New York & gun control

[tothemax93]

I have said the moderate republican thing a number of times before even.

If you consider Obama a moderate Republican, then JFK was a complete right wing conservative, tea party Republican.

Then:

"My fellow Americans, Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

Now:

"My fellow Americans, Ask not what you can do for your Country, ask what your country can do for you."

I can't think of any better words that sum up half of America's attitude today.

 

[ouchez]

I live in Chicago and +1 to just about all of it. So feel free to formulate a serious reply to a bunch of sensible commentary that was unrelated to the author's physical location.

I have said the moderate republican thing a number of times before even.

Zack,

I appreciate your thoughts and ideas, I will read them, you are credible, you live here. The other guy, for the reason I stated, has no credilbility at all, at least to me.

Now Zack, I know you share many of the same views as the Mexico guy, and I have told you what I think of your views, and I find some of them disturbing, but I again appreciate your views.

I have also given serious replys to many topics. I am just at the point that I will not suffer fools who fail to read the Constitution and B.O.R. and ignore the math of taxation and Gov. debt and the dual loyalists that control Washington and many more institutions. (Such as my Senator, the powerfull Carl Levin, who now, after 4 direct and respectful requests, will not confirm or deny his dual loyalties and citizenship!)

O

 

[ZackDaniels]

If you consider Obama a moderate Republican, then JFK was a complete right wing conservative, tea party Republican.

Then:

"My fellow Americans, Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."

Now:

"My fellow Americans, Ask not what you can do for your Country, ask what your country can do for you."

I can't think of any better words that sum up half of America's attitude today.

Funny you went straight to fiscal issues as an example.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...am/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Today's Republican reps are largely out of touch with what their own voters want. That's caused many to vote Dem because as red moved further right, blue filled their void.

 

[tothemax93]

Funny you went straight to fiscal issues as an example.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...am/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Today's Republican reps are largely out of touch with what their own voters want. That's caused many to vote Dem because as red moved further right, blue filled their void.

My quote is directly aimed at todays entitlement attitude, AKA Obama voters. At least 47% anyway... I used the word aimed to keep this a gun thread.:rofl_200:

 

[forestdaledave]

My quote is directly aimed at todays entitlement attitude, AKA Obama voters. At least 47% anyway... I used the word aimed to keep this a gun thread.:rofl_200:

It is incorrect to assume people who voted for Obama are people who believe they are entitled to anything at others expense. Interesting to note where this 47% came from. A private fundraiser of Romney's that was secretly videoed. It is also the same amount of popular vote that he got in the election. Ironic, eh? But, more accurately it was used to describe people who pay no income tax. When that figure is analyzed of who the 47% really are it is a very different picture. Retirees, students, disabled military personal, millionaires who are able to use the tax code so they pay no income tax and of course the very poor which includes the mentally retarded. Romney himself who has a 172 foot yacht that flies the flag of the Cayman Island to avoid paying any U.S. tax.
David

 

[85 MAX-fan]

Danny, this is what I mean by irrational. Obama hasn't presented a gun problem. It has been developing for years.

Wrong Dave, actually our violent crime rate as a nation has declined for decades. Not because these dirt bags can or cannot get guns, but because we are locking them up for life.

Because he and others want to find a solution to the violence that is a plague on our society that is labeled dividing the country?

Making ownership of many of the most common firearms in our country illegal has nothing to do with solving violence. Particularly since the gun control laws proposed now, and in the past by BO and his crew will only affect the good guys here. Even he is not stupid enough to believe that banning common firearms will stop criminals that are already willing to break any law invented, all the way to commiting murder.

Give me a break. Healthcare, dividing the Country? He was elected because people wanted health care reform.

He was elected by a small portion of the population of our country. There was no overwhelming mandate from the people for socialised health care. That is proven by the fact that despite his pledge to have the most open administration in history, he hid the details of the law from the people, lied about the content, and its costs. Ever here the famous phrase:





"We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it"


If it was clearly demanded by the people it could simply been proposed as a free standing referendum and put to a vote. They didn't do that because if the majority of voters here learned the true impact of this nightmare it would have been resoundingly rejected.


Then confusing issues of majority rule in a Democracy with people in the country illegal.

The US is NOT a democracy Dave, its a constitutional republic. Specifically designed to prevent tyranical governing of the people by the political elite, and the Statists. A simple fact of reality the statists don't ever want to acknowledge, despite it being clear historical fact.

No way. Two separate issues. The idea that somehow illegals have affected the outcome of any election is bogus.

Wrong again, you have zero knowledge of election and voter fraud which has been rampant and well documented numerous times in Chicago for example, which is a sanctuary city.

The fact is Obama's administration has deported more illegals than any other president has. That is a fact.

GREAT. What did he do, go from deporting ten guys to eleven? The number deported is fart in a huricane. WE HAVE MILLIONS in the US, and in some states like California they make up the majority of the prison population due to the felonies that they are commiting.

Another fact is the migration numbers are such that more are going back to Mexico than are crossing North. Allegiance to Sharia law? Who are we talking about? Illegal emigration is a Southern border problem and they are Catholic. No one ever refers to illegals crossing down from Canada. Are Muslims sneaking across the Alantic ocean?

YES DAVE THEY ARE. Did you ever hear about the terrorist attacks (MORE THAN ONE) on the World Trade Center a few years ago? Do you have the slightest clue who those people were, how they got here, and what they did????

The abortion issues has been dividing the U.S. for years, way before Obama. It is a $10,000 fine and/or five years in jail for voting illegally. Does any one really think a person who has risked their life crossing the southern desert to make a few dollars to send back to their family in Mexico will risk it all to cast an illegal vote? In 2008 out of 180 million votes cast, 5000 was called into question. 2 was found.

Interesting how if nobody is arrested your logic dictates there is no crime. 2 were found??? Who was looking Dave? Apparently with your logic there are exactly the same numbers of crimes commited as there are arrests.
Also, a large number of these illegals are not here to work honestly and "make a few dollars to send back to their family in Mexico". Many are criminals and members of organized crime. They come here to pilage, and take whatever they can at the expense of the honest people that are our citizens. So you imply that none will risk getting caught for fraud?? Get a grip on reality.

Am I happy with Obama? No. He is actually a moderate Republican, not the socialist liberal that some want to paint him as.

Obama has been at the least a hard core socialist, some would point out he is actually a Marxist. From his history as a "comunity organizer", to his circle of friends, to his voting record and rhetoric, to call him a moderate republican is nonsensical.

The country is divided. If Obama wanted to call the Sun bright, the republicans would filibuster it.

You have no idea how our govenment works Dave. If he wanted to call the sun bright, nobody would care. If he wanted to pass a law that increased taxes on the people here to shake them down for more money to "prevent the sun from growing brighter from global warming", I would demand that my representatives do everything they could to stop yet another patronage scheme for the statists. Including a filibuster.

McConnell actually filibusted himself.
David

This country is indeed divided, by the statists, and the constitutionalists. Hopefully we can stop the us from becomming like Mexico.

 

[85 MAX-fan]

I too have just been reading about the Medical Device Tax. It is levied on production and importation of some medical devices. Some internet sites are claiming companies are moving overseas to escape the tax. That doesn't sound correct to me because the tax will still be levied when importation occurs.

I suggest you take some educational courses at a non socialist school to learn how economics work Dave. Some companies operating at a competitive disadvantage are often forced to move portions of there operations outside the US to remain profitable. If they don't, the federal and state taxation they are subject to dictates they raise the prices of their product to the point nobody will buy them. Then they go out of business and lay off their work force.

As for Cabella's levying the tax sounds illegal and done for political purposes because they do not produce medical devices. Besides it is not a retail tax. That is why the consumer will not see it.
David

Statists often suggest they are taxing "the corporations, not the consumer", but of course this idiotic concept intentionally ignores the fact that the money is ultimately paid by the consumer. Every time.

 

[tothemax93]

It is incorrect to assume people who voted for Obama are people who believe they are entitled to anything at others expense. Interesting to note where this 47% came from. A private fundraiser of Romney's that was secretly videoed. It is also the same amount of popular vote that he got in the election. Ironic, eh? But, more accurately it was used to describe people who pay no income tax. When that figure is analyzed of who the 47% really are it is a very different picture. Retirees, students, disabled military personal, millionaires who are able to use the tax code so they pay no income tax and of course the very poor which includes the mentally retarded. Romney himself who has a 172 foot yacht that flies the flag of the Cayman Island to avoid paying any U.S. tax.
David

It is not incorrect to assume people who voted for Obama are people who believe in entitlements. Didn't say anything about who gets them. I used the 47% to get a rise :shittystick: Why do you blame the millionaires when it comes to taxes. The Government makes up the rules. At what income level is it a crime to keep as much of your own money, as possible. Here's some people that wanted to keep a little more.http://michellemalkin.com/2013/01/01/obamas-tax-evaders-of-the-year/

 

[85 MAX-fan]

It is so easy to find out facts. Google it. Federal tax rates are at a very low rate. Local and State taxes are a different animal.

Very low for who Dave? The lowest tax bracket that effectively pays no income tax, of the higher earners that the fed and state govenments shake down to pay for their chronies, and to win re-election by those that get the cash? I KNOW what I pay in taxes (ALL COMBINED), and it is over 50% of what i earn. How can you possibly make the statement that taxes are low? Do you believe people in general are too stupid to understand how much is being taken from them?

Capitalism? Since when has the U.S. economy operated as pure capitalism?

Too long Dave. That is largely the problem the US has.

Tax breaks and welfare for large corporations that have the money to buy politicians.

And your solution is more government intrusion, and therefore more corruption Dave? More government = more coruption, guaranteed. That is why our constitution was structured specifically to limit the scope of government.

The U.S. military paid for by taxpayers keeping markets safe for U.S. business who pay little or no taxes. Walmart being the largest welfare recipient due to their business model of paying such a low wage and no health care benefits that the workers need to collect welfare to exist.

WTF? this makes zero sense. I don't see what you are trying to say here.....Welfare is entitlement program for people Dave, Walmart doesn't get it.

U.S. capitalism; privatise profits but socialise costs. So much whinning about Obama, liberals, the Government, complaining about the second amendment. Throwing labels around like chicken feed. What are you doing to right the ship other than buying guns and ammo?

Personally I vote Dave. Everytime it is possible I vote against statism. Statism is the largest failure of all of man's history, yet time and again ill informed want to create more of it.

With every freedom comes limits.

UUUhhhh, if it has limits its not freedom Dave. It does not surprise me that someone that grew up in, and was indoctrinated by, a culture whos government denies freedom to the people cannot understand the concept of freedom. Thats why the US has a Bill of Rights, to protect the people against the statist rule.

It is easy to make the case that when the Bill Of Rights were written it meant single shot muskets because that all they had. So Danny when you write weapons, that is a dead issue.

Our supreme court has declared this lame concept as wrong Dave. Research the rulings on "in common use" and you will see they reject your argument. Thankfully.
Take it a step further and read the writings of those that created our constitution and you will clearly see they wrote the second ammendment to protect our people from your mindset. The people that wrote our Constitution clearly understood human nature, which has remained unchanged for the last several hundred years.

Obviously no one wants their neighbor to own a nuclear bomb. I realize that I'm being extreme to the point of being absurd but the point is restrictions.

I don't see your point, but agree the above is absurd.

Like it or not we have them, we live with them and they are good.

Spoken like a true statist. "restrictions are good". The British tried to sell us shit like that a few hundred years ago and did their best to convince us that it was gold. We shot them.

I believe freedoms are good. Liberty is good, and a well defined limit placed on government to keep it as limited as possible is fantastic.

Who would want a center for homeless people to be built next door? Stockpiling guns will do nothing to deal with the problems we are facing. As long as we keep focused on being irrational we will not even identify the real problems.
David

I don't find demanding liberty as being irrational. I do see the concept of ignoring the failure of statism as irrational though.

 

[tothemax93]

Local Assemblyman, David Depietro is doing an interview with a local radio guy. He said It has been introduced, that you will have to have a million dollar insurance policy per gun. :damn angry: There was a gun rally there yesterday (Albany). He said a lot of the other members were mocking and dismissing the group. Always interesting to hear whats said behind closed doors.

 

[dannymax]

They have been trying to push this thru for quite awhile, altho this is the first I've heard of 'per gun'. There's a pretty big problem with it as no liability insurance of this type is currently underwritten. It's an end run at the 2nd, don't see any career minded politician getting behind it.

 

[Rusty McNeil]

I don't think the insurance thing has a chance in hell in the Supreme Court, any more than a Poll Tax would now. And for the same reason. Unlike driving a car owning a gun is a constitutionally granted privilege just like voting, a completely disingenuous attempt to curtail it doesn't hold water, unlike an "honest" attempt at "sensical" regulation.

 

[Rollie]

I never would have thought a " conservative " Supreme Court Justice would uphold BO-Care mandated / forced participation either , and suggest to them it could be considered as a TAX !!!!! Especially when fully half the country did not want gov't mandated healthcare.

 

[Langley182]

My wife's uncle is an Obama supporter. He is convinced that the big O will be remembered as the best president ever. I argue that Obama has so far failed to uphold even one of his campaign promises, and entrenched us in even more debt and government control. I only bring this up to highlight the facts that people are willing to ignore as long as they get there way (uninformed as it may be).

 

[ouchez]

My wife's uncle is an Obama supporter. He is convinced that the big O will be remembered as the best president ever. I argue that Obama has so far failed to uphold even one of his campaign promises, and entrenched us in even more debt and government control. I only bring this up to highlight the facts that people are willing to ignore as long as they get there way (uninformed as it may be).

Langley,

In time it will become very evident just what a failure, and just how inept BHO is.

Just watch.

O

 

[forestdaledave]

I don't find demanding liberty as being irrational. I do see the concept of ignoring the failure of statism as irrational though.

85Max fan, though I don't know your name. How does Santa Rosa Junior College, Sonoma State College, Eastern CT. State College, Southeastern MA. University sound as places of higher education? But you got me on another "ism" I never heard before. Sent me right into research mode. Statism comes from French. Not sure how it could ever be used in a sentence though. Would have to experiment with usage. You seem to knock statism as a bad thing, somehow interfering with personal freedom. Yet without statism anarchy would rein. ( There, I used that word twice) So my question to you would be in a state of anarchy how much freedom do you suppose any person would have? On another point, and yes, I have researched election fraud, is a link for you. From conservative Forbes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnwasik/2012/11/06/voter-fraud-a-massive-anti-democratic-deception/

David

 

[forestdaledave]

Just to keep the pot stirred:

http://youtu.be/_52pMg8qQcc

Jim, I did watch that video. I'm curious about something, maybe you can answer it because you are living in Canada. Why did they keep showing people using shotguns for sport while talking about this one law that is going to be responsible of taking everyone in Canada guns away but only showing one gun, a 22 semi-automatic with a banana clip being the only gun that is actually in jeopardy of being taken away?

David

 

[forestdaledave]

They have been trying to push this thru for quite awhile, altho this is the first I've heard of 'per gun'. There's a pretty big problem with it as no liability insurance of this type is currently underwritten. It's an end run at the 2nd, don't see any career minded politician getting behind it.

With the amount of guns running loose in the Country the Insurance companies just might see that law as a cash cow and send the lobbyists to Washington with seed money.
david

 

[forestdaledave]

Dave,

Living in Mexico please excuse me if I find you totally lacking in credibility.:biglaugh:

O

Would it matter if I own a house in the States, vote there, pay taxes there, and contribute to the U.S. society? Would it matter why I'm in Mexico? Would it matter that my Max is parked in a 14 story garage and I can ride it all year instead of 4 months like in New England? Or that I'm living directly on the Pacific Ocean in a 1800 square foot condo with 4 swimming pools, nine hot tubs, a gym, and more for less money than I'm leasing my house for? You can find out all about it for only ten dollars. Buy the book my wife and I wrote from Amazom.com, " Escaping the USA". Plus the chances are good you will see us on TV. The Travel Channel which will be a documentary about Rosarito, Baja California, Mexico. This is a project I'm involved with that has already started.
David

 

[tothemax93]

Or that I'm living directly on the Pacific Ocean in a 1800 square foot condo with 4 swimming pools, nine hot tubs, a gym, and more for less money than I'm leasing my house for? David

Sounds like you and Rush Limbaugh are on the same page. I hope your not in Mexico to avoid paying your fair share. :ummm::shittystick: Guess i'll have to read the book. Is there a VMOA discount. :eusa_dance: