gun sane

I would have said Heaven, but that's not a place where the general population can go.

TGO David, would you consider running for office?....Like next year?  :clap:

After reading the story about a man getting gunned down in a New Jersey mall carjacking, I thought I'd check to see how topnotch their security is. I found this quote on their website. It turns out none of the methods of getting help was quick enough in this case.     http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2013/12/short_hills_mall_shooting.html   New Jersey is a "may issue" state that requires a damn good reason for a carry permit. I wonder if this man's wife may now move to the head of the line.

I agree with what radio host Don Imus said:  "Nelson Mandela is a leader Barack Obama should try to emulate...He could start by spending 27 years in prison."

If the truth were known:   Mag,  $22 Extra profit for putting item in box with packing peanuts, $5 Time it takes to sweep up spilled peanuts, $1 Post office or FedEx storage charge, $4 Actual cost of shipping, $2

  He's certainly freed up to run.  I'm doubling your vote.

I'll talk a bit out of school here.  New Bern does have a good assortment of firearms with reasonable enough prices, but make certain before you walk out it's what you wanted.  My buddy asked for the .40 cal Hi-Point carbine which was marked on display.  They did the paperwork and the money changed hands.  When he got home he found out it was a .45 ACP.  He returned it unfired to the store and they wouldn't give him full credit.  They ordered a .40 for him, which came in a couple of weeks.  So the owner made three profits--one on the original sale, one on the re-order and another when the first gun was re-sold.  I've heard of "Let the buyer beware," but the store should be just as careful on a gun sale.  JMO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4lGUtmzeMo

Well, it's a relief to read everyone's comments following my last.  I get a little tired of "seeing through a glass darkly" and clarification certainly helps illuminate meaningful rhetoric.  It's a mistake to confuse conservatism with strict constitutional constructionism.  Our cultures and opinions of "the way things ought to be" are much too diverse.  As a Christian, I firmly believe that this world is only temporary and I'm just passing through.  If I read my Bible right, everything physical will be on fire someday and the only thing we have that is permanent is our own soul.  It's that belief in my eternal destiny that helps me to keep my sanity in this daily flash mob of madness.  But I'm not so heavenly minded that I can't be of earthly use.  It is our vital duty to protect the blessings of liberty which we have, but as it's been said, liberty must have common limits, ie. "Your rights end where my nose begins."   When the Constitution was written, the founders knew nothing of worldwide terrorism, nuclear bombs or low flush toilets.  So they furnished us legal precepts and guidelines, not overly specific, to conduct our affairs as free individuals who appoint representatives of our interests.  They wrote phrases such as "provide for the common defense," and "promote the general welfare,"  with the understanding that there would be times when each and every citizen would be called to contribute or sacrifice for our mutual survival.  But the founders, even as we, were powerless to strictly regulate personal perspectives of how a person should live, except when that liberty trespasses upon the physical, spiritual and financial domain of another.  In those kingdoms we must be our own keepers.

I'm a bit ashamed of you guys for not noticing the cultural value of that video.  I mean, there had to be some in it somewhere.

  I gotta admit that I got lost, too, with JayC's labeling of Levin and Hannity as neocons.  I figured he may have picked it up from the pseudo-journalists at MSNBC, since the term originated with leftist ideology and they make a habit of name calling when they're fresh out of logical points to make.  I knew that Reagan was formerly a Dem, but often said, "I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me."  My apology for any misunderstanding.  

  I didn't realize that.  I don't watch MSNBC.

  I doubt we're talking about the same person.  The one who penned The Liberty Amendments is Mark R. Levin.  He is one of the champions of the Tea Party who advised Ronald Reagan's cabinet and has a popular radio program.  Sean Hannity calls Levin, "the Great One."    Perhaps you're pointing to radio host  Mark Levine, who served as a legislative counsel to Barney Frank and often appears on Fox News to make a fool of himself.  Rush Limbaugh has called Levine, "a glittering jewel of colossal ignorance."

  In the first chapter of his book, The Liberty Amendments, Mark Levin addresses this unsettling phraseology:     What Hamilton are saying is that since the state alternative is written into Article V, Congress, as a formality, must grant this convention whether they like it or not.  This and other objections to what we've been discussing here are answered quite specifically and clearly by Levin.  I join with 6.8 AR in urging you to read this book before making your mind up about this convention process.

Our "stunned" senator put Ryan Loskarn on unpaid leave of absence, a signal that his days are numbered.   http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/sen-lamar-alexander-s-chief-of-staff-put-on-leave-following-allegations-involving-child-pornography-20131211

Can't make it Saturday, but maybe Sunday.  Love me some Expo Center hot dogs!  :yum:

There's more in the Constitution for individual and states' rights than there are for the feds.  Much of the authority that's been usurped by the federal government has been done under the "peace and safety" banner, but we've given them an inch and they've taken a mile.  We've seen several new law enforcement agencies created under Homeland Security which was originally the states' responsibility.  The EPA was started because nobody wanted dirty air or water.  Now industry is hamstrung by thousands of EPA laws with climate change junk science opening a new front against profitability.   Don't forget that colonies--states if you will--came before the United States.  It was they that created the federal government, not the reverse.  That's why Article V is written the way it is.  The framers granted Congress the authority to make amendments but also extended equal authority to the states, just in case Congress got too big for its britches.  And even the congressional amendment process requires 3/4 states' approval.  The primary foundation of government is the people and the states, according to the original design.  That's what this convention business is all about.  If the federal government ignores new amendments created by the convention and ratified by the states...well, that's what the second amendment is all about.

  Good idea.  Everybody should pick a place to dig their foxhole.

What, no free mag?

  With all due respect, there's a lot more at stake than anyone's gluteus maximus.  Millions of Americans have--and are--putting a lot more than that on the line.  I'm no political analyst, but I'm pretty confident that these liberal socialists didn't get to where they are today with a defeatist attitude.  Just what country do you think is going to have pity and send us some backbone?  Who's going to do something about it if the people who have the most to lose don't step up and take some risk with the constitutional provisions we have?  If we don't have strong leaders, we damn well better go find some.  Or do we want to be known as the nation who lost every freedom they have because of free phones and a welfare check?

Judging by the pictures I've seen of the Mt. Vernon assembly, none of the delegates was wearing a wet blanket.

"We've never done it this way before" or "what'll we do if it gets out of hand" arguments will get us to the same place as expecting the Republicans to turn out for elections.  I'd rather go with whatever constitutional means we have for changing this tyrannical bastardization of our country before we're forced to have Lexington/Concord rallies.  But this quote from The Foundry article offers a ray of sunshine:     If we can't throw the rascals out, making them uncomfortable is the next best thing.  

What began as a book by Mark Levin, pointing to a provision for constitutional change in Article V, looks like it's growing some legs. It's a hope and change movement that I hope will change the last hope and change movement.   http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/09/gaining-steam-nearly-100-lawmakers-descend-on-mount-vernon-to-talk-convention-of-states/

When you wished you could gamble as good as Maverick, dress as good as Paladin, hunt BGs as good as Josh Randall and would give anything to take Miss Kitty upstairs.

When the corner grocer "put it on your bill."