Obama has won

an armed society is not a police society JW.. and I saw your smilie face

agree with DA it is the same down here to his south, many are "well" armed in fact and sadly enough the survivalist creed still lives down here in the back hills. it may be quite unbelieveable to some but I have friends that depend on their hunting in the fall and winter months to keep their own families fed during the lean times when the man is not able to work. Remove the guns from that homeowners hands ? ....... try it and see what happens.

and yes DAVE agree with your last sentance ~

 

A civilian military force, independent of the military, just as big and Just as well funded? In fact for the first few years it would have to be funded at least three-four times that of the actual military. Let us remember that most of the military budget is in Maintaining what we already have. Creating another 2 million strong force from scratch is going to take quite a bit of money. Buying new weapons, armor, training, etc. The military now is having some difficulty in maintaining it's numbers as current (well only some branches, from what I hear the Navy and Air force are having no such difficulties), so is he going to draft unwilling citizens into this force? How is this force to be used? Natural Disasters, such as the National Guard already does? or will they be taking the place of Police Officers? He needs to elaborate on this greatly. The thought alone is just way to scary.

 

When the US Constitution was written, the population of the country was generally split into two camps; one felt that the Constitution, as written, was necessary to give the Federal government the power it needed to successfully govern the country as a country rather than a loose confederation of individual states. The other camp was fearful that the Constitution gave far too much power to the Federal government and that it would lead to a national government of dictatorship. The issues were widely and vehemently debated in the press and through several public debate forums. The record of these debates were collected and still exist in "The Federalist Papers".

But neither side could convince the other of the validity of their arguments. Since the Constitution could not take effect until the states had ratified it, and there were too many people skeptical of the protections for civil liberties in the Constitution for all the states to agree to it. A compromise was finally offered by those who favored adoption of the new Constitution. They drew up a list of ten amendments that guaranteed the new Federal government could not be used to destroy our civil liberties. These ten amendments were collectively called the Bill of Rights and were the price the pro-Federalists were willing to pay to get the majority of the American public to consent to be governed by the Constitution.

The First Amendment guaranteed freedom of the press, of speech, and of religion. The Second Amendment guaranteed that the government could not make any laws infringing on the right of the People to keep and bear arms. This was important because the people could form an armed militia to oppose the government if it ever ignored the Bill of Rights. In other words the Second Amendment is the "teeth" in the guarantees of our civil rights. Additional Amendments guaranteed other civil rights, some more important that others. With these important and pre-existing rights spelled out and guaranteed in writing as part of the Constitution, most people dropped their opposition to the Constitution being adopted and the Federal government, more or less as we know it today, was created.

It is widely held in this country that the Bill of Rights is the basis of our freedoms, although the rights enumerated therein certainly existed before the Constitution was written. Since the very foundation of American government is the "consent of the governed", and the Bill of Rights was what that consent was based on, the first ten amendments cannot be changed or repealed without calling into question the legitimacy of the entire system.

That is why so many Americans feel strongly about the Second Amendment and jealously guard against any indication that the government is attempting to weaken it. It is, quite simply, the linchpin of our freedom.

 

Yes, it calls to mind the independent organizations of "civilians" that the Nazis created in the 1920's and 1930's. It is, as far as I'm concerned, certainly not authorized by the Constitution.

So now all the Left-leaning Europeans can call me paranoid and defensive, once more.

 

and according to many from several years ago the constitution is an old faded document which needs to be updated.........good grief ! guess we wait for the future c in c to pose his thoughts ......... on many things

 

Doesn't bother me, simply pointing out that you don't have to bark at everyone who walks past your drive. I'm not necessarily talking about the second amendment, it's pretty common (MacDonalds maybe?).

Try taking it easy, it can't be good for your blood pressure. I'm frankly amazed that you care what someone so far away from the US thinks about your laws, does it really matter?

 

Excellant, I never shoot a gun before but iv'e always wanted too though.
What i meant by obama changing the gun laws is that to stop gangs and crims buying and owning guns. that will help America alot.
I think an owner with a licence in hunting orginations or for protection of them selfs and home should not be restricted from there Pistols AND Riffels.

 

Pardon my European ignorance, but how is that supposed to work?

 

I think it's based on a fear that someone from Washington is going to turn up to take your freedom. I'd advise doing what we do and hide it under the bed

 

What do you care about my blood pressure? And save your "advice" for someone who thinks you're qualified to give it.

I don't "bark" at everyone, and certainly feel entitled to express my opinion on why McDonald's thrives in Australia. I personally don't care if you like my responses or not. Be amazed all you want about what I think, but I'll continue to respond to comments on which I hold an opinion. If you don't like that, tough, as I said earlier, deal with it.

 

Yeah, look where that's gotten you. LOL!

 

Firefoxy,

If Obama really wanted to keep criminals and gangs from getting guns, all he has to do is see to it that existing regulations are strictly enforced; he doesn't need to enact a single new gun control law. On the contrary, Obama's statements prior to his candidacy, and his voting record in the Senate and in Illinois, makes it clear he isn't concerned about crime. He is bent on gutting the Second Amendment and eliminating, as far as possible, civilian gun ownership in this country.

I agree with your sentiments about firearms ownership by law-abiding citizens, but few, if any, gun control initiatives in the last 30 years have been about reducing criminal's access to guns. Most have been about harassing legal gun owners, and making gun ownership so needlessly burdensome that few citizens will want to bother. In short, anti-gun advocates have discovered that banning guns outright will not work, and they have resorted to incremental tactics to destroy Second Amendment rights.

 

As a proud Brit I'm a little confused by that remark ?

What worthwhile freedoms have you got that we haven't ?

 

Fair enough mate, keep barking at the moon. Just offering some friendly advice, no need to get so defensive.

Sorry pal, it's called humour. Why so serious?

As for the question of freedom, there is little practical freedom you have over there that we lack, we just don't kid ourselves that if the government wants to take more away we are going to be able to stop it with a rifle in the broom cupboard, they are far too subtle for that! I do sometimes wonder whether successive governments in the US have let you keep your weapons to distract you from the rights they are taking away.

Anyhow, probably worth leaving gun control, after all, this thread has stayed civil for 10 pages. Why spoil it now because a bunch of ignorant foreigners don't understand the situation?

 

There you go again... I'm just trying to understand you mate no harm intended.

Most people in this forum are just trying to discuss some matters always with a bit of humour. It's nothing personal. For instance that joke I made about wine and art was to make fun (in a nice manly way) of Steffan. Not to be taken seriously...
And you wound up going at me for that... It's odd.


Oh and about those freedoms Brits seem to lack, please tell me what those are I wanna know too.



As for the discussion at hand, I didn't got the impression he was talking of a force that only responded to him. I didn't understood what he meant as it was so vague so I guess that can be part of it... But if he plans on cutting expenses how'll he do that by creating another money vacuum?
Maintaining your current army is hard enough as it is... Imagine maintaining two armies...
I'll certainly be eagerly waiting for more developments on this...



Cheers...

 

If you really want to poke fun at me, it's taken me 3 pages or so to realise you were on about the Napoleonic war! What a dunce I can be at times!

But we did pinch some half decent art and some excellent wine, I reckon I'm protecting Portugal from the credit crunch alone with the amount of Port I get through sometimes

 

this is making the rounds amongst the veterans, this sent to me yesterday by a pilot friend of the 20th fg.

some interesting thoughts that may prove true in the coming months/years

By Tom Adkins
Look at my fellow conservatives! There they go, glumly shuffling along, depressed by the election aftermath. Not me. I’m virtually euphoric. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not thrilled with America ’s flirtation with neo socialism. But there’s a massive silver lining in those magical clouds that lofted Barak Obama to the Presidency. For today, without a shred of intellectually legitimate opposition, I can loudly proclaim to America : The Era of White Guilt is over.



This seemingly impossible event occurred because the vast majority of white Americans didn’t give a fluff about skin color, and enthusiastically pulled the voting lever for a black man. Not just any black man. A very liberal black man who spent his early career race-hustling banks, praying in a racist church for 20 years, and actively worked with America-hating domestic terrorists. Wow! Some resume! Yet they made Barak Obama their leader. Therefore, as of Nov 4th, 2008, white guilt is dead.



For over a century, the millstone of white guilt hung around our necks, retribution for slave-owning predecessors. In the 60s, American liberals began yanking that millstone while sticking a fork in the eye of black Americans, exacerbating the racial divide to extort a socialist solution. But if a black man can become President, exactly what significant barrier is left? The election of Barak Obama absolutely destroys the entire validation of liberal white guilt. The dragon is hereby slain.



So today, I’m feeling a little “uppity,” if you will. From this day forward, my tolerance level for having my skin color hustled is now exactly ZERO. And it’s time to clean house. No more Reverend Wright’s “God Damn America ,” Al Sharpton’s Church of Perpetual Victimization , or Jesse Jackson’s rainbow racism. Cornell West? You’re a fraud. Go home. All those “black studies” programs that taught kids to hate whitey? You must now thank Whitey. And I want that on the final.



Congressional Black Caucus? Irrelevant. Maxine Waters? Shut up. ACORN? Outlawed. Black Panthers? Go home and pet your kitty. Black separatists? Find another nation that offers better dreams. Go ahead. I’m waiting.



Gangsta rappers? Start praising America . Begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. And please…no more ebonics. Speak English, and who knows where you might end up? Oh, yeah…pull up your pants. Your underwear is showing. You look stupid.



To those Eurosnots who forged entire careers hating America ? I’m still waiting for the first black French President.



And let me offer an equal opportunity whupping. I’ve always despised lazy white people. Now, I can talk smack about lazy black people. You’re poor because you quit school, did drugs, had three kids with three different fathers, and refuse to work. So when you plop your Colt 45-swilling, Oprah watchin’ butt on the couch and complain “Da Man is keepin’ me down,” allow me to inform you: Da Man is now black. You have no excuses.



No more quotas. No more handouts. No more stealing my money because someone’s great-great-great-great grandparents suffered actual pain and misery at the hands of people I have no relation to, and personally revile.



It’s time to toss that massive, obsolete race-hustle machine upon the heap of the other stupid 60s ideas. Drag it over there, by wife swapping, next to dope-smoking. Plenty of room right between free love and cop-killing. Careful…don’t trip on streaking. There ya go, don’t be gentle. Just dump it. Wash your hands. It’s filthy.



In fact, Obama’s ascension created a gargantuan irony. How can you sell class envy and American unfairness when you and your black wife went to Ivy League schools, got high-paying jobs, became millionaires, bought a mansion, and got elected President? How unfair is that??? Now, Like a delicious O'Henry tale, Obama’s spread-the-wealth campaign rendered itself moot by it's own victory! America is officially a meritocracy. Obama’s election has validated American conservatism!



So, listen carefully…Wham!!!

That’s the sound of my foot kicking the door shut on the era of white guilt. The rites have been muttered, the carcass lowered, dirt shoveled, and tombstone erected. White guilt is dead and buried.



However, despite my glee, there’s apparently one small, rabid bastion of American racism remaining. Black Americans voted 96% for Barak Obama. Hmmm. In a color-blind world, shouldn’t that be 50-50? Tonight, every black person should ask forgiveness for their apparent racism and prejudice towards white people. Maybe it’s time to start spreading the guilt around.

 

Entertaining though hard to take seriously when he has managed to misspell 'Barack Obama' throughout the article. I also thought the 'you must now thank whitey' comment to be a bit dubious.

 

"Always use the word "Dubious", it doesn't actually mean anything, but it scares people every time."

From BABYLON 5

Londo Molari to Vir Coto on how to write his reports on the "Mimbari" (as ambassador to them) to be sent back to their homeworld on Centauri Prime.

J. Michael Straczynsky has "Pseudo-Politicing" bagged there, ... eh?