RobertNashville
-
Posts
6,650 -
Joined
-
Days Won
44 -
Feedback
100%
Content Type
Forums
Events
Store
Articles
Posts posted by RobertNashville
-
-
Yeah...yeah...yeah...they put out the same "BIG TALK" at Nissan back a few years ago when they last tried to get Nissan to vote in their piece of crap union and Nissan employees rejected them 3 to 1.
The only thin the UAW is good for is protecting worthless, employees who need to be fired...for the 95% of the rest of a plant's workforce all they are is a huge drain on their pay while giving to politicians that most of the workforce probably detest. Thankfully, the good folks at VW were smart enough to see that and make the right decision.
-
2
-
-
And you think that is what is being proposed? Robert?
Yeah...when people say they want to go and kill them (legislators and media supporters) that's what I think they mean.
-
I guess the King of England thought the same thing when we were colonies. I also guess you would bow down to the King, back then.
The colonists didn't have the power of the vote nor the power of the internet for that matter. There will be no good outcome to armed resistance and there certainly is NO justification for just going and "killing them" as was being suggested. I doubt any of the founders would have be supportive of assassinating King George.
As I've said many times, I think it's tool late to stop what's going to happen and there may be an armed resistance but I've no illusions about how I think that will turn out nor will I participate in murder or assignation of political leaders.
-
1
-
-
I would call it justified self defense. If an individual or a group of individuals from the wrong end of town in tshirts and baggy pants seek to deprive me of my life, liberty or property by gun/knifepoint, I am well within my rights to seek to defend myself using whatever force I have available to me. What is the difference in the equation if those individuals that seek to deprive me of my life, liberty or property hail from the good end of town, wear suits and pay others to wield their guns for them? You say you see no good outcome from violent resistance, only a lot of dead people. I see no good outcome at all, just the same piles of dead folks. The only real difference I can find is that hopefully the piles I see will have more of the people that deserve to be in them than those who just want to be left alone.
You can call it that but it still isn't "self defense"; justified or otherwise.
You said. paraphrasing, that you think the correct and appropriate consequences for the legislators and the individual's liberty and the lickspittles in the media that support their totalitarian schemes with their propaganda is to kill them. Well, unless those legislators and/or media types show up on your doorstep with guns blazing I don't see how you can call "killing them" as being "self defense".
You don't "kill" people because they have a different political philosophy than you do...you don't kill people because they violate the Constitution...you vote them out of office...maybe you put them in jail for crimes if they've committed any; but you don't "kill them".
-
I don't think I have ever been very coy about what I think the correct and appropriate consequences are for the legislators who seek to usurp the individual's liberty and the lickspittles in the media that support their totalitarian schemes with their propaganda work.
You kill them.I think that's called murder and I think that's illegal in most jurisdictions.
I see no "good" outcome for violent resistance; just a lot of dead people.
-
Some of us have counted the costs. The question I must ask is who has really counted the costs of continuing to allow the state to do as it pleases without consequence?
While we can estimate; no one can really know the cost until they are faced with the bill. I mean no disrespect to you or anyone else here but it's one thing to say we've counted the cost...that we understand the repercussions when all we are doing is talking about it. It's quite another thing altogether to have several armed men standing at our door demanding to come it to search our home for "illegal" (i.e. "mean looking" weapons) or "illegal high-capacity magazines" or some other such nonsense. It's good to think about it before that moment in time is confronting us but can anyone know what they will do until that moment has arrived? I truly doubt they can know.
What are the consequences you think the average person can bring to the "state"? Other than voting I can't think of any that can actually make a difference and I'm not sure even that can effect change anymore because I think we are too late. What I'm expecting to happen is complete collapse of our economy which maybe...MAYBE will provide an opportunity to bring about real change for the good and a return to our founder's ideals (but with that opportunity also comes some very dangerous possibilities as well). -
16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance oflaw constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and anystatute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a lawviolating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law isin reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionalitydates from the time of it's enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed.Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute notbeen enacted.Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties,confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords noprotection, and justifies no acts performed under it.....A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannotoperate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to thefundamental law of the lend, it is superseded thereby.No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it
At first glance I can't say I disagree with anything you said above but I do think you left out something important; that being the power of the state. The power of the state to enforce a law, be it a constitutionally valid law or not, is significant and if anyone is going to chose to not follow that law it should be done with the understanding of the cost involved.
Luke 14:28: "For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?" (I suggest that is pretty good advice regardless of what one believes about the Bible or the Christian religion!)
I'm not saying that people should comply with unjust, ill-advised, unconstitutional laws but I am saying that one needs to be prepared for the consequences which could include financial loss, loss of liberty (jail), even loss of life (not to mention the repercussions for a person's family).
-
The difference being speeding tickets aren't criminal charges in most cases... carry a minor fine sub-$100 in most cases, and are so minor the vast majority of the public doesn't seem to mind....
You sort of missed the point.
Moving on...I don't know where you got the idea that speeding tickets aren't criminal charges; they most certainly are - most start out as Class C Misdemeanors and heard in general session courts in Tennessee. And a fine in hardly the only expense...Class C's carry fines starting at $50 and can include up to 30 days in jail but that doesn't include court costs or the impact of points on your DL or the likely increase in your insurance premiums that can cost many times the amount of the fine.
-
This is what happens when people simply chose to not obey the law...
-
Actually, I can't think of any law that can work or be enforced unless the vast majority of people follow it. You need look no further than speed limit laws, especially on the interstate; I'd wager that the vast majority of drivers on the interstate purposely do not follow the posted speed limit. And why should they? Most speed limits are set by politicians and bureaucrats to cover the lowest common denominator, Our interstates can safely handle speeds far in excess of 55 or 65 or 70 MPH making one "set" limit inappropriate for most people. If a state wanted to they could stop and ticket everyone and keep every cop in every village, city, county and state busy writing tickets 24/7 but not only do they have better things to do (like address important crimes) it would bring travel on the highways to a standstill which isn't very good for commerce (meaning loss of business and loss of tax revenue, etc.) so only a minor amount of enforcement is done and everyone else, unless they are really acting irresponsibly, is left alone.
I see irresponsible gun control laws (and what gun control laws aren't irresponsible) no differently than irresponsible speed limits...if politicians pass a law that people inherently know is BS and violates their natural rights as human beings a lot of people are just going to ignore the law and when they do, all the stupid politicians can do is wring their hands and say "oh dear oh dear what are we going to do?".
-
Anyone who doesn't believe in evil is not paying attention as situations like this proves beyond any doubt that evil and evil people exist.
I'm not going to sully this officer's reputation by speculating based on absolutely nothing...why would anyone jump to "jealous husband" as a basis for this officer's death??? :shrug:
RIP to this fallen officer and prayers and condolences to his family.
-
1
-
-
I'm not a proponent of the death penalty and I generally try not to celebrate anyone's death but when someone so obviously deserves it it's difficult not to be pleased and it's a shame it took this long to finally see justice done.
-
Not taking anything away from the AR platform; it's certainly served well for many, many years now but it also took a long time to get where it is! However, I would suggest that in every measurable category, the SCAR platform is simply a better platform than the AR.
The SCAR is pricy (but for good reason I think) and most of the complaints I've heard have been minor/superficial and based on personal preference rather than objective rational.
If one has the money for one I can't think of one good reason not to buy one.
-
I have no trouble believing that this is true...the government is scared and they have reason to be.
The federal government...all of it... is almost completely corrupt (with a few...very few exceptions) and they are scared that the may finally be found out to be the worthless, corrupt, morally (and financially) bankrupt people they are.
Even though this administration tries desperately to put a happy face on everything (even to the point of claiming that millions losing their jobs because of Obamacare is a "good thing") they are not stupid...they know that the economy is going down the sewer and they know that when it collapses (and I think we may well be too late to stop it) people...ALL PEOPLE are going to be mad as hell and looking for answers and looking for someone to blame and to extract justice from...and the government is scared because they know they'll likely be the ones people are looking to blame. The government's only hope is to try and blame someone else...the Jews ew...the "rich"...the "whites"...the "old"...whoever proves to be the easiest to blame or all the above.We are heading for a world of hurt that will make the great depression look like a minor market correction.
-
2
-
-
-
This sounds pretty cut and dried to me; at least based on the stories I've read. I haven't seen in any of the stories anything that would indicate that the shooter's life was ever in danger or that he had any rational reason to believe he was in danger. As such, his claim of self defense should be a non-starter.
I had hear early on that the shooter claimed that the three in the SUV had a shotgun and was or had pointed it at him but apparently that was either a lie by the shooter or he imagined something that just wasn't there.
As armed citizens we have a higher duty to avoid conflicts when we can.
-
1
-
-
I don't do much shopping out these days anywhere and even less so at WalMart...seems that every other day someone is getting shot in a WalMart parking lot and try not to go to places that are that seem unusually prone to gunfights.
-
Very, very sorry for your loss, Tanker - I lost my Mom last May (2013) and it still hurts. I guess that shouldn't be a surprise because I lost my father in 2001 and that still hurts too.
I think that when we lose someone close we have both the memories and great sadness. Eventually, however, the hurt subsides and the memories will still be there.
Take care.
-
I am fortunate to own both a 16s and a 17s and I absolutely LOVE the SCAR. Flat out dependable, easy to maintain and I think they can do anything an AR can only better (yes, I am a little biased toward the SCAR as well as to FNH).
They are a joy to shoot and I think you'll be please that you own one.
-
1
-
-
One more perspective from the WSJ -
Good article...thanks for referencing it.
I think all that needs to be said about the UN "preaching" to anyone is summed up quite well in this paragraph..."That's rich coming from the U.N., which has still not solved its own festering problems of peacekeeper sex abuse, including the rape of minors. Exposing abusers and holding them to account is a great idea. The Vatican has spent years addressing the scandal of its own past handling of such cases. But the U.N. hardly engages in the transparency it is now promoting."
The UN calling for "transparency"; most especially in the areas of child abuse is beyond ridiculous and could be the definition of hypocrisy.
Moreover, pedophilia is no more prevalent among men in the church than in any other area of society - adults using children for sexual gratification is epidemic in all classes, professions, religions, and communities. To single out the Catholic church is ridiculous - the problem and any lack of effective response to the problem is hardly just an issue for the Church; it's part of the widespread decay of society's moral fiber. -
I would love to re-try his case considering half the evidence against him wasn't allowed to be presented in court. Such as his past behavior, making videos begging the public to believe his side of the story and donate money...the list just goes on and on..which I'm not going to do!
Dave
As I recall there was a good bit of information about the sweet little thug that wasn't allowed in court either and if all the unfavorable background about Zimmerman was going to be allowed in then certainly all the details about the thug's background should have been fair game too don't you think? :shrug:
-
1
-
-
Zimm needs to disappear, change his name and get a new life.
He is certainly not helping himself (in terms of trying to have a normal life) but at the same time, it doesn't help that people (here and other places) feel the need to keep bringing him up!
Based on some of the comments in these two related threads it seems that there are some who want to re-try his case and love any opportunity to bash him. Anyway, I think we would stop "hearing" about him if people simply stopped "listening". ;)
-
1
-
-
I didn't care that he was going to have one and I really don't care that it's now been cancelled. :shrug:
-
2
-
-
Was this actually a no-knock? In the article the defense atty agreed that the entry was probably "announced", but also alleged that it wasn't clear enough so the resident couldn't know it wasn't a home invasion.
Maybe like a lot of the other cases that hit the news, the announcement was "Police!" then immediately BLAM down goes the door. If a resident happens to be close enough to the door on these entries, and would try to open the door when hearing "Police!", the resident risks serious injury when police kick the door down on him?
Announced sounds about the same as unannounced if the door goes down near simultaneous with the announcement?The only warrants I've seen being served are on TV (reality shows)...I've no idea how "real" they are but since they are being filmed I assume they are accurate for that particular warrant. Anyway, of the ones I've seen there is usually about a half-second between "POLICE" being yelled and the door being ripped off its hinges by the battering ram they use meaning virtually no time for someone inside to mentally process what is happening (which I'm sure is the intent). My impression of a true "no knock" warrant is they the break down the door first leaving even less time for anyone inside to react.
-
1
-
UAW not leaving Chattanooga and may contest the vote.
in General Chat
Posted
Yuup and I'm one of them.