The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: Pathfinder on May 08, 2010, 09:28:13 AM
-
Interesting open letter to Ted Nugent from the JPFO about the NRA. NB: I am a Life Member of the NRA.
http://www.jpfo.org/articles-assd02/nugent-open-letter.htm (http://www.jpfo.org/articles-assd02/nugent-open-letter.htm)
FTA: "We at JPFO recently received a letter from an angry and very articulate fellow who took the vast majority of gun owners to task for not being NRA members. He rightly points out that there are more than eighty million gun owners and only five million members of any pro-gun organization, the NRA obviously being the largest.
Ted, the day I’ll join the NRA is…
1. When the NRA announces, from the rooftops, that the police have NO LEGAL DUTY to protect the average American citizen. Time after time, our courts have upheld this. If every American understood this, we would see gun ownership, and Second Amendment awareness, burgeon across our nation. The tide would resolutely turn in our favor.
One of JPFO’s finest projects was the book “Dial 911 and Die”. It is meticulously documented with actual court cites. Why didn’t the NRA, years ago, publish this material in a reader friendly format for nationwide distribution?"
And it goes on from there, raising some very disturbing points. It certainly reinforces the occasional opinion that the NRA is more about lining the pockets of LaPierre et al., than it is about ensuring the enforcement of our rights.
-
WOW :o
And people get mad at the NRA for being "too strong and uncompromising." I can't say that I disagree with his letter and beliefs. How many times have we been reminded that if we were stronger we would be more effective by comparing us to the homosexual and abortion rights people?
I also find it wise that they wrote to Ted Nugent on this, because he is probably the person that is doing most of what they ask already.
-
I've said it before and I'll be saying it again, but a clear cut defeat of the Anti's is not in NRA's best interest.
NRA is the largest single voice we have but there is a point where the best interests of gun owners and lobbiests diverge.
-
I just spent a little time perusing the website for that organization, and they are saying basically the same things we're ALL saying on this forum. THe time I spent there makes me respect and admire the organization, and wonder if one must be a jew to join, or if they'd take a good little* catholic boy like me.
* - No fat jokes this time, Mikey. ;D
-
I just spent a little time perusing the website for that organization, and they are saying basically the same things we're ALL saying on this forum. THe time I spent there makes me respect and admire the organization, and wonder if one must be a jew to join, or if they'd take a good little* catholic boy like me.
* - No fat jokes this time, Mikey. ;D
They welcome non Jewish 2A supporters.
-
They welcome non Jewish 2A supporters.
Even fat little Catholics!!! ;D
Not to mention fat old evangelicals like me!!!!!
-
:-X
-
They even accept "Micks" from Chelsea ;D
Guy I used to know joined, He was very Irish from Quincy Ma.
I razzed him really hard ;D
-
JPFO is a great site, I believe they have alot to offer because they have been there - this mackeral snapper joined them.
-
Interesting about the NRA, Reagan, and the BATFE...
Hmmmm...
Is this really true? Not that there is a reason to doubt it, just wondering if the interpretation is accurate.
-
Interesting about the NRA, Reagan, and the BATFE...
Hmmmm...
Is this really true? Not that there is a reason to doubt it, just wondering if the interpretation is accurate.
I do think it is accurate, and now to a thread drift, just a little bit, it is important to get a hard core Secretary of the Treasury, who over sees and commands the BATFE, G Gordon Liddy was the SOT under Nixon, and stopped a lot of stuff, stone cold, by simply saying, that is against the 2nd Amendment, no fanfare, just NO. Then take Lloyd Bentsen, unfortunately from Texas, who had a good career until he got mixed up with Clinton, who by the stroke of pen, made the USAS 12, the Spas 12 and the Street Sweeper shotguns, class 3.
We need to make this a point in electing our next president, its not just him or her, but who they chose for their cabinet, especially SOT. Don't bash G Gordon, he admitted what he did, did not rat out the others and paid his dues, including offering himself up to assassination for the greater good.
-
Don't bash G Gordon, he admitted what he did, did not rat out the others and paid his dues, including offering himself up to assassination for the greater good.
I aree with all that, except the not ratting out part. Its no different than ghetto "no snitch'in". I will not lie cheat or steal, NOR TOLERATE THOSE WHO DO. That's my beef wih Liddy, and to some degree with Ollie. Honor sometimes demands overcoming personal and political loyalties.
FQ13
-
A quote from Bon fire of the Vanities, a really good movie by the way. " if the truth will not set you free, Then lie ". FQ I do believe in honor, and stand by it everyday, even when it would be easier not to. And since G Gordon was an officer he did take that oathe as did Oliver, I do recommend reading " Under Fire " that is Ollies book and " Will " G Gordons book, I don't think you will disappointed, it go's a long way in describing each mans passion and grit. Not to mention, Ollie told congress about Bin Laden, a long time ago. Point is, would you put Honor above purpose, when in the serpents den?
-
G Gordan Liddy was NOT the Secretary of anything, He's a felon . Convicted of breaking into the Watergate Hotel ;D
I aree with all that, except the not ratting out part. Its no different than ghetto "no snitch'in". I will not lie cheat or steal, NOR TOLERATE THOSE WHO DO. That's my beef wih Liddy, and to some degree with Ollie. Honor sometimes demands overcoming personal and political loyalties.
FQ13
Lying, Cheating, and stealing are completely un acceptable in the line of duty. Keeping your mouth shut, taking the fifth, as part of the assigned job are absolute NO NO's.
But killing is OK ?
Personally I'd lie, cheat, steal or kill without hesitation to get the job done.
Funny thing is, what the libs f-ucked Ollie for, trying to "do Business" with Irans "moderates".
Is now Obummers stated policy.
-
G Gordan Liddy was NOT the Secretary of anything, He's a felon . Convicted of breaking into the Watergate Hotel ;D
Lying, Cheating, and stealing are completely un acceptable in the line of duty. Keeping your mouth shut, taking the fifth, as part of the assigned job are absolute NO NO's.
But killing is OK ?.
According to the service academies and every ROTC program? Yes, and it has been since West Point was founded. Lying to the enemy, good for you. Lying to lawful authority? You lose.
Not a hard concept. Ollie and Liddy both thought they were above the law because of what they believed, and the fact that President had given them (at least in their own minds) reason to think they were above the law. Thats not how it works in a republic.
FQ13
-
Ollie and Liddy both thought they were above the law because of what they believed, and the fact that President had given them (at least in their own minds) reason to think they were above the law. Thats not how it works in a republic.
FQ13
and you can base your critical assessment, and opinion on what? Hindsight being 20/20???
Remembering Van Halen's " Right Now" tune, that quoted "our gov't is doing only things we think 3rd world countries do."
BUT unless we are there, in the moment, someone has to fall, someone will get thrown under the bus, and it was Liddy and Ollie.
But study your historical analysis FQ, even GWB will come out being a better POTUS than BHO any day. Even Cheney, Rice, and the "evil" Rumsfeld.....
-
Ollie and Liddy both thought they were above the law because of what they believed, and the fact that President had given them (at least in their own minds) reason to think they were above the law. Thats not how it works in a republic.
FQ13
and you can base your critical assessment, and opinion on what? Hindsight being 20/20???
Remembering Van Halen's " Right Now" tune, that quoted "our gov't is doing only things we think 3rd world countries do."
BUT unless we are there, in the moment, someone has to fall, someone will get thrown under the bus, and it was Liddy and Ollie.
But study your historical analysis FQ, even GWB will come out being a better POTUS than BHO any day. Even Cheney, Rice, and the "evil" Rumsfeld.....
Actually, I base my assesment on three things.
1) Both men swore an oath to the Constitution.
2) Statutory laws against B&E and conspiracy in Liddys case, and the Boland Ammendment which said no more money to the Contras in Ollie's case were lawfully and Constitutionally passed and promulgated..
3) Both men acknowledged their knowledge of wrongdoing by their actions. Liddy offering Haldeman the opportunity to "shoot him on any street corner" and Ollie's trying to smuggle shreaded documents out of his office. Both realized they had broken the law and took active steps to cover it up.
What part of this is hard to understand? If this had been a liquor store heist you'd convict them both. Instead, because they are are your team, they break the law they swore to uphold, and you're covering for them? I call BS. TW, I don't call names on this board very often, and I won't now because I like you. Still, the H word is floating around out there. Are we a government of laws or men? Its just that simple.
FQ13
-
You are so full of crap FQ.
We all know that just like with the Bay of Pigs and the Castro assassination attempts.
The President said do it, so they did it, and when it fell apart they took the crap and kept their mouths shut so that 20 or 30 years later some Professor could pontificate about "ethics". ::).
-
When the crap hits the fan I'll take Liddy and Ollie on my team anyday. You can have bHo, Bidden, Pelosie, et al.
-
Tom, TW and Blackwolf
You are saying that if BO orders his underlings to violate the law and constitution to suit his FP, or DP objectives its OK? Or is it only conservatives who get that priviledge? I'll go ahead and use the H word. Smells like Hypocrisy around here. No BS Tom, all the kings horses? Or are we a republic of laws? Make the call. We can't have one rule for Presidents we like and one for Presidents we don't, or its welcome to the 3rd world.
FQ13 who will stand his ground on this one. The law, without fear or favor. KMA if you don't like it.
-
Tom, TW and Blackwolf
You are saying that if BO orders his underlings to violate the law and constitution to suit his FP, or DP objectives its OK? Or is it only conservatives who get that priviledge? I'll go ahead and use the H word. Smells like Hypocrisy around here. No BS Tom, all the kings horses? Or are we a republic of laws? Make the call. We can't have one rule for Presidents we like and one for Presidents we don't, or its welcome to the 3rd world.
FQ13 who will stand his ground on this one. The law, without fear or favor. KMA if you don't like it.
No wonder you suck at history. Your reading comprehension is nonexistent.
You are saying that if BO orders his underlings to violate the law and constitution to suit his FP, or DP objectives its OK
I never mentioned Nixon or Reagan, they caught hell for trying to cheat the system.
I was commending underling who showed loyalty to leaders they believed in..
-
No wonder you suck at history. Your reading comprehension is nonexistent.
You are saying that if BO orders his underlings to violate the law and constitution to suit his FP, or DP objectives its OK
I never mentioned Nixon or Reagan, they caught hell for trying to cheat the system.
I was commending underling who showed loyalty to leaders they believed in..
Like Himmler or Roehm? Look, Tom, no BS and zero snark. We are a Constitutional Republic. We don't take an oath to a president, a party or even a flag. We take one to a constitution. You either keep it or you don't. You may find virtue in someone's loyalty to a superior who violates it. Me, I see a traitor. You keep your oath, resign your position, or are condemned.Period, full stop.
FQ13 who again isn't backing down on this one.
-
I just spent a little time perusing the website for that organization, and they are saying basically the same things we're ALL saying on this forum. THe time I spent there makes me respect and admire the organization, and wonder if one must be a jew to join, or if they'd take a good little* catholic boy like me.
* - No fat jokes this time, Mikey. ;D
if you want a real shocker, google the pink pistols.
-
Tom, TW and Blackwolf
You are saying that if BO orders his underlings to violate the law and constitution to suit his FP, or DP objectives its OK? Or is it only conservatives who get that priviledge? I'll go ahead and use the H word. Smells like Hypocrisy around here. No BS Tom, all the kings horses? Or are we a republic of laws? Make the call. We can't have one rule for Presidents we like and one for Presidents we don't, or its welcome to the 3rd world.
FQ13 who will stand his ground on this one. The law, without fear or favor. KMA if you don't like it.
These comments are indicative of the classic ethical discussion writ stupid.
The ethical question is posed: you have a chance to murder Adolf Hitler in 1933 and get away from Germany scot-free - with full knowledge of what would transpire if you did not - with murder being not only against the law as well as a prohibition expressed in the Bible. Would you pull the trigger?
Me? I would drop the hammer in a heartbeat, sleep well that night, and figure God and I would someday have some interesting conversations about the act.
Slavish devotion to the law is a dangerous mindset, FQ. Yes, we are a nation built on the law rather than the whims of man. So was Germany in 1931. Everything Adolf did was "legal", as were the actions of Josef and Mao. Sometimes, when the law has been perverted, or when there is a greater good, a higher calling is required.
-
These comments are indicative of the classic ethical discussion writ stupid.
The ethical question is posed: you have a chance to murder Adolf Hitler in 1933 and get away from Germany scot-free - with full knowledge of what would transpire if you did not -
And here Path, you render your whole argument moot. We don't have fore knowledge or get to go back in time with hindsight. We also don't get "Get out of jail free cards" and instead have to make hard choice that involve not just ourselves, but our families, our causes, etc. Thus you are setting up a straw man. Try again.
FQ13
-
And here Path, you render your whole argument moot. We don't have fore knowledge or get to go back in time with hindsight. We also don't get "Get out of jail free cards" and instead have to make hard choice that involve not just ourselves, but our families, our causes, etc. Thus you are setting up a straw man. Try again.
FQ13
Fail!
The argument is hardly moot. If you knew history instead of just teaching it, you would understand Santayana's admonition. It is that we do have foreknowledge, not of specific details of course, but of what happens when you let tyrants loose. Sometimes, the extra-legality actions are all that stand between us and tyrannical actions against us. That is the point of the Hitler ethics quiz, and it is a particularly telling point that you do not get it, instead preferring to wallow in the warm fuzzy academic emotionalism so prevalent on today's campuses.
And next time trying including facts instead of opinions passing as . . . opinions.
-
There was an episode of Magnum PI...so I was a fan..wanna make something of it? ;D ;D
It this episode, Magnum's pal, the helicopter pilot and buddy from the war and prison camp, had been "brainwashed" by a Communist agent while in the prison camp.
Acting on a post hypnotic suggestion, the buddy was going to use a helicopter to kill some folks but was stopped, of course, by Magnum.
Well, Magnum tracked down the villain out in the bush and had the drop on him. The BG said "If you take me in, I will go free because there is no evidence and I will be able to activate others like your friend. You cannot kill me in cold blood. It is against your laws and morals. So I win."
The closing scene was of the muzzle of Magnum's 1911 aimed at the guy...and then a boom and muzzle flash.
It wasn't the legal thing to do, but, for me, it was the moral thing to do.
-
There was an episode of Magnum PI...so I was a fan..wanna make something of it? ;D ;D
It this episode, Magnum's pal, the helicopter pilot and buddy from the war and prison camp, had been "brainwashed" by a Communist agent while in the prison camp.
Acting on a post hypnotic suggestion, the buddy was going to use a helicopter to kill some folks but was stopped, of course, by Magnum.
Well, Magnum tracked down the villain out in the bush and had the drop on him. The BG said "If you take me in, I will go free because there is no evidence and I will be able to activate others like your friend. You cannot kill me in cold blood. It is against your laws and morals. So I win."
The closing scene was of the muzzle of Magnum's 1911 aimed at the guy...and then a boom and muzzle flash.
It wasn't the legal thing to do, but, for me, it was the moral thing to do.
Agreed. I remember that episode and would have done the same. BUT, Magnum (I can't believe we're having this conversation, but it beats the hell out of using Star Trek examples. At least we've both had a girlfriend. ;D), was going to have to worry about jail for the rest of his life, unlike Path's "get a free shot at Hitler" example. Plus the fact is Magnum wasn't a serving officer. What a private citizen can/should do and what someone who is oathbound to the Constitution should do are two seperate things. This seems pretty simple to me.
FQ13
-
Agreed. I remember that episode and would have done the same. BUT, Magnum (I can't believe we're having this conversation, but it beats the hell out of using Star Trek examples. At least we've both had a girlfriend. ;D), was going to have to worry about jail for the rest of his life, unlike Path's "get a free shot at Hitler" example. Plus the fact is Magnum wasn't a serving officer. What a private citizen can/should do and what someone who is oathbound to the Constitution should do are two seperate things. This seems pretty simple to me.
FQ13
As do You FQ .
-
As do You FQ .
Cute. Tell me where I'm wrong though. Do you want someone with a badge (a licence to kill) making these sorts of calls, or obeying the laws that protect us from the state?
FQ13
-
Has a lifetime in academia turned you into a total idiot ?
Didn't you ever watch mission impossible ?
The deal for the cushy title, is you get the job done . Period.
And if things go wrong no one knows anything about you.
-
Has a lifetime in academia turned you into a total idiot ?
Didn't you ever watch mission impossible ?
The deal for the cushy title, is you get the job done . Period.
And if things go wrong no one knows anything about you.
When did you become an apologist for government wet work on US soil? News flash, you haven't won the election yet. Who do you think is going to be first in line for this, "Hey, the feds can do what they want attitude you've suddenly developed? Don't come crying to me when Holder decides to 'get a rope' "Mr. President". :o ;D
FQ13
-
Cute. Tell me where I'm wrong though. Do you want someone with a badge (a licence to kill) making these sorts of calls, or obeying the laws that protect us from the state?
FQ13
::)
-
Has a lifetime in academia turned you into a total idiot ?
This must be my lucky day!
Ahhhh, hell. The courtious thing to do is to let a newbie take a swing at that softball.
-
::)
And you call me a faux libertarian? Two words, Ruby Ridge. How about Waco? Or another thousand or so that don't go beyond the local papers? Not saying that the power shouln't be there, just that it should be kept on a tight leash. As far as newbies taking a swing? I'll be their Huckleberry. ;D
FQ13
-
And you call me a faux libertarian? Two words, Ruby Ridge. How about Waco? Or another thousand or so that don't go beyond the local papers? Not saying that the power shouln't be there, just that it should be kept on a tight leash. As far as newbies taking a swing? I'll be their Huckleberry. ;D
FQ13
Shackled by your ethics your more likely to be their b!*ch than their Huckleberry. :o
My ethics are, What's good for me and mine is good and the rest can KMA.
Why do you think I plan to put the entire congress in jail and suspend the Constitution ?
So I can get things fixed so meat heads like FQ, or even a Maxine Waters or Barney Frank can't screw them up again.
-
Like Himmler or Roehm? Look, Tom, no BS and zero snark. We are a Constitutional Republic. We don't take an oath to a president, a party or even a flag. We take one to a constitution. You either keep it or you don't. You may find virtue in someone's loyalty to a superior who violates it. Me, I see a traitor. You keep your oath, resign your position, or are condemned.Period, full stop.
FQ13 who again isn't backing down on this one.
You never pledged allegience to the flag? I did. I bet TomB did too.
-
Many times. ;D
-
I have to agree with Quaker's main point here (:o). Allegiance to the constitution is sacrosanct. It goes above loyalty to any commander or politician. Of course I'm talking about those who take an oath to uphold the constitution.
When I was much younger, I thought Iran-Contra was no big deal- we were trying to overthrow a communist regime in Central America. But after seeing what has happened since, I have come to believe the methods used was a mistake.
As an aside I know Oliver North is a hero to conservatives, but let's not forget he participated in planning for a martial law take over of our government in case of a national emergency in the 1980's. This was raised in the hearings but was squelched because it was classified. :(
And I have to agree with Quaker when says we have to be consistent about following the constitution. We can not be for ignoring it when it suits our aims but insist that our opponents/enemies adhere to every word as some sort of cynical political game....
-
I'm sorry, but when it comes to the constitution and our founding fathers, I must become an EXTREMIST! This is the word of the people, that and the BoR are the SUPREME LAW of the LAND!
If ya find another writing that ya think makes it better, READ THE CONSTITUTION and the BoR! NOTHING explains it more simple than THAT!
-
For the record, bho, Biden, Pelosi et al. all took oaths to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
People lie, people have no scruples. Sometimes your oath to the Constitution forces you to act against those who also took that oath, when it becomes apparent that their oath was highly dishonest.
Like the mooslims, commies have no problem with lying to achieve their goals. To paraphrase a line from my favorite movie, bho is a 6-cylinder Davis-trained commie.
-
Shackled by your ethics your more likely to be their b!*ch than their Huckleberry. :o
My ethics are, What's good for me and mine is good and the rest can KMA.
Why do you think I plan to put the entire congress in jail and suspend the Constitution ?
So I can get things fixed so meat heads like FQ, or even a Maxine Waters or Barney Frank can't screw them up again.
Tom, this statement has been bothering me for a bit, and I need to address it. We already have a president who is getting by with ignoring it, suspending it should be an absolutely last-ditch effort.
You do not need to suspend the Constitution, you need to enforce it. You have the 10th Amendment which will allow you to make sweeping changes by EO alone. You can appoint aggressive US attorneys who will pursue the hirers of illegals, and those who pervert the laws and the Constitution, and I would suggest doing so.
And put kongress krittes in jail? WTF? What's all this rope for, huh? ;D
-
I'm in agreement with Path on this one. The last thing we want to do is suspend the Constitution. The tool will work, and we can work with it. Many that are ignoring it will be amazed someday when they learn what someone following the Constitution can do to them ... with rope ;D
Personally, I believe that if we are fighting for the Constitution to be followed we need to let it work and use it rather than suspend it.
-
They will be amazed briefly. Then that whole gravity thing will kick in. ;) Still I am not amazed, but pleased, that you and Path agree with me here. A man has to have limits. Things he will simply not allow himself to do no matter how tempting they may seem at the time, no matter how necessary they seem even. A man has always got to have a line he just won't cross. If we are willing to do anything, we stand for nothing and everything we accomplish is meaningless. I think the Constitution (speaking politically) is a good limit. Its worked for quite some time, been reliable even under extreme circumstances, and unites us as the one value that a diverse socciety can pretty much agree on. Don't ever suspend it unless you want me, and most board members, taking that extended camping trip and marching towards your house.
FQ13
-
Quick, Tom, Send me rope ... lots of rope!!!
FQ agrees with me ... This is happening way too often, and I can't take it anymore!
-
The Constitution is just like any other document drawn up by self serving politicians and contains several blatant errors that need to be adjusted.
For a few examples, Slavery was not addressed because Thomas Jefferson among others had his slaves mortgaged to the hilt and could not afford to free them, and did not have the courage to face down the other slave owning delegates.
There is no requirement for Senators and Representatives to be "of good Character" like there is for SCOTUS justices .
There is no mechanism to review the Constitutionality of a law before it is put in place, currently we must wait until a law is challenged before there is any review.
There are no provisions to either protect the BoR from amendment, those "God given, unalienable rights" survive at the whim of the amendment process. Nor is there anything to prevent the passage of stupid laws like prohibition.
There is no way except armed insurrection to force the politicians to do the right thing, such as enforcing our borders.
The compromises and cowardice contained in the Constitution have already caused one war, so don't talk to me about the perfection of the document.
Every living veteran of congress should be arrested on RICO charges, the theft of the Social security trust fund and their refusal to enforce immigration law should be enough.
Lock them up ? Need to hold them somewhere while waiting for an empty phone pole or tree limb.
FQ, don't make threats like that ("Don't ever suspend it unless you want me, and most board members, taking that extended camping trip and marching towards your house.") If the people haven't risen up in arms yet they don't have balls enough to ever do it.