Isaac, your the man!:rotflol::rotflmao::rotflol:
And Joe- I think you're a great example of what an I.Q. score really means: not much.(and AL did win that debate!) My I.Q. has also been tested in the "high-end", does that mean I'm a genious? No.(but I DO buy powerball tickets:laugh:)
I would NEVER, under ANY circumstance, surrender my weapons to ANYONE.

Joe was mainly takin issue with my assertion that violations of the Bill O' Rights constitute treason, and he cited the U.S. Constitution's extremely narrow definition to make his point. He also took issue with my statement that violations of the Bill O' Rights should rate the death penalty, as they constitute treason. Well, far as I'm concerned, when the government confiscates lawfully owned guns from the citizenry, and as We The People are the de facto masters and not the government, then the government becomes the enemy of the United States, meetin the constitutional definition of treason. Thats just common sense. The thing is, violations of the Second Amendment are on an order of magnitude far more diabolically heinous, because they strike at the "teeth and claws" of the very safeguard intended to protect us from government oppression and deprivation of our inalienable rights. And if that aint treason, I dont know what is. The ultimate penalty for treason is death, and the death penalty should be mandatory when our government violates the Second Amendment. However, in regards to violations of the rest of the Bill O' Rights, I would suggest that in some cases, life in prison or banishment/deportation to countries ruled by oppressive regimes may be more appropriate sentences.

Furthermore, just cuz "every president since Lincoln" got away with Bill O' Rights violations merely means We The People have been much too tolerant...far too lax.

I hear ya, I think the death penalty may be a little harsh-depending on the case. If anyone tried to take MY weapons, they would recieve the death penalty from ME. I am willing to die for my beliefs, and THAT is pretty serious in my book!
I also think Joes interpretation of our bill of rights is questionable:rolleyes:

Amen brother. But the death penalty is not harsh, because once you've been disarmed, you're at their mercy. And history has shown time and again that when the people are disarmed, they are subjected to the most outrageous abuses imaginable, up to and includin genocide. The first thing, the very first move a tyrannical regime makes is to disarm the citizens. So when they come for our lawfully owned guns, armed resistence is every American's patriotic duty. And the survivin violators, if there are any left, should be tried and sentenced in court for treason, sendin a strong message to the rest.

Thats always been my philosophy...I'm willin to die to hold onto my guns, the question is, are they willin to die to take em from me.

Has armed resistance against the government worked once in the last 100 years in this country (or any other first world nation)? I think it stopped being a viable option about the time the tank was invented. I really don't see my 30-06 holding off the 82nd Airborne.

I'm a huge second Amendment supporter, but I wish "stand up for your gun rights" was associated with a better crowd than it currently is. We need better examples than Randy Weaver and David Koresh. Maybe just a couple that aren't insane.

Ahh, I forgot my car picture was on here. That pic of me in the car was in 1994. That black truck was an 87 (or maybe an 89?) but I got in 93. I bought a new car last month, another Japper one, although they're all pretty much made in America now. if you want a foreign-built car you have to buy a European one, a high-end Japanese, or a GM.

http://www.shreveport.com/forums/pho...a9759eeb98.jpg

For comparison:

http://www.shreveport.com/forums/pho...a95c934781.jpg

Truly amazing the resemblance :laugh: You may have forgotten but Isaac never forgets a face :peace: Good photo Joe Joe ! You looked like the stud in your day :D

I'm with you Joe. That's definitely not a Moe cut you're sporting. It's more of a Fred Flintstone. :D

Just pulling your chain Joe. I don't agree with everything you say, but I enjoy reading your posts.

http://www.shreveport.com/forums/pho...a9759eeb98.jpg
Does this come with cutouts in the floor so you and Wilma can add some hybrid leg power? You must get killer gas mileage. And with gas approaching three clams, it's no joke!

let me beat Isaac to the punch
 

See if you can find me in this picture from high school.

It's big so I linked to it. I uploaded it full size, but the shreveport.com server scaled it down to 1800xsomething.

The guy on the far right hugging the other guy with the bandanna.
Nice new car you have there player !

Attachment 1752

There is a school o' thought that our Second Amendment rights are, for the most part, largely ceremonial these days, as resistence to an all-out onslaught by government forces would be almost certainly doomed to failure. However, when governments move to disarm their citizens, private ownership is usually first made illegal by edict, fiat, or rigged parliamentary/congressional action, followed by an "amnesty period" whereby the public is encouraged to turn over their guns peacefully in exchange for immunity from prosecution. This is in turn followed by actual door to door raids usin purchase records kept by a regulatin agency such as our own BATFE. The vehicles usually employed for this purpose are either local or state law enforcemnt, which typically do not have the heavy weaponry in use by the military. This is why here in the U.S, per the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, it is illegal for the military to act in a domestic law enforcement capacity, essentially giving We The People a snowball's chance in hell of mountin a viable program of armed resistence.

>it is illegal for the military to act in a domestic law enforcement capacity, essentially giving We The People a snowball's chance in hell of mountin a viable program of armed resistence.

That law is pretty toothless, since all it takes to sidestep it is permission from Congress or the President deciding that it is necessary. It was even more crippled last year. The bottom line is you're not winning that battle.

Even if the P.C. Act weren't impotent none of us would stand a chance against the National Guard or even the FBI, ATF, or U.S. Marshals. The federal government has access to resources that far outstrip anything the public can put together. There won't ever be another American Revolution fought with weapons.

I personally do not think there will be any "armed resistance" to the government or military in this country.(at least not in my lifetime) But, rest assured, if anyone-cops or military, kicked in MY door....I am a pretty good shot and have plenty of ammo. They would eventually kill me, but not before I took out a bunch of them. They, of course, know this about many Americans, which makes it even more unlikely. I hope it never comes to that, I love my country- but I will NOT be dis-armed.
This, however, does not group me in with the branch davidians or the Weavers(although I think the government over-reacted in BOTH instances). It does not make me a "gun nut" or an anti-establishment fool either. Joe, are you FOR gun control? And if so, to what extent?