2BRKnot2B

So, a Pope who advocated against another religion (Islam), sought to wage war on that religion, for a region of the world (political) which he did not control is injecting theology into politics, and should be discounted? You're insane! Your belief trumps everyone else? You may not be religious, but religion and politics ism and always has been, interconnected. Even our nation was founded on religious principles, and morality. You leftists on here will say you can speak freely, but someone else may not because they inject religion? Last I saw, the first amendment covered both speech and religion. Can you accept one while denying the other? Well, the same applies to the 2A. Yet, you have no trouble insisting that some limits may be placed if they are "common sense," or have some other value to "state security." Bunch of BS.

Yep, didn't think you'd understand it.

Firstly, the 2A isn't about hunting. It is about "arms" and the 'bear'ing of them by the individual. If NRA gets involved in a bow issue, they have every right. The bow is an 'arm'ament. So is a sword, knife, blackjack, nunchuck, etc. The problem appears to be in the reasons behind the 2A which were settled under Heller (collective right v. individual right, self defense v. collective military defense). Further, that little segment where it says "...shall not be infringed," and what that entails. Look up infringe, encroach, hinder, violate, limit, etc. What laws are permissible under such a definition? Well, absolutely none! But we have people in the pro-2A groups, and those who won't join those groups because they disagree with that constitutional provision's ("shall not be infringed") concept.They feel (using heart v. brain) that there must some provisions to limit the 2A for people whom they feel are not worthy. These same individuals will often fight for the right, vociferously at times, vocally, to stop any limits on free speech. Surely, you have the right to speak out on whether there should be limits, but to accept the limits is to accept the delusion that your right to speak is any less able to be limited than my right to 'keep and bear' any armament which is the "birthright of the American citizen." That same quote includes that "every arm of the everyday soldier" is that "birthright." So, should I be able to own grenades, LAWS, RPG's, Stinger anti-aircraft, full auto rifle(s), pistols, and carry (bear) them in any manner I so presume to do so, whether open, or concealed? How does my carry, as long as I am not in outright rebellion, or using them criminally, of offense to you? Does it make you wish to carry to prevent me from doing anything so criminal? Isn't that exactly what our 2A was meant to provide? So, any who would say that the insane, mentally deranged, etc. should not be allowed to carry, presumes that they know who is, or may become, insane, or mentally disturbed at any time. That presumption is based on what? Anything logical? Anything personal? If personal, are you thinking with your heart, or your head? If you think with your heart, could you not be seen as insane by some, and if with your head, then insane by those who think with their heart? The 2A was set up so that the individual "right to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed." It doesn't disallow the insane, or the criminal. What it says is that "all" individuals have the right, that said right can only be, according to some founders, be removed, only if these be in direct opposition (shooting war with) the government. The question then becomes, what government since some of our founders thought that any devolving away from the constitution constituted a government which was not of the constitution, and thus usurping that document. Thus, the reason for the 2A, a means to return the gov't to its constitutional limits, and to institute a new one if any number of individuals could rightly put such in place.

It depends on what county you live in. Try getting a CCW in Saratoga County when saying you want it for personal protection carry. They'll take your money, but if you don't check hunting, and target shooting, forget it. Of course, the legal aspect of this is a no brainer. You simply always, either going hunting, or going to the range. Remember, you don't have to go to a certified range. The range could be a nearby field at which you are going to shoot. You're carrying at work to shoot someplace afterward. You're going hunting, but it's after dark? Well, you were going to, but things at work got out of hand, and you couldn't get out in time. Weekend at the mall, you wrre going shooting afterward. Dark out already? You were at the place, but didn't get a chance to shoot, or leave a little powder in the barrel so you can say you were already shooting and are on your way home. It's a mere technicality meant to make the judge sound reasonable in issuing your permit to you. Some don;t want you carrying all the time, and think self defense is BS. Cops are there for your protection. Unfortunately, they are almost always minutes away when your attacker is right in front of you.

Just the type of answer I would expect from you patriots. I am as guilty as anyone else living in this country for the plight of these people. I however don't tout all of America's great virtues without acknowledging this very sad fact in our nations past. Holding ones freedoms to such a degree is nothing short of hypocrisy if we don't give a rats ass about the freedoms we took away from others to get it. Yep, so typical. Lip service. I admit it, but ain't willing to give up what I have to support my belief, but I'll do whatever I can to tax you to take what you have away to give to these others who deserve your wealth, but not mine. Bunch of leftist jerks. These troll types are on every right thinking group.

That's what I thought.

Shhhhhh!!! Bpb, your rattling the Republican tree. Yep, it was Pataki, and one of his minions seeking (pork) money for NYC schools, or, so I've heard. Pulled a fast one on the NY gun owners by putting the bill to the floor thru a committee which they didn't usually go thru, but thru a Senator who Pataki had in his back pocket.

All I know is "common sense" meant a whole different thing than it does today. Of course, that's "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America" (yes, it's a free download of the book if you want to look it up on the internet).

I think I explained why I believed Barry Soetoro isn't, and can't be, our president. That people still consider him such is why he remains in office. He has spent trillions of dollars, indebted us for his socialist philosophy, to our enemies, no less. The next step is slavery as the congress refuse to make needed cuts. if they do make the cuts, they can only cut where most of the money goes. The problem is we have a budget submitted & proposed that is $1T more than the 2008 "W" budget. That to promote the policies which Barry wanted for "shovel ready jobs." We find out now there were no "shovel ready jobs." Want to keep spending like water? I think there ar a lot of leftists who are gun owners, voted for Barry, think he's the best thing since liverwurst, can't understand the Democrats (especially in NY) push to deny us the rtkaba, and are keeping their heads in the sand. Fine, if you want to argue semantics, but truth is, the encroachments are ongoing, and current.

When you start thinking with your head, not your heart get back to me. What greater good to society restricts weapons to law abiding people while allowing them to continue unabated in the hands of thugs & criminals. YOU CANNOT LEGISLATE UTOPIA! This is, after all what you want, right? There is no such thing as a law which will prevent people from getting murdered, else, Cain would never have killed Abel. Your belief system is simply scrwed up What you believe, or want to believe, is that people are all the same, and that some "magic bullet" (pardon the intended pun) is going to make them all fine & dandy. Well, the world just doesn't work that way. There are evil people who will do evil things. If we want to stop them, the only way is thru force of arms. That you don;t wish to ever have to use one that way is fine with me, but don't seek to legislate that I may not, either. That is the totalitarian mindset that gets millions murdered by thei government. If you want to use guns for sporting purposes, move to England, or some other European country.

This is not to say that calls shouldn't be made, but that every year the assembly members propose anti-gun bills which ar passed, but never make it thru a committee in the senate. I wold concentate my calls in the senate, not the Assembly, but it's always nice to tie up the lines of anti-gun assembly people like Eric Adams, and Amy Paulin. Peruse our scope egroup [email protected], find us on facebook, or go to our website for more info.

Shhhhhh! They's too busy sleeping.

Actual figures for use of so-called (by leftists in Brady campaign, AGV, DemoncRATicks--evil, blood sucking vermin, etc.) AW Ban criminal use prior to the federal law was less than a few tenths of 1%. What drove the law was shows like "Miami Vice," and movies like Mel Gibson's cop series, "Lethal Weapon."

Actually, what's unAmerican, what's traitorous is trying to change the constitution by law rather than by amendment. That's treasonous, and wrong. And, unpatriotic. So yes, I say what it is, and if you don't like that, big bippy. As to the guy wearing a confederate flag, he has a right to speak his mind in whatever fashion he wishes here in America. if you have a problem with that, I hear Germany has laws against such freedom. You might consider moving.

I see death coming to you and me one day also. You can be sure we won't escape it. Should I spend every minute of the day worrying about it? I sure won't. Death is inevitable.. gun ownershiprights and hunting rightsdon't have to be.. thats the difference Only way they won;t be if we have dolt infil'traitor's who don't understand that these are rights, and fight to keep them. You want to pack it in, because you don't believe they should be, you go right ahead. I'm gonna keep on fighting for my progeny to keep them, and myself, free.

Actually a tank might be nice. I would make sure I drove it by the houses of some of the members here just to freak them out a bit. They would think that the boogeymen have finally arrived! LOL So, you're one of the tyrants. Also, what I call an infil'traitor'.

Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... the unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. Founder & Patriot Tenche Coxe According to his definition, that means automatic weapons (the real Assault rifle), LAWS (Light Anti-Tank Weapons Systems), RPG's, grenades, even hand held Stinger missiles. These are weapons our current military man might carry and use.

So who is making this concerted effort? PETA? The humane society? Sorry to tell you, but their concerted efforts have not put more than a mere scratch on hunting in this country. As far as I know every damned state in the union has a hunting season of one form or another. Even the most liberal states have never put an outright ban on hunting into effect. Yeah, maybe a special hunt has been stopped somewhere along the way, but as I've said this is no more than a mere scratch on hunting opportunities in this country. Hunting brings in the bulk of revenue for wildlife and environmental management to states and it will be a cold day in hell before the states just throw away such a source of revenue. Hunting ain't going anywhere anytime soon!! Sorry to have to say it but some of you guys are downright paranoid. You think the boogeymen are hiding in the bushes in your backyards and are out to get for everything that you do. This is pretty sad if you ask me. One should go about living life and not constantly be obsessed with what the other guy may have up his sleeve. Ask NJ bear hunters about PETA, etc., stopping the hunts there. You are a piece of work, and that's putting it mildly. The left attacks in all areas. Their motto: "The end justifies the means seems part of your platform/persona, too.

Yeah, we have all seen films of the old Soviet Union. You forget that the people living in the old Soviet Union ditched that government a good while ago. Only people living in LaLa land think that this country now wants to go down that same route. If you don't like Barry, get someone to run who can beat him in the next election. Quite simple really. Complaining about him won't solve much. Yep, righty doesn't like leftist policy, and he's automatically a racist. What a farce, and joke you on the left are. Same old, same old. You ned to come up with a new strategy because this one's getting old.

Nothing since? You're one of those disarmed (no wits) idiots aren't you. What was LAX shortly after 9/11? What was Ft Hood? What were the Islamists with bombs, and guns in their trunk headed fro Ft Ord? What of the bomber in NYC's Times Sq.? What you live in a box, and never get to watch TV read a newspaper, or surf the 'net (Give me a break)?And that's but a few of those arrested, or charged who didn't carry out their attacks.Braindead.

Hunting forum with a bunch of unAmericans on it. Imagine. If someone doesn't fit into your mold, they're undesirables. How long before undesirables are sent to gas chambers, or reeducation, uh, I mean, internment camps. All of you are laughable, You have no concept f where this country is headed. Long as you can pay for a license to hunt something in a state where their is no right to hunt (like several other U.S. states have in their constitutions), and own weapons, which can be, at any time, at the whim of Andy Cuomo, pulled from your cold dead hands, one at a time by his trooper thugs, you're all set. Until that day when they are knocking at your door. If it isn't Andy & his boys, given Barry's propensities, it could be foreign troops at the behest of the UN.

You guys really think that armed citizens could hold off government forces with pistols, rifles and shotguns only?? I think not. Maybe 230 years ago the armed citizens with muzzleloading weapons had a chance against government forces, but these days things are a bit different. That is why what was written 230 years ago doesn't exactly hold water in the same way today. As I have mentioned before the same people who wrote the 2nd amendment also were slave owners and had NO problem with the concept of slavery. Of course today things are also a bit different. If everything they wrote and believed in back then is so perfect, how could they be so right with one idea and so wrong with the other?? My hunch is that things back then don't exactly relate to things today with both of these issues. I know most here can't accept this, but this is just a very simple example. Their ideas back then were in general good and a foundation for what was to come afterwards. They had no crystal ball to look into what the world would be like in 200 plus years. If they did, maybe they would have had a change of heart as to some of the ideas they had back then. Seems to me we just saw a bunch of MuSlim zealots do it with nothing more than their bare hands. I think we could do it a bit better. Our problem is a "standing army" which many of our founders warned against. As to your contentions, I think these were mentioned by some of the founders. They lived well into the 1800's, and most knew of the newer modernities. What they related was that tho' modernity happened, the general condition of the individual is not affected by it. One will still endure the lash if they feel the consequence to do otherwise is the freedom to do what they will. In other words, many people would prefer the lash to not having some bailouts of banks, or car companies, not being secure in their homes, having roaming gangs able to take it t a whim, but then again, I just descried out current gov't. Uh oh! One still wishes to be free as possible, regardless of the consequences, but some would give up some freedom for some safety, or assurances in future. Look where that got us. A Ponzi scheme of gigantic proportions called Social (in)Security (SinS). The bank of the federal gov't is broke unless they print more money or tax everyone into poverty. Of course, then all will be in the welfare teat, and isn't that what Barry HuJinTau and his cronies wish? Ever see films of the Soviet Union? Fat old ladies out shoveling snow off RR tracks, sidewalks, and the like. They didn't work, they didn't get a paycheck. Everyone worked where & when the gov't told them. You didn't have the choice between being an engineer, or a busboy, a traitorous troll, or a ditch digger. The gov't made the decision. That's what will happen if Barry HuJinTau Obama's policies are allowed to continue in this country.

LOL. I paused on the same part of the post---first thing that came to me was---boot int he A$$ and GTF out of the house...Either that or he would be performing maid duties and polishing my car every day Who said he isn't being 'made to be maid'? LOL! He does help out to some extent, but it doesn't eat a job, and his own family, especially when he knows how much his mother wants to become a grandma, preferably not with both of them living under out roof, because that won't be tolerated. Son, your mother and I are becoming nudist's, leave your keys by the door and see you at Thanksgiving. lol

Not a birther. I don't know where he was born, and it has no bearing. I a a constitutionalist, sir. I believe in original intent. If you have a problem with that, then see Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and George Washington. Washington would likely shoot you between the eyes as a traitor for allowing someone who is unconstitutionally elected become president, without so much as a peep.

So, who is willing to help fight the law? Who is willing to pony up the cost of a coupleboxes of shotgun shells to join SCOPE? How about a donation to the Legal Fund for SCOPE, or our PAC? You have seen how registration (PP Holder system) can be used to undo privacy.