Page 16 of 92 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 914

Thread: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

  1. #151
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Sure he can investigate all he wants in his own jurisdiction. The moment he steps out of that he is in the wrong.


    j-mac
    He should have been indicted by the prosecutors of those states for conspiring to violate federal and state gun laws.

  2. #152
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Funny I thought it highlighted the sorry state of gun control in this country, especially at "Gun Shows". That couldn't be the REAL reason you object, could it? Surely you don't approve of the behavior of those gun sellers so why would you object to any means that may correct the problem? Stings are the brread and butter of law enforcement nationwide, would you want them outlawed?

    I guess you couldn't figure out that the mayor's butt boys were not acting in a legal law enforcement fashion and they should be bubba's wives in some prison now

  3. #153
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    I don't think there is anyone including responsible firearms owners including myself that would say that regulation on guns is all together a bad thing as a blanket statement like you are trying to portray here Joe. But, there is such a thing as 'over regulation' to the point of infringement also. So let's take a look at the actual sentence in question shall we? And remember punctuation matters.
    That is not what I'm trying to say. I merely want accpetance of the premise that regulation is allowed. Once that is accepted, the argument is then where is the line. I don't care to ban all guns. Nor do I believe that will ever, ever happen, and thus think the hand wringing is kind of silly, and a tad dishonest. But just a tad.

    So, stop with they will take all or guns, and go with this regulation makes sense, but this one is too far. It changes the tenor of the debate, and loses some of the scare tactics.

    Does this make sense to you?

    If you will notice the comma's in this sentence, notating a break in the thought for a purpose.

    First part: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" Meaning that the founders saw the need for an actual standing army, regulated, and uniform as being necessary to remaining free.

    Second part: "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" Denoting also that the people had the right to own, and on occasion as needed bear their own firearms.

    Lastly: "shall not be infringed."

    Notice the wording here, it isn't vague at all. Shall not is pretty clear. So while I can agree that some regulation of gun ownership is absolutely necessary in today's society, such as in the case of felon's, registration, and so forth. I do not get your particular misunderstanding of such a clear, and easy amendment of our constitution.

    j-mac
    Yes, the first part sets up the context, the standing army. So factually, self protect isn't the context. Nor is even hunting really. All of it set in the context of the need for a standing army, citizen milita. Does that aplly at all today?

    This also sets up a bit of a problem for the courts, as some might read it in that context as we can have tanks and rocket launchers, or surface to air missles. Admittedly, only the extremely radical tend to go this far. but the courts have to consider context and intent and how that works today. hence, they can be regulated, but no nukes.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #154
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    It was absolutely a stunt by Bloomberg, and a dishonest one to boot. And I can't speak for the AZ AG, or Gov. but if I were them, I'd file suit against the city of NY, and Bloomberg for what ever they can throw at them, and cost them a bundle, then I would call Dumb ass Bloomberg, and tell him if he EVER tries to pull this again, and they are caught, that his henchmen will be arrested on the spot and charged to the fullest extent of the law.


    j-mac
    See we can agree. I have no problem with the AZ ag bitch slapping him, as long as they were not in the loop. No problem.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #155
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    That is not what I'm trying to say. I merely want accpetance of the premise that regulation is allowed. Once that is accepted, the argument is then where is the line.

    The line in my mind is where ever the citizens of the particular communities want for, and this is important, THEIR OWN communities. For instance, if NYC, or Chicago want's to ban the ownership of guns within their cities, then they may have a problem with federal suits, but they can try and do so. What they can NOT be allowed to do, is go into other cities, and communities and try and tell them what to do regarding their own laws, and practices.

    I don't care to ban all guns.
    What guns are acceptable to you for me to own? And why should that be up to you?

    Nor do I believe that will ever, ever happen, and thus think the hand wringing is kind of silly, and a tad dishonest. But just a tad.
    Oh, I don't think it is silly, or dishonest. See, we know that agendas that are rarely accepted well by the populace when imposed in large sweeping chunks, incrementalism has been the practice to slowly chip away at original intent for 100 years plus.

    So, stop with they will take all or guns, and go with this regulation makes sense, but this one is too far. It changes the tenor of the debate, and loses some of the scare tactics.

    Does this make sense to you?
    I see what you are saying, but there is very little trust left now to believe that the intent is what the outcome in the future would show.

    Yes, the first part sets up the context, the standing army. So factually, self protect isn't the context. Nor is even hunting really. All of it set in the context of the need for a standing army, citizen milita. Does that aplly at all today?
    Yes, yes it does, and I think you have the context wrong here. The first part seperated by a comma, does indeed talk of a standing army, however after that it talks of every citizen of this country individually. And as long as 'We the People' retain the right to determine, and overthrow an tyrannical government if, and when they get too far out of control, then the amendment MUST be read as such. Otherwise, you stray from the right to gun ownership, to exactly what is feared.

    This also sets up a bit of a problem for the courts, as some might read it in that context as we can have tanks and rocket launchers, or surface to air missles. Admittedly, only the extremely radical tend to go this far. but the courts have to consider context and intent and how that works today. hence, they can be regulated, but no nukes.
    Really?, I want to see the politican that runs a campaign on the "own a tank, or surface to air missle" platform....heh, heh...

    But, see, this is where I think in this creeping incrementalism thing, that we have strayed. Show me in Article 3 where the court is to "interpret" the Constitution?

    Also, please document any "extreme radical" in this country that has been caught with a tank, or SAM, I would think that would be news. So, the "silliness" stems on both sides eh?


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  6. #156
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    I guess you couldn't figure out that the mayor's butt boys were not acting in a legal law enforcement fashion and they should be bubba's wives in some prison now
    If I were the AG of Arizona I'd make them absolutely **** their pants. 1) Lawsuits against NYC, NYPD firearms division, and individually against all perpetrators. 2) File jurisdictional grievance 3) File state and federal charges for fraud, possession of false identification in a firearms transaction, and interstate transfer of illegally obtained weapons 4) File extradition orders on all perps.

    I would see all suits and charges through personally. Then again I can be a very vengeful **** when I want to be personally.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  7. #157
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    It would not be in the amendment if it had not meaning (I do think it is poorly worded).

    It does have meaning.Meaning that the militia itself is well regulated not the peoples right to keep and bear arms.

    Now, it is true people disagree on the meaning. I accept that. But the fact remains, they are regulated, and the courts have upheld the idea of regulating.
    The only people who disagree on the meaning are anti-2nd amendment loons seeking to squash second amendment rights.The fact is a well regulated militia and the peoples right to keep and bear arms are two separate rights.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  8. #158
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    If I were the AG of Arizona I'd make them absolutely **** their pants. 1) Lawsuits against NYC, NYPD firearms division, and individually against all perpetrators. 2) File jurisdictional grievance 3) File state and federal charges for fraud, possession of false identification in a firearms transaction, and interstate transfer of illegally obtained weapons 4) File extradition orders on all perps.

    I would see all suits and charges through personally. Then again I can be a very vengeful **** when I want to be personally.
    That's what should happen.That would make New York city's mayor stick to squashing 2nd amendment rights in his own city.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  9. #159
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    That's what should happen.That would make New York city's mayor stick to squashing 2nd amendment rights in his own city.
    The mayor ought to be doing some time in Arizona or Ohio prisons

  10. #160
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    That's what should happen.That would make New York city's mayor stick to squashing 2nd amendment rights in his own city.
    My ultimate goal would be to make the charges stick so he can be removed and thus can't **** anyone up anymore.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

Page 16 of 92 FirstFirst ... 614151617182666 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •