Forum Groups

 

Forums / Politics / J V Team Has Arrived

J V Team Has Arrived

26 posts
  1. Ronald Kirkman
    Ronald Kirkman avatar
    42 posts
    12/2/2015 8:12 PM
    Greetings;

    Wonder if any of you out there will contact our leader from Pennsylvania Avenue and inform him that the J-V Team has arrived in San Bernardino, CA. Not too bad yet, only 14 innocent civilians murdered and 17 wounded.

    By no means am I saying it is Radical Islam because we are loved and adored by all ISIS throughout the world. I am concerned that this is only the beginning with HOME GROWN RADICALS. Of course, they have to be indoctrinated by someone somewhere and probably in some type of building. And, your guess is as good as mine.

    Capt. Kirk
    Retired Alien
    Needham Golf Club
    Needham, MA



  2. Trevor Monreal
    Trevor Monreal avatar
    5 posts
    12/3/2015 8:12 AM
    Stating that the shootings in San Bernardino are somehow tied to radical Islam is like saying the shootings in Colorado Springs are somehow tied to right wing/pro lifers...
    Who would ever think of doing such a thing??



  3. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    12/3/2015 10:12 AM
    These tragedies are supposed to be averted by the law-abiding gun owners in the U.S.

    Except the shooters' guns were legal.



  4. Peter Bowman
    Peter Bowman avatar
    11 posts
    12/3/2015 10:12 AM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said: These tragedies are supposed to be averted by the law-abiding gun owners in the U.S.

    Except the shooters' guns were legal.


    Except it was probably another gun-free zone.



  5. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/3/2015 12:12 PM
    California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, a lot of good they did. France's laws are much, much stricter, that didn't work either. Maybe we should pass a whole bunch more gun control laws for criminals and terrorists to ignore.



  6. Sandy Clark
    Sandy Clark avatar
    0 posts
    12/3/2015 12:12 PM
    My wife knows someone who works for that group but in San diego. It is from what I gather a gun free zone!



  7. Joel Rhodes
    Joel Rhodes avatar
    0 posts
    12/4/2015 2:12 AM
    Everything is wonderful. We dont need to have laws governing gun control. The holy second amendment is not in anyway being misinterpreted as I know our founding fathers meant automatic weapons should be in ever home. Our Congress just voted to say that people on the terrorism watch list should still be able to buy a weapon. Any weapon they want. Why are we surprised when 356 mass shootings happened so far this year? It is what we want! Yes, everything is wonderful.



  8. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/4/2015 6:12 AM
    Joel Rhodes said: Everything is wonderful. We dont need to have laws governing gun control. The holy second amendment is not in anyway being misinterpreted as I know our founding fathers meant automatic weapons should be in ever home. Our Congress just voted to say that people on the terrorism watch list should still be able to buy a weapon. Any weapon they want. Why are we surprised when 356 mass shootings happened so far this year? It is what we want! Yes, everything is wonderful.


    Well, which of the other amendments would you like to do away with? The 1st? Yeah...lets get rid of that one, too.



  9. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    12/4/2015 7:12 AM
    They are called amendments for a reason. Would it be that hard to amend and amendment to better reflect the realities of modern day "Arms" When written, I doubt anyone ever pictured an automatic assault rifle.

    Limiting those things while still allowing you "personal protective devices" ie handguns, and you dinner plate target shotguns, might be a nice compromise.



  10. Steve Nelson
    Steve Nelson avatar
    0 posts
    12/4/2015 9:12 AM
    As Steve H. pointed out, CA has some very restrictive gun ownership rules. By definition, an 'assault rifle' is illegal in CA. One of the misleading things about this incident have been the headlines that state the guns were legally purchased. That may be true, but the pictures posted by the SB county sheriff's dept. shows heavily modified AR-15 variants that are absolutely not legal in CA or perhaps anywhere. Unsure how gun control debate will limit the use of illegal assault weapons by terrorists. Where there is a will, there is a way.



  11. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/4/2015 9:12 AM
    Larry Allan said: They are called amendments for a reason. Would it be that hard to amend and amendment to better reflect the realities of modern day "Arms" When written, I doubt anyone ever pictured an automatic assault rifle.

    Limiting those things while still allowing you "personal protective devices" ie handguns, and you dinner plate target shotguns, might be a nice compromise.


    It's just fine as written thank you, as are the others.
    But to answer your question.....very, very difficult to amend or repeal an article of the Bill of Rights.



  12. Peter Bowman
    Peter Bowman avatar
    11 posts
    12/4/2015 10:12 AM
    Are pipe bombs illegal? They had a bunch of those, too.



  13. Mahaffey Donald
    Mahaffey Donald avatar
    12/4/2015 10:12 AM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said: These tragedies are supposed to be averted by the law-abiding gun owners in the U.S.

    Except the shooters' guns were legal.


    You sure about that? They were legally purchased but both guns were altered to be more lethal. Don't think that was legal, also don't think it was legal to be making pipe bombs in the kitchen and garage, but hey, the components were legally purchased so we should blame Walmart.



  14. Mahaffey Donald
    Mahaffey Donald avatar
    12/4/2015 10:12 AM
    Larry Allan said: They are called amendments for a reason. Would it be that hard to amend and amendment to better reflect the realities of modern day "Arms" When written, I doubt anyone ever pictured an automatic assault rifle.

    Limiting those things while still allowing you "personal protective devices" ie handguns, and you dinner plate target shotguns, might be a nice compromise.


    All this talk about automatic assault "rifles". Where can one buy a fully automatic assault rifle? (I'm using the assault "rifle" [weapon] definition the state of CA uses...https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs#2)

    (they call them assault weapons since in fact "assault rifles" were banned by the feds long ago, but hey, don't that get in the way factual political talk)



  15. Larry Allan
    Larry Allan avatar
    0 posts
    12/4/2015 10:12 AM
    Donald Mahaffey said:
    Larry Allan said: They are called amendments for a reason. Would it be that hard to amend and amendment to better reflect the realities of modern day "Arms" When written, I doubt anyone ever pictured an automatic assault rifle.

    Limiting those things while still allowing you "personal protective devices" ie handguns, and you dinner plate target shotguns, might be a nice compromise.


    All this talk about automatic assault "rifles". Where can one buy a fully automatic assault rifle? (I'm using the assault "rifle" [weapon] definition the state of CA uses...https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs#2)

    (they call them assault weapons since in fact "assault rifles" were banned by the feds long ago, but hey, don't that get in the way factual political talk)

    Hey, I don't know anything about guns, and I openly admits it
    I understand even less about the American Culture that celebrates their use.



  16. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/4/2015 3:12 PM
    Hey Lar....You know, I'm at the point where I don't normally discuss guns with people who don't understand because usually, they don't want to understand and nothing I say will change their minds or even open them a bit. I can totally see how people who don't understand anything about guns or who are afraid of them can come to the conclusion that the easiest and best solution would be to just ban them all. A lot of those same people don't understand the 2nd Amendment and think that all of us gun lovers are some sort of aberrant psychopaths. It's not likely that anything I say will influence them, but I will tell you that the reason for the 2nd Amendment and the ensuing gun culture in our country has to do with the founding of the country and nothing to do with hunting or target shooting. It's about a civil right.

    Sometime if you get a chance, read about an incident called "The shot heard 'round the world" and understand that everything stems from the fact that the first thing the British did in trying to quell our revolution was to quarter troops in our houses and confiscate our guns. The Bill of Rights addresses these issues and to this day, we are a people who are highly suspicious of government (especially our own). The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only NOT the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.

    The 2nd Amendment protects the rest of the Bill of Rights and without it, our rights of free speech and all the rest are not worth the paper they are written on.

    Regards,

    Steve



  17. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    12/4/2015 4:12 PM
    Amendment II

    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



    Steve, the amendment's opening phrase refers to a militia and its purpose is to provide for a militia. The "well-regulated" modifier refers to the militia, not the property, in this case, the gun. A "well-regulated militia" would be a disciplined and organized fighting force, not a bunch of yahoos with extended clips in assault rifles. We don't have militias anymore, but I have no problem with the National Guard being armed.



  18. Mahaffey Donald
    Mahaffey Donald avatar
    12/4/2015 4:12 PM
    This thread is a great example of why we are so bad at dealing with these horrible acts.
    So, a guy brings in a middle eastern foreigner on a "marriage" visa, they get married, then at some point start planning to kill a bunch of people. At some point they pledge allegiance to a group I refuse to name, acquire guns, make bombs, horde ammunition, destroy all their digital devices to eliminate their communication and travel history, and then worst of all actually walk into a crowded room and just start blowing away innocent people.

    And we have people in our country (and in Canada I guess) who think it only happened because we "celebrate" guns in the US.

    I think it is nuts that anyone can ever buy a gun without a background check. We have licenses for our cars, our boats, our dogs, our bicycles in some cities, and I would have no problem with licenses for guns. Sorry, that is the world we live in. But one of you really smart guys, please explain to me how that stops what these lunatics did because once they started planning this think and altering their weapons I'm thinking they no longer cared about the law?


    The only way I know we stop them is by monitoring their private lives and we know that is not allowed. If we really want to stop this crap we might have to look hard at what private conversations and communications should be protected. Also, unless HIPA is changed, doctors are not allowed to report patients they feel have potential for carrying out these acts. Bottom line, if we really want it to stop, we have to make a few changes. Meanwhile, the gun control argument will continue, and when it is won, they will just find someone or something new to blame when it happens again. Just like the PP attacker is not at fault, I guess Ted Cruz made him do it.

    The fact that this tragedy in CA has been made into a gun control issue is sickening because it proves to me that is it is really only about politics for most of our leaders. Truth and safety are far down the list.



  19. Clay Putnam
    Clay Putnam avatar
    33 posts
    12/4/2015 5:12 PM
    Donald Mahaffey said: This thread is a great example of why we are so bad at dealing with these horrible acts.
    So, a guy brings in a middle eastern foreigner on a "marriage" visa, they get married, then at some point start planning to kill a bunch of people. At some point they pledge allegiance to a group I refuse to name, acquire guns, make bombs, horde ammunition, destroy all their digital devices to eliminate their communication and travel history, and then worst of all actually walk into a crowded room and just start blowing away innocent people.

    And we have people in our country (and in Canada I guess) who think it only happened because we "celebrate" guns in the US.

    I think it is nuts that anyone can ever buy a gun without a background check. We have licenses for our cars, our boats, our dogs, our bicycles in some cities, and I would have no problem with licenses for guns. Sorry, that is the world we live in. But one of you really smart guys, please explain to me how that stops what these lunatics did because once they started planning this think and altering their weapons I'm thinking they no longer cared about the law?


    The only way I know we stop them is by monitoring their private lives and we know that is not allowed. If we really want to stop this crap we might have to look hard at what private conversations and communications should be protected. Also, unless HIPA is changed, doctors are not allowed to report patients they feel have potential for carrying out these acts. Bottom line, if we really want it to stop, we have to make a few changes. Meanwhile, the gun control argument will continue, and when it is won, they will just find someone or something new to blame when it happens again. Just like the PP attacker is not at fault, I guess Ted Cruz made him do it.

    The fact that this tragedy in CA has been made into a gun control issue is sickening because it proves to me that is it is really only about politics for most of our leaders. Truth and safety are far down the list.


    Dingdingding... Mr. Mahaffey, I hope you dropped the mic after that post. The left will not let a tragedy go to waste particularly when they can forward their efforts for more control. The San Bernardino event has nothing to do with gun control. Yet Obama, Sanders, et al place the blame squarely on gun control and global warming. Brilliance in our constituency.



  20. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/4/2015 5:12 PM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said: Amendment II

    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



    Steve, the amendment's opening phrase refers to a militia and its purpose is to provide for a militia. The "well-regulated" modifier refers to the militia, not the property, in this case, the gun. A "well-regulated militia" would be a disciplined and organized fighting force, not a bunch of yahoos with extended clips in assault rifles. We don't have militias anymore, but I have no problem with the National Guard being armed.



    I guess we will agree to disagree about the meaning of "well regulated". I am interpreting it as it was written and as the Supreme Court has affirmed.

    Regards,

    Steve



  21. Christopher Thuer
    Christopher Thuer avatar
    101 posts
    12/4/2015 6:12 PM
    Stephen Okula, CGCS said: Amendment II

    A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.



    Steve, the amendment's opening phrase refers to a militia and its purpose is to provide for a militia. The "well-regulated" modifier refers to the militia, not the property, in this case, the gun. A "well-regulated militia" would be a disciplined and organized fighting force, not a bunch of yahoos with extended clips in assault rifles. We don't have militias anymore, but I have no problem with the National Guard being armed.

    "Militia" refers to a citizen army, us, in order to defend ourselves from a tyrannical government. "People" is also us, and the right to have fire arms can not be taken away by the government.

    Chris Thuer, CGCS, Bear Slide Golf Club, Cicero, IN

  22. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    12/5/2015 2:12 AM
    Why is gun control considerd to be political? It's a public safety issue, like trafic laws.

    As for the sacred second amenment, there is a provision (and a precedent) for abolishing amendments. That's how the founding fathers wanted it to be.



  23. Christopher Thuer
    Christopher Thuer avatar
    101 posts
    12/5/2015 5:12 PM
    Driving is a privilege and not a right guaranteed by the constitution. The second can be repealed but the creators of the bill of rights made it so that the repeal of amendments or the creation of new ones is a very difficult process.

    Chris Thuer, CGCS, Bear Slide Golf Club, Cicero, IN

  24. Ronald Kirkman
    Ronald Kirkman avatar
    42 posts
    12/6/2015 4:12 PM
    Greetings;

    You guys should relax. In another year we will have Hillary as President and some think we have it tough now.

    I will say, Mr. Trump would be the only one that secures the Border.

    Now, do I remember something about the Government a couple of years ago giving some assault rifles to some drug kings in Mexico? I'm sure some of you will clarify that for me. Oh, by the way,I thought I heard on the news that the guns used in CA were bought by another person for the two Muslim Terrorists.

    Capt. Kirk
    Retired Alien
    Needham Golf Club
    Needham,MA



  25. Steven Huffstutler
    Steven Huffstutler avatar
    11 posts
    12/7/2015 8:12 AM
    Trump is still a buffoon, but if you really want Hillary elected, keep shilling for him.



  26. David Hebermehl
    David Hebermehl avatar
    0 posts
    12/7/2015 10:12 AM
    Oh, by the way,I thought I heard on the news that the guns used in CA were bought by another person for the two Muslim Terrorists. ---which is illegal. So they weren't bought legally.



View or change your forums profile here.