More info.. not looking good...
 

In article , says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..

Are you going to require that prosecutors stop using the felon in
possion of a firearm as a
bargining chip when getting the "alleged" criminal to admit to the
primary crime? What good
is the law if it isn't goint to be enforced?

--------------------------------------

Huh?

Weren't you in the Marines or the Marine reserves or something? You
had a background check run on you then and fingerprints were taken.
What's the big deal?

I was finger printed at the age of 16 when I was hired as a GS-1 by the USDA. I also had to
have a background check in order to handle confidential information. It was a choice and I
didn't have a right to a government job.

When I enlisted in the USMCR it was a choice and I didn't have the right to enlist.

I have a civil right to keep and bear arms as a citizen of the USA. It isn't a choice, it is
a right.

I've had background checks run on me several times in my life for
various reasons, both as military and as a civilian. I just don't
understand why people are so up in arms (pun intended) about this.

After I gout out of the USMCR I made the decision not to do government work. I didn't want to
have to be subjected to background checks, security investigations and such just to enable me
to work. I just want to live my life without constantly asking the government permission to
do things. I especially don't want to have to ask them permission to exercise my civil
rights. Why can people just walk up and register to vote and vote without having a background
check to ensure that they are legally able to register to vote and vote?

More info.. not looking good...
 

In article , says...

"JustWaitAFrekinMinute" wrote in message
...

On 6/22/2013 11:55 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 07:46:54 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 05:21:35 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Look, there's a serious problem related to having guns in the
hands of
those who shouldn't have them. We have laws that prohibit some
from
gun ownership that are not a violation of anyone's constitutional
rights. Nobody disagrees with that. Having fingerprints on
file
along with a cursory background check as a requirement for legal
gun
ownership does not violate anyone's constitutional rights. All
they do
is confirm the identity of the person and checks that there is no
lawful reason for the person not to have a gun.




Why should any law abiding citizen care if his telephone calls are
monitored and his mail read?


Why would a law abiding citizen complain about the cops searching
their house anytime they wanted and why would they need a right
against self incrimination or need guaranteed due process?
Those people who wrote the bill of rights must have been anarchists
who had an unreasonable fear of the government.

The government is always looking out for our best interests, I guess
we should throw out all of that dated stuff.

The self named "boat" guys can go first.


Isn't this the same government that just admitted targeting
individuals
because of their beliefs? Thought so... The fact is "law abiding
citizens" were targeted for having opposing thoughts period. So no,
even
as a "law abiding" citizen, I don't want the government to monitor my
email or phone calls... Especially when for all we know a phone order
to
"Chic Filet" could end up putting you on a "list"...

----------------------------------

You obviously have not been keeping up with the current news on this
subject.

What did we miss?

More info.. not looking good...
 

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..

In article ,
says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..

Are you going to require that prosecutors stop using the felon in
possion of a firearm as a
bargining chip when getting the "alleged" criminal to admit to the
primary crime? What good
is the law if it isn't goint to be enforced?

--------------------------------------

Huh?

Weren't you in the Marines or the Marine reserves or something?
You
had a background check run on you then and fingerprints were taken.
What's the big deal?

I was finger printed at the age of 16 when I was hired as a GS-1 by
the USDA. I also had to
have a background check in order to handle confidential information.
It was a choice and I
didn't have a right to a government job.

When I enlisted in the USMCR it was a choice and I didn't have the
right to enlist.

I have a civil right to keep and bear arms as a citizen of the USA. It
isn't a choice, it is
a right.

I've had background checks run on me several times in my life for
various reasons, both as military and as a civilian. I just don't
understand why people are so up in arms (pun intended) about this.

After I gout out of the USMCR I made the decision not to do government
work. I didn't want to
have to be subjected to background checks, security investigations and
such just to enable me
to work. I just want to live my life without constantly asking the
government permission to
do things. I especially don't want to have to ask them permission to
exercise my civil
rights. Why can people just walk up and register to vote and vote
without having a background
check to ensure that they are legally able to register to vote and
vote?

-----------------------------------

Sorry to hear about your gout. Left foot or right?

More info.. not looking good...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 19:50:59 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

He seems perfectly reasonable except for his gun nuttery.

You just seem to ignore where the guns come from that cause most of
the murders.

Nope. Never once suggested that background checks are a
cure-all.

Criminals selling stolen guns to other criminals do not submit
requests for background checks.

Looks like you and criminals have something in common
with the background check thing.
Personally, I'd make myself very distinct from criminals
when selling a firearm. Law or no law.
You do what suits yourself.

More info.. not looking good...
 

In article , says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..

In article ,
says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..

Are you going to require that prosecutors stop using the felon in
possion of a firearm as a
bargining chip when getting the "alleged" criminal to admit to the
primary crime? What good
is the law if it isn't goint to be enforced?

--------------------------------------

Huh?

Weren't you in the Marines or the Marine reserves or something?
You
had a background check run on you then and fingerprints were taken.
What's the big deal?

I was finger printed at the age of 16 when I was hired as a GS-1 by
the USDA. I also had to
have a background check in order to handle confidential information.
It was a choice and I
didn't have a right to a government job.

When I enlisted in the USMCR it was a choice and I didn't have the
right to enlist.

I have a civil right to keep and bear arms as a citizen of the USA. It
isn't a choice, it is
a right.

I've had background checks run on me several times in my life for
various reasons, both as military and as a civilian. I just don't
understand why people are so up in arms (pun intended) about this.

After I gout out of the USMCR I made the decision not to do government
work. I didn't want to
have to be subjected to background checks, security investigations and
such just to enable me
to work. I just want to live my life without constantly asking the
government permission to
do things. I especially don't want to have to ask them permission to
exercise my civil
rights. Why can people just walk up and register to vote and vote
without having a background
check to ensure that they are legally able to register to vote and
vote?

-----------------------------------

Sorry to hear about your gout. Left foot or right?

No gout. I have developed arthritis.

More info.. not looking good...
 

On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 18:37:52 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"John H" wrote in message
.. .


So maybe it's the generation after that, or, more than likely, the
multi-generations of inner-city
folks who've been on the dole for a long time.

John H.


---------------

It *is* the generation after. It would be your grandkid's
generation. Don't know what they call it.

The 'Grandkids' Generation. Luckily, mine have parents who are presenting a hard work ethic. Both my
older grandsons took or are taking, geometry in the eighth grade - two years ahead of the norm.

Now if I could just convince them that a military academy is a good place to go!

John H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

More info.. not looking good...
 

In article ,
says...

"Hank©" wrote in message
b.com...

On 6/22/2013 7:58 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...

On 6/22/13 1:45 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:

Yeah, but they promise to properly fund the fence, and enforce the
laws
as soon as we let the 15 million new democrat voters register...
Then of
course they won't follow through, just like 1984 and 2006. These
people
hate America and are doing what ever they can to destroy the two
party
system...


"These people" don't hate America. They simply don't buy into your
concept of what America should be. And, specifically, if anyone is
"destroying" the two party system we have here, it is the
Republicans,
who seem to be doing whatever they can to alienate as many voter
groups
as they can...women, students, Latinos, the elderly, the middle
class,
everyone, basically, who doesn't fall into the demographic and
thought
patterns of Southern white males.

The demographics in this nation are changing rapidly. Even a bastion
of
Southern white conservatism, Texas, has a chance of becoming a
"blue"
state within the next decade.

Adapt to the new realities...or die.

---------------------------------

Harry, don't let this go to your head, but I agree with you 100
percent. It shouldn't come as a big surprise to anyone and it
certainly isn't the result of the election of one President. The
changing demographics of this nation that we are witnessing was
forecast 20 - 30 years ago.

I think the problem is that the "rules" we play by ... which
include
things like older cultural influences, tax codes and the general
subscription to a smaller government role in our lives hasn't kept
pace
with the demographic changes. It's still a very fluid process. Some
who
were more influenced by how things were back in the 50's, 60's and
70's
find it hard to accept and understand a larger government role that
includes expanded entitlement programs and other benefits, mostly
paid
for by those who didn't rely on those programs. Meanwhile much of
the
population growth that has led to the demographic changes have not
benefited yet from the expanded government programs in terms of
becoming
self sufficient. So it seems to many that a shrinking class is
being
expected to contribute more in terms of taxes and adjustments to
their
lives and expectations. That's understandable to a degree.

In my limited exposure to people's attitudes today I've seen a big
change in the expectations of the younger generation. They are far
more comfortable with having the government play a larger role in
their
lives than many of us old farts did when we were their age. Many
expect
things that I would have never even considered or thought of. Those
who
still adhere to the "old ways" are usually in their late 50's or
older.

You're right though. Change is inevitable and corresponding changes
to
how our entire system run and financed is needed. Priorities have
to
change. It will become easier as us "old farts" die off and ride
off
into the sunset.



We will have our memories of better times. ;-)

------------------------------------------

We won't have any memories. We'll all be six feet under, or spread
out as ashes somewhere.

Exactly!

More info.. not looking good...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:55:49 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"Hank©" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 6/22/2013 7:58 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"F.O.A.D." wrote in message
...

On 6/22/13 1:45 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:

Yeah, but they promise to properly fund the fence, and enforce the
laws
as soon as we let the 15 million new democrat voters register...
Then of
course they won't follow through, just like 1984 and 2006. These
people
hate America and are doing what ever they can to destroy the two
party
system...


"These people" don't hate America. They simply don't buy into your
concept of what America should be. And, specifically, if anyone is
"destroying" the two party system we have here, it is the
Republicans,
who seem to be doing whatever they can to alienate as many voter
groups
as they can...women, students, Latinos, the elderly, the middle
class,
everyone, basically, who doesn't fall into the demographic and
thought
patterns of Southern white males.

The demographics in this nation are changing rapidly. Even a bastion
of
Southern white conservatism, Texas, has a chance of becoming a
"blue"
state within the next decade.

Adapt to the new realities...or die.

---------------------------------

Harry, don't let this go to your head, but I agree with you 100
percent. It shouldn't come as a big surprise to anyone and it
certainly isn't the result of the election of one President. The
changing demographics of this nation that we are witnessing was
forecast 20 - 30 years ago.

I think the problem is that the "rules" we play by ... which
include
things like older cultural influences, tax codes and the general
subscription to a smaller government role in our lives hasn't kept
pace
with the demographic changes. It's still a very fluid process. Some
who
were more influenced by how things were back in the 50's, 60's and
70's
find it hard to accept and understand a larger government role that
includes expanded entitlement programs and other benefits, mostly
paid
for by those who didn't rely on those programs. Meanwhile much of
the
population growth that has led to the demographic changes have not
benefited yet from the expanded government programs in terms of
becoming
self sufficient. So it seems to many that a shrinking class is
being
expected to contribute more in terms of taxes and adjustments to
their
lives and expectations. That's understandable to a degree.

In my limited exposure to people's attitudes today I've seen a big
change in the expectations of the younger generation. They are far
more comfortable with having the government play a larger role in
their
lives than many of us old farts did when we were their age. Many
expect
things that I would have never even considered or thought of. Those
who
still adhere to the "old ways" are usually in their late 50's or
older.

You're right though. Change is inevitable and corresponding changes
to
how our entire system run and financed is needed. Priorities have
to
change. It will become easier as us "old farts" die off and ride
off
into the sunset.



We will have our memories of better times. ;-)

------------------------------------------

We won't have any memories. We'll all be six feet under, or spread
out as ashes somewhere.


Hopefully in the National Cemetery at Quantico, which just happens to be close to Forest Greens Golf
Course.

John H.

Why, what difference would it be whether you were buried there or in a
dumpster?

More info.. not looking good...
 

On 6/23/13 8:22 AM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

They all missed my point. The point is like gun control... if we let
them give citizenship, without *first* securing the border, the border
won't get secured. There will be financing delays, lawsuits, and just
"rules" made by administration officials that delay or sink the security
end of the bill asap.... It's just the way things go in Washington, the
Dems make promises "if" the repubs will just cave and of course like in
84 and the fence in '06... All we will end up with in millions of new
dem voters....

Scotty O'reilly speaks!!

It really doesn't matter whether a fence is erected along the
U.S.-Mexico border, because such devices don't work. The Great Wall of
China didn't work, and the Berlin Wall didn't work...both were breached
many, many times. But calling for the building of such a wall gets the
righties what they want...a delay in a real immigration plan "until" the
wall is built. It's just more conservative cynicism.

More info.. not looking good...
 

In article z_
,
says...

It really doesn't matter whether a fence is erected along the
U.S.-Mexico border, because such devices don't work. The Great Wall of
China didn't work, and the Berlin Wall didn't work...both were breached
many, many times. But calling for the building of such a wall gets the
righties what they want...a delay in a real immigration plan "until" the
wall is built. It's just more conservative cynicism.

Walls and fences are a joke.
So are the proposed "immigration plans" I've seen.
About half of the illegal immigrants came in on legal
visas.
What will it take to fix just that piece? A massive
change in visa procedures. And massive hiring of INS
agents to track down and deport visa overstays.
But wait. Why do people illegally cross the border or
illegally overstay their visas?
To work.
A working e-verify system and strict enforcement of laws
against hiring illegal immigrants, with stiff penalties -
and I'm talking jail time - will take care of it all.
Add a $500 government bounty for each illegal reported
and deported. Shops using illegals didn't last long in
the past. They got reported to the INS and a raid
shortly followed.
Any good union guy would report illegals.
Now, with most unions almost dead, you need a $500 bounty
to get the average dope thinking.
Add swift and sure deportation for any illegal caught
after whatever "amnesty" deadline is set.
THAT'S the "secure border." That's all it takes.
Which party has that in their "immigration plan?"
Let me know when you find out.