Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:09:26 -0400, H the K
wrote: On 7/23/09 8:51 PM, Gene wrote: Both of mine said, "Yea!" Here's who said what.... http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI..._call_vote_cfm .cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00237 One of ours said NO and the other did not vote on this issue. I agree with the NO votes. So long as there is no single standard or in fact any sort of commonality in standards for issuing these permits, it should be up to the states to decide where they stand on the issue. Bloody hilarious that Republicans would scream about states rights until a carry permit law comes up. Hypocrite mother ****ers pimping for the gun lobby. |
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
jps wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:09:26 -0400, H the K wrote: On 7/23/09 8:51 PM, Gene wrote: Both of mine said, "Yea!" Here's who said what.... http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI..._call_vote_cfm .cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00237 One of ours said NO and the other did not vote on this issue. I agree with the NO votes. So long as there is no single standard or in fact any sort of commonality in standards for issuing these permits, it should be up to the states to decide where they stand on the issue. Bloody hilarious that Republicans would scream about states rights until a carry permit law comes up. Hypocrite mother ****ers pimping for the gun lobby. Well, we all know the GOP fondness for "states' rights" has to do with segregation. -- Whatever moral rules you have proposed, abide by them as they were laws, and as if you would be guilty of impiety by violating any of them, *unless* you are a conservative Republican office holder or minister. If that is your position in life, then anything goes. |
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:39:31 -0400, Gene Kearns
wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:07:45 -0700, jps penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: |On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:09:26 -0400, H the K |wrote: | |On 7/23/09 8:51 PM, Gene wrote: | | Both of mine said, "Yea!" | | Here's who said what.... | | http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI..._call_vote_cfm | .cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00237 | | | |One of ours said NO and the other did not vote on this issue. | |I agree with the NO votes. So long as there is no single standard or in |fact any sort of commonality in standards for issuing these permits, it |should be up to the states to decide where they stand on the issue. | |Bloody hilarious that Republicans would scream about states rights |until a carry permit law comes up. Hypocrite mother ****ers pimping |for the gun lobby. It isn't about states rights.... unless you are trying to allow states to abridge the US Constitution.... Isn't that exactly what they're trying to do? |
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
Gene Kearns wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:07:45 -0700, jps penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: |On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:09:26 -0400, H the K |wrote: | |On 7/23/09 8:51 PM, Gene wrote: | | Both of mine said, "Yea!" | | Here's who said what.... | | http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI..._call_vote_cfm | .cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00237 | | | |One of ours said NO and the other did not vote on this issue. | |I agree with the NO votes. So long as there is no single standard or in |fact any sort of commonality in standards for issuing these permits, it |should be up to the states to decide where they stand on the issue. | |Bloody hilarious that Republicans would scream about states rights |until a carry permit law comes up. Hypocrite mother ****ers pimping |for the gun lobby. It isn't about states rights.... unless you are trying to allow states to abridge the US Constitution.... The 10th amendment comes to mind. |
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
Gene wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:42:04 -0400, BAR wrote: Gene Kearns wrote: On Wed, 29 Jul 2009 02:07:45 -0700, jps penned the following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats: |On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:09:26 -0400, H the K |wrote: | |On 7/23/09 8:51 PM, Gene wrote: | | Both of mine said, "Yea!" | | Here's who said what.... | | http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI..._call_vote_cfm | .cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00237 | | | |One of ours said NO and the other did not vote on this issue. | |I agree with the NO votes. So long as there is no single standard or in |fact any sort of commonality in standards for issuing these permits, it |should be up to the states to decide where they stand on the issue. | |Bloody hilarious that Republicans would scream about states rights |until a carry permit law comes up. Hypocrite mother ****ers pimping |for the gun lobby. It isn't about states rights.... unless you are trying to allow states to abridge the US Constitution.... The 10th amendment comes to mind. I think the 2nd amendment came first..... I think the 1st amendment came first!!!!!! |
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
"jps" wrote in message ... On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:59:21 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:04:59 -0400, NotNow wrote: The 10th amendment comes to mind. I think the 2nd amendment came first..... I think the 1st amendment came first!!!!!! We didn't defeat the British by yelling at them, we shot them. What foriegn army are we defending against these days? We couldn't shoot those Saudi piloted planes out of the sky with our most advanced weapons systems. The most frightening threat I've heard recently comes from the thought that Cheney was trying to convince Bush to use US Military troops for home soil police work. Is that what we're defending ourselves against? We were not fighting a foreign army in 1776, We were fighting a terrorist government. |
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
Calif Bill wrote:
"jps" wrote in message ... On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:59:21 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:04:59 -0400, NotNow wrote: The 10th amendment comes to mind. I think the 2nd amendment came first..... I think the 1st amendment came first!!!!!! We didn't defeat the British by yelling at them, we shot them. What foriegn army are we defending against these days? We couldn't shoot those Saudi piloted planes out of the sky with our most advanced weapons systems. The most frightening threat I've heard recently comes from the thought that Cheney was trying to convince Bush to use US Military troops for home soil police work. Is that what we're defending ourselves against? We were not fighting a foreign army in 1776, We were fighting a terrorist government. Pesky insurgent colonists... :) -- Indict Dick Cheney. Arrest him. Try him. Then...pardon him. |
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Thune Amendment
jps wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:29:12 -0400, wrote: On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:10:09 -0700, jps wrote: On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:59:21 -0400, wrote: On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 16:04:59 -0400, NotNow wrote: The 10th amendment comes to mind. I think the 2nd amendment came first..... I think the 1st amendment came first!!!!!! We didn't defeat the British by yelling at them, we shot them. What foriegn army are we defending against these days? The Cambridge police? We couldn't shoot those Saudi piloted planes out of the sky with our most advanced weapons systems. We could, we just wouldn't. Remember the Iranian airliner we had no problem dispatching? The problem was that it happened too quickly to react in NY. We weren't prepared. The most frightening threat I've heard recently comes from the thought that Cheney was trying to convince Bush to use US Military troops for home soil police work. Oh like the 15 US Army regulars (along with the Texas NG) who were at Waco? I thought they were all ATF agents. Never heard they were NG troops or Army. That's ****ed up. Is that what we're defending ourselves against? We are defending ourselves against garden variety criminals that the government seems powerless to stop but if we did find ourselves invaded by a foreign power, the US would be a hard target. Bear in mind it was the US who taught most of the "insurgents" we have had trouble with for the last half century just about everything they know when they were on "our side". (Vietnam, South America and the current middle east cluster****) Well said. The other day, one of the righties here hinted that my opinion about the police would change if I had to call on them in case of some undefined emergency. Well, I don't have a "bad" opinion of the police. I simply don't trust the police to police or investigate themselves when there is a controversy involved police. It shouldn't come as any surprise that I am underwhelmed by organizations administering "uniformed" personnel, except of course for fire departments and firemen. Police do a decent job of what they actually do, but I'm pretty sure it's not a bright idea to depend on police to defend oneself from zombies with guns or knives. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Ship captain's Second Amendment rights upheld | ASA | |||
Reagan's own words on Second Amendment | ASA |