girl in high school. That's "frottage". You shouldn't have copied that tape.You shouldn't listen to Napster. YOu shouldn't have used bootlegged software. You shouldn't have made a bet, you shouldn't have "forgetten" to declare that $ to the IRS, you shouldn't have oral sex with your wife, etc, etc, ad nauseum. ALL are felonies, punk, and you're ALL guilty. So by your own BS "logic', YOU shouldn't have guns, either.
Well TARD, I see your still serving up your old, tired, shop worn invective, to justify your currect third class citizenship status.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
andy said:
POS wannabe Hitler like YOU has WHAT to say? :)
Well TARD, if you want to know what I have to say -- read the post just above yours. Really simple isn't it?

To the TARD, and anybody else reading this, the TARD can't talk or make a point without using his potty mouth. What a deficieny in intellect the TARD has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,151 Posts
andy said:
with guns until the 1968 Gun Control Act. The law used to have to give a paroled man a horse, tackle, gun, ammo, and a $20 gold pc. So you punks that claim that anyone who's done what YOU'VE done shouldn't have a gun. you shouldn't have touched that girl in high school. That's "frottage". You shouldn't have copied that tape.You shouldn't listen to Napster. YOu shouldn't have used bootlegged software. You shouldn't have made a bet, you shouldn't have "forgetten" to declare that $ to the IRS, you shouldn't have oral sex with your wife, etc, etc, ad nauseum. ALL are felonies, punk, and you're ALL guilty. So by your own BS "logic', YOU shouldn't have guns, either.
Selling cocaine to teenagers isn't the same as trying to get in the prom queens underwear. Classic example of "I'm not that bad, everybody does it." Sorry. that does NOT cut it. You don't sell drugs to a kid so in a few months he has a a $200.00 day habit. Your life went wrong, nobody's fault but your own. By the way what's "frottage"? I do not believe the "convicted felon" thing should scar you for life, it should be a case by case decision. But in your case, from what you have written, I wouldn't let you touch a firearm. Sorry John, your a Wacko.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
54 Posts
FELON

I also think it should be possible to restore rights on certain felony convictions based on a case by case review. Also, we seem to have an over-abundance of laws that are plain unnecessary, even law-enforcement doesn't know them all. Note I am not advocating restoring gun rights to violent, multiple convicted or mentally deranged felons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
90+% of the felonies on the books were never even THOUGHT of by the Founding Fathers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
there aint a word ANYWHERE in the Constitution or any of the essays written by the Founding Fathers, keeping a guy out of the Militia, cause he'd committed a REAL felony, much less the bs that passes for a felony today. NOTHING that I have a felony conviction for was a felony, more than 50years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,117 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
should read 70 years ago, 1934 Firearms Act, enacted ONLY to give the out of work liquor-agents something to do, after Prohibition ended.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,586 Posts
Quit your whining, you alone screwed up your life. Try accepting the responsibility for doing it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,890 Posts
andy said:
there aint a word ANYWHERE in the Constitution or any of the essays written by the Founding Fathers, keeping a guy out of the Militia, cause he'd committed a REAL felony, much less the bs that passes for a felony today. NOTHING that I have a felony conviction for was a felony, more than 50years ago.

Yeah, except back then they just hung people who committed "real" felonies. Be happy you just lost your rights?

I kinda prefer the old way myself. Anyone alive can carry, if you're too dangerous to carry, then you're hung.

As one of my old calculus teachers would say, "Easy. Right?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
andy said:
90+% of the felonies on the books were never even THOUGHT of by the Founding Fathers.
Tar and featherings, burning people out of their houses were all acceptable means of dealing wiht things that are now felonies.

The founding fathers were smart enough to know that they had not thought of all the necessary laws - that's why they gave congress the ability to pass new ones.

Wire fraud, was not covered by the founding fathers - maybe because it didn't exist then...same with many others.

Some things were so obvious to them, they didn't need to be spelled out. They didn't list everything that was against society...

Your claims ignore a lot of history and factual information.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
Aslan said:
Tar and featherings, burning people out of their houses were all acceptable means of dealing wiht things that are now felonies.

The founding fathers were smart enough to know that they had not thought of all the necessary laws - that's why they gave congress the ability to pass new ones.

Wire fraud, was not covered by the founding fathers - maybe because it didn't exist then...same with many others.

Some things were so obvious to them, they didn't need to be spelled out. They didn't list everything that was against society...

Your claims ignore a lot of history and factual information.

:devil:
Tim, I have come to the conclusion that you, like Garand, are too literate for NUTTY JOHN.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
Thanks, I try.

It would be so easy to resort to insults and name calling on stuff as stupid (at least to me) as this. Ignore or invent history, ignore what crimes he did actually commit, and claim that he's some how an innocent victim.

Sorry, If I weren't trying to be nice, I can think of a lot of insults that would be very easy to hurl, and probably true to boot.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
andy said:
should read 70 years ago, 1934 Firearms Act, enacted ONLY to give the out of work liquor-agents something to do, after Prohibition ended.
To give the Devil's his due, he is correct here. Besides, there is a difference between a violent crime (felony) and a non-violent one in my eyes. The second shouldn't prevent anyone from owning a weapon.

KJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,648 Posts
Actually the 1934 firearms act was created out of desparation over the crime waves that were taking place. (Or so I have been told)

It was misguided, like so many other laws, but politicians are generally the least qualified to determine how to fix any problem...

I don't have a problem with completely restoring full rights to those that have served their time. I have a problem with not dealing with some of the crimes adequately.

It is clear that some who have done their time, have neither remorse, nor respect for any laws. These people should not be back out on the street, IMHO. Of course that's the problem - since the current justice system is only about punishment and not about solving the problem.

:devil:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
Aslan said:
Actually the 134 firearms act was created out of desparation over the crime waves that were taking place.

It was misguided, like so many other laws, but politicians are generally the least qualified to determine how to fix any problem...
...that ended the year before with the end of prohibition. It was a way to have something to bust the bad guys for that they couldn't catch on alcohol charges. The bad part was that the bad guys were no longer doing that stuff like they were before since prohibition was out the door.

I repeat: the law was made to keep a larger group of government employees employeed. That's similar to the war on drug today in my opinion. I don't understand how anyone could use those drugs, but I understand it less how marijuana is illegal and alcohol is legal! I can't understand it at all how a voter should care what you use in your home!

KJ
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
Aslan said:
It is clear that some who have done their time, have neither remorse, nor respect for any laws. These people should not be back out on the street, IMHO. Of course that's the problem - since the current justice system is only about punishment and not about solving the problem.

:devil:
Did you change this post? I made a reply, and then I read stuiff that I didn't see before and didn't show up in the paragraph I quoted from you? Wierd if not. Anyway, back to the ranch...

I agree with the "new" text completely on violent crimes. If you have paid your debt to society and are now a reformed citizen, then you should be treated as a law abiding citizen, etc. If you haven't reformed and paid your debt, then you belong in prison or executed. End of story. My opinion only, of course. Too bad the system doesn't work that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,586 Posts
Thanks Bill, but if you take into account that erika/gunkid was barely literate when she/he first found the internet years ago, you would realize how far he has come.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,151 Posts
Case in point. Martha Stewart. Insider trading? A Felony? No way. Possesion with intent to distribute cocaine? Felon in possession of a firearm? Falsifying a document to purchase a firearm? Three time convictions? Go buy a peashooter. No way am I going to condone his "rights" to own a firearm.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top