Jeep Wrangler Forum - Reply to Topic
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > General Discussion Forums > Off-Topic > Gun control--Just imagine the possibilities!

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Thread: Gun control--Just imagine the possibilities! Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
06-17-2013 07:45 PM
Walkingstick
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridajpr View Post

AR=Armalite Rifle and an Assault weapon is FULLY AUTOMATIC
An AR15 is a SEMI AUTO, like a lot of regular hunting rifles!
30 is standard capacity
06-17-2013 07:38 PM
NCJeepin
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
They have scenerios for this. It involves an overwhelming amount of force, and a disdain for the Constitution. Funny how bloodhounds have been pulling lost hikers, cadavers, and convicts out of the southern forests for 200 years, yet couldn't find a man with 3 holes in him on foot from a known origin several blocks away.


Attachment 246603



Attachment 246602



Attachment 246604




Attachment 246605

Don't think for a second that politicians would be afraid to send other people to take from you, they do it everyday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
I have not served or volunteered federally, no. I was 18 when the towers fell, and contemplated joining. I decided against it; long story short, let's just say the political directions I saw us taking did not inspire me to enlist. I do contribute locally.
I have not, thankfully, been in an active theatre of war.
I do not support the military-industrial complex or its long reaching arms (the '26$ for a can of coke' & 'private contractor security' mil-ind complex).
I do question those leaders of our forces that continually use fear to justify those forces deployment.
I am often mistaken for being anti-military. I see it as pro-Constitution.

I have absolutely nothing against the John Wayne generation of boys, or the G.I. Joe generation of boys (or whatever came next) who grew up 'shooting' their friends in neighborhood wide wars growing up and enlisting to serve their country, or the kids that grow up too quick and get into some sort-of heavy stuff, then enlist to have a true opportunity in life through discipline and values being instilled in them. Or any other US citizen (or foreign national, for that matter) who feels compelled to serve their friends, families, neighbors, and complete strangers. The problem I have, however, is with a standing national fighting force beyond the USCG and Navy. I can tell you that were we to have true States' Militias and only States' Militias, I would muster without hesitation. Were the antiquated and original gun laws in Virginia, laws like NY and MA passed first, that required all male citizens to maintain powder and shot, a capable rifle, and field provisions for 18 months, I would. But the federally controlled gaurd and/or army are not that.

Whenever Morocco invades from the East, or the Chinese cross the Mississippi, I'll be there. Unfortunately, standing armies lead to imperialistic wars, occupations, and martial law. It is just the nature of human society. This is why Jefferson famously compared the dangers of banks to them. Look into Royal Gov of Mass General Gates and his gun grab. An armed populace does not need an army, and is simultaneously free from oppression or tyranny. The inverse? An army does not need an armed populace, and is precluded from fulfilling their handlers agenda with one. Which of the great military societies of all history is still around? Our 224 year old gal.

All due respect, what do you think German soldiers in 1939 thought? That they should shoot their countrymen with reckless abandon, or that things got out of hand way to quickly? Now, I am not making excuses for genocide, but I am using history for an example. It happens time and time again, and it starts with political or socio-economic seperation. One side gets, the other gets jealous, then one gets scared. Game over. The Native Americans were people, Men Created Equal, with a divine Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, but public opinion said they were scary (because they had land, and we got jealous). So my 5 Great Grandpa and a bunch of white folks started doing something about it, and he was given a chunk of land just outside Atlanta for doing it. From the politicians that said those weren't people, they were enemy combatants. So, because of my knowledge of history, I am very cautious when people tell me things are scary and we need to do something about it. And when they tell me those aren't people.

BTW, let me go ahead and thank you for your service - were you a g.i. joe kid, too? I sure was. Sorry for the ramble.
06-17-2013 05:04 PM
floridajpr
Quote:
Originally Posted by ed98208 View Post
Okay...high magazine capacity weapons. Whatever. So what does AR stand for?
AR=Armalite Rifle and an Assault weapon is FULLY AUTOMATIC
An AR15 is a SEMI AUTO, like a lot of regular hunting rifles!
05-23-2013 06:00 PM
Senior Chief
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post



A strawman? Where!

Cheif, that's a fallacious arguement. No boogie man is out to get ya.
An argument requires a premis an a conclusion. I offered neither, only an opinion. As to whether or not anyone actually wears a hat made from tinfoil, in the absence of photos, I'll rely on my imagination...
05-23-2013 04:38 PM
BlueRidgeYJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
... There are many laws prohibiting the use of our military inside the US. I don't know if that has all changed but I can tell you most will go " constitution first orders second". I am personally not scared of our military and more worried about local and federal enforcement.
Posse Comitatus, an extrapolation of the Insurection Act of 1807, is the primary Act governing military involvement in domestic affairs.

The 1807 Act gave permission to the president to call on 'land or naval forces' of the US to quell insurections in situations where he was already qualified to call out the militia. This act was ammended several times, most recently after Katrina to change mere verbage. Historically, the act was based on quantity or scale of a situation, not source. They changed it to mean source, not size, and included natural disasters as a qualifier. So if 1 man is bleeding out on foot in a major city, they can send humvees and apcs to go get him - so long as he is a 'terrorist'. If a mall gets looted after a hurricane, an Abrhams can respond, so long as there was a hurricane.

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/c...df/302521p.pdf

The Posse Comitatus Act came about in 1878, when the mil-ind yankees wanted to continue using federal soldiers to police the South. It was written to disallow that action henceforth, by prohibiting the military from policing domestically in any capacity, except when 'expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress.' The above pdf, the DoD modified rules for domestic use of military force, issued Feb of this year, on page 16, directly authorizes military forces to act without authority from Congress, the President, or duly elected local officials. This is usurpation of the United States Constitution and akin to the Enabling Act of the Third Reich.

Additionally, the Reagan administration was instrumental in defining the misguided war on drugs as a national security issue, authorizing federal forces to patrol, surveil, and arrest.

+1 on ATF, FBI, State PD concerns. This is why national guard armories are a bad idea, the reason behind the 2nd amendment. That way the politicians CAN'T send somebody after you (and it is why Royal Gov Gates tried to disarm Massachusetts previous to their invasion by the Red Coats, one of many examples that left our grandpappies untrusting of armories).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senior Chief View Post
I don't know about the other active and former military members here, but I took a certain ironic pride in knowing I was helping to protect the rights of the "tinfoil hat" types to speak out against me....
A strawman? Where!

Cheif, that's a fallacious arguement. No boogie man is out to get ya.
05-23-2013 09:51 AM
Senior Chief I don't know about the other active and former military members here, but I took a certain ironic pride in knowing I was helping to protect the rights of the "tinfoil hat" types to speak out against me....
05-23-2013 09:46 AM
Ditchdoc You guys should look up John young Pelton I think he explained the lifestyle most military men want to live. It's not all about the gi bill
05-23-2013 07:59 AM
Ditchdoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokieneer View Post

ah ok I see what your saying now, never really thought about it that way but it would not surprise me, I trust the government less and less each day
Don't get me wrong. When I joined I joined to travel, get shot at and shoot back. That's just what the job is. There are many laws prohibiting the use of our military inside the US. I don't know if that has all changed but I can tell you most will go " constitution first orders second". I am personally not scared of our military and more worried about local and federal enforcement.
05-22-2013 11:34 PM
n00g7 Y'all, I'm coming to take your guns....

because I want them in my collection.
05-22-2013 11:22 PM
Hokieneer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
After Vietnam we didn't get into any conflicts for a long time. When we invaded Granada we made a lot of errors and cost lives. So if you look at our history after that we get into a conflict every two years to cycle vets. It's one of those thing air government won't admit to because of angry moms.
ah ok I see what your saying now, never really thought about it that way but it would not surprise me, I trust the government less and less each day
05-22-2013 11:18 PM
Ditchdoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hokieneer View Post

not sure I follow?
After Vietnam we didn't get into any conflicts for a long time. When we invaded Granada we made a lot of errors and cost lives. So if you look at our history after that we get into a conflict every two years to cycle vets. It's one of those thing air government won't admit to because of angry moms.
05-22-2013 11:12 PM
Hokieneer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
We I mean Americans we get into a conflict about every two years to keep combat vets. If we don't we get Granada
not sure I follow?
05-22-2013 11:05 PM
Ditchdoc We I mean Americans we get into a conflict about every two years to keep combat vets. If we don't we get Granada
05-22-2013 11:05 PM
Hokieneer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
I can tell. Well joining the military is about sticking my 10 1/2 boot up some foreign fighters ass and living dangerous. I don't have to believe in the cause all I know is there is their side and there is my side. That can also be implied here at home.
Ugh I have a feeling this is going to turn south real quick, but I am not sure this is what Joining the military should be about and at this time I am considering joining the air force medical core. I personally feel joining the military should be about service to ones country and its citizens not being a bad ass, I know this won't be a popular opinion but at the end of the day we are all people and just want to raise our families and lead a happy life and I think this gets lost with this line drawing and fear mongering. I thank you for your service and I am sure you have seen some terrible things but in the same line I am sure you have see many good people in other places just trying to raise their families and they are simply caught in between "a rock and a hard place".
05-22-2013 10:55 PM
BlueRidgeYJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post

I can tell. Well joining the military is about sticking my 10 1/2 boot up some foreign fighters ass and living dangerous. I don't have to believe in the cause all I know is there is their side and there is my side. That can also be implied here at home.
You can tell all that? Very intuitive of you! lol, jk.

All joking aside, that's my point - there has to be a foreign fighter to insert said boot into. And you should up it a size or two, just for good measure. But what if there isn't a bad guy? Then what? Oh, wait, there is always Cobra.
05-22-2013 10:40 PM
Ditchdoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
I have not served or volunteered federally, no. I was 18 when the towers fell, and contemplated joining. I decided against it; long story short, let's just say the political directions I saw us taking did not inspire me to enlist. I do contribute locally.
I have not, thankfully, been in an active theatre of war.
I do not support the military-industrial complex or its long reaching arms (the '26$ for a can of coke' & 'private contractor security' mil-ind complex).
I do question those leaders of our forces that continually use fear to justify those forces deployment.
I am often mistaken for being anti-military. I see it as pro-Constitution.

I have absolutely nothing against the John Wayne generation of boys, or the G.I. Joe generation of boys (or whatever came next) who grew up 'shooting' their friends in neighborhood wide wars growing up and enlisting to serve their country, or the kids that grow up too quick and get into some sort-of heavy stuff, then enlist to have a true opportunity in life through discipline and values being instilled in them. Or any other US citizen (or foreign national, for that matter) who feels compelled to serve their friends, families, neighbors, and complete strangers. The problem I have, however, is with a standing national fighting force beyond the USCG and Navy. I can tell you that were we to have true States' Militias and only States' Militias, I would muster without hesitation. Were the antiquated and original gun laws in Virginia, laws like NY and MA passed first, that required all male citizens to maintain powder and shot, a capable rifle, and field provisions for 18 months, I would. But the federally controlled gaurd and/or army are not that.

Whenever Morocco invades from the East, or the Chinese cross the Mississippi, I'll be there. Unfortunately, standing armies lead to imperialistic wars, occupations, and martial law. It is just the nature of human society. This is why Jefferson famously compared the dangers of banks to them. Look into Royal Gov of Mass General Gates and his gun grab. An armed populace does not need an army, and is simultaneously free from oppression or tyranny. The inverse? An army does not need an armed populace, and is precluded from fulfilling their handlers agenda with one. Which of the great military societies of all history is still around? Our 224 year old gal.

All due respect, what do you think German soldiers in 1939 thought? That they should shoot their countrymen with reckless abandon, or that things got out of hand way to quickly? Now, I am not making excuses for genocide, but I am using history for an example. It happens time and time again, and it starts with political or socio-economic seperation. One side gets, the other gets jealous, then one gets scared. Game over. The Native Americans were people, Men Created Equal, with a divine Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, but public opinion said they were scary (because they had land, and we got jealous). So my 5 Great Grandpa and a bunch of white folks started doing something about it, and he was given a chunk of land just outside Atlanta for doing it. From the politicians that said those weren't people, they were enemy combatants. So, because of my knowledge of history, I am very cautious when people tell me things are scary and we need to do something about it. And when they tell me those aren't people.

BTW, let me go ahead and thank you for your service - were you a g.i. joe kid, too? I sure was. Sorry for the ramble.
I can tell. Well joining the military is about sticking my 10 1/2 boot up some foreign fighters ass and living dangerous. I don't have to believe in the cause all I know is there is their side and there is my side. That can also be implied here at home.
05-22-2013 10:34 PM
free78 I can see we are about to high jack this thread and I don't want to do that. We can start a new thread on this topic.



Yes, I was a g.i joe kid.
05-22-2013 10:22 PM
BlueRidgeYJ I have not served or volunteered federally, no. I was 18 when the towers fell, and contemplated joining. I decided against it; long story short, let's just say the political directions I saw us taking did not inspire me to enlist. I do contribute locally.
I have not, thankfully, been in an active theatre of war.
I do not support the military-industrial complex or its long reaching arms (the '26$ for a can of coke' & 'private contractor security' mil-ind complex).
I do question those leaders of our forces that continually use fear to justify those forces deployment.
I am often mistaken for being anti-military. I see it as pro-Constitution.

I have absolutely nothing against the John Wayne generation of boys, or the G.I. Joe generation of boys (or whatever came next) who grew up 'shooting' their friends in neighborhood wide wars growing up and enlisting to serve their country, or the kids that grow up too quick and get into some sort-of heavy stuff, then enlist to have a true opportunity in life through discipline and values being instilled in them. Or any other US citizen (or foreign national, for that matter) who feels compelled to serve their friends, families, neighbors, and complete strangers. The problem I have, however, is with a standing national fighting force beyond the USCG and Navy. I can tell you that were we to have true States' Militias and only States' Militias, I would muster without hesitation. Were the antiquated and original gun laws in Virginia, laws like NY and MA passed first, that required all male citizens to maintain powder and shot, a capable rifle, and field provisions for 18 months, I would. But the federally controlled gaurd and/or army are not that.

Whenever Morocco invades from the East, or the Chinese cross the Mississippi, I'll be there. Unfortunately, standing armies lead to imperialistic wars, occupations, and martial law. It is just the nature of human society. This is why Jefferson famously compared the dangers of banks to them. Look into Royal Gov of Mass General Gates and his gun grab. An armed populace does not need an army, and is simultaneously free from oppression or tyranny. The inverse? An army does not need an armed populace, and is precluded from fulfilling their handlers agenda with one. Which of the great military societies of all history is still around? Our 224 year old gal.

All due respect, what do you think German soldiers in 1939 thought? That they should shoot their countrymen with reckless abandon, or that things got out of hand way to quickly? Now, I am not making excuses for genocide, but I am using history for an example. It happens time and time again, and it starts with political or socio-economic seperation. One side gets, the other gets jealous, then one gets scared. Game over. The Native Americans were people, Men Created Equal, with a divine Right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, but public opinion said they were scary (because they had land, and we got jealous). So my 5 Great Grandpa and a bunch of white folks started doing something about it, and he was given a chunk of land just outside Atlanta for doing it. From the politicians that said those weren't people, they were enemy combatants. So, because of my knowledge of history, I am very cautious when people tell me things are scary and we need to do something about it. And when they tell me those aren't people.

BTW, let me go ahead and thank you for your service - were you a g.i. joe kid, too? I sure was. Sorry for the ramble.
05-22-2013 08:59 PM
free78 Blueridgeyj, did you ever serve this country? Have you ever gone to war? I ask because a lot of your post seem to not support the military. You seem to question the military a lot. Maybe I just take you the wrong way.
05-18-2013 10:18 PM
Ditchdoc I just got home from the range. BZO my new bolt gun. It controls good. Very good 1/4 mil at 100 yards.
05-18-2013 09:12 PM
BlueRidgeYJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
I was in the Philippines during people's power. You would be surprised what one man with the willingness to die while only armed with the national flower can stop. It also could have gone the other way if the officer ordered to fire.
Exactly.

Attachment 250743

It's a fine line and the sword cuts both ways.
05-18-2013 02:26 PM
Fishtaker What it all comes down to is at what point are we ready to fight and die. The revolutionary war was fought over far less than we are allowing today.
05-18-2013 01:46 PM
Ditchdoc I was in the Philippines during people's power. You would be surprised what one man with the willingness to die while only armed with the national flower can stop. It also could have gone the other way if the officer ordered to fire.
05-18-2013 10:33 AM
BlueRidgeYJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tweak View Post

that is EXACTLY the answer I was looking for. now I would like you to go to any Navy squadron, Marine corps or Army unit and see how long it takes you to meet someone from Texas who spent most of his childhood hunting and would actually follow an unlawful order like that. I give you 10 minutes. Senior Chief knows what im talking about.

so that leaves us with police. there are not nearly enough of them that the ones that actually oppose civilian gun ownership would be able to do anything. at least not down here.
True, but all they have to do is turn off the pumps. In 3 days, you'll likely either A) gladly turn in your guns for gas coupons or food, or B) gladly wear a patch and take others guns for gas coupons or food. Particularly those city dwellers with children. Far-fetched? You bet-cha. But possible none-the-less.

Also, don't forget your Department of War recently (Feb '13) dropped Posse Comitatus (1878) and trumped the Insurection Act of 1807, allowing Federal soldiers (not Nat Gaurd) to police within America without Congressional OR Presidential consent (unconstitutionally) making arrests, removing firearms (and gasoline) from stores and individuals, and, among other things, imprisoning citizens. This is the #1 reason permanant soldiers are prohibited in the Constitution, and the #1 reason the Right to keep and bear arms exists, so they can't 'bring in the tanks'. But the soldiers would say no? Then why would you enlist to do the bidding of those that would want it done? You did see the militarization of Boston, yes? In blatant violation of the 4th Amendment.
http://i.imgur.com/ZdLUN2ih.jpg
You can clearly see this HMMWV is a 'Military Police' vehicle, not a Federal, State, or Local police vehicle. Had they not changed protocol, that really couldn't have happened with any pretense of legality. And how about that assualt with a deadly weapon... what would that cop do if the homeowner responded in kind to having a full auto assault rifle pointed at their face, in their own home. Think those gaurdsmen would've admitted they will raid citizens homes two months ago? Looking for 1 man with 3 boolit holes on foot?
05-18-2013 01:02 AM
Tweak
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1jeeplvr View Post
martial law
that is EXACTLY the answer I was looking for. now I would like you to go to any Navy squadron, Marine corps or Army unit and see how long it takes you to meet someone from Texas who spent most of his childhood hunting and would actually follow an unlawful order like that. I give you 10 minutes. Senior Chief knows what im talking about.

so that leaves us with police. there are not nearly enough of them that the ones that actually oppose civilian gun ownership would be able to do anything. at least not down here.
05-17-2013 09:48 PM
BlueRidgeYJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post

I never said I would do what the government tells me regardless if its right or wrong. Plus I don't think a war on foreign land fall under the bill of rights.
Ya kind-of did, though I know you were being a bit sarcastic there.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/201...sing-stun-gun/
Don't think for a second some wouldn't - this is a veteran having his door kicked in by the police because his neighbor said they were having a DV episode, except the SCOTUS said you can't do that: "Such an exception would enable any person seeking to harass another to set in motion an intrusive, embarrassing police search of the targeted person simply by placing an anonymous call.…" Justice Ginsburg, on the courts decision of Flordia v. J.L., Mar 2000, about using anonymous tips as probable cause. These cops violated the civil rights of Mr. Woods (and company), period. Slippery slope.

The Bill of Rights (and entire US Constitution) is not for you. It is not for me, or for Habeeb the Iraqi. It is not for Sammy from Australia, or Debbie in Dallas. It is a rule book for the US Government, and only for the US govt (though it does supercede all lower authorities and many nations have copied it since). The Right to not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment is a HUMAN Right, inalienable at your creation. If you do not think an Afghani has the Right not to be subjected to unwarranted search and seizure, by our governments proclomation, then you empower that same government to remove YOUR firearms, or quarter troops at your expense, or restrict public demonstrations (whoops, already have done that), or restrict religous practices (needless to say admitting the Afghani, Iraqi, Syrian, Libyan, N Korean, etc government does not have to offer human rights to US civilians and soldiers during war). You see the slippery slope when we create 'us' and 'them' in regards to accepted human rights, like the BoR, yes? Here's a hint - think 1950's in, say, my home - Atlanta. Fair application of laws? How about 1850? Because it doesn't say ANYTHING about non-white or non-land owners; it must not have applied to those people, either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
Let me put it to you this way because of people like you now our GI's need to be shot at twice before they can shot back. If you haven't notice American casualties have doubled per year.
If making sure you are actually killing 'evil doers' is too difficult, we need to re-evaluate our ability to wage war, particularly at such an extreme financial, social, and political - needless to say human - cost. The end does not justify the means. Notice how the Apache was not fired on once, let alone twice... perhaps that is why the rules of engagement changed. Or maybe it's because I told people about it. But if that's the case, then why can't I get Gitmo closed? I keep trying, lol.
I have also noticed the dramatic increase in suicides of our armed forces personel. More than doubled, actually. Maybe we should likewise look into why our professional soldiers, like Robert Bales, are going crazy instead of sending more kids to chase ghosts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
To me a American life is far more valuable then any foreign fighter.
Agreed 1,000%. 1,000,000%. But what about a foreign civilian, or children? Collateral damage? Or victims? How about US civilians killed in the war on terror? Collateral damage, or victims? All life is precious. All of it. If some bad trees grow in the forest, you don't slash-burn the whole thing, or clearcut it. You logically and methodically extract the bad elements while giving the least amount of exposure necessary to contaminate as few as possible good, or at least otherwise nuetral, trees. This is no longer how our remote control munitions department is run, it is much more slash-burn. From a computer screen and joystick it is 'so easy' to sit behind. Ya know, like an Xbox. Unfortunately, the consequence is years and years of future attacks on American interests globally.

Our legacy? Fear. That is what we will pass to our children, along with crushing debt, and frankly that just sickens me.

...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
It's good to see a legitimate debate, but it should go without saying that you guys have to play nice. If this spills into overt hostility, it'll be gone.
We try... I apologize to all if I overstepped any bounds, you fun killin ninja. =)
In addition, thanks to the other posters for keeping this as a civil discussion, this is the ONLY forum I have found where that is the normal; I guess all y'all Jeepers are just good folk.
05-17-2013 10:25 AM
MTH It's good to see a legitimate debate, but it should go without saying that you guys have to play nice. If this spills into overt hostility, it'll be gone.
05-17-2013 09:58 AM
Ditchdoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRidgeYJ View Post
Nope. No Xbox, and what on Earth would give you the implication I like the Saudis and Pakistanis that attacked New York? Because I value human life? Because I adhere to the Bill of Rights? Because I think the 86 individuals currently at Gitmo with no links to terror are being held in violation of human rights? Nice defense to your 'responders are at fault' logic train, btw.

Terrorism, as defined, is an attempt to coerce through the use of force and fear. If you are afraid to help the wounded because you too will be blown up, youre being terrorized (fear has coerced you) - in NY, Boston, Baghdad, Basra, Kabul, or anywhere else.

Restraint.... like those same pilots showed the 2 militants that surrendered? See, they decided while a helicopter can be enough to send alone, it cannot arrest people. So they shot and killed em. Guns on the deck, hands in the air. Shot and killed. Is Bobby Bales your hero or something?

Thanks, that's my original point. It would be wrong to confiscate guns in violation of our Rights, but nationalists would do it. Because the govt said it needed to be done.
I never said I would what the government tells me regardless if its right or wrong. Plus I don't think a war on foreign land fall under the bill of rights.
Let me put it to you this way because of people like you now our GI's need to be shot at twice before they can shot back. If you haven't notice American casualties have doubled per year.
To me a American life is far more valuable then any foreign fighter.
05-17-2013 08:06 AM
BlueRidgeYJ Nope. No Xbox, and what on Earth would give you the implication I like the Saudis and Pakistanis that attacked New York? Because I value human life? Because I adhere to the Bill of Rights? Because I think the 86 individuals currently at Gitmo with no links to terror are being held in violation of human rights? Nice defense to your 'responders are at fault' logic train, btw.

Terrorism, as defined, is an attempt to coerce through the use of force and fear. If you are afraid to help the wounded because you too will be blown up, youre being terrorized (fear has coerced you) - in NY, Boston, Baghdad, Basra, Kabul, or anywhere else.

Restraint.... like those same pilots showed the 2 militants that surrendered? See, they decided while a helicopter can be enough to send alone, it cannot arrest people. So they shot and killed em. Guns on the deck, hands in the air. Shot and killed. Is Bobby Bales your hero or something?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdoc View Post
It's ok this country will always have guys like me to do what needs to be done no matter if its wrong or right.
Thanks, that's my original point. It would be wrong to confiscate guns in violation of our Rights, but nationalists would do it. Because the govt said it needed to be done.
05-17-2013 12:07 AM
Ditchdoc It's easy to talk from your computer. Look when the guy was crawling they stopped firing. Was even nagging at him to pick up a weapon. So give them credit. They showed restrain when needed. By the way if I was on the ground and saw a guy pointing a black tube around a corner I would put a round in him too. But it really shows your combat experience is from your Xbox.
Still the best part of the video is the comm. that staff was clear. A lot better than when I was in desert storm, Somalia, or Kosovo, amazing just amazing. Thanks for the video it gives me a hard on when we blow stuff up.
By the way you probably think the bastard that use road side bombs detonated from a cell phone from afar are true acts of courage or the butt wipes that train to hi jack civilian planes filled with mothers and children and purposely crash them into buildings filled with people just going to work those guys must get medals in your book.
It's ok this country will always have guys like me to do what needs to be done no matter if its wrong or right.
This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:45 AM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC