Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > The Soapbox

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-28-2014, 15:14   #781
ddoering
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 View Post
Colorado Judge upheld Colorado's fifteen round magazine limitation and universal background checks today. She determined that no one "needs" more than fifteen rounds to protect themselves.
How did she determine that? What if I show her I have 16 enemies?
ddoering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2014, 18:29   #782
drivfast
Asset
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddoering View Post
How did she determine that? What if I show her I have 16 enemies?
Ha, Someone should explain to her honor what "shoot to stop the threat" means. 1 round per target with a 5.56 carbine? in what universe does that happen? I guess she is assuming getting hit means instant incapacitaion. With all due respect to her honor, she has seen too many movies imho. Reading the Team Sergeant's post on the 2nd Amendment further confirms the lack of logic commonly used by the anti-2nd Amendment crowd. This Colorado judge's remark is a perfect example.
drivfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2014, 10:29   #783
Team Sergeant
Quiet Professional
 
Team Sergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 20,927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadsword2004 View Post
Colorado Judge upheld Colorado's fifteen round magazine limitation and universal background checks today. She determined that no one "needs" more than fifteen rounds to protect themselves.
That "judge" is a moron.

Had I been the defense attorney in her court room I would have asked for 5 armed court police to appear in her courtroom immediately, then ask them each how many rounds are each carrying.

My guess would have been 45 or more rounds each. Then I'd ask them why so many rounds?

F**king socialist judges.....
__________________
"The Spartans do not ask how many are the enemy, but where they are."
Team Sergeant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2014, 13:40   #784
drivfast
Asset
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 37
perfect analogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Team Sergeant View Post
That "judge" is a moron.

Had I been the defense attorney in her court room I would have asked for 5 armed court police to appear in her courtroom immediately, then ask them each how many rounds are each carrying.

My guess would have been 45 or more rounds each. Then I'd ask them why so many rounds?

F**king socialist judges.....
Roger that. Perfect analogy.
drivfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2014, 07:56   #785
tonyz
Area Commander
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 4,230
Hard Truth for Gun-Control Advocates: Permit Holders Extremely Law-Abiding

I recall members of this board citing similar statistics for both Florida and Texas in a discussion years ago. Additional information via links embedded in the actual article.

Hard Truth for Gun-Control Advocates: Permit Holders Extremely Law-Abiding
Sarah Jean Seman | Aug 06, 2014
TownHall.com

Guns can be frightening, particularly for those individuals who have no idea how to use a firearm. In a recent Townhallvideo, one man reasoned that concealed carry in Washington D.C. was dangerous because "more people carrying guns means more opportunity for those guns to be used."

Individuals employing the “more guns more crime” logic are using shoddy research as the basis for their claim.

“If you look at information from the Justice Department, they have something called the National Crime Victimization survey. What you find is that guns are used in crime about 250,000 times a year.” John R. Lott Jr., economist, Yale professor, and president of Crime Prevention Research Center, told Townhall.

“If you look at similar surveys of people who use guns defensively, it’s about two million times a year. So basically people are using guns defensively to stop crimes about four to five times more frequently each year than guns are used to commit a crime. Most people don’t realize that.”


The truth is that individuals with gun-permits are extremely law-abiding. Less than one percent of licensed firearm holders have had their permits revoked due to misdemeanors.

The Crime Prevention Research Center reported on statistics from Florida, Texas, and Michigan (the three states where more than 2.5 million of the United States’ 11 million handgun permits are held):

During almost three decades, from October 1, 1987 to May 31, 2014, Florida issued permits to almost 2.66 million people. These permits have been revoked for firearms-related violations at an annual rate of only 0.0003 percent. For all revocations, the annual rate in Florida is 0.012 percent.
The numbers are similarly low in Texas. In 2012 (the latest year that crime data are available), there were 584,850 active license holders. Out of these, 120 were convicted of either a misdemeanor or a felony, a rate of 0.021 percent. Only a few of these crimes involved a gun.

Revocations and suspensions occur when people are charged with a crime, but only about 5 percent or less of these cases result in conviction and thus people are eligible for having their licenses reinstated.

While 120 were convicted of a crime in 2012, 905 people had their permits revoke, for a total rate of 0.15%.

Over the last five years that revocation data is available (2009 to 2013), the rate is slightly lower, 0.13%.

For Michigan, overall revocation rate for the five years from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2014 is slightly higher but still low, at 0.26%.

News agencies rarely report prevented crimes, Lott pointed out. After all, the newsworthy aspect of the tale never occurred.

“Almost all of defensive gun uses don’t require a shot to be fired; it’s like 95 percent simply brandishing the gun. Attackers are killed less than one out of a 1,000 times a gun is used defensively. And those are basically about the only stories that are going to get news coverage anyway.”

Yet people with the right to carry are stopping crimes and saving lives. Here are just a few examples reported on Townhall: In Washington state, a bus passenger carrying a concealed weapon brought down a gunman. In Texas, an armed citizen prevented a man from mugging a woman’s purse. In New York, a pizza delivery man potentially saved his own life by being armed when thugs jumped him at night.

It is no wonder that President Obama has a misconstrued theory on gun control, since he seems to hear about everything through the media. It is essential for policy makers, however, to recognize the full range of unintended consequences that could ensue from disarming citizens.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/sarahje...tm_campaign=nl
__________________
The function of wisdom is to discriminate between good and evil.

Marcus Tullius Cicero
tonyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-13-2014, 14:03   #786
pcfixer
Guerrilla
 
pcfixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 349
Federal judge upholds Maryland’s ban on ARs

Federal judge upholds Maryland’s ban on ARs; Calls them ‘dangerous and unusual’


http://www.guns.com/2014/08/13/feder...s-and-unusual/

In upholding Maryland’s strict new gun control laws, a federal judge on Tuesday ruled that AR-15 style rifles and others “fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms.”

The ruling, in the case of Kolbe et al v. O’Malley et al, pitted a number of plaintiffs including both local and national gun rights groups against Maryland in a challenge to the state’s 2013 assault rifle ban. Filed last September, the case was heard in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland who denied the plaintiffs’ request and found for the state.

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...ss-Motion1.pdf

"Another socialists Judge"!
pcfixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2014, 04:47   #787
BryanK
Guerrilla Chief
 
BryanK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcfixer View Post
...In upholding Maryland’s strict new gun control laws, a federal judge on Tuesday ruled that AR-15 style rifles and others “fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms.”
Yep, that's how I interpret the 2nd Amendment as well..."All weapons deemed fitting for the proles which WE will decide; Shall not be infringed; Not even a smidgeon"
__________________
"1000 days of evasion are better than one day in captivity"

"Too many men work on parts of things. Doing a job to completion, satisfies me."- Richard Proenneke
BryanK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2014, 06:01   #788
Streck-Fu
Area Commander
 
Streck-Fu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,086
I still want my Mk19.....
__________________
Daniel
GM1 USNR (RET)

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Streck-Fu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2014, 06:20   #789
BryanK
Guerrilla Chief
 
BryanK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 856
Ask, and ye shall receive...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Mk19.jpg (49.9 KB, 28 views)
__________________
"1000 days of evasion are better than one day in captivity"

"Too many men work on parts of things. Doing a job to completion, satisfies me."- Richard Proenneke
BryanK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-2014, 09:55   #790
ddoering
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,511
Perhaps she would change her mind if she found her neighborhood in the middle of a riot zone.
ddoering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2014, 08:36   #791
pcfixer
Guerrilla
 
pcfixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 349
Conclusion of FSA in Md

The Judges Conclusion: Federal Judge Catherine C Blake.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, which represents the considered judgment of this State’s legislature and its governor, seeks to address a serious risk of harm to law enforcement officers and the public from the greater power to injure and kill presented by assault weapons and large capacity magazines. The Act substantially serves the government’s interest in protecting public safety, and it does so without significantly burdening what the Supreme Court has now explained is the core Second Amendment right of “law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” Accordingly, the law is constitutional and will be upheld.

http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/...ss-Motion1.pdf

I don't and have never understood how the "STATE" can assert that 'public safety' and 'government interest' is or ever overrules an enumerated right. These judges skirt the actual plain use of legal language that is to be read 'in context' (many judges use partial phrase or sentence from USSC) by use of semantic or use of rationalized thinking due to politics.
pcfixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2014, 09:30   #792
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,465
In Miller, the SCOTUS ruled that he had no right to possess an unregistered short-barreled shotgun because it was NOT a commonly used military weapon.

Shouldn't that, and the original intent and wording of the founders, mean that every land-owning male not a felon should be provided an M-16 or M-4 for their own use?

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2017
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-2014, 11:03   #793
pcfixer
Guerrilla
 
pcfixer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Reaper View Post
In Miller, the SCOTUS ruled that he had no right to possess an unregistered short-barreled shotgun because it was NOT a commonly used military weapon.

Shouldn't that, and the original intent and wording of the founders, mean that every land-owning male not a felon should be provided an M-16 or M-4 for their own use?

TR
TR, Absolutely! Also with at least a basic load of ammo and 30 round PMAG's.

Militia: "A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline." And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time. From US vs Miller.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/307/174

Last edited by pcfixer; 08-16-2014 at 11:05.
pcfixer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2014, 10:49   #794
TOMAHAWK9521
Quiet Professional
 
TOMAHAWK9521's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,049
53-46 vote

One of my uncles just sent me this little article:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.N. Resolution 2117 lists 21 points dealing with firearms control, but perhaps of most interest is point number 11. It: “CALLS FOR MEMBER STATES TO SUPPORT WEAPONS COLLECTION and DISARMAMENT of all UN countries”.


By a 53-46 vote - The U.S. Senate voted against the U.N. resolution. HOORAY.


This is that brief, glorious moment in history when everyone stands around... reloading.


Now, Which 46 Senators Voted to Destroy Us? Well, let their names become known ! See below . If you vote in one of the states listed with these 46 “legis..traitors”… vote against them.


In a 53-46 vote, the Senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The Statement of Purpose from the Senate Bill reads: "To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty." The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S. and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry, now get this, on all private guns and ammo.


Astonishingly, 46 out of our 100 United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.


Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N.
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
__________________
"It is a brave act of valor to condemn death, but where life is more terrible than death, it is then the truest valor to dare to live." -Sir Thomas Browne (1605-1682)
TOMAHAWK9521 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2014, 11:04   #795
Sdiver
Area Commander
 
Sdiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The OTHER Mile High city ... with Mtns on the East side
Posts: 5,893
Notice too, which party ALL of those who voted to give away our constitutional rights belong to.

King and Sanders, have an (I) behind their names, but in their hearts, they are nothing but D's in my book.

__________________
Non Sibi Sed Suis
_____________________________________________
It's Good To Be Da King !!!! Just ask NDD !!!!
Sdiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 13 (0 members and 13 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 18:44.



Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies