American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Jackson; 431032]Caricoso,

Please pay attention here, because this is the 3rd time I've said this to you, and yet it continues to fly right over your head.

I did not say anything about using firearms to defend your family [i]against government troops[/i].

What I clearly said was.

However, you suggested that instead of getting personally involved in a resistance movement, you would instead need to go home "to protect my family". Given our mutual assumption that individuals cannot prevail in a direct confrontation with government troops, I assumed that you were talking about "protecting" them from criminals, which led me ask how exactly you were going to protect your family [against criminals] when you are unarmed.

To summarize:

- Armed citizen in direct confrontation with tyrannical government troops = NO Good.

- Armed citizen in guerrilla action against tyrannical government troops = Good!

- Unarmed citizen protecting family against criminals = NO Good.

- Armed citizen protecting family against criminals = Good!

My point being that even if you accept the argument that citizens do not need to be armed to resist government tyranny, they most certainly need to be armed to protect themselves [and their families] against criminals.

Get it?

I doubt it, because you obviously have your eyes closed and your hands over your ears.

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]I guess my 'Shakespearian English' is not sufficient to explain what I am trying to say about this guns thing!

Ok, this is my point of view:

I've read the 2nd amendment. I try to transport myself to the times where it was written, and it makes perfect sense to me.

Now, would you 'please' explain to me how you keep these nuts for killing innocent people? One of my family members could be the next victim. My son or my daughter at the school? At the movie theater? Shopping mall?

Who say that I don't have the tools necessary to protect my family at home? But, should I go to the street with them? Not much if a nut carries a semi-auto Pum! Pum! While I am in the shopping mall. Should I give my kids a Chinese ak47? 'Just in case' to protect themselves at the school? But wait, what if another kid brings a grenade and wants to immolate himself and bring some companions to heaven?

The above was about "personal protection!"

Next: you said. 'I doubt it, because you obviously have your eyes closed and your hands over your ears'

I say. Were you with my in the seventies as an army soldier in Cordoba, and Buenos Aires and see and feel the 'real scene' of what happened when some people play hero in real life because they are experts in video games?

Were you with me as a civilian three years after in class at the university 'UBA' in Baires, and a platoon of army soldiers interrupt the classes carrying F. A. L. 's while the police was interrogating us?

Fortunately a friend of mine and me, because we were in the military, knew the codes of how to talk to them and 'what not to do! The others? Were shiting on their pants!

Ironic, I remember patrolling some of the street in Recoleta (Junin included). Now I stroll with the chicas from Black, Hippo, Madahos etc.

'Mr. Jackson', I understand and I respect your point of view, but I wish I have someone that will tell me how to avoid the killing of innocent people and not just tell me that the killer is the person and not the gun. What do they use to kill 20 inocent kids in 45 seconds? It's my simple question!

Thank you!

[QUOTE=Punter 127;431025]Obama is the President isn't he? WTF do you think this guy is made of teflon and nothing will stick to him?[/QUOTE]Yes, so long as he continues to use to use the country's credit card to give free money to 51% of the voters.

Jackson, you know you are wasting your time arguing with folks who believe guns kill people and pencils misspell words.

The only shocking thing I see is how the left wing news media never reports on the times firearms stop violence. Most recently the mother in Georgia and the young girl in Wisconsin who either killed or wounded the criminals invading their homes. In one case the deceased criminal had in his possession a Model 1911 taken from a previous home invasion in which the 70 year old home owner was murdered.

I own many firearms: pistols, rifles, shotguns and the dreaded assault rifle (Colt AR 15, AK97, SL8, and a Styer Aug). I have never in more than 50 years of gun ownership observed one of these weapons jump up, run out and kill anyone of its own volition.

Obama's Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation but they still had over 500 homicides – that's an average of more than one a day.

Automobile accidents kill more people annually than firearms, but since everyone depends on vehicles this 'uncontrolled violence' is tolerated.

While you are at it the attached articles are worth a read.

[url]http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/is-it-time-to-call-for-hammer-control/[/url]

[url]http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/03/FBI-More-People-Killed-With-Hammers-and-Clubs-Each-Year-Than-With-Rifles[/url]

[QUOTE=Doppelganger; 431041]Jackson, you know you are wasting your time arguing with folks who believe guns kill people and pencils misspell words.

The only shocking thing I see is how the left wing news media never reports on the times firearms stop violence. Most recently the mother in Georgia and the young girl in Wisconsin who either killed or wounded the criminals invading their homes. In one case the deceased criminal had in his possession a Model 1911 taken from a previous home invasion in which the 70 year old home owner was murdered.

I own many firearms: pistols, rifles, shotguns and the dreaded assault rifle (Colt AR 15, AK97, SL8, and a Styer Aug). I have never in more than 50 years of gun ownership observed one of these weapons jump up, run out and kill anyone of its own volition.

Obama's Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation but they still had over 500 homicides – that's an average of more than one a day.

Automobile accidents kill more people annually than firearms, but since everyone depends on vehicles this 'uncontrolled violence' is tolerated.

While you are at it the attached articles are worth a read.

[url]http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/is-it-time-to-call-for-hammer-control/[/url]

[url]http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/03/FBI-More-People-Killed-With-Hammers-and-Clubs-Each-Year-Than-With-Rifles[/url][/QUOTE]I really miss my toys!

I had a Steyr Aug, an HK 91 with a G3 Fully Automatic Trigger Group, folding bi-pod, sniper scope and an adujtable stock; both very nice and when the importation was banned by Clinton it had a magical effect on these weapons. The values sky-rocketed! From about $900. 00 to $5000. 00 plus! That will happen again if they go through with the proposed ban. Nice for some people!

I guess my ball and pin hammer collection along with my sledge hammers will go up too!

TL

I read that 1 in 4 Americans have criminal records, the same for mental illness. Americans are dropping in their educational standards, Americans have hugh credit card debts. Why? How?

It seems ethics, morality, discipline are going by the wayside. Self destruction started down the slippery slope many decades ago, but it is almost full bloom now. All this hate talk about tyranny, liberty & freedom is part of the self destruction. I saw a guy who sounded like Russ Limbaugh, but he turn out to be Alex Jones. Where they find him? Should I fear him or should I fear the government. Oklahoma City revisited.

Happy New Year

[QUOTE=Black Shirt; 431043]I read that 1 in 4 Americans have criminal records, the same for mental illness. Americans are dropping in their educational standards, Americans have hugh credit card debts. Why? How?

It seems ethics, morality, discipline are going by the wayside. Self destruction started down the slippery slope many decades ago, but it is almost full bloom now. All this hate talk about tyranny, liberty & freedom is part of the self destruction. I saw a guy who sounded like Russ Limbaugh, but he turn out to be Alex Jones. Where they find him? Should I fear him or should I fear the government. Oklahoma City revisited.

Happy New Year[/QUOTE]Perhaps you should fear both.

The Oklahoma City bombers claimed the bombing was motivated by the federal governments mishandling of the Waco Siege (1993) and the Ruby Ridge incident (1992). The bombing claimed 168 lives, [b]19 were children, [/b] More than 680 people were injured.

[b]Number of shots fired zero. [/b]

Punter thou dost protest too much. Name calling and personal attacks? I called out your clear evasiveness to place any blame on your own party. If you take every critique of your words and actions as a personal attack, you'll go through life being easily offended and angered.

You finally admitted that Republicans shared the blame. Which was my singular point. Conceding my point is inconsistent with your claim I was desperate and my argument was weak. You're not making any sense, but we've seen this type of reaction from you before.

Guess what. I hadn't stated my personal opinion on the indefinite detention issue. In fact, I agree with you. There is a potential for abuse here and Americans should have the right to due process. I believe this because this is the opinion I've formulated myself, not because the Constitution said so. I'm happy to blame both Obama and Congress for failing to strip this power from the NDAA. But I'm not too worked up about it, as I really haven't seen the power being abused and doubt it would be.

[QUOTE=Punter 127;431025]I've got a big problem with people like you that want to walk on the Constitution in order to further a political agenda.[/QUOTE]Understand this. People like me aren't motivated to "walk on" the Constitution, for an agenda or any other reason. We are motivated to examine problems and take action to address them. We do this by critical thinking, not blind adherence to a document. If there is something in the Constitution that may be contributing to an important problem, you bet it's up for discussion.

I never saw a bottle of cyanide jump up, run out and kill anyone.

[QUOTE=Black Shirt; 431043]I read that 1 in 4 Americans have criminal records, the same for mental illness. Americans are dropping in their educational standards, Americans have hugh credit card debts. Why? How?

It seems ethics, morality, discipline are going by the wayside. Self destruction started down the slippery slope many decades ago, but it is almost full bloom now. All this hate talk about tyranny, liberty & freedom is part of the self destruction. I saw a guy who sounded like Russ Limbaugh, but he turn out to be Alex Jones. Where they find him? Should I fear him or should I fear the government. Oklahoma City revisited.

Happy New Year[/QUOTE]Black Shirt-I share your many concerns about the USA's self destructive path. I also feel the pain of the gun enthusiasts who fear that the tide is turning against them. As you know, President Obama and I are quite close. He has surreptitiously attended many of my lavish barbecues thrown in my back yard in Lat Phrao. I explained some of my concerns to him recently. Being the gracious fellow he is, he agreed with my suggestion that the government provide FREE firearms and ammo to those gun owners who may be forced to relinquish their more hazardous firearms. I offer an example of these firearms and ammo, to be given FREE, in photographs below.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28636[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28637[/ATTACH]

[QUOTE=Esten;431066]Punter thou dost protest too much. Name calling and personal attacks? I called out your clear evasiveness to place any blame on your own party. If you take every critique of your words and actions as a personal attack, you'll go through life being easily offended and angered.[/quote]Wrong in so many ways, first of all I have stated many times that I am NOT a member of the GOP and never have been, I was once however a member of the Democrat party, but I grew up, wised up, and figured out I didn't want to be a socialist.

You can crawfish all you want but I think everyone who saw your post understood what you were implying. But I am really touched by your concern for my well being, but you needn't bother yourself I'll be just fine without your help, especially considering how busy you are trashing the Constitution.

As long as you continue to spread left-wing propaganda I will continue to protest.

[QUOTE=Esten;431066]You finally admitted that Republicans shared the blame. Which was my singular point. Conceding my point is inconsistent with your claim I was desperate and my argument was weak. You're not making any sense, but we've seen this type of reaction from you before.[/quote]I never denied Republican involvement but it's a secondary point. What part of the fact that a bill doesn't become law until the President signs it don't you understand? Except in a override situation the buck stops with the president. In the future it will be remembered that NDAA 2013 became law under Obama, it won't be known as having become law under the 112th congress. How can I make it simpler for you?

[QUOTE=Esten;431066]Guess what. I hadn't stated my personal opinion on the indefinite detention issue. In fact, I agree with you. There is a potential for abuse here and Americans should have the right to due process. I believe this because this is the opinion I've formulated myself, not because the Constitution said so. I'm happy to blame both Obama and Congress for failing to strip this power from the NDAA. But I'm not too worked up about it, as I really haven't seen the power being abused and doubt it would be.[/quote]I'm glad to hear that you at least support some individual rights, even if your reasoning is a bit askew. I caution you against being insouciant about this, anytime you give government a power sooner or later they will use it.

I noticed you didn't bother to give your 'personal opinion' about assassinating American citizens just because some government agency labels them a "terrorist". Why?

[QUOTE=Esten;431066]Understand this. People like me aren't motivated to "walk on" the Constitution, for an agenda or any other reason. We are motivated to examine problems and take action to address them. We do this by critical thinking, not blind adherence to a document. If there is something in the Constitution that may be contributing to an important problem, you bet it's up for discussion.[/QUOTE]Understand this. The Constitution of the United States Of America is NOT just a 'document'! Your 'critical thinking' is irrelevant when it comes to the Constitution. You don't have to like it and there is a procedure (doesn't include executive order) to change it, but you can not circumvent or ignore it, and you are required to obey it. Like it or not the Constitution IS the supreme law of our land.

[QUOTE=Black Shirt;431043]I read that 1 in 4 Americans have criminal records.[/QUOTE]That number includes every person who has ever been arrested, regardless of the eventual disposition of the originating charge. It does NOT reflect of the number of citizens who have been convicted of felonies or even misdemeanors.

The percentage of Americans who have been convicted of a felony is about 2.5% of the entire population of the country. That's 1 in 40.

Thanks,

Jackson

[QUOTE=Jackson; 431105]That number includes every person who has ever been arrested, regardless of the eventual disposition of the originating charge. It does NOT reflect of the number of citizens who have been convicted of felonies or even misdemeanors.

The percentage of Americans who have been convicted of a felony is about 2. 5% of the entire population of the country. That's 1 in 40.

Thanks,

Jackson[/QUOTE]His quote regarding what he read is solely a statement on what he wants to believe, and / or what sources he selects to read. Just standard bash the Yankee rubbish. To be taken with a grain of salt. Monger on all. Toymann

[QUOTE=Toymann;431108]His quote regarding what he read is solely a statement on what he wants to believe, and / or what sources he selects to read. Just standard bash the Yankee rubbish. To be taken with a grain of salt. Monger on all. Toymann[/QUOTE]Glad to know that everything is cool & humming, cash in the pockets, people warm, smiling and happy. Nothing that can't be solve with a handshake. Looking forward to my arrival in Los Angeles in about 6 weeks. Wall Street has been kind to me.

Punter, if you're not a member of the GOP or don't otherwise support them, let's just rephrase it that you evaded assigning responsibility to anyone except Obama. Same point. Anyways, I hope you don't give Congress a free pass. They are elected representatives and have power and responsibilities. Yes people and the media tend to focus on the President under which a law was passed. But that doesn't mean we don't or shouldn't hold Congress accountable as well. Congress has tremendous influence on what happens. Sometimes, a President is forced to sign legislation he does not entirely approve, as it may be the best deal he can get, and the consequences of not signing it may be worse.

[QUOTE=Punter 127;431086]I noticed you didn't bother to give your 'personal opinion' about assassinating American citizens just because some government agency labels them a "terrorist". Why?[/QUOTE]Another issue I'm not too concerned with. But since you asked I gave it some thought. Consistent with my opinion on indefinite detention and right to due process, in principle I am against assassinating American citizens just on the basis of government labelling them a "terrorist". HOWEVER, I will concede an exception. Which is if the person is abroad and cannot be detained, and the government has evidence or probable cause the person is involved in terrorism. If an American is plotting a terrorist attack on the US, and we cannot detain him, do we do nothing? These are the tough questions in the war on terror. In this case I will give our government and it's intelligence operations (which have a pretty good record) the benefit of the doubt and allow them to take the guy out, rather than risk a terrorist attack on other Americans. Again, I arrive at my position through critical thinking, not blindly following an ideology or principle. If I see abuse of such power, I would then re-evaluate my position.