Not that I'm paranoid or anything but uh.......

[Aaron]

No one changed the terminology.

 

Umm... Concealed carry is not the term used for a concealed weapons permit. In fact the link you posted says, "Concealed Carry or Carrying a Concealed Weapon in the United States" as the title of the wikipedia article, but anyone who knows about guns knows what it has ALWAYS been referred to. Oh, and just to clarify, automatic rifles do not have armor piercing rounds, rather the size of the round penetrates most kevlar armor, including the armor worn by law enforcement. Armor piercing rounds refers to rounds that are specifically designed to pierce armor, in particular lightly armored vehicles, such as APCs. At least know what you're talking about before you start spouting off "facts".

 

Aaron

Edited January 12, 2013 by Aaron

[Aetherous]

Concealed carry or CCW is referred to in both ways, and it always has been.

 

About 7.62x39, it appears that I was mistaken in calling them "armor piercing", since they only penetrate body armor. (that sounds sarcastic, but I really was mistaken...I didn't know about APC or anything)

[Immortal4life]

I don't see the problem of fundamentalist Christians as a problem of fundamentalist Christians, but a problem exasperated by Moderates who enable their agenda

http://atheistexperi...ans-enable.html

 

If you read that article,....use the underlying message, relook at most groupthink,...even the bullying on TTB.

 

"The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded upon the Christian religion." That declaration was drafted in 1796 under George Washington, unanimously ratified by the U.S. Senate, and signed into law by President John Adams on June 10, 1797. And even though that document, less than two pages long, was read aloud in Congress without dissension and well-publicized at the time, there were no complaints, and there was no public outcry, as would be media-ted today. Before the testimonium clause is this paragraph of ratification and proclamation, published in several national newspapers of the time:

 

"Now be it known, That I John Adams, President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the said Treaty do, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, accept, ratify, and confirm the same, and every clause and article thereof. And to the End that the said Treaty may be observed and performed with good Faith on the part of the United States, I have ordered the premises to be made public; And I do hereby enjoin and require all persons bearing office civil or military within the United States, and all others citizens or inhabitants thereof, faithfully to observe and fulfill the said Treaty and every clause and article thereof"

 

The people of that era knew well that Article VI of the U.S. Constitution said: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law the Land." The people of that time wrote Article VI of the Constitution. Despite that indisputable event, Christian revisionists continue to media-te their faithful towards the reactionary side or the far right of even an appearance of religious neutrality. The past sixty years have shown that they have been quite successful in forcing their theo-beliefs on the common citizenry. They cleverly removed the original national motto, E Pluribus Unum, "out of many, one," which was coined by Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams, from U.S. currency and public places. They successfully proselytize that the U.S. was founded as "One Nation under [their] God" and one nation under their religion. However, the historic truth is, according to people such Herman C. Weber, DD, an expert in religious censuses and statistics, that few early Americans were members of a Christian church. In the 1933 Yearbook of American Churches, for instance, it says that just 6.9% of U.S. citizens belonged to a church in 1800. By 1850, religious membership had risen to 15.5%. By 1900, Christians had doubled their percentage to 37%. However, not until 1942 did Christian affiliation exceed 50% of the U.S. population.

 

The United States was established through common law. On February 10, 1814, Thomas Jefferson wrote that common law "is that system of law, which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England . . . about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century. . . We may safely affirm that Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the common law."

 

Christian values are not American values. Christian values are not nature’s values. Christian values can never lead the world towards an era of peace."

VMarco

 

Why do you hate Jesus?

 

Why do you hate America?

[Apech]

Why do you hate Jesus?

 

Why do you hate America?

 

Oh please don't turn this into anther Vmarco thread.

[ralis]

Why do you hate Jesus?

 

Why do you hate America?

 

Exactly where did he say that? This thread is controversial enough without you trolling and disrupting.

[Immortal4life]

Well he's been here a long time, I'm sure getting down to the bottom of it has been on people's minds for a long time.

 

Why do you believe American Republicans are using Hitler stye propaganda, "visual aesthetics" as you mention earlier here in the thread, to brainwash people into accepting war, mass shootings, global warming and the like?

Edited January 13, 2013 by Immortal4life

[Aaron]

Concealed carry or CCW is referred to in both ways, and it always has been.

 

About 7.62x39, it appears that I was mistaken in calling them "armor piercing", since they only penetrate body armor. (that sounds sarcastic, but I really was mistaken...I didn't know about APC or anything)

 

Actually the 7.62mm is almost completely restricted to rifles made in the Eastern Bloc countries. In America and NATO countries they use .5.56mm ammo for their guns. The rifle used in almost every mass shooting that's occurred in the United States over the last year is the AR15 or an AR15 variant (which is a refined and updated model of the M16) which uses a .223 caliber round. The .223 can shoot through nearly anything on a car except the engine block. Now why would an ordinary citizen need a gun that powerful? You can't hunt with it, it would shred the animal to pieces. There is only one purpose for these guns and that's simply to kill people. That's why they are called Assault Rifle (AR in other words) rather than recreational rifles.

 

The people starting all of these conspiracy theories are anti-government nutters that simply want to support their own twisted beliefs about the government. The fact that much of your rhetoric is spouted verbatim on conservative radio shows tells me that you're getting your information second hand and you're not even aware of it. Now that makes me wonder why? If you want to find the conspiracy, it's not with the government, but those who are trying to oppose the ban on assault rifles. The NRA, militia groups, etc. It seems clear as day to me, can't see why anyone else can't see it.

 

Aaron

 

edit- Also, go into any sheriffs department in the country and you'll find that the line you get into for fingerprints for a "concealed carry" actually has a sing that says "For Concealed Weapons Permit". What's even more disturbing is that you'll find a lot of people in those lines.

Edited January 13, 2013 by Aaron

[Aaron]

Oh please don't turn this into anther Vmarco thread.

 

Well lets face it, this thread really has no place in the General Discussion section. It's not even remotely spiritual, just political rhetoric. Why it hasn't been moved to Off Topic is beyond me. I would really like a clarification in the FAQ so people would stop posting these kinds of threads here and start posting them in Off Topic.

 

Aaron

[Immortal4life]

Out of curiosity and intrigue, did you admit at one time to being autistic or asbergers? Or am I mistaken?

[Birch]

What 'is' 'spiritual' Aaron? I agree that relative to the detailled gun stuff it probably should go to OT. However, relative to discussions on questioning, perceptions (per Ralis) and open-mindedness (per some others) I think it does have some of that 'spiritual' about it. But as usual, this is a personal opinion.

[Aetherous]

Actually the 7.62mm is almost completely restricted to rifles made in the Eastern Bloc countries. In America and NATO countries they use .5.56mm ammo for their guns.

 

If you look back, I was speaking of the AK47, which uses that round...which if I remember correctly definitely pierces all body armor...

 

The rifle used in almost every mass shooting that's occurred in the United States over the last year is the AR15 or an AR15 variant (which is a refined and updated model of the M16) which uses a .223 caliber round.

 

If I'm not mistaken AR-15 and other legal American firearms also use 5.56. I used to have a cheap AK variant that used 5.56, which made it legal (I think because it's less likely to penetrate police body armor).

 

The .223 can shoot through nearly anything on a car except the engine block. Now why would an ordinary citizen need a gun that powerful? You can't hunt with it, it would shred the animal to pieces. There is only one purpose for these guns and that's simply to kill people. That's why they are called Assault Rifle (AR in other words) rather than recreational rifles.

 

Yes. The second amendment has little to do with hunting, and everything to do with self defense against tyrannical government or invading armies. It should be fine for Americans to have this weapon...especially when it's unlikely to penetrate police body armor.

 

At this point, consider if our government did become overtly tyrannical...due to their armor, weapons and technology, Americans would be pretty much defenseless even with these weapons!

 

The people starting all of these conspiracy theories are anti-government nutters that simply want to support their own twisted beliefs about the government. The fact that much of rhetoric is spouted verbatim on conservative radio shows tells me that you're getting your information second hand and you're not even aware of it. Now that makes me wonder why? If you want to find the conspiracy, it's not with the government, but those who are trying to oppose the ban on assault rifles, the NRA, militia groups, etc. It seems clear as day to me, can't see why anyone else can't see it.

 

It's not anti-government to have studied American and Western history, and to understand how short of a time we've lived in peace on this land. To understand how quickly nations can change, and wars can start.

 

Study history. It's good to know.

 

I have already told you twice that I have no connection whatsoever to Rush Limbaugh. I mainly get my news from CNN and truthdig, which are on the very opposite side of that spectrum (they are considered very liberal sources). I make up my own mind. Please do not insist on saying a fourth time that I listen to Rush or anyone like that...I'll report you for harassing and making knowingly false, inaccurate and defamatory statements about me.

 

edit- Also, go into any sheriffs department in the country and you'll find that the line you get into for fingerprints for a "concealed carry" actually has a sing that says "For Concealed Weapons Permit". What's even more disturbing is that you'll find a lot of people in those lines.

 

You are the one that's disturbed by that. All of those people aren't. Many people on this forum aren't. All of those you think are "nuts" in this country (over half of the country, at the bare minimum) aren't.

 

Having a permit means that you're even more responsible for what you do with the weapon...you don't see people with a permit going around killing everyone. I don't think that has ever happened...but maybe I'm wrong. What you do see is them stopping the criminals.

 

I'm letting you know, both ways of saying concealed carry are correct. I looked up my state's judicial, police and informational websites about it earlier today...they ALL say "concealed carry permit" or "license", and only at rare times say CCW. They did not change these websites after Sandy Hook.

Edited January 13, 2013 by turtle shell

[Aetherous]

Well lets face it, this thread really has no place in the General Discussion section. It's not even remotely spiritual, just political rhetoric. Why it hasn't been moved to Off Topic is beyond me. I would really like a clarification in the FAQ so people would stop posting these kinds of threads here and start posting them in Off Topic.

 

Aaron

 

I agree that this belongs in the off topic section.

[Aaron]

Out of curiosity and intrigue, did you admit at one time to being autistic or asbergers? Or am I mistaken?

 

Troll, troll, troll, troll.... troll........ troll........................ troll.............................................. troll.....................................................

 

You get the picture?

 

 

If you look back, I was speaking of the AK47, which uses that round...which if I remember correctly definitely pierces all body armor...

 

 

 

If I'm not mistaken AR-15 and other legal American firearms also use 5.56. I used to have a cheap AK variant that used 5.56, which made it legal (I think because it's less likely to penetrate police body armor).

 

 

 

Yes. The second amendment has little to do with hunting, and everything to do with self defense against tyrannical government or invading armies. It should be fine for Americans to have this weapon...especially when it's unlikely to penetrate police body armor.

 

At this point, consider if our government did become overtly tyrannical...due to their armor, weapons and technology, Americans would be pretty much defenseless even with these weapons!

 

 

 

It's not anti-government to have studied American and Western history, and to understand how short of a time we've lived in peace on this land. To understand how quickly nations can change, and wars can start.

 

Study history. It's good to know.

 

I have already told you twice that I have no connection whatsoever to Rush Limbaugh. I mainly get my news from CNN and truthdig, which are on the very opposite side of that spectrum (they are considered very liberal sources). I make up my own mind. Please do not insist on saying a fourth time that I listen to Rush or anyone like that...I'll report you for harassing and making knowingly false, inaccurate and defamatory statements about me.

 

 

 

You are the one that's disturbed by that. All of those people aren't. Many people on this forum aren't. All of those you think are "nuts" in this country (over half of the country, at the bare minimum) aren't.

 

Having a permit means that you're even more responsible for what you do with the weapon...you don't see people with a permit going around killing everyone. I don't think that has ever happened...but maybe I'm wrong. What you do see is them stopping the criminals.

 

I'm letting you know, both ways of saying concealed carry are correct. I looked up my state's judicial, police and informational websites about it earlier today...they ALL say "concealed carry permit" or "license", and only at rare times say CCW. They did not change these websites after Sandy Hook.

 

Alright report me for whatever you want, but I've done nothing wrong. You're just trying to bully me into silence because your information is lacking.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I had to listen to Rush Limbaugh in the truck at work a few days after the Sandy Hook tragedy. Rush was very adamant about the number of people that stopped crimes because they had a concealed weapons permit, so I'm very aware of the statistics, of course have you checked the statistics for the number of people who have a registered gun and commit murder using it?

Edited January 13, 2013 by Aaron

[Aaron]

What 'is' 'spiritual' Aaron? I agree that relative to the detailled gun stuff it probably should go to OT. However, relative to discussions on questioning, perceptions (per Ralis) and open-mindedness (per some others) I think it does have some of that 'spiritual' about it. But as usual, this is a personal opinion.

 

Well this topic is 2% spiritual and 98% off-topic. I would suggest at least 25% spiritual to qualify for this section.

 

Aaron

[Aetherous]

Aaron, simply stop saying I listen to Rush Limbaugh! You're free to speak otherwise, and I will only report you for that if you continue (for a fourth + time now).

 

And my information is not lacking at all. If you have a question about something specific, feel free to ask.

Edited January 13, 2013 by turtle shell

[Birch]

 

 

Well this topic is 2% spiritual and 98% off-topic. I would suggest at least 25% spiritual to qualify for this section.

 

Aaron

 

%?

 

 

[ralis]

 

 

It's not anti-government to have studied American and Western history, and to understand how short of a time we've lived in peace on this land. To understand how quickly nations can change, and wars can start.

 

Study history. It's good to know.

 

 

What revisionist version of history did you study? Peace on this land? What land are you referring to? Revolutionary War, wholesale slaughter of Native Americans by insane European invaders, Civil War, and myriad wars against other nations. Furthermore, the U.S. is the largest arms dealer in the world. I would not call that a peaceful nation. Moreover, this insane idea that more guns are a solution to the myriad social problems in this country is ludicrous. All social problems are not a problem of polarized politics but need to be addressed in the context of the culture.

Edited January 13, 2013 by ralis

[ralis]

Out of curiosity and intrigue, did you admit at one time to being autistic or asbergers? Or am I mistaken?

 

That is really uncalled for here!

[Aetherous]

What revisionist version of history did you study? Peace on this land? What land are you referring to?

 

Please calm down and try to understand what I'm saying...

 

I studied American and Western history at a university level...and still try to learn more about it, because it's important not to repeat some things...

 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

- George Santayana

 

Here is my point. We have been living in peace in America recently. People watch football games, walk down the street without being killed on a consistent basis, drive to the mall and shop, surf the web in their happy homes, etc. There is barely a need for citizens to have guns in this state of things. This is living in peace on this land...which is a completely temporary phenomenon. It was not this way until recently, and judging from history, it will not be this way for long.

 

You are right about the following:

 

Revolutionary War, wholesale slaughter of Native Americans by insane European invaders, Civil War, and myriad wars against other nations.

 

That's exactly some of the history I was referring to when saying that every person should be able to defend themselves. People today live almost completely disconnected from the realities and lessons of history, as well as the realities and lessons from around the world...there are places at this moment that are purely violent. We are next in line for that, because "what goes up must come down".

 

Furthermore, the U.S. is the largest arms dealer in the world. I would not call that a peaceful nation.

 

I didn't say this was a peaceful nation, and I don't agree with what our politicians do most of the time.

 

Moreover, this insane idea that more guns are a solution to the myriad social problems in this country is ludicrous. All social problems are not a problem of polarized politics but need to be addressed in the context of the culture.

 

Not a single person is saying that guns are the solution to all of our problems.

Edited January 13, 2013 by turtle shell

[idquest]

I've had a number of incidents were I was personally involved that were later reported in the media: TV, radio, newpapers. In ALL cases the facts of the incidents were grossly mixed up and/or presented inaccurately. In ALL cases that inaccurate reporting had nothing to do with any conspiracy or otherwise pushing forward any interest groups. All those inaccuracies were just journalists' mistakes due to the pressure of time/laziness.

Some people say that the reports of the tragedy don't add up. I'm inclined to blaim only the time pressure for journalists' inaccuracies. Not even laziness this time.

[chi 2012]

I've had a number of incidents were I was personally involved that were later reported in the media: TV, radio, newpapers. In ALL cases the facts of the incidents were grossly mixed up and/or presented inaccurately. In ALL cases that inaccurate reporting had nothing to do with any conspiracy or otherwise pushing forward any interest groups. All those inaccuracies were just journalists' mistakes due to the pressure of time/laziness.

Some people say that the reports of the tragedy don't add up. I'm inclined to blaim only the time pressure for journalists' inaccuracies. Not even laziness this time.

 

I know exactly what you are talking about. Anytime I've been told to watch the news or read a newspaper because somebody I know is having a story done on them - without fail - most of the stuff is inaccurate and mixed up. It's not because of a conspiracy though. Just news people trying to do their jobs under strict time pressures.

[Vmarco]

What revisionist version of history did you study? Peace on this land? What land are you referring to? Revolutionary War, wholesale slaughter of Native Americans by insane European invaders, Civil War, and myriad wars against other nations. Furthermore, the U.S. is the largest arms dealer in the world. I would not call that a peaceful nation.

 

Martin Luther King stated in 1967, "My government is the world's leading purveyor of violence." It doesn't take much research to understand what Martin was saying. From the Native American massacres to the current times, America is indeed a leading purveyor of violence.

 

Yes, the 9-11 tragedy was shocking and horrible to watch as the WTC Twin Towers were attacked by "faith based initiative" terrorists, resulting in the deaths of thousands.

 

However, was it not equally as shocking and horrible when Bush's father attacked Baghdad and the rest of Iraq, and killed 200,000 people during that "war", which includes the infamous "highway of death" in the last days of the slaughter when U.S. pilots literally shot-in-the-back retreating Iraqi civilians and soldiers.

 

Was it not Shocking and horrifying when the sanctions on Iraq, which have resulted in the death of over 1,000,000 Iraqis, including over 500,000 children, about whom former Secretary of State Madeline Allbright has stated, their deaths "are worth the cost".

 

What about the U.S. sponsored coup against democracy in Guatemala in 1954 which resulted in the deaths of over 120,000 Guatemalan peasants by U.S. installed dictatorships over the course of four decades.

 

What about the events when the U.S. overthrew the government of the Dominican Republic in 1965 and helped to murder 3,000 people. Or the shock in 1973, when the U.S. sponsored a coup in Chile against the democratic government of Salvador Allende and helped to murder another 30,000 people, including U.S. citizens.

 

How about the shock and horror in 1965 when the U.S. sponsored a coup in Indonesia that resulted in the murder of over 800,000 people, and the subsequent slaughter in 1975 of over 250,000 innocent people in East Timor by the Indonesian regime, with the direct complicity of President Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

 

What about the shock and horror of the U.S. sponsored terrorist contra war (the World Court declared the U.S. government a war criminal in

1984 for the mining of the harbors) against Nicaragua in the 1980s which resulted in the deaths of over 30,000 innocent people (or as the U.S. government used to call them before the term "collateral damage" was invented--"soft targets").

 

Anyone remember the horror inflicted by the U. S. war against the people of El Salvador in the 1980s, which resulted in the brutal deaths of over 80,000 people, or "soft targets",...or the shock and horror during the U.S. sponsored terror war against the peoples of southern Africa (especially Angola) that began in the 1970's and continues to this day, and has resulted in the deaths and mutilations of over 1,000,000.

 

What of the shock and horror as the U.S. invaded Panama over the Christmas season of 1989 and killed over 8,000 in an attempt to capture George H. Bush's CIA partner, now turned enemy, Manual Noriega.

 

What about how the Shah of Iran was installed in a U.S. sponsored brutal coup that resulted in the deaths of over 70,000 Iranians from 1952-1979.

 

What about the shock and horror of the how the U.S. has "manufactured consent" since 1948 for its support of Israel, to the exclusion of virtually any rights for the Palestinians in their native lands resulting in ever worsening day-to-day conditions for the people of Palestine. What of the hundreds of towns and villages that were literally wiped off the face of the earth in the early days of Israeli colonization,...or the horror in 1982 as over 17,000 civilians were massacred by Israeli.

No, those scenes were not repeated over and over again on the national media to inflame the American public.

 

What is shocking and horrifying how mainstream commentators refer to "Israeli settlers" in the "occupied territories" with no sense of irony as they report on who are the aggressors in the region.

 

Isn't it strange that the Israelis are always "retaliating", but the Palistinians are always commiting terrorism.

 

Of course, the largest and most shocking war crime of the second half of the 20th century was the U.S. assault on Indochina from 1954-1975, especially Vietnam, where over 4,000,000 people were bombed, napalmed, crushed, shot and individually "hands on" murdered in the "Phoenix Program" (this is where Oliver North got his start). Was anyone shocked and horrified as the U.S. attacked and bombed with impunity the nation of Libya in the 1980s, including killing the infant daughter of Khadafi.

 

Was anyone shocked and horrified as the U.S. bombed and invaded Grenada

in 1983,...or horrified by the U.S. military and CIA actions in Somalia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sudan, Brazil, Argentina, and Yugoslavia. The deaths in these actions ran into the hundreds of thousands.

 

America needs to realize that the tragedy of 9-11 was not an unsolicited attack, nor a "sucker-punch",...it was a "faith based initiative" by those who agreed with Martin Luther King, that America is the world's leading purveyor of violence.

Once Americans begin to realize this, then the healing can begin,...the healing of this Planet can begin, but not before.

 

V Oct 2001

[Aetherous]

So you guys are saying that the US government is not to be trusted...eh?

[ralis]

So you guys are saying that the US government is not to be trusted...eh?

 

As you know that is a very generalized question.

[GrandmasterP]

"My shrink said I was a paranoid schizophrenic. Well she didn't actually say that but we knew what she was thinking."

(Robert Rankin)