Consumer Credit Card Act and Loaded Weapons?
Real Estate Investor · Tampa, FL · Member since 2008 · 456 posts · 42 votes
I was reading an article on concealed weapons today. Actually, it can be found here if you're interested in that
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090722/ap_on_go_co/us_concealed_weapons
but that isn't really the topic here. I read through this article and got to the end to see this:
In May, President Barack Obama signed into law a consumer credit card act that also restored the rights of people to carry loaded weapons in national parks.
lol! Now I knew about the Consumer Credit Card Act and I own both guns and credit cards but I fail to see how one has to do with the other. I was just floored. I'd never heard that before. But I thought I would show this as an example of how things get pushed through the system without the American people knowing about it. Hide it in with something really popular and run it through.
I have noticed throughout this thread that others are using other countries as examples to prove a point. But be careful. Most of the counties that have been mentioned are social democracies, or democracies using the parliamentary system.
America is truly unique, in that it is a Republic that was born out of the ashes of a revolution against tyranny. True Republics are rare in the history of the world. Because they contain strong executive branches, they lend themselves to evolving into dictatorships.
The founding fathers knew this. They assumed that at some point the people would have to turn against a federalist government if it became too powerful and tyrannical. Hence, why gun ownership is at the core of this country’s founding.
Guns, muskets and cannons gave us our freedom and they protect our freedom against enemies foreign and domestic.
And I think it is, so we disagree. That's fine.
Interesting Augument on the military aspect.
The last time the draft was going was 1973.
So with todays all volunteer force you could never have a kent state again!
The troops would deffinatly question an order fire.
Also if you want a good example of what would happen if the US where invaded look to the state department disbading the Iraq miliitary and telling all those troops to just go home. They did and took their weapons with them.
How long did it take us to get them to stop fighting us.
Thats what would happen in the US if somebody invaded, only we are better armed as a civilian population.
Now on the "right to bear arms" thats what keeps those banks and politicians from just plain stealing everything thats not nailed down! Would I ever give up my right to bear arms, right after I give up my right to vote and free speech. Which is when those rights will go away!
Police and national guard units are just a quick reaction force and could not last more than a couple of hours in an uprising of any duration. Not enough manpower or reserve assets to keep going in the fight.
True power lays with those with nothing left to lose.
So what are you going to do kill me, yea, not if I get you first.
Which is why the government worlks so hard at keeping the sheople happy.
The other main difference in history is that almost all other countries are controlled by a socialist regeime who controls who can control or own property. Here we extent that right to everyone and it is exactly that pride in ownership that provides the incentive for everyone to fight for what is theirs, on their own, or as a collective protecting the collective interests of their property.
This knowledge, that even if the military (or militaries including the reserves) could be breached as was the case at Pearl Harbour, when the occuping forces were to land and attempt that occupation they would be met with so terrible an onslaught that they will think twice about the invasion as practical (as the Japanese actually did). They could have practically sailed up the Mississippi River and split the country into two, but if the attempted to land anywhere there would have been opposition from behind every tree and blade of grass that could have concealled anyone or anything as did happen the last time that we were actually invaded by foreign troops.
No, they're not doing it yet, but the socialists would like to. I believe that they'll start with free speech, as they're already doing in England and many other countries. Take away the freedom of speech and then you can take away just about everything else.
That Russian general that predicted that the US would break up into separate countries isn't looking so stupid now. The Texas Governor said today that Texas might resist universal health care under the 10th Amendment. Could secession be next? It doesn't sound so crazy anymore. I'd be in favor of letting the socialists have the west coast and northeast and the capitalists could have the rest.
Mike
I have noticed throughout this thread that others are using other countries as examples to prove a point. But be careful. Most of the counties that have been mentioned are social democracies, or democracies using the parliamentary system.
America is truly unique, in that it is a Republic that was born out of the ashes of a revolution against tyranny. True Republics are rare in the history of the world. Because they contain strong executive branches, they lend themselves to evolving into dictatorships.
The founding fathers knew this. They assumed that at some point the people would have to turn against a federalist government if it became too powerful and tyrannical. Hence, why gun ownership is at the core of this country’s founding.
Guns, muskets and cannons gave us our freedom and they protect our freedom against enemies foreign and domestic.
Please, any one of you that think any different than those arms as a deterrant, ask those countries as you may wish to invade us and watch us in action!!!!!!!!
Heck, that might even solve some of our current political problems.
Sorry Eddie, but if you take that view,then America is not unique at all as there have been several "association" of states including the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the union of the twelve brothers of Israel.
What is different is that it was formed as a Republic and not a democracy.