|
“Shall NOT be infringed.”
Joined: Dec 6, 2006
Comments: 33521
Phoenix, AZ.
ISP:
Phoenix, AZ
|
Mock26 wrote: <quoted text> I don't see anything wrong with the police keeping a record. Given that it would take a HUGE collusion for this country to be taken over by a modern day Hitler I don't fear having my information in the hands of the police. There are enough checks and balances in this county to make it very difficult for this country to turn into a fascist state like 1930's Germany.
As for the NSA, I feel that they should have the right to listen in on terrorist calls indiscriminately, but ONLY if they have proof that they are dealing with terrorists. If they only suspect someone, they should be required to get a legal order for a wiretap.
As far as I know the police are not pouring over the records of gun owners and are staking out their homes waiting for the gun owners to committ a crime. With the exception of one specific police officer I have faith and confidence in the local law enforcement. I don't have faith and confidence in the NSA because with an "unauthorized" wiretap they may learn information from someone that, while perfectly legal, is information that that person would want to be kept private. Tapping someone's line with an "unauthorized" wiretap is an invasion of their privacy. Registering a firearm with the local police, in my opinion, is not an invasion of one's privacy. Have you ever thought of moving to a communist country? You sure sound like that's what you belong in.
|
|
“Shall NOT be infringed.”
Joined: Dec 6, 2006
Comments: 33521
Phoenix, AZ.
ISP:
Phoenix, AZ
|
Mock26 wrote: <quoted text> "In reality" is not always the same as reality. The reality is that I need a permit to own a firearm in Chicago. Since I want to own firearms in this city I choose to obey the law. And since I support the law I willingly obey this law. Only in your diseased communist-socialist mind. You are nothing more than one of those "use[less] idiots" that Lenin wrote about. A REAL American you most assuredly are NOT.
|
|
BobbyS
Rome, NY
|
Foolish liberals who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it's not an individual right or that it's too much of a public safety hazard don't see the danger in the big picture. They're courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the constitution they don't like.— Alan Dershowitz
|
Joined: Jul 10, 2007
Comments: 2904
Collins, MS
|
Mock26 wrote: <quoted text> I don't see anything wrong with the police keeping a record. Given that it would take a HUGE collusion for this country to be taken over by a modern day Hitler I don't fear having my information in the hands of the police. There are enough checks and balances in this county to make it very difficult for this country to turn into a fascist state like 1930's Germany.
As for the NSA, I feel that they should have the right to listen in on terrorist calls indiscriminately, but ONLY if they have proof that they are dealing with terrorists. If they only suspect someone, they should be required to get a legal order for a wiretap.
As far as I know the police are not pouring over the records of gun owners and are staking out their homes waiting for the gun owners to committ a crime. With the exception of one specific police officer I have faith and confidence in the local law enforcement. I don't have faith and confidence in the NSA because with an "unauthorized" wiretap they may learn information from someone that, while perfectly legal, is information that that person would want to be kept private. Tapping someone's line with an "unauthorized" wiretap is an invasion of their privacy. Registering a firearm with the local police, in my opinion, is not an invasion of one's privacy. We have laws against the federal government keeping lists of law abiding citizens who purchase guns. Why would you want to allow the crime ridden Chicago machine to be able to keep such records?
|
|
Snowflake
Rochester, NY
|
Mock26 wrote: <quoted text> I don't see anything wrong with the police keeping a record..... In many states, Arizona included, you can walk into a gun shop and purchase any weapon up to but not including a Federal Class III (machine gun, silencer, etc.) and no records will be sent to the local or state police. In DC and Boston, you have local police going house to house in "certain" neighborhoods asking to search for weapons. Chicago is a corrupt police state and should be cleaned out by the militia of the rest of the country.
|
|
cannoneer2
Mount Juliet, TN
|
Mock26 wrote:
<quoted text> Not true. I already have by FOID form. I can go to Bass Pro Shops, show them my FOID, buy a shotgun, and take it home the same day. I have a certain time period (I think it is 30 days) to take a copy of the relevant documentation to the local police station. That's pretty quick.
Yeah, and I'm sure that there were some German Jews back in the '30's who said "But aren't these stars such a pretty shade of yellow..." You're well on the way to losing more freedom.
|
|
thomas k daniel
San Antonio, TX
|
you must also look at how people like jefferson looked at it laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those that are neither inclined nor detemined to commit crimes such laws make it better for for assailants georege mason father of the bill of rights what is the militia the whole people to disarm the people is the mosr effectual way to enslave them
|
|
“Look at me, I'm gorgeous!”
Joined: Mar 6, 2008
Comments: 1680
Chicago
ISP:
Chicago, IL
|
cannoneer2 wrote: Mock26 wrote:
<quoted text> Not true. I already have by FOID form. I can go to Bass Pro Shops, show them my FOID, buy a shotgun, and take it home the same day. I have a certain time period (I think it is 30 days) to take a copy of the relevant documentation to the local police station. That's pretty quick.
Yeah, and I'm sure that there were some German Jews back in the '30's who said "But aren't these stars such a pretty shade of yellow..." You're well on the way to losing more freedom. If you honestly believe that that is the path we are taking then why haven't you taken up arms against our government?
|
|
“NOBama '08”
Joined: Nov 25, 2007
Comments: 4136
Fort Collins, CO
ISP:
Fort Collins, CO
|
Mock26 wrote: <quoted text> If you honestly believe that that is the path we are taking then why haven't you taken up arms against our government? Because unlike people like YOU, the sensible people who are voicing their concerns about their rights only act on what has or is happening. You people are trying to CONTROL what MIGHT happen. We only act when it is warranted. Just like we use our weapons only when we ARE being attacked, as opposed to just shooting people because they MIGHT attack us. I know you owuld like the believe otherwise, but reality tells us that your irrational fears never materialized. The day someone comes to my door to try to put me or my family into slavery (even figuratively speaking) is the day I act. Right now, I can still carry my guns, I am not a slave, and my liberties are intact. Why is everything you seem to want to do so extreme?
|
|
“Shall NOT be infringed.”
Joined: Dec 6, 2006
Comments: 33521
Phoenix, AZ.
ISP:
Phoenix, AZ
|
Mock26 wrote: <quoted text> If you honestly believe that that is the path we are taking then why haven't you taken up arms against our government? BECAUSE IT MUST BE DONE IN A CONSTITUTIONAL MANNER, YOU MORON. A fair application of the Rights secured in the First Amendment must be applied before the Second comes into play. Do you know ANYTHING about American Constitutional Law?
|
Judge it!
Poll:
Aquarius
Most Popular