Politics

[cpr0312]

 

[cpr0312]

 

[cpr0312]

 

[Hogpatrol]

 

[Ray B]

You laugh but it is entirely possible to get welfare for dogs and even cats- just be sure to give them "human" names.

 

[Rob404]

 

[Vashper]

Yeah, well, the dogs deserve it.
Although this is not humor: during the war, registered hunting dogs received rations - some cereals, horse meat. The first time I heard about it was from a man who was neither a hunter nor a dog lover, but according to family legend, he, being not a very healthy baby, survived thanks to this ration. Their family dog shared with him, I don't know how much voluntarily. I then clarified - it turned out that it was. The then chairman of the hunting society obtained an audience with Stalin and resolved the issue.

 

[Cervus elaphus]

View attachment 405347

We laugh at their stupidity but they are deadly serious about removing your guns because socialism is hamstrung while the populace is still armed. Dangerous criminals are still armed and will continue to be because they're with the democrats and if you don't believe this, take a look at what's happening in California at the moment, or Chicago, or any other crime-ridden democrat-run city in the US. Cling to 2A because that's all that stands between you, the gulags and extermination camps. Billy O'Gates of the DAVOS depopulation group isn't buying up thousands of acres of farm land to grow tomatoes.

 

[Cervus elaphus]

We laugh at their stupidity but they are deadly serious about removing your guns because socialism is hamstrung while the populace is still armed. Dangerous criminals are still armed and will continue to be because they're with the democrats and if you don't believe this, take a look at what's happening in California at the moment, or Chicago, or any other crime-ridden democrat-run city in the US. Cling to 2A because that's all that stands between you, the gulags and extermination camps. Billy O'Gates of the DAVOS depopulation group isn't buying up thousands of acres of farm land to grow tomatoes.

further: Noah Webster, Author and political commentator wrote circa 1787 regarding the Constitution.
"Before a standing army can rule the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."

 

[Ray B]

circa 1787 because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."

But things have changed. In 1787 the idea that the US would have a military that it has had since it became the world's policeman after WWII would have been unimaginable. Given the various restrictions on the allowable weapons for civilians the military and law enforcement have a significant advantage. things would be a repeat of the usual asymmetric fights that have occurred in years.

 

[Cervus elaphus]

But things have changed. In 1787 the idea that the US would have a military that it has had since it became the world's policeman after WWII would have been unimaginable. Given the various restrictions on the allowable weapons for civilians the military and law enforcement have a significant advantage. things would be a repeat of the usual asymmetric fights that have occurred in years.

Yes, things have changed a lot since then but the central thread still holds. The writers expected the amendments to be used because they clearly understood the threat of a tyrannical government and I think this is why in the 2A the words "shall not be infringed" is very important, especially the word "shall" which is a direct order, no ifs buts or maybe's. In the days of the kings of yore, "you shall" was from the king and meant you do it or be killed on the spot. Every time the democrats move on gun restrictions, they infringe. If there were more Constitutional judges in America this would not happen, and the best lawful gun owners can do is to challenge restrictions every way they can. We could debate The Constitution until the cows come home but I'd rather talk about rifles and hunting !

 

[Ray B]

things have changed a lot since then but the central thread still holds.!

At the time of the constitution the technology available to citizens was on a par with that available to governments. the gov't had muskets and musket tactics while the citizens had rifles and those tactics but otherwise they were fairly equal in armaments. today anything beyond a semi-auto rifle such as full auto or what is termed destructive devices- items routinely available to the military such as grenade launchers, rocket launchers, cannons etc. so even though it says "Not be infringed" things are heavily infringed. since the weapons that are being prohibited or at minimum heavily regulated have been very very ever used in commission of a crime, one could reasonably conclude that the reason the items are allowed only to the government is that the government wants to have the ability to maintain physical dominance over a citizenry that has tired of those that run things.

 

[Ray B]

I wonder what the policymakers of other countries are doing in response to the present situation in USA. If i made policy in any country I would be very leery of making any deal or arrangement with the present administration. I say this because it is clear that the ones presently running the show have only their self-interest in view and will say anything and promise anything with no intention of keeping their word. It is only a matter of time before they would stab me and my country in the back. the countries that are really up against the wall are those that have relied on the US for the last seventy years for their survival- Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, The Philippines. I hope they can survive the next few years until a patriot can again assume leadership of the USA.

 

[Cervus elaphus]

At the time of the constitution the technology available to citizens was on a par with that available to governments. the gov't had muskets and musket tactics while the citizens had rifles and those tactics but otherwise they were fairly equal in armaments. today anything beyond a semi-auto rifle such as full auto or what is termed destructive devices- items routinely available to the military such as grenade launchers, rocket launchers, cannons etc. so even though it says "Not be infringed" things are heavily infringed. since the weapons that are being prohibited or at minimum heavily regulated have been very very ever used in commission of a crime, one could reasonably conclude that the reason the items are allowed only to the government is that the government wants to have the ability to maintain physical dominance over a citizenry that has tired of those that run things.

Yep, a govt only confiscates citizen's guns when it wants to do something bad to those citizens. History is full of it

 

[Cervus elaphus]

I wonder what the policymakers of other countries are doing in response to the present situation in USA. If i made policy in any country I would be very leery of making any deal or arrangement with the present administration. I say this because it is clear that the ones presently running the show have only their self-interest in view and will say anything and promise anything with no intention of keeping their word. It is only a matter of time before they would stab me and my country in the back. the countries that are really up against the wall are those that have relied on the US for the last seventy years for their survival- Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, The Philippines. I hope they can survive the next few years until a patriot can again assume leadership of the USA.

With China-Joh in charge (via Barry & Val) the CCP could invade any of those countries and he would stand aside and let them do it. Not just the ones you name but also places like Indonesia, Australia/NZ, the Pacific Islands where the belt & road cash & freebees is flowing freely, Africa. Vietnam is near the top of their list after they got a hiding there. When I was last in the islands, the CCP was in the process of building new police stations and courtrooms. There are few places in the world where they don't have their dirty fingers in. A change in President will not solve the problem because every, and I mean every agency of federal govt plus msm. big tech, is corrupt and owned by the democrat-marxists, DAVOS and George S. So much for these agencies who swore to protect Americans and turned against them instead, including the woke armed services. Until this addressed, and I believe it must come from individual states (Texas e.g.), nothing will change and the unelected bureaucracy will continue to rule. They slipped up in 2016, it won't happen again.

 

[Foxi]

View attachment 405953

and my country (G) is exemplary in its stupidity

 

[sgt_zim]

further: Noah Webster, Author and political commentator wrote circa 1787 regarding the Constitution.
"Before a standing army can rule the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."

James Madison wrote essentially the same thing in Federalist #46

 

[cpr0312]

 

[jpr9954]

As someone said, still overpriced.

 

[sgt_zim]

"his essential wisdom"????

RUFKM!?!?!?!