Military Camp

Do you have a "Biden approved" carry?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jar

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 26, 2008
    385
    46
    The Valley
    Jar, put your lid back on, your brains are running out. Why will fewer guns in the hands of potential victims lessen crime? It won't, crime will lessen when justice has the potential to be immediate, not 30 years in the future.
    I never said fewer guns in the hands of potential victims would lessen crimes. And I don't believe that more guns in the hands of potential victims will lessen crime either.
    Lynx Defense
     

    Sam7sf

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Apr 13, 2018
    12,466
    96
    Texas
    More guns will stop criminals. It’s not rocket science and we should never entertain talking about the ethics of should or shouldn’t we care about certain lives.

    Democrats today are people who would put you in jail for stopping a home invasion but give you a hero’s welcome for hiding and waiting for police as a family is tortured or killed.

    Joe Biden is scum.
     

    jar

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 26, 2008
    385
    46
    The Valley
    Fence sitter mentality, I hope it is not barbed.
    Not at all. Simply a realist.

    We need to address root causes but quite frankly both those opposing gun limitations and those supporting gun limitations are simply an attempt to avoid address those root causes.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    I never said fewer guns in the hands of potential victims would lessen crimes. And I don't believe that more guns in the hands of potential victims will lessen crime either.

    Maybe it doesn't lessen crime of potential victims, and have no proof one way or the other that proves or disproves your statement. But I will say that more people being armed, increases the odds of more people having a better chance of surviving an armed or violent encounter with violent criminals.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    Not at all. Simply a realist.

    We need to address root causes but quite frankly both those opposing gun limitations and those supporting gun limitations are simply an attempt to avoid address those root causes.

    Here's a simple question then.

    Where in the 2nd Amendment does it address gun limitations?
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    "Shall not be infringed" was pretty clear language that addresses limitations, but politicians and judges seem to be blind to those four words.

    You know what I find so ironic, is that at a very young age, my nieces very well understood this when supposedly grown adults couldn't grasp the concept of those four words.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    The 2nd Amendment includes well regulated.

    But none of the rights outlined in our Constitution are absolute.

    We, the citizens are the militia. There was not standing army at the time the 2nd Amendment was written.

    Ummm....okay. Then show me where the word absolute shows up anywhere in the 2nd Amendment.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    A person needs to put the 2nd Amendment into the context of those minds of those that wrote the 2nd Amendment, and the definitions as they intended of that time period.


    Doing so, one becomes very aware, (or at least they should.) of what the intentions and thoughts were of those men that wrote the 2nd Amendment.
     

    2ManyGuns

    Revolver's, get one, shoot the snot out of it!
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 31, 2010
    2,666
    96
    Somewhere in Texas!
    Thank you Sasquatch, Jar, before inserting foot, please try to understand what the meanings of the words were when the document was written. It is the same as trying to judge what other peoples of other times morals were versus today's morals. You cannot condemn those of the past by the standards of today.
     

    Fishkiller

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Jul 22, 2019
    4,626
    96
    Frederickburg
    Well as far as I can tell the Harris/Biden administration will try to restrict ownership of those nasty black rifles and "high" capacity magazines. Of course those writing these laws will have no comprehension of what they are trying to stop other than total ban on ownership. As it stands now the only thing standing in the way is for one of two Georgia Senators to be republican, and not a RINO like a few of the folks on this forum.
     

    jar

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 26, 2008
    385
    46
    The Valley
    We, the citizens are the militia. There was not standing army at the time the 2nd Amendment was written.

    Ummm....okay. Then show me where the word absolute shows up anywhere in the 2nd Amendment.
    LOL

    It does not nor did I say that it did.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    LOL

    It does not nor did I say that it did.

    LOL? So you think the 2nd Amendment is a joking matter?

    In all fairness, you did insert the word "absolute" into the discussion in terms of rights.

    I believe in the absolute right to self defense against tyranny, whether that it comes from a person, or a government.
     

    Sam7sf

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Apr 13, 2018
    12,466
    96
    Texas
    Gun control is a vicious cycle designed to infringe on your freedom. Even if all they want to do is ban mags. Allow me to explain some points:

    Banning none nfa items leads to infringement. Don’t think so? Think a confiscation plan will include compensation for your loss? Not at all. So because you do the right thing and don’t give up your property you’re reward in a overreaching Democrat country is stripping you of your buying abilities. Crystal clear infringement.

    The authors of the second amendment. Listen and I tread carefully here per forum rules but our founding fathers used some pretty clear words. It also helps to understand and read articles that give us an insight into what it meant to them. It meant we have the right to be the militia to remain free and our right to bear arms to do so can’t be infringed. Our founding fathers made it clear our freedom wasn’t granted by government but granted by our creator. If my next statement gets me in hot water with the mods I apologize and understand my post can be deleted. I listened to a good sermon last time I attended church. Democrats have been encouraging and educating people to think they need government permission and who they answer to and give thanks to is government. Our country needs to return to realizing who we the people really answer to.
     

    Axxe55

    Retiretgtshit stirrer
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 15, 2019
    47,022
    96
    Lost in East Texas Elhart Texas
    I have huge concerns with a mandatory "buy-back" program of an individuals personal property.

    First, the largest one of them all, is that IMO, when it says they will be mandatory, that not only infringes upon the 2nd Amendment rights of the person, but does in essence infringe upon the 4th Amendment as well.

    Second concern, is adequate compensation for your property that they have determined they are "buying" back from a mandatory requirement from an illegal law they have legislated. They will set the value of your property and what amount you will be compensated during the mandatory "buy-back" once they decide to institute these programs. Not you. I can just imagine anyone who did decide to participate in this program, will be paid pennies on the dollar in terms of actual value of your property.

    Third concern, is where will the funds come from for the compensation of your "seized" and devalued firearms? Right out of the coffers of the government. Think Biden, or Harris, or any other politician supporting a mandatory gun buy-back program is going to dig deep into their own pockets to meagerly compensate you for your property? Nope! They are going to go right into the money you paid in taxes to pay you, for your own property.

    Just some points I think people should ponder on about our gun rights and our guns.
     

    Sasquatch

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 20, 2020
    6,590
    96
    Magnolia
    But we are living today and so apply reasoning that is relevant today.

    The relevant reasoning today is the same as it was when the document was drafted - the intent doesn't change because the people today do. Literally the only part of the Bill of Rights to include the four words "shall not be infringed" is the part that gets shit on and ignored the most. The right to defend yourself, the right to bear arms is a universal right and any restriction to it is an affront to liberty and the security of the individual.

    Laws only apply to those who obey them. They mean nothing to those who ignore or break them. They do nothing but inhibit the individual's liberty and give power to the ruling class. Words on paper do not make anyone safer, never have, never will. The social agreement most of us live under - that being that we will adhere to he laws passed by those elected to represent the people - is a tenuous agreement. When those who seek power and control over the masses go too far, the people must have the ability to remove them. The founders recognized this - and to ensure that concept was kept alive they put some words on paper. Its not those words that make us safer, or freer, but the concept behind them.

    Those that wish to abuse and control us want to destroy the concept, to instill obedience and the belief that government is the savior, government is the solution, the provider. Individuals mean nothing. Freedom means nothing. Freedom means danger, and government can relieve danger - just give up your guns. You don't need a gun in public - we have the police. You don't need a gun - government will never abuse you. We'll never fend off foreign invaders. You can still have your single shots and your pump actions and your .22's for "sporting purposes" - just give us those nasty self loaders, give us those pistols. Be a good subject.
     
    Top Bottom