Unconstitutional Action and Gun Laws

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-09-2009, 09:51 PM
ScottGoodman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor

Have you guys ever thought that using landmines around your houses, specially under the windows and on the walkways, would be very costworthy, automatic and effective way to stop unwanted visitors? Another good thing with these mines is that attackers and robbers do not use them. And if you live somewhere near the beach, then there's no better way to stop felons with boats than using good old acoustic/magnetic seamines? Seamines aren't even banned in the Ottawa mine ban treaty.

Yes, I've considered this, but after you and I have had a few beers & laughs you might step on one while walking to your car. :beer2:I'd hate to loose someone to debate with.

I'm landlocked, so the mines may be out of the question...but you have me thinking:mace:. Got any for sale that you could mail to me?
12-09-2009, 10:09 PM
Sailor

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter74743

I'm landlocked, so the mines may be out of the question...but you have me thinking:mace:. Got any for sale that you could mail to me?

Well not for sale, but changing few mines into one or two nice razors would sound a fair deal to me :)
12-09-2009, 10:53 PM
Vekta

Quote:

Originally Posted by fccexpert

Ah yes, the police. But, courts have repeatedly ruled that the police do not have any responsibility to protect individuals. That's right, no responsibility to protect you, your wife, your children or your aging grandmother.

When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

I thought it might be interesting( and scary) to post these...

South vs. Maryland "The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that local law-enforcement had no duty to protect individuals, but only a general duty to enforce the laws." (1856)

DeShaney vs. Winnebago County Department of Social Services " There is no merit to petitioner's contention that the State's Knowledge of his danger and expressions of willingness to protect him against the danger established a "special relationship" giving rise to an affirmative constituational duty to protect"(1989) Basically even if you tell the cops someone is threatening to kill you they can't really do anything since a crime hasn't actually been committed yet.

Bowers vs. Devito "There is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen" (1982)

Warren vs. D.C. Offical police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection."( 1981)

Hartzler vs. City of San Jose " The court of Appeals held that the police department and it's employees enjoyed absolute immunity for failure to provide sufficient police protection"( 1975)

Davidson vs. City of Westminister...this one is too long to type out. (1982)

Westbrooks vs. State ...another long one (1985)

Ne Casek vs. City of L.A. ...long (1965)

Susman vs City of L.A. "The court held that non of the allegations presented was sufficient to show any duty owed by any of the officials named as defendants to act to prevent or avoid the harm suffered by the plaintiffs" (1969)

Antique Arts Corp. Vs. City of Torrence " The Court held that government code section 846 provides for immunity if no police protection is provided; or, if police protection is provided, but that protection is not sufficient"

:dropjaw:
12-09-2009, 10:55 PM
gregs656

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lt.Arclight

motorvehicles than by firearms-there isn't any talk of banning cars is there?

I think there's something about intent that's important here.
12-09-2009, 10:57 PM
honedright

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruno

If I remember correctly, soldiers are only allowed to handle service weapons while on duty, right?

Two words: Fort Hood.
12-09-2009, 11:29 PM
Slartibartfast

Is that a yes or a no?

Quote:

Originally Posted by honedright

Two words: Fort Hood.
12-09-2009, 11:41 PM
nun2sharp

They were unarmed at the time of the attack. Weapons are issued for maintenance, training and when it's time to get on the plane and wonder what idiot on earth has done something stupid this time.
12-10-2009, 05:36 AM
JokiJo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruno

If I remember correctly, soldiers are only allowed to handle service weapons while on duty, right?

@joki: if you want to fight your own home army, then you die. There is a TON of problems facing the US today. The 'what if you have to fight your own army' consideration is one of the most silly to base decisions on. The entire US government election process is still working according to the rules. Whoever is in charge, YOU put them there.

Kind of like our ragtag band of founders defied an entire nation and built arguably the greatest nation on earth did? Just kinda, you know, died?

Hmm.

History books can be a great place to look for political insight.
12-10-2009, 06:50 AM
Bruno

Quote:

Originally Posted by JokiJo

Kind of like our ragtag band of founders defied an entire nation and built arguably the greatest nation on earth did? Just kinda, you know, died?

Hmm.

History books can be a great place to look for political insight.

Hey here's a fun history fact: If the French hadn't jumped in to block the English from sending troops and equipment, the founders would have been hung, drawn and quartered for high treason... if they had survived the massacre of course, which is doubtful.

From France in the American Revolutionary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

Secretly approached by Louis XVI and Vergennes, Beaumarchais was given authorization to sell gunpowder and ammunition for close to a million pounds under the veil of the Portuguese company Rodrigue Hortalez et Compagnie. The aid given by France would ultimately contribute to George Washington's survival against the British onslaught. France accommodated American frigates that committed piracy against British merchant ships, provided economic aid, either as donations or loans, and also offered technical assistance, granting some of its military strategists "vacations", so they could assist American troops.

Quote:

The 1781 Battle of the Chesapeake caused a part of the British fleet to flee, making possible the entrapment of Charles Cornwallis' army at Yorktown, Virginia, where he hopelessly awaited the promised British reinforcements. Cornwallis was trapped between American and French forces on land and the French fleet on the sea. The French alliance was crucial in the decisive victory of the patriots at Yorktown on October 17, 1781, which could not have been achieved if not for the French Navy under Admiral François Joseph Paul de Grasse. Cornwallis formally surrendered on October 19, ending major hostilities in North America.

Think of that, next time you eat fries.
12-10-2009, 07:17 AM
Vekta

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruno

Hey here's a fun history fact: If the French hadn't jumped in to block the English from sending troops and equipment, the founders would have been hung, drawn and quartered for high treason... if they had survived the massacre of course, which is doubtful.

From France in the American Revolutionary War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Think of that, next time you eat fries.

Hip-Hip-Hazza for American Pirates.:shrug::D

http://counterfeitchic.com/Images/Am...ly%20Roger.jpg

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page