02-01-2013, 18:45
|
#121
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Texas, I can see OK from here!
Posts: 2,077
|
I'm a Signer!
|
SF18C is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:11
|
#122
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Pauls, NC
Posts: 2,668
|
I couldn't help but laugh when I read this. I really like this guy.
Very heart warming story. I will sign on to support the green berets, as I am approaching 70 yrs old but I can still march and shoot. But I may have to take a Nap in between Fire fights. I salute you all, and I will see you all at the appropriate stone wall when the time comes..
|
alelks is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:17
|
#123
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Black Hills of SD
Posts: 5,917
|
To the QPs who composed, signed and wanted to sign this letter ....
I think it's safe to say, that speaking for the majority of us, although not QPs and unable to sign, we support you 100% in this endeavor, and know that we do not stand behind you ..... but stand WITH you.
SD
__________________
Non Sibi Sed Suis
_____________________________________________
It's Good To Be Da King !!!! Just ask NDD !!!!
|
Sdiver is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:21
|
#124
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cochise Co., AZ
Posts: 6,177
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdiver
..... but stand WITH you.
SD
|
Well, someone on here, a signer I reckon, has already volunteered me for KP as Pots and Pans Man.
Pat
__________________
"Hector Lives!"
"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." -- Frederick Douglass
"The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." -- Dennis Prager
"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it." --H.L. Mencken
|
PSM is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:25
|
#125
|
RIP Quiet Professional
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Ozarks
Posts: 10,072
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdiver
To the QPs who composed, signed and wanted to sign this letter ....
I think it's safe to say, that speaking for the majority of us, although not QPs and unable to sign, we support you 100% in this endeavor, and know that we do not stand behind you ..... but stand WITH you.
SD
|
Well said.
__________________
"There you go, again." Ronald Reagan
|
Dusty is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:31
|
#126
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tampa
Posts: 2,578
|
I signed.
|
Joker is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:40
|
#127
|
Guerrilla
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Texas
Posts: 293
|
Tahnk you all.
|
Javadrinker is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 19:44
|
#128
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: DFW Texas Area
Posts: 4,741
|
I signed!!
__________________
Martin sends.
|
Ambush Master is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 20:10
|
#129
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 20,929
|
I signed.
|
Team Sergeant is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 20:19
|
#130
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 4,792
|
Protecting the 2A
An interesting perspective on the recent attempts at gun control from a Constitutional law professor.
Op-Ed: Gun control fails rationality test
The Washington Examiner
January 29, 2013
Randy Barnett
Randy Barnett teaches constitutional law at Georgetown Law and is the author of "Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty" (2005).
On Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the various gun control proposals that have been floated in the wake of the Sandy Hook school shootings. Although they are said to be merely "reasonable regulations" of the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms, most or all of these proposals are irrational and unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has established a two-tiered protection of liberty. Under the lowest tier, "rational basis review," it will uphold restrictions on liberty so long as it can imagine any possible reason why Congress might have adopted the measure. By contrast, if a liberty is deemed by the court to be a "fundamental right," it will subject restrictions of that right to "heightened scrutiny," meaning that it will skeptically examine the means Congress chose to achieve its ends. This close comparison of means to ends is intended to smoke out justifications that are really pretexts for efforts to improperly stigmatize or restrict the exercise of a fundamental right.
In 2008, the Supreme Court held that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental right. In DC v. Heller, the court did not specify the exact type of heightened scrutiny it would employ when legislation restricts gun rights, except to insist that it would be higher than "rational basis review," and that a complete ban on weapons "in common use" by the citizenry for self-defense and other lawful purposes -- such as handguns -- is unconstitutional under any type of heightened scrutiny.
So, when considering the constitutionality of bans on so-called military-style assault weapons, or restrictions on the capacity of magazines, senators should begin by asking whether the weapons being banned are in common use by civilians. When it comes to so-called assault weapons, like the AR-15, or 30-round magazines, the answer is clearly "yes." Millions of such weapons and magazines are in private hands.
That should settle the matter, but senators can go a step further and ask whether these or other measures are actually rational -- to articulate the end they are seeking to accomplish, then assesses whether the means adopted actually match up with the purported end. Would they actually have prevented a mass shooting or ameliorated real crimes?
This heightened "rationality review" could help ensure that the reason being articulated is the real reason for the law.
For example, "assault weapons" are a made-up category of weapons that is based solely on cosmetic features that make them look like the fully automatic weapons used by the military. Banning them leaves other rifles that are functionally identical in their lethality and rate of fire completely legal. Moreover, far more powerful hunting rifles are left untouched by the law, as are shotguns. This is simply irrational and therefore unconstitutional.
The same can be said for New York's law limiting handguns to seven rounds, while allowing both active and retired police officers to keep their handguns that hold up to 15 rounds. If retired cops need 15 rounds to effectively protect themselves and others, then so do other citizens. Arbitrarily discriminating among Americans in this way is irrational and unconstitutional.
In fact, heightened rationality review confirms what we independently know is going on. Within hours of Sandy Hook, gun control proponents were beating the drums for their long-desired measures, like background checks for private gun sales, that would not in any way have prevented that tragedy. But the exploitation of these deaths is not just morally offensive.
The measures now being rushed through Congress before emotions can subside are irrational and pretextual, which means they are also unconstitutional.
__________________
The function of wisdom is to discriminate between good and evil.
Marcus Tullius Cicero
|
tonyz is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 21:23
|
#131
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Texas, I can see OK from here!
Posts: 2,077
|
NO!
|
SF18C is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 22:51
|
#132
|
Asset
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 24
|
Letter
The letter was OUTSTANDING!
As the Second Amendment goes, so goes the Constitution. I do not intend to leave my children, grandchildren or their children a legacy of subjugation.
|
Cordite is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 22:58
|
#133
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 170
|
I am....
the 1000.
__________________
From rabble such as this, rise a people who defy kings.
Nous Defions
SFA Life Member D-5851
USA Ranger Assoc. Life member #LRR4625
DAV Life Member Chapter #46
"The 1000"
|
ODA CDR (RET) is offline
|
|
02-01-2013, 23:13
|
#134
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Washington
Posts: 2,053
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ODA CDR (RET)
the 1000.
|
__________________
Grando autem duodecimo hominis
|
Divemaster is offline
|
|
02-02-2013, 04:10
|
#135
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: OK. Thanking Our Brave Soldiers
Posts: 3,614
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdiver
To the QPs who composed, signed and wanted to sign this letter ....
I think it's safe to say, that speaking for the majority of us, although not QPs and unable to sign, we support you 100% in this endeavor, and know that we do not stand behind you ..... but stand WITH you.
SD
|
S~,
Very well said!!! I echo your sentiments and can only hope that the SF Men on this site know how much folks like us appreciate ALL that they do, and proudly support each and every one of them!
OUTSTANDING Gentlemen!!!!
Holly
|
echoes is offline
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 00:50.
|
|
|