What's on your mind?


[140]

Viewing User Wall: Ghost1958

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by Nakyak View Post
What part of the fifth specifically states 2A rights are voided?
Yes sir. All that applies when one is found guilty and sentenced. Once released all inalienable rights return . Just as,they did from our founding until 1934 I believe, with the unconstitutional NFA. "

Yesterday, 11:34 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
" I get a bit weary of the terms absolutist, moderate , etc.

There is the COTUS. It says what it says very clearly. Any law that is contrary to it is null and void.
Enforcing such a law is a criminal offense.
I expect to see LEO s politicians and judges to be turning themselves in for prosecution any day now.

Not really but they ARE the real criminals when it comes to this issue. "

Yesterday, 07:00 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by DogWalksWithMe View Post
And statutes do specify loss of firearms rights for life for felonies, unless reinstated through and per each state's process. And while I do not know of anywhere this is codified, I have heard many times that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Which would be fine except any law,contrary to the zzconstitution is null and void

Those statutes are contrary to the 2a clearly.

Want to finr someone so much for life , fine.

Want to take one of their inalienable rights away once free? It's done, but it's illegal. "

Yesterday, 06:55 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

GRCarry clicked Like for this post: Sell Privately or Use FFL? by Ghost1958

Yesterday, 06:53 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by DogWalksWithMe View Post
I find it interesting that this discussion has so much focus on prison, and rights restoration after prison, considering prison was not a common punishment at the time this nation was founded.

See: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwe...2&context=jclc




So now we use prison but did not then, and already had laws to add increase penalties for repeat offenses. Nowhere in the constitution does the government have the power to imprison citizens, unless you find it in interpretation of the 5th. That is where I find it. By that measure, it is also where we can find corporal punishment such as maiming, branding, etc. Those were common at the founding.

The First says "Congress shall make no law." The second says "shall not be infringed." But as we dig deeper, we find that phrase in the 5th "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." That is there for crimes. Crimes can result in loss of rights.
Yep while your in custody or jail.

After that nope. "

Yesterday, 05:02 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Like for this post: NRA Dirty Laundry ? Ruh Roh by Ghost1958

Yesterday, 11:31 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: NRA Dirty Laundry ? Ruh Roh by Siam

Yesterday, 11:00 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by Hoganbheag View Post
I've heard that claim promulgated for some time now and it may be true but I've never heard or seen any substantiation of it.

Even if it's not true , the gov still had no authority to strip a free person of their inalienable rights. "

Yesterday, 10:52 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

RScottie clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

Yesterday, 12:53 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
" IMO gov does not constitutionally have the,authority execute a person.

I can find no constitutional authorization for it.

Though I know,its,been done for a very long time.

Should thr victim or victims family have,that right? Absolutely. Gov ? No IMO. "

May 22nd, 2019, 08:17 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Love for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by RightsEroding

May 22nd, 2019, 04:23 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 02:32 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 02:30 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 02:26 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by RScottie View Post
Well said.

There should be no arms regulations at all.

The only laws needed are those against murder, robbery, assault, rape, etc. etc. Actual crimes against others. Methods or tools used are irrelevant.
Agree completely. What is strange, and this is not directed at any particular person, is that on gun forums , one has to defend the RTKABA and the 2a, as written from some other gun owners.

It's like they WANT their birth right limited, regulated and taken away. The RTKABA doesn't exist anymore. Permission does.

We have to fight to take that right back. Not bargain, politic and appease. "

May 22nd, 2019, 02:03 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by RScottie

May 22nd, 2019, 01:54 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

RScottie clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 01:31 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

RScottie clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 01:30 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

RScottie clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 01:26 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
@ccw9mm: The comparison between eating and carrying is hyperbole. Everyone who does not eat for a period of time, probably about month at most, will die, for sure. People who do not carry will probably survive. In fact, most people do not carry and tey do just fine.

Carrying is better, of course. It improves your chances. And it is exercising our right, even though the right is infringed. But nonetheless, we are cooperating with the "destroyers." It is for good reason, as you point out. But that just helps make my point about how gray and nuanced the situation is. "The people" have cooperated with infringements to 2A since the day it was signed.

And your point about continuing to fight for improvements is also exactly my point. But how can we not admit we are cooperating with infringements when we fill out a form, sign our name and pay the fee for our permit? I said that was NOT hypocritical, just ironic, just "gray." What is hypocritical in my view is spouting an absolutist viewpoint when we go along with infringements every day we carry with a permit.It is fine to hold the absolutes as an ideal, but as the loony left shows us constantly with their crazy antics, there are problems caused by not being able to differentiate between ideals and action.

I carry every day, but I own up to what I am doing. To use your words, "I am going along with an infringement, while working to improve things." And I do, provably, improve things. I can show the progress my state group makes all the time at getting anti-gun bills killed, getting pro-gun bills passed and making sure localities don't do end runs on the law. I am clearly in the gray area, but I am OK with it.

Here's where the conflict becomes a problem. While people with absolutist views may feel "pure of heart," they often refuse to play that "short game" that improves things and they put down the pro-gun activists who do. So they won't work for and vote for a politician who is not pure on 2A, and that lets a politician who is even worse get in office. They won't rally for improvements to the restrictions on CC permits, because permits are an infringement, so that activity is not "pure." They say things like citizens should own WMD, which may be a justifiably "pure" view, but makes 2A advocates seem like nuts to the voters in the middle, the ones who might be swayed by good arguments. In short, they criticize what is not "pure" when they themselves are cooperating with infringements, impurity, every day.
I'm clearly one your referring too but you have the absolutionist wrong in many ways.

You are right that I don't believe there is a short game as you put it.

And you are correct I won't vote for a politician that utters one sentence that supports any form of gun control.

But there's nothing ironic with a person who knows there is no gun regulation allowed by the COTUS getting a permit to carry if they must.

I have one. But I don't try to excuse having one by speaking of it and the RTKABA in the same breath.
My ccdw is infringement. Had I not had to travel out of state I would have simply open carried here and not got one.
That said. I would not have been able to do my small part in getting those permits axed sitting in a Ohio or Tenn prison now would I?

Simply because one gets a permit when forced to to does not mean they accept that permit is not infringement and has to go.

The only game to play where we,make any gain toward regaining the RTKABA is a steadfast demand being made daily to repeal all gun regulation.

I'm states that have permitless carry that is the stsnd most gun owners took. And it worked.

Electing mealy mouthed candidates talking out of both sides of their mouth concerning the RTKABA is,a,guarantee we don't move forward and likely get taken back several steps. "

May 22nd, 2019, 10:00 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Kennydale clicked Like for this post: Prayer Request For Where My Son's Job Is Sending Him. by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 08:04 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

RightsEroding clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 22nd, 2019, 05:29 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Prayer Request For Where My Son's Job Is Sending Him..
" Done "

May 22nd, 2019, 03:13 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
" Like I said I didnt expect you to understand that for a lot of people going unarmed is not an option.

Some how refusing to carry , because the gov doesn't want you too and sets up these quickly disappearing In many places road blocks so you won't carry makes no sense whatsoever.

The absutionists you refer to were the founders. You beef is,with them . After all they put in shall not be infringed. Part of the law,of the land . Most of us simply want to obey the law,of the land. "

May 22nd, 2019, 12:37 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
@ccw9mm: You have clearly and logically laid out all the reasons people get permits and how things are different from a couple of centuries ago. I will give you that.

But excuses aside, for whatever reasons, there is still no denying that there are people taking absolutist positions against infringements, but at the same time willingly choosing to cooperate with those infringements. They are not forced to do so. They could take the position that since their rights are infringed, they will not carry. But that is not what they do. It may not quite be hypocrisy, but sure is ironic.

And it is important to some of the points I've made. The Founding Fathers allowed infringements, the country has always allowed infringements and even the staunchest RTKABA people today cooperate with infringements. Nothing in the real world is black and white. There is always some gray. Good progress can be, and is being, made in the gray areas. And the people who are working on getting better situations for CC permits are not somehow traitors to the gun community because they are working on improving "permissions" and not just sitting back and droning "shall not be infringed" over and over.

There is a saying, "Perfection is the enemy of progress."
I realize,you may not understand this , but not carry is not an option for alot of people. Legally or illegally.

To do so would be in many people's cases , stupid. "

May 21st, 2019, 08:58 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by jmf552

May 21st, 2019, 07:07 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Nakyak little more on this.


Here is the paragraph that this quote is referring to in the post #91 above the one you quoted.

From post #91
"As far as your last statement, I can rewrite it in a way that perhaps you will understand the point I am trying to make. If Trump's bump stock ban helps him beat Joe Biden who made this statement on Tuesday "Joe Biden: Second Amendment Does Not Say You’re ‘Entitled’ to Own a Gun", then yes it will be a good thing he did it. Not because the infringement is good but because a Biden victory would be so much worse in the way of infringements.That also does not mean I think making these concessions is a good idea or will help Trump win and I have made my position known, and if a couple or three million more would do the same, perhaps Trump would change his tactics. One thing is certain, a Biden victory will be far worse for the 2nd Amendment than a Trump victory, and anyone who doesn't believe that has their head in the sand. Of course that is just my opinion and here is some more from the Biden article to confirm my opinion."

Again I have never said that any infringement is good, just that the infringement would be worse if the Democrat won. I have made this point 4 or 5 different ways, you have made it clear you are not going to understand. I don't really care other than to say that what you offered in your original response to me was nothing more than your opinion because no matter how hard you try to deflect my meaning, you still have not pointed out one post where I said I support or am OK with any infringement of any citizen who has not forfeited his freedom after due process is given him.

I will never support any restoration of any rights to violent criminals (Rapists, murderers, pedophiles, etc.) who manage to walk out of prison. This view is clearly the view of the Courts, the majority of the public and certainly LE. There is nothing in the COTUS that denies the States from punishing these scumbags with taking their lives and their freedoms. At least there isn't as of now, and in my opinion the COTUS is clear that criminals can lose those freedoms.

You ignored it so I'll try again.
The courts, the majority of the public and LE support unlawfully stripping away the RTKABA from a freed felon and in your eyes that renders,the 2a moot?

Here I was,thinking all this time it would take a constitutional amendment to do that.

The protection given by the 2a is trumped by majority opinion, court opinion, and LE opinion?

Really?
I think you have that backwards.


And yes you do support infringement though you seem loathe to admit it.

Yet you defend the infringement of stripping the RTKABA from any citizen who has committed a felony. Something not allowed by the 2a , or the COTUS. "

May 21st, 2019, 07:05 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 21st, 2019, 02:02 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
@ccw9mm: That is a valid point also and one that concerns me. But on the other side I see progress. When first bought a gun, there was not such thing as "shall issue" CC permits. Now most states have them. There are several states with permitless carry and constitutional carry. Something like 16 million people have permits now and a study said 3 million people are carrying every day. Unheard of when I started shooting.

I know there are those who call permits "permissions" like that negates their value. But I find most of those people actually have carry permits, which I think is kind of ironic. I don't care what labels get put on things, I care about what I can and can't do, today, and not wind up in jail. All else is theoretical to me.


All due respect to many gun owners having the "I'M only conserned with what I can do today. All else is theory " is how we got in this mess.

The cotus isn't a therory. It's the law of the land.

As long ,as,we have gun owners thinking the 2A is therory we will never be rid of c.c permits nation wide and all the rest of the infringements "

May 21st, 2019, 12:18 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Aceoky

May 21st, 2019, 12:05 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by hackberry

May 21st, 2019, 12:01 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 21st, 2019, 11:08 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Love for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 21st, 2019, 11:04 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by 21bubba View Post
In the past you have accused me of posting nothing but short cryptic posts that have no substance because they don't fall into lockstep with you. Here's another one. You're nuts.

What kind there hoss. Cashew? Peanut? Walnut?

Don't lie . It is personal because I call LE out when they screw up. And you don't like that. Your words

As far as gun regulation being unconstitutional, blame the founders who denied gov the authority to regulate weapons.

They laid down the line . Anyone else's line that allows any regulation is unconstitutional.

Get over it. "

May 21st, 2019, 10:22 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Siam

May 21st, 2019, 10:14 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by John W in SC

May 21st, 2019, 10:14 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

nlyric clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 21st, 2019, 08:38 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Nakyak little more on this.


Here is the paragraph that this quote is referring to in the post #91 above the one you quoted.

From post #91
"As far as your last statement, I can rewrite it in a way that perhaps you will understand the point I am trying to make. If Trump's bump stock ban helps him beat Joe Biden who made this statement on Tuesday "Joe Biden: Second Amendment Does Not Say You’re ‘Entitled’ to Own a Gun", then yes it will be a good thing he did it. Not because the infringement is good but because a Biden victory would be so much worse in the way of infringements.That also does not mean I think making these concessions is a good idea or will help Trump win and I have made my position known, and if a couple or three million more would do the same, perhaps Trump would change his tactics. One thing is certain, a Biden victory will be far worse for the 2nd Amendment than a Trump victory, and anyone who doesn't believe that has their head in the sand. Of course that is just my opinion and here is some more from the Biden article to confirm my opinion."

Again I have never said that any infringement is good, just that the infringement would be worse if the Democrat won. I have made this point 4 or 5 different ways, you have made it clear you are not going to understand. I don't really care other than to say that what you offered in your original response to me was nothing more than your opinion because no matter how hard you try to deflect my meaning, you still have not pointed out one post where I said I support or am OK with any infringement of any citizen who has not forfeited his freedom after due process is given him.

I will never support any restoration of any rights to violent criminals (Rapists, murderers, pedophiles, etc.) who manage to walk out of prison. This view is clearly the view of the Courts, the majority of the public and certainly LE. There is nothing in the COTUS that denies the States from punishing these scumbags with taking their lives and their freedoms. At least there isn't as of now, and in my opinion the COTUS is clear that criminals can lose those freedoms.
So the,2a which DOES prohibit removing a person's RTKABA, is just a catch phrase gov and LE and the,courts are free to just ignore it as,they would a childs,scribbling? "

May 21st, 2019, 07:38 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

ShooterGranny clicked Like for this post: What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's? by Ghost1958

May 20th, 2019, 11:16 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread What is your litmus test for the RTKBA's?.
" No regulation is constitutional . Not the first one nor the last.

In the founders day, cannon, warships , the most destructive weaponry could be owned privately and was.

The 2a does not grant the RTKABA. Not does it allow regulation of arms.

Arms meaning weapons of any sort from the simplest to the most complex and destructive.

Otherwise the 2a has no meaning.

It wasn't written for SD, hunting , target shooting etc. It's MAIN purpose was to assure the people could , if nessacary, throw off grips of a tyranical government . Just as the founders had just done.

Unless the people are armed in parity or greater with gov the whole purpose the founders wrote the 2a for. Regulation of weapons by any gov defeats that purpose. "

May 20th, 2019, 08:48 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
You and Nakyak must have the same record player, it seems you would both tire of that same old song.

You both make statements that are false and pretend your statement makes it true.

There is no post you can point to where I said I support the NFA and GCA, and in fact posted that since these are federal laws, for them to impose disenfranchisement would be unConstitutional. Why do you say something you know to be false? You have to come to grips with the fact that just because you say something, that doesn't make it true especially if you post nothing but your opinion. I am still waiting for you or someone to post the exact part of the COTUS that denies the State governments from imposing penalties on violent criminals up to and including death.

I am tempted to post those parts of the COTUS that have been quoted where criminals have brought multiple arguments before the Courts, before the State Governments and before the people, trying to have the rights denied them by the States restored. Those arguments have been denied at every level.

I will keep posting the 10th Amendment and hope you read it.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Here it was in the Articles of Confederation.

"Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled."

So do you not support the 10th Amendment?



Did you know that in my life, I have never voted for a Democrat. I did not support the Democrats in 1968 when they passed GCA, the very first time I was able to vote for the President. In fact the GCA was what sealed my distaste for Democrats for the rest of my life and not even Rino Republicans have been able to persuade me to vote for a Democrat, although they leave a bad taste in my mouth when they are the only choice to keep the Democrat out. (I always choose the path that I believe does the least damage to the 2nd)

Why do you keep stating something as fact, that you may believe to be true, when you know that it is just your opinion?

Now for my "opinion". You have expressed your support for Democrats at varying times, expressed your support for the Democrat union thugs who tried to hamstring the Nation with unconstitutional closed shop laws, Democrats who have supported federal laws authorizing abortion overriding the States ability to say no when the COTUS clearly does not give the Feds that right, the Democrat Party who have been in control of all 3 branches when almost all of these unConstitutional federal gun laws have been passed, and I can go on about just how Constitutionally corrupt the Democrat Party of today is.

So I submit that (in my opinion) you have shown more support for the infringement of the 2nd Amendment and damaged it more than I have.
Yes there is something denying gov state or Fed the authority to take away a free persons RTKABA.

The states are bound by the COTUS as well as the fef.
The 2a cannot be any plainer . Shall not be infringed.

That's it and that's all.

Pointed it out twice.

It is the law of the land regardless of its being ignored or not.

No gov has the authority to prevent free felons from being armed. It's a moot point anyway. They do arm themeelves.

No ive never suppoerted a gun regulation in my life.
Nor a politician that does. "

May 20th, 2019, 08:00 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Arejay clicked Like for this post: Possible 3rd party in 2020 election? by Ghost1958

May 19th, 2019, 07:54 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by Arejay View Post
Winds and currents are strong in this thread. The topic has drifted far from it's original mooring.
Apologies.
Back on topic.

If I have a third party candidate that is rabidly pro gun , pro constitution, you betcha I'll vote for him or her.
Getting a third party in control of major offices has to start someplace. Now is a good time as honestly I don't trust Trump in a 2nd term. Hes too wobbly on the RTKABA, the 4th A and due process.

If there is no third party candidate I like it'll be a toss up as too if I even vote in the presidential . "

May 19th, 2019, 07:21 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

oneshot clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 19th, 2019, 02:51 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

oneshot clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 19th, 2019, 02:29 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

oneshot clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 19th, 2019, 02:24 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Never advocated that. You need to catch up I am talking about violent felons only, though states do have the right under the COTUS to pass laws denying regular felons from possessing because the COTUS does not deny the States that right. When you figure out a way to put these violent scumbags away and keeping them there, I would not care if the government gave them all a gun while they were in there. Hopefully they would kill each other off and save us the expense.

Go to the other thread where I have posted several thousand words dedicated to what I believe, what I say the COTUS says, what the Courts say the COTUS says and several very good articles that back up all of that. I will reply again when someone on the other side of the debate does that as well. In fact I will probably limit my responses on this subject to only those posts made by Ghost, since all on that side of the debate just keep posting the same thing over and over.

I am going to limit my responses to only those posts that supply references giving standing to the opinions expressed, or I guess I could limit my posts to "No it doesn't" or "yes it does". I learned those tactics on some of the very liberal stock exchange boards I have participated on.

I will add it only gives government the power over those people who are too stupid or too violent to prevent themselves from harming innocent human beings, and it is not a joking matter if the innocent they damaged or killed is someone close to you. I will never support a politician who is for restoring rights to violent felons and Constitutionally I am on firm ground.

I have to get some sleep sometime, so I will say goodnight.

So the 2A in your opinion doesn't apply to the states?

Because if your claim barring released felons from their inalienable RTKABA to fly then for the states the constitution is so much old toilet paper.' uh "

May 19th, 2019, 06:34 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: Shooting steel - lots of it by ShooterGranny

May 19th, 2019, 01:53 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
The COTUS does not grant powers to the States except to say that they can pass laws (powers) that are not denied to them by the COTUS, so of course there is no where that it says they can. The problem is there is no where the COTUS denies that power to the States. At least you can't point it out if there is. Apparently no one else can either because these laws have withstood much court scrutiny.




Read the 10th Amendment again slowly.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

The COTUS states what powers the Federal Government has (or doesn't have depending on how you look at it), and if the COTUS does not deny the States the power (or law), they can pass whatever law the people want.

I don't think that is ambiguous at all. There is nothing in the COTUS that says the States can't pass a law that determines the conditions of release for a violent felon or any felon for that matter. I only care about the violent ones.

You keep calling them free, but if they have been rendered due process, they are not free until the State says they are free. As I have pointed they don't get to vote, associate freely, communicate freely, move about freely, carry a gun freely, and depending on the crime, the outcome of their due process, and the length of time the State determines they will pay for their crimes, they can be held in perpetuity in a state of punishment.

So i will post this link again which if read thoroughly it will point out all of the Constitutional limits that should keep the Federal Government from regulating disfranchisement laws, The article shreds Rand Paul's legislation that seeks to have the Federal Government circumvent State laws that deny felons the right to vote. There is some discussion on gun disfranchisement as well.

The article is long and here is just a snippet from it with a little about guns.
https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-j...onal-overreach

Finally, it is particularly odd that this proposed legislation is limited only to the restoration of convicted criminals’ right to vote. Senator Paul has stated that the effort to restore felon voting rights is “about helping people get their lives back on track, about enabling them to provide for their families, about breaking the cycle of violence and poverty.”[37] Similarly, the findings in H.R. 3335 state that this legislation would reintegrate “offenders into free society, helping to enhance public safety.” The findings also say that felon disenfranchisement laws serve “no compelling State interest” for felons “who are living and working in the community.”

If that is correct, then why does neither H.R. 3335 nor S. 2550 propose to restore all of the other civil rights that a convicted criminal loses in many states? A whole host of “collateral consequences” imposed by states and the federal government, such as limitations on types of employment, access to financial aid, and housing restrictions, arguably pose far greater impediments to reintegration into society than are imposed by felony disenfranchisement laws.

For instance, if convicted criminals can be trusted to exercise the right to vote, and if restoring that ability will help to integrate such criminals back into society, then why are their rights to public employment not restored? Many states prohibit felons from working as police officers or school teachers; if they can be trusted with the right to vote, why do the sponsors of these bills not trust them to work in law enforcement or as teachers in our public schools?

State and federal laws also prohibit felons from owning or even possessing a gun. If restoring the right of felons to vote helps to reintegrate them into society, why does Senator Paul’s bill not also amend federal law to allow them once again to own a gun? In fact, Senator Paul has specifically said that it is “Absolutely, untrue” that his goal is also to restore Second Amendment rights for felons.[38]

This proposed legislation assumes that felons can be trusted enough to require the automatic restoration of their right to vote but not enough to automatically restore their right to own a gun or all of the other rights that were taken away when they were convicted of a “nonviolent” crime. While plausible arguments could possibly be made for this differential, proponents of the restoration of voting rights for felons are silent on this issue and do not explain why felons can be trusted to exercise their right to vote properly but not to sit on a jury or work as a police officer or public school teacher.
You can list examples of the COTUS being violated till the cows come home . It still does not make those actions constitutional. .

I've pointed the part of the COTUS out that does,not allow, Fed or state to remove a released felon a RTKABA. The 2A.
The states,must also follow the COTUS.

And they are constitutionally barred from infringement iof the RTKABA. "

May 19th, 2019, 01:37 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
One more time if you can point out where in the COTUS disfranchisement of violent offenders is denied by the COTUS then you might could make that argument.

Applying your theory of no infringement ever, never, ever then we could not disarm people going into prison. We could not imprison violent criminals, we could not execute them, I doubt we could slap their hands. Your argument makes no sense and only would make sense if the COTUS had a line that said. "When violent offenders somehow gain release from prison there can be no disfranchisement of their rights." There is nothing in the COTUS that protects them from the punishment they receive other than cruel and unusual. Considering their crimes I am not sure anything could be considered cruel and unusual in their case. The 8th does not cover this.
The,COTUS in the BOR states what gov may not do.

There is,no place,in the COTUS where gov the authority to strip a pre existing inalienable right, not granted by gov , from a free person.

You cannot find anywhere the COTUS does grant that authority.


It isn't there.
The 2a,does not say shall not be infringed, unless the person is a,felon. "

May 18th, 2019, 09:32 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread A gun in a diaper bag went off, injuring dad and daughter. Now the dad has died.
" Everyone seems to be assuming the gun wasn't in a holster of some kind.

Yet I never saw that in the article. Or mentioning what type if gun it was. "

May 18th, 2019, 09:03 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I have no doubt you supported the RTKAB. I don't like your method of supporting the right and you don't like mine. The fact is you are making the assumption that because I don't agree with your method that means I support the federal infringements on the RTKAB. That is false.

Ok.
So I get this straight. It's ok for the states to throw the COTUS in the river and violate a right that existed before there even was a state?

Are you trying to say the COTUS doesn't apply to the states? "

May 18th, 2019, 08:31 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: Get Old Lose Your Rights ! by RightsEroding

May 18th, 2019, 08:26 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Love for this post: Get Old Lose Your Rights ! by ShooterGranny

May 18th, 2019, 08:24 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Was the NFA of 1934 a federal law? Yes.

The COTUS does not give the Federal Government the right to take weapons away from violent felons released from prison. The law is unConstitutional (as is the GCA of 68).

The COTUS does not deny the States from disenfranchising violent felons the right to own a gun. Therefore those States that pass laws that disenfranchise violent felons are within the COTUS. You say they are not.

It is quite simple, point out where the COTUS says that, point out where the Supreme Court says that. You cannot because they are doing it and they haven't been stopped.

I know this will come as a shock but just because Ghost says it isn't and I say it is Constitutional doesn't make it so either way. What makes it so is that as of now it is happening, I am right, you are wrong. That might change, but I hope not. Still does not mean I ever expressed support for either of those laws, they are both unConstitutional, the State laws are not.
One word . Incorporation.

But even if that were not done by SCOTUS, The states must obey the COTUS. It does not and never has,only applied to the Fed . Though folks in favor of violating some portions of it , in both parties have tried to make that argument.

The states don't have to enforce or even recognize an act of Congress. But they do have to honor the COTUS .

Just because gov is doing something illegal like oh say regulating guns, does,not make constitutional. "

May 18th, 2019, 08:17 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I don't believe the NFA banned felons from owning firearms, rather it exempted them from the act of registration because they were prohibited persons from owning firearms by the various State laws that applied to them.

"The United States Supreme Court has ruled in Haynes v. United States that the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution exempts felons—and, by extrapolation, all other prohibited possessors—from the registration requirements of the Act. The prohibited person who violates the possession prohibition can, however, be convicted under the Gun Control Act of 1968 for being a prohibited person in possession of a (any) firearm."

The GCA of 1968 was a federal law which imposed prohibition on felons from owning guns. I know you only read snippets of what I post but I made it clear that federal laws make this unConstitutional because it violates the 10th Amendment.

I support the ability of the States to pass disfranchisement laws onto the punishment of violent felons. Did I stutter there?

States doing this are within the Constitution and they do nothing to violate the God given rights of all other citizens who choose to live among society without inflicting violence on their fellow humans who are innocent of wrongdoing.

In late 1968 in the middle of my military service I wrote a letter to the editor of my hometown newspaper opposing the GCA of 1968 at some risk to my service.

I thought since LBJ was from my State I should express my view regardless of the consequences. I don't know that it was published, but I tried. What exactly did you do to prevent this onerous gun control bill from being passed.

I oppose both of those gun control bills. Anything you add to that other than agreementt is fabrication.

I broke this post this in snippets hoping you will actually read all of them.

Oh I missed that last.

Well NFA, I didn't exist yet.
GCA in 68, I knew about It because every adult I knew was furious about it and they all were Democrats but my mom.
However I was 10 in 68.
I did carry a 38 special or a Colt frontier scout almost all the time and had since I was 7. That's about as much opposition as I was capable of then. "

May 18th, 2019, 05:01 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I don't believe the NFA banned felons from owning firearms, rather it exempted them from the act of registration because they were prohibited persons from owning firearms by the various State laws that applied to them.

"The United States Supreme Court has ruled in Haynes v. United States that the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution exempts felons—and, by extrapolation, all other prohibited possessors—from the registration requirements of the Act. The prohibited person who violates the possession prohibition can, however, be convicted under the Gun Control Act of 1968 for being a prohibited person in possession of a (any) firearm."

The GCA of 1968 was a federal law which imposed prohibition on felons from owning guns. I know you only read snippets of what I post but I made it clear that federal laws make this unConstitutional because it violates the 10th Amendment.

I support the ability of the States to pass disfranchisement laws onto the punishment of violent felons. Did I stutter there?

States doing this are within the Constitution and they do nothing to violate the God given rights of all other citizens who choose to live among society without inflicting violence on their fellow humans who are innocent of wrongdoing.

In late 1968 in the middle of my military service I wrote a letter to the editor of my hometown newspaper opposing the GCA of 1968 at some risk to my service.

I thought since LBJ was from my State I should express my view regardless of the consequences. I don't know that it was published, but I tried. What exactly did you do to prevent this onerous gun control bill from being passed.

I oppose both of those gun control bills. Anything you add to that other than agreementt is fabrication.

I broke this post this in snippets hoping you will actually read all of them.
The NFA prohibited violent felons from owning firarms. The GCA expanded that to include all felons.

You support not honoring a freed felons RTKABA.

So you support at least that part of those acts.

Any state that does so is violating the COTUS as well. "

May 18th, 2019, 04:42 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
The only ludicrous argument here is saying that violent criminal actors somehow regain their rights when released from prison. That is Constitutionally inaccurate, as has been pointed out numerous times. We have had capital punishment in country almost continuously since 1608 with the first known execution of a traitor. Disfranchisement of prisoners from the rights granted to citizens in good standing is Constitutional, it is smart, it is commonsense. To indicate that we have the right to imprison someone for life, to execute them for their crimes, and yet somehow we cannot deprive them of movement, association, voting, gun possession, etc., as a condition of their release is not only ludicrous, it is also does not even represent what is happening.

Your only argument is, it is wrong in your opinion. My argument is that in my opinion it is right and as of now I am getting my way. I hope that never changes.
Nothing myself or several others here are maintaining has been "proven " constitutionally inacurate.
The only thing being done is leaping to the death penalty, which occurs while still incarcerated btw, to try to justify unconstitutional restrictions after the felon has been released.

Apple's to moon rocks comparison.

And that you support the NFA, and GCA which initiated this stupidity about free felons .
And agree with the lib dems that passed both acts. "

May 18th, 2019, 04:23 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Subhuman clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 18th, 2019, 04:20 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread 25 yard and up club..
" Dbbl post "

May 18th, 2019, 04:07 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread 25 yard and up club..
" 25 yrd attempt at a post it note.

9 rds, cold , offhand,SR9c.
About a second per shot.

Not a horrible group but only 2 in the note itself.

Attachment 22164 "

May 18th, 2019, 04:01 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
The NSSF for one and I will let you research the other I was referring to. I just put you down as a support any organization other than the NRA type guy so I thought that included anyone other than the NRA. Did not mean to say that you had verbalized sport for any certain organization.



Now you are just making up stuff as you go. I will offer you the same chance as I offered Nakyak to show where I ever said I support either of those acts. If you can it was a typo or you are failing to grasp what I am saying.

You steadfastly defend both unconstitutional acts.
The NFA, was the first act that banned guns from freed violent felons. Something you enthusiasticly support.

The GCA expanded that to include all freed felons . Something you enthusiastically support.

Both acts are unconstitutional on their face. Yet you support at minimum an important infringement both acts intiated.

Since we both know your position on free felons RTKABA I would assume I need not go hunting quotes that prove that point.

No typos, no waffling. Either you support what's in those two unconstitutional acts, or you dont.

You undeniably have defended regulations brought into existence by both those acts.




Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I will accept responsibility for not being able to post coherently enough to get my point across, but if that is not the case then you are fabricating what I said. Please post the exact thread and post number where I said/indicated that I support either the GCA or NFA, and if that is accurate I will correct the post.

Perhaps you are just upset that I pointed out that both the GCA and NFA were passed by the Democrats (who controlled all 3 branches of government) with support from your union buddies.

Perhaps you are more responsible for getting those infringements passed than I am. You see it is rather easy to make baseless accusations such as yours or mine when you don't back it up with historical provenance, isn't it?
"

May 18th, 2019, 03:19 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Aceoky clicked Love for this post: SD. . . OK. . . AR. . . Corp of Engineers Updates by Ghost1958

May 18th, 2019, 12:53 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by DogWalksWithMe View Post
Well, I do question what governmental or public interest is served by stripping the RKBA from the mom who is the subject of this thread. Her offense was not violent.

But incarceration is not the only punishment available to the people for a criminal act. We have fines, probation, parole after incarceration, diversion into various programs in lieu of prison, mandatory community service, restitution, and other options. So I can not hold release from incarceration as some magical point where a criminal has completely served "the" penalty.

Lifetime curtailment of rights is a part of the penalty our society can and does impose on criminals. As I just noted, I can question it in this case... But when she does complete any incarceration, pays any penalties imposed, completes any requirements of parole or probation, she can then apply to have her rights restored.

Not many apply for restoration, and not many applications are successful. The mom in this case might succeed if she does apply.

I do agree restricting the 2nd for known felons is not likely to result in much reduced crime in terms of felons actually not procuring weapons, all it can do is mandate longer sentences the next time they get caught. Instead of waiting for a third strike, punish longer at the second strike. That does serve the public interest.

Nothing you have noted gives gov the authority to strip an inalienable right from a freed felon.

Probation, parole, community service , etc etc are inventions of lawyers and judges.
If a,person is out of jail he constitutionally is entitled to the return of all inalienable rights.
It really is that simple.
What our legal system and gov have done in violation of that does not make those acts legal not constitutional. "

May 18th, 2019, 11:11 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by DogWalksWithMe View Post
[/INDENT]
And that provides a space for the courts to intervene in legislation and application of the laws.

Enumerated rights such as the 1st and 2nd can not be infringed against the entire population.

But criminal's rights can be impacted with due process.

But not to a degree which does not fit the crime or standards of human decency.

Some examples:

- California -- that glittering bastion of progressive thinking -- decided some years ago that prison is for punishment, not rehabilitation; There is no presumption of rehabilitation after a sentence is served. California also had enough of recidivism and led the way with a three strikes law. Under a principal of full restoration upon release, each crime should be considered individually. But since some criminals clearly do not learn, why should we forget?

- New York State created an education program for prisoners to learn to cut hair; Upon release, the "graduates" found out the state would not issue them a professional license to practice this craft since the had a conviction on record. Maybe the legislature wanted them to move elsewhere?

- Domestic violence is a misdemeanor. We can argue firearms rights should not be stripped at the misdemeanor level, but the easy fix for this is to make it a felony.

- And looking at Kentucky, no CCDW for anyone behind more than a year's worth of child support. Clearly an encroachment on the right to carry, but hard to argue in favor of the deadbeat.

It is up to the courts to determine if a punishment is unconstitutional as excessive, or cruel and unusual. The constitution lays out our rights as law-abiding citizens, has provisions for those among us that are not, and places a general limit on those provisions.
All due respect, nothing in that mentions punishment after one is freed.

That's reading an awful lot of can into one little paragraph dedicated entirely to what the gov can't do.

That states,,including my own treat the BOR like toliet paper in no way makes it constitutional. "

May 18th, 2019, 08:07 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
" Oh and all three branches were Republican when fix nics came up. "

May 18th, 2019, 12:46 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I just gave you the history, you just gave me your opinion that you stated historical fact.



If all 3 branches were Conservative Republicans fix NICS might have never come up to start with. I would point out that one of your preferred gun organizations supported fix NICS as well as many gun forums and the people that participate on them, along with several gun publications. In fact in the beginning it garnered majority support among gun owners until the tinkering started.
Which preferred org would that be. ? NAGO nor GOA supported anysuch thing.

Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
You compare this to the history I posted above? Did you read it?
You steadfastly defend the NFA, and GCA.
So apparently you agree with the liberal democrats at least concerning parts of both acts.

Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
True, but your assertion that gun owners will leave Trump to vote for a Democrat over a bump stock ban, is nothing more than opinion. In my opinion they won’t because most them have read the history of gun control laws in this country.



I sincerely doubt you appreciated the history or even tried to understand the lesson there in. The modern Democrat Party is the greatest threat this Country has faced in my life time and the people who support them are to blame. All in my opinion only, of course.
"

May 18th, 2019, 12:43 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: Possible 3rd party in 2020 election? by Mike1956

May 18th, 2019, 12:35 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I am going to limit my post to make it easy for you.

Direct me to the exact Amendment in the BOR that does the bolded in your post. I want to read the part that says a violent criminal is free when released from jail.
Direct me to any part of the COTUS which says a person released from jail is NOT a free man and entitled to his inalienable rights.
Ehhhh you can't cuz it ain't in there. "

May 18th, 2019, 12:34 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I am going to limit my post to make it easy for you.

Direct me to the exact Amendment in the BOR that does the bolded in your post. I want to read the part that says a violent criminal is free when released from jail.
Oh , most of them. Shall not be infringed. Congress shall make no law, stuff like that.

Your trying to claim its constitutional because the COTUS doesn't specfically say a freed prisoner ie a free man is entitled to his inalienable rights.

Its,a,ludicrous argument.

The oppression on that front only started in 30s imposed by the liberals you hate but so staunchly try to defend their position . "

May 18th, 2019, 12:24 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Nothing more than your opinion and in my opinion wrong. It is always “worse” with Democrats. I will post just a little backup for my opinion. Stating your opinion is the American way, stating it without some references is nothing more than a guess.

1934 Democrats all 3 branches—-BAD
“The first piece of national gun control legislation was passed on June 26, 1934. The National Firearms Act (NFA) — part of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal for Crime“— was meant to curtail “gangland crimes of that era such as the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre.”
The NFA imposed a tax on the manufacturing, selling, and transporting of firearms listed in the law, among them short-barrel shotguns and rifles, machine guns, firearm mufflers and silencers. Due to constitutional flaws, the NFA was modified several times. The $200 tax, which was high for the era, was put in place to curtail the transfer of these weapons.“


1938 Democrats all 3 branches—-BAD
“The Federal Firearms Act (FFA) of 1938 required gun manufacturers, importers, and dealers to obtain a federal firearms license. It also defined a group of people, including convicted felons, who could not purchase guns, and mandated that gun sellers keep customer records. The FFA was repealed in 1968 by the Gun Control Act (GCA), though many of its provisions were reenacted by the GCA.”


1939 Democrats all 3 branches—-BAD
“In 1939 the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case United States v. Miller, ruling that through the National Firearms Act of 1934, Congress could regulate the interstate selling of a short barrel shotgun. The court stated that there was no evidence that a sawed off shotgun “has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia,” and thus “we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”


1968 Democrats all 3 branches—-BAD
“Following the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Attorney General and U.S. Senator Robert F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., President Lyndon B. Johnson pushed for the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968. The GCA repealed and replaced the FFA, updated Title II of the NFA to fix constitutional issues, added language about “destructive devices” (such as bombs, mines and grenades) and expanded the definition of “machine gun.”

Overall the bill banned importing guns that have “no sporting purpose,” imposed age restrictions for the purchase of handguns (gun owners had to be 21), prohibited felons, the mentally ill, and others from purchasing guns, required that all manufactured or imported guns have a serial number, and according to the ATF, imposed “stricter licensing and regulation on the firearms industry.”


1986 Democrats House, Republican Executive & Senate MOSTLY GOOD/LITTLE BAD
“In 1986 the Firearm Owners Protection Act was passed by Congress. The law mainly enacted protections for gun owners — prohibiting a national registry of dealer records, limiting ATF inspections to once per year (unless there are multiple infractions), softening what is defined as “engaging in the business” of selling firearms, and allowing licensed dealers to sell firearms at “gun shows” in their state. It also loosened regulations on the sale and transfer of ammunition.

The bill also codified some gun control measures, including expanding the GCA to prohibit civilian ownership or transfer of machine guns made after May 19, 1986, and redefining “silencer” to include parts intended to make silencers.”


1993 Democrats all 3 branches BAD
“The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 is named after White House press secretary James Brady, who was permanently disabled from an injury suffered during an attempt to assassinate President Ronald Reagan. (Brady died in 2014). It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The law, which amends the GCA, requires that background checks be completed before a gun is purchased from a licensed dealer, manufacturer or importer. It established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which is maintained by the FBI.”


1994 Democrats all 3 branches BAD
“Tucked into the sweeping and controversial Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, signed by President Clinton in 1994, is the subsection titled Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act. This is known as the assault weapons ban — a temporary prohibition in effect from September of 1994 to September of 2004. Multiple attempts to renew the ban have failed.

The provisions of the bill outlawed the ability to “manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon,” unless it was “lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.” Nineteen military-style or “copy-cat” assault weapons—including AR-15s, TEC-9s, MAC-10s, etc.—could not be manufactured or sold. It also banned “certain high-capacity ammunition magazines of more than ten rounds,” according to a U.S. Department of Justice Fact Sheet.“


2003 Republicans all 3 branches ALL GOOD
“The Tiahrt Amendment, proposed by Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), prohibited the ATF from publicly releasing data showing where criminals purchased their firearms and stipulated that only law enforcement officers or prosecutors could access such information.

“The law effectively shields retailers from lawsuits, academic study and public scrutiny,” The Washington Post wrote in 2010. “It also keeps the spotlight off the relationship between rogue gun dealers and the black market in firearms.”


2005 Republicans all 3 branches ALL GOOD
“In 2005, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was signed by President George W. Bush to prevent gun manufacturers from being named in federal or state civil suits by those who were victims of crimes involving guns made by that company.

The first provision of this law is “to prohibit causes of action against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and their trade associations, for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and intended.” It also dismissed pending cases on October 26, 2005.”


2008 Democrats House & Senate Republican Executve VERY GOOD upheld by 5 Republican appointed Justices
“District of Columbia v. Heller essentially changed a nearly 70-year precedent set by Miller in 1939. While the Miller ruling focused on the “well regulated militia” portion of the Second Amendment (known as the “collective rights theory” and referring to a state’s right to defend itself), Heller focused on the “individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.”

Heller challenged the constitutionality of a 32-year-old handgun ban in Washington, D.C., and found, “The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment.”

It did not however nullify other gun control provisions. “The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms,” stated the ruling.“
My opinion based on recent historical fact.

And correct .
A republican Senate would have killed fix nics rather than send it to a Democrat pres to sign, just on party principle. We both know that.

As,it was they sent the bill on to a republican president who signed it.

And the bump stock ban lays in the final analysis with Trump and nobody else.

Your history lesson was appreciated but had nothing at,all to do with the question . "

May 17th, 2019, 11:16 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Subhuman

May 17th, 2019, 11:05 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by DogWalksWithMe View Post
The 5th for the Fed, and the 14th for the states, specifically allows abridgment with due process.
Yep while the person is a prisioner. Once freed he is entitled to all his inalienable rights.

I understand some support the NFA,and GCA out fear.
Others out of a need for revenge.
Some are just up on a pedestal and holier than thou.

But none of that excuses our throwing the COTUS into a mudhole and stomping on it.

What's worse the darned acts don't accomplish a blasted thing.
Prohibition was finally done away with.

NFA,and GCA will be too in time. The have to be or the COTUS is,just so much toilet paper. "

May 17th, 2019, 07:14 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread 25 yard and up club..
"
Quote Originally Posted by Subhuman View Post
this is all I could manage today
3 mags with the 1911 shooting dead slow, 17 in the plate 2 in the landscaping timber 3 nothing but air

https://i.imgur.com/P88wO1n.jpg

3 15 round mags with the P07 37 in the plate and landscaping timber 8 nothing but air

https://i.imgur.com/yhAnCnj.jpg

my eyes and hands just did the best they could but it was enough to ruin a bad guys day
Good shooting Sub. "

May 17th, 2019, 07:00 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Kentucky is infringed, get over it. Not as infringed as Texas. Texas not as infringed as California. They are all infringed period. You will not live to see it completely reversed.



Wrong. You just don't listen. I go on about all of the COTUS violations perpetrated by the Democratic party, including the unConstitutional union thugs who tried to force me to pay union dues to benefit the Democratic party. Perhaps you support those unConstitutional laws that benefit your beliefs, I don't because they are "actually" unConstitutional, unlike those opinions of what is unConstitutional often bandied about here.



Doesn't matter, he believes in the COTUS on guns and he believes in the COTUS on RTW. He is right in both instances. If your fellow constituents don't believe in the COTUS perhaps you should relocate.



They have everything to do with the COTUS.



Those who maim and kill innocents are never free from their crimes, they can't undo their crimes or even make compensation for them unless we take their life. Execute them and bury them with their gun if it makes you feel better. I know it would me.



Only because the same liberal idiots who let them out of prison to start with refuse to prosecute them for it. I notice you posted no stats. I posted the stats on the recidivism of violent ex-cons and it was quite high, but apparently you chose to ignore it.



Optics have kept even worse COTUS infringers out of office. Doesn't make it right or legal but it is still better than the alternative. We lost the RTKAB as it was originally stated because the general public demanded it. Every major gun control bill that has been passed has had the support of the majority of the voting public. UnConstitutional laws that have been passed always lie at the feet of the people, whether it be gun control or closed shop union laws.



You will take nothing back and in fact could well make it worse if you force a large majority of the people who actually are willing to give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety to accept something that is far beyond their ability to understand. The only thing that will restore the 2nd to any degree is our ability to change hearts and minds and get the majority of people to see the dangers of an unarmed population. We certainly are not at that point now. Failure to accomplish this will insure that the people will eventually have the majority required to write the 2nd Amendment out of the COTUS all together. At that point we become a speaker without an audience, an unarmed speaker at that.
With utmost humility. BS.

Agree the RTKABA is gone in every state.
Even a state that has no restrictions is still under the federal yoke.

We WILL reclaim the RTKABA as written. But we will never do it the way you insist it be done.

Conservative think tanks ? Really.

Just read the BOR. The constitution gives no authority to anyone to punish by removing their rights, a free person released from jail.

It simply is not there no matter how it's twisted.

Yes ky is infringed . For the most part now by federal stupidity. But we REGAINED the ability to CC with no permit by playing hardball instead of tiddly winks

I can carry a long gun or handgun openly or concealed with nothing. And yet you are correct I still don't have my birthright because of the fed. "

May 17th, 2019, 06:36 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Sporadic clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 17th, 2019, 09:49 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Sporadic clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 17th, 2019, 09:49 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread 25 yard and up club..
"
Quote Originally Posted by Sporadic View Post
Amazing shooting considering the distance and the gun.
I’ll throw this in to keep the ball rolling although it’s only a 3 shot string at 25 yds with a XDM 40 on an IDPA Target. About 1 shot per second based on experience with a shot timer. Two out of three is good for me but the -3 ... I can’t even best the other 70 plus year olds.
Attachment 22113
What? Another sideways picture?
Great shooting . "

May 17th, 2019, 07:51 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
He is still not HRC, I understand that and you don't in my opinion.



I have told you many times you don't really try and understand my posts. I don't praise Trump as much as I condemn HRC and the Democrat party she represents. Trump and Republicans are the only option that will keep the Democrats out.



Your methods will get us no where and only make matters worse. Without "Conservatives" our gun rights would have gone the way of outdoor theaters years ago and would be missed only by the old people who remembered them. "A lot of us" is not good enough anymore, it has to be hundreds of millions of us for those numbers to bring about change. The best chance of that is to get all Conservatives behind the 2nd Amendment.

Actually if you want to place blame put some on those CINOs (Conservative in name only) who decided to forsake the 2nd Amendment by voting for more important (to them) issues such as abortion rights, closed shop unions, free health care and redistribution of wealth as promoted by the anti-gun party Democrats. They are the real sell-outs.
See I know what you call my methods work.
Because sending the NRA packing along with their moderate stand , got the need for a ccdw repealed here. Because it was,insisted on.

We have a state gun org here that saddled us with ccdw, in the 90s. Using the same we gotta give ground to get anything passed thinking you aspire toowhen we could have had permitless cc back then had they kept their trap shut.

KY is about as gun friendly as it gets. It didn't stay that way by gun owners taking moderate give ground positions.

You keep going on about unions. One that has,nothing at all to do with the RTKABA.

Two . The most pro gun gov we ever had in my memory is probably going to be a one term governor because he over saw turning KY into a right to work state.

Those other issues you keep bringing up have nothing at all to do with the RTKABA.

It's very simple. Trying to ban free felons from guns is useless. It's simply giving the antis another foothold . And it doesn't work. Never has.

Nationwide the number of felons caught with a gun that were not committing a crime with it is so tiny as to not even be considered.

It's infringement for infringements sake and fear of "optics.
Such thinking by too many gun owners is why we lost the RTKABA.

Now its,time to take it back. Not twiddle more away. "

May 17th, 2019, 07:31 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread 25 yard and up club..
"
Quote Originally Posted by 21bubba View Post
Nice shooting. How much time between shots?
Thanks.
Didn't use a timer this time. Guessing about 1 to 2 seconds. "

May 17th, 2019, 07:13 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

RightsEroding clicked Like for this post: Get Old Lose Your Rights ! by Ghost1958

May 17th, 2019, 04:56 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

21bubba clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 16th, 2019, 09:19 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Rabbit212

May 16th, 2019, 08:54 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread 25 yard and up club..
"
Quote Originally Posted by Rabbit212 View Post
I'll play next time I get out to the range. 25 yards minimum and are we going with 10 shots??
As many as you like. But a minimum of 5rds.

At any range you like with a minimum of 25 yrds.

The above was at 50 yrds. I noticed id forgot to put the distance but it was to late to edit the post. "

May 16th, 2019, 08:53 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
I will break this down where perhaps you will understand. From your reply I can tell you are having difficulty understanding my posts. I have never stated that I am for infringements on the RTKAB as I define it. Perhaps you think your definition is sacrosanct but I assure you it is not, and yes I agree that I cannot claim that about my definition either. The 2nd Amendment has limits, you either believe that or you don't. Disagreeing with you about those limits does not mean that somehow I am less invested in the RTKAB than you.

You stated my OK to infringement as fact. You did not "imply" that I said it or state that it was your opinion that I said it, and that statement is simply not true. Had you simply added the word "imply" or a multitude of other words that would qualify your statement as an opinion, I would have no problem with that, but as it was stated, it was false.

When I have questioned any of your statements I have tried to qualify those questions as opinions and I freely admit that is what they are. I usually preface such questions with qualifiers such as "you seem to be saying" or "are you implying that" both of which imply my opinion of what you are saying. Doesn't make it fact but doesn't make it wrong either, it is just an opinion. When I have failed to frame it that way I have either posted historical facts or written words that I believe shows your position to be wrong.

As far as your last statement, I can rewrite it in a way that perhaps you will understand the point I am trying to make. If Trump's bump stock ban helps him beat Joe Biden who made this statement on Tuesday "Joe Biden: Second Amendment Does Not Say You’re ‘Entitled’ to Own a Gun", then yes it will be a good thing he did it. Not because the infringement is good but because a Biden victory would be so much worse in the way of infringements. That also does not mean I think making these concessions is a good idea or will help Trump win and I have made my position known, and if a couple or three million more would do the same, perhaps Trump would change his tactics. One thing is certain, a Biden victory will be far worse for the 2nd Amendment than a Trump victory, and anyone who doesn't believe that has their head in the sand. Of course that is just my opinion and here is some more from the Biden article to confirm my opinion.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...itled-own-gun/
"Former Vice President Joe Biden admitted that the “Second Amendment exists” but stressed during his speech in New Hampshire on Tuesday that it does not say everyone is “entitled” to own a gun.

Biden, who was taking questions at a small outdoor venue, then added, “By the way, if one of you left the keys in your car down the street, and a kid comes along and jumps in it and takes off, you could be held liable civilly for that. So if you own a gun, put a damn trigger lock on it. Put it in a case. You have an obligation.”

Other Biden gun control statements.
"The 2020 Democratic primary field front-runner said that it is more important to figure out whether individuals are entitled to have firearms, bringing up universal background checks."

"In 2013, the Senate rejected proposals backed by Biden and former President Barack Obama that would have expanded background checks for gun sales and banned some military-style semi-automatic "assault" weapons."

"Biden also brought up fingerprint-locking guns that allow only authorized users to fire a weapon."

Joe Biden in Colorado:
“[I]t’s outrageous — it’s outrageous that we still only talk about offering prayers. Look, I don’t know enough detail to know — maybe you guys do — about whether or not, what kind of weapon was used, what the background checks were of the detail. But the idea the we don’t have universal background checks, the idea that we don’t outlaw a number of the weapons that I was able to get outlawed in the crime bill, from large magazines and assault weapons, this is crazy. By the way, it has no — it doesn’t impact on the First, the Second Amendment at all.”
What if the anti gun anti 4A stance Trump has taken causes him to lose that faction of voters who only voted for him because he wasn't Hilary and his word he would not do what he had done?

I understand everything to you is a praise Trump ,praise conservatives opportunity.

Alot of the rest of usuns Amuricans out here give a eats butt about " conservatives ".
We just want our damn rights BACK.
Not wheedled away by the political posturing of those who have no authority over those rights to begin with. "

May 16th, 2019, 08:37 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Rabbit212 clicked Like for this post: 25 yard and up club. by Ghost1958

May 16th, 2019, 08:07 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Really? You can't discriminate between WMD and bump stocks? Perhaps therein lies the problem.

FWIW, I was with a contingent of VCDL members who attended a panel discussion hosted by Mark and Gabby at the VA statehouse. We sat in the front row wearing big orange "Gun Save Lives" buttons. We were told we could not have anyone on the panel or ask questions, or make a statement, so we figured sitting there with the buttons would at least get our message on camera. Mark and Gabby came over and introduced themselves to us beforehand, I guess so they could appear "open minded."

You accusing me of using the antis' playbook is way out of line, BTW. I put in a lot of work for gun rights and I know their playbook better than most. What I also know is we look like nuts and lose ground in battle for the RTKABA by making statements that private citizens should own WMD. If you think that helps, you are as wrong as you can be.

What have you actually done for gun rights lately?

All of that post but the first paragraph would be your opinion.
Like you know the antis playbook better than most. Opinion.

That insisting the RTKABA is unlimited, and that the 2a says,what it clearly says makes gun owners look like nuts. Again your opinion.

Advocating for the RTKABA from a position of appeasement is not advocating at all. It's giving ground that nobody has the authority to give. "

May 16th, 2019, 07:58 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread 25 yard and up club..
" Some time ago I think PEF started a similar thread that ran for a good while on another forum I think.

Anyway. This thread is for shooting attempts ,off hand , no warmup, at distances of 25yrds min.

I'll start. This was about an hour ago , SR9c , Seller Beloit 115 gr fmj.
Target is based on FBI new smaller bottle target.

10 rds fired off hand , cold,. 7 hits of 10 fired.

Attachment 22111

Hope this thread catches on. SD situations don't always happen at 7 yards. "

May 16th, 2019, 07:45 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Trump to go National Emergency. Pelosi eyes shining with happiness..
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
A fine example of just how tricky appointing SCJs can be. Looking at their past is not always accurate. Napolitano was all in for Trump until it became clear that Trump would not appoint him to the SC and now Trump rarely does anything right. There is debate on each of your highlighted blurbs in the post. There are workarounds that have been tossed out there which could possibly give POTUS standing to accomplish each of them to some degree without subverting the COTUS. I am not going to go into them but they are out there and I notice Napolitano does not mention them. These exceptions have been noted by such Constitutional scholars as Dershowitz, Turley and Levin, but have been ignored by MSM.

My point would be that while the ability of the POTUS to address this national emergency (which is now acknowledged by the NYT and other liberal media) is certainly debatable, I wonder if our never-Trump posters have likewise conceded that it is indeed a national emergency, or is acknowledging that Trump was right a step too far for them?

I will acknowledge that there is a possibility that Trump may take further action which violates the COTUS, but if he does so I still have faith that his own party (FreedomCaucus, Rinos) will reign him in, if he does. I still don't understand how anyone can continue to support the other major party (directly or indirectly) which is continuously running roughshod over the COTUS with no opposition from their base or anyone within the leadership of that party.


Napolitano simply tells it as the COTUS lays it out.

Trump wasn't a thought when Bundy Ranch happened but the judge ,quite correctly stated the federal gov constitutionally cannot own the lands it claims.
The lands it can own and how are as clearly spelled out as the 2a is.
I don't believe Trump being the pres, violating the COTUS has anything to do with the judge's statemenrs. "

May 16th, 2019, 05:29 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread NRA Dirty Laundry ? Ruh Roh.
" I personally hope they told up and let a genuine pro gun outfit like GOA, or NGOA take over.

The problem with NRA,clout is they use it to further various degrees of infringement. "

May 16th, 2019, 04:01 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
I didn't say that, nor did I mean it. I have worked with all kind of weapons in the Navy, including nuclear, biological and chemical, as well as anti-aircraft. There are some weapons that should not be in general circulation. Most citizens, even well meaning ones, cannot have the kinds of controls and security required and the risks of mass casualties are too high. For the rich few who could afford to handle these weapons properly, I think there is a risk that when the SHTF, they will become the "new tyranny."

I can see your philosophical point, but we will just have to agree to disagree on that. To me, the practicalities outweigh the theory. To me, handling weapons like that are part of what we, the people, pay the government to do.
You mean your opinion of practicalities, trumps a basic human right AND the COTUS which are NOT theories.

Besides removal of all gun regulations isn't going to put Raptors in everyone's garage.

But the citizenry has the consitutional right to be armed at minimum in parity with the gov "

May 16th, 2019, 02:48 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Well proofs always have to be in context, so it would vary by the kind of discussion I was in. But generally:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since there have been creatures on this planet, all creatures have been endowed with mechanisms to defend themselves. No prey willingly sacrifices itself to the predator. Ancient humans either defended themselves against adversaries or their lineage did not survive to be recorded into history. The legal justification of lethal force for defense of one's life has been recognized by every society, major religion and legal system that has contributed to Western Civilization. It was supported in Athenian law, Roman law and English law (after 1532).

It is simple logic that the right of self defense is made hollow without the defenders having access to weapons, weapons that are up to the job, weapons that are more than equal to the likely threat. The Heller decision made it clear that the RTKABA has always been part of the human condition. It also states that the Second Amendment makes that clear also, but it goes even further. The Framers of the BOR clearly had more serious matters on their mind than just individual self defense. They recognized that the people, collectively, had a right to defend themselves, collectively, against tyranny in any form. So the RTKABA is both an individual and a collective (not government) right. That is a logical extension of the idea of true liberty, that the power in the US would reside with the people and that the government would be subservient and answerable to the people. For that to be true, it follows that the people must have the RTKABA as well as the other rights protected (not granted) by the BOR.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That was just off the top of my head. Depending on the audience, and whether certain gun specific gun restrictions were being discussed, I would change it up.

Thank you.

Now the eloquent part about gov being subservient to the people sort of withers,in the vine if said gov is,allowed to limit the access of the people as to type of weapon they may have. Where they can have it and how they must transport it ,don't it. "

May 16th, 2019, 08:59 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
" Jmf552 said.

I would challenge that the government does not have the authority, since they are actually doing it..


That logic failed faster than you could type it.

By your thinking murderers have the authority to murder. After all they are doing it daily.
Rapists have the authority to rape. They ARE doing it.

Felons have the authority to be armed with whatever they wish. They are doing so thousands of times a day.
I could go on but you see where the ground fell out from under you.

Just because something is being done by gov doesn't mean it has,the authority to do so. Or that what it is doing or trying to do in the case of disarming felons, which they fail at miserably, requiring this and banning that will always be tolerated. "

May 15th, 2019, 10:30 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

OlympicViking clicked Like for this post: NRA Dirty Laundry ? Ruh Roh by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 10:21 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Really, what is your proof that the RTKABA is God given and preexisted this nation by thousands of years? Is it in the Bible? The Code of Hammurabi? Where?

I would challenge that the government does not have the authority, since they are actually doing it.

As a pro-gun activist, who takes our cause to the streets and the statehouse, instead of just playing on social media, I think the big question is why some gun owners so strongly try to make arguments that are so easily defeated by research and logic, that do not help the cause, that make all of us sound like nuts. Honestly, I think some gun owners don't really understand the battle we are in, how it is being fought and how to win it.
Please . You surely didn't ask me to prove that the right to keep and bear weapons predates this arrogant over reaching gov of ours did you?

Weapons ie arms, are,not just guns. Spears rocks swords are all arms.

This ones to easy.

But please if you go to advocate outside of your state , dont. Reasonable restrictions , gov interests , blah blah blah are terms pulled out of thin air with NO backing in the COTUS at all. Advocating using that thinking and those terms only embolden the antis and aids them.

Your not the only one that does stay involved. Only some of us realize there is no moderate middle ground and repeal is the ONLY goal.
Usually reflected in the state we live in gun regulations. Or better put lack of them . "

May 15th, 2019, 10:08 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Since you have now fallen back to the "COTUS and the BOR doesn't grant rights" argument it seems you have backed off of the idea that 2A actually does not protect against all infringements. I have provided references that it never has done so from day one.

And thanks for referencing SCOTUS because in that same decision, they allowed that there is room for reasonable restrictions. Either SCOTUS is authoritative or it is not.
SCOTUS is a blind squirrel that occasionally finds a,nut.

No I haven't backed off anything.

Fact . RTKABA preexisted this nation by thousands,of years. The founders nor the 2a grant it not does gov have the authority to limit it. As clearly written in the 2A.

SCOTUS has never opined anything but that fact and that any law repugnant to the COTUS is null and boid.

The big question is,why some gun owners so strongly try to argue the anti gunners side. "

May 15th, 2019, 05:25 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Update on my Daughter and her recovery.
"
Quote Originally Posted by RScottie View Post
I am happy to report that my daughter is recovering pretty well. She is still very sore and has limited motion.

She has returned to school and that has really helped her emotionally.

I on the other hand am still feeling the fallout from this.

We are starting to get bills for her hospital stay, the surgeries, and her aftercare. All totaled, they billed my insurance almost $200,000 so far. My insurance says they will go after the drivers insurance policy for me.

That is all well and good but I have 80/20 coverage and they are sending me the bills for the 20%.

I have called a lawyer as 20% could be as much as $40,000.

I don't have that.

I have been riding my motorcycle a lot and just trying to keep my sanity.

I have a lot to be thankful for, especially that my daughter even survived. But, this is likely going to go on for some time. I cannot let it bankrupt my family.

If anyone has been through something similar, advice is appreciated.
How old is your daughter Scottie? "

May 15th, 2019, 12:43 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

NONAME762 clicked Like for this post: This case should be dropped. by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 11:54 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

NONAME762 clicked Like for this post: This case should be dropped. by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 11:52 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

NONAME762 clicked Like for this post: This case should be dropped. by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 11:45 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

NONAME762 clicked Like for this post: This case should be dropped. by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 11:39 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

NONAME762 clicked Like for this post: This case should be dropped. by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 11:30 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

NONAME762 clicked Like for this post: NC: Trooper shoots armed suspect during traffic stop by Ghost1958

May 15th, 2019, 10:44 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
But they did not say "free men" in the document they signed. 2A says, "the people" and obviously prisoners are still people. So obviously you do believe there is a line that can be drawn by the government to deny the RTKABA, which is people in prison (which I agree with, BTW) even though it has no basis in 2A.

Also, as I'm sure you are aware, when the Founders wrote about "free men" they meant free, white men who were not indentured servants:

"The rules against owning guns were aimed not just at those nominally deemed “slaves” in America; they were aimed at all subjected peoples. The text of Virginia’s first slave code applied the same restriction to “free” blacks and indentured servants (mostly Irish Catholics and Scotch Presbyterians, but also criminals). Nearly all other Southern slave-holding states copied Virginia’s lead, passing laws banning the ownership of guns for both slave and free African-Americans. These laws stayed in effect and were updated after independence from Britain,"
"The Racist Origin of America’s Gun Control Laws" -The New American, Tuesday, 09 September 2014

BTW, the Virginia Slave Code was in effect the day the BOR was signed and continued in effect afterwards, including its infringements on the RTKABA for freemen in the classes mentioned. The Founders would have known that well because the slave codes of several other states was based on it. So the signers of the BOR had lines that they were drawing on the RTKABA, contrary to what they wrote and what they signed.
The RTKABA was not granted by the founders not the 2A.
That is not just my opinion but a fact upheld by the courts including SCOTUS.

It can only be infringed or taken by force or the threat of force, as in the case of criminals submitting to arrest before death.

Might however doesn't make right in such matters where a God given right is stolen and seldom do the oppressed tolerate it more than a few decades.

The RTKABA is limited not by any law since all such laws,are,repugnant to the COTUS and void.

It's only limted by the use or threat of force illegally applied to limit it. Such is the case with free felons. And prisoners of the people. "

May 15th, 2019, 12:00 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by billt View Post
Do you think we would be better served 2nd Amendment wise with one of the Democratic alternatives? Or are you just whining?
Under the same conditions house control and Senate control?

Probably we wouldn't have fix nice or a bump stock ban . Because the GOP Senate would never have sent either to any Dem president just on principle of opposing the DEMS.

With Trump they could while still staying in party lines.

That law got passed, and that EO is in place specficalky BECAUSE Trump is president.

Oh and I do alot of things. But whining has never been one of them. "

May 14th, 2019, 06:41 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
COTUS and the BOR don't say that. "Prisoner of the people" is not a constitutional or legal term.

You have argued that if 2A doesn't say the RTKABA can be restricted, then any restriction in unconstitutional. You can try to have it both ways, but it doesn't work. Either the government has the power to restrict the RTKABA in some circumstances, or it doesn't.
I've explained it.

Your argument is simply argument for arguments sake.

A person seperated from society forcibly after due process has a sentence to serve during which he only has the rights while incarcerated the COTUS gusrantees. No cruel unusual punishment.

He is a prisioner of the people with the COTUD specifying the prisoners rights.

Once free constitutionally he should regain ALL rightd. "

May 14th, 2019, 06:07 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by Arejay View Post
Why do you want to know ?
Probably to see what level of crime excuses doing away with due process as red flag laws do. "

May 14th, 2019, 03:38 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by billt View Post
As far as the, "Never Trumpers". Old man Bush and McCain are dead. And Flake and Jeb are both out of politics, so no one remotely cares what they say. (Not that anyone did when they were still in office). And Bill Krystol's magazine went belly up, because no one wanted to read the anti Trump slop he was trying to shovel on a weekly basis. Let alone pay to read it.

So the whole, "Never Trump" movement is pretty much dead. It died the day he was elected. As far as Romney, perhaps him and Flake can open up a delicatessen. Then they can shovel slop instead of blabbing it.
Trump may well win.

If he does the permissions to bear arms we still have ,and the 4thA will pay dearly in more gun bans, more gun regulation, red flag , stop and frisk and worse.

Then the Trump faithful can look back and try to excuse him as they do now. "

May 14th, 2019, 03:33 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Well if you get right down to it, 2A doesn't have any wording to restrict people from having guns in prison. Are your for that?
The people vs (insert criminals name here).

Once caught tried convicted the criminal is a prisoner of the people. Separated from the people in prison as punishment.

However once freed in a legal manner all rights should be restored.
If the criminal is to dangerous to release then he is to be kept seperated from and a prisioner of the people.

All thru our history until the mid 1934 there was no such foolishness to contend with. "

May 14th, 2019, 03:27 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
Often with crimes, there are additional penalties given apart from prison. There is probation, where a variety of restrictions may be applied, including restriction on where you may live or travel, at least until probation ends. Even after probation, one might be restricted in profession. Would one be in favour of a convicted pedophile being allowed to be a child counselor at a school? Why should they be restricted in their pursuit of happiness, or profession? People convicted of computer crimes may be restricted from using a computer. There are more ways of penalizing for crimes than just jail. Fines may be levied, and those exist past any prison sentence.
All due respect , none of that pertains to the pre existing RTKABA or the 2a which protects,it. "

May 14th, 2019, 01:36 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
The first issue will not be solved by some new amendment. That rule is on paper now. Adding new words won't change the fact that it will still be up to government officials what "violating the Constitution" is and isn't.

The second issue may be important to some, but I don't care about it and I don't think most Americans do either.

So again, I see the whole thing having no upside, but a lot of possible downsides.

As to term limits, I just look at the long term damage FDR did to this country, starting us down a socialist path as proof term limits are a good idea. We need fresh blood in government and incumbents get unfair advantages when running for re-election I would not let any politician run for even a second term. If they are popular and still want to make a contribution, they can run for a different office. That would clean out Congress pretty quickly. And as you say, presidents tend to do their worst stuff in their second term. If we move that to a first and only term, at least they will be out sooner.

One thing, maybe the only thing, I like about the UK government is that any Prime Minister and their cronies, can get a vote of "no confidence" at any time. I think we should have that too. That would keep presidents on their toes!

The second issue of illegally claimed land by the Fed, was important enough to being 100s of people from all over to send the Fed packing at Bundy ranch.

To find the Bundys not quilty in Oregon

To lose their life over.

May mean nothing to you ,but it does to many many Americans affected by it. "

May 14th, 2019, 11:37 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Get Old Lose Your Rights !.
" When I'm too old to lift a gun is when they can maybe take them. "

May 14th, 2019, 10:31 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Well if you want violent felons to have guns, good for you. I for one, do not. They gave up the RTKABA when they intentionally raped, killed or injured someone committing a crime. I have zero sympathy for them, unlike the bleeding hearts who think they can be rehabilitated or deserve a second chance. Heck, why don't we just hand them a Glock as they are being let out?

Stats show they are highly likely to offend again and it is likely the next offense will be worse. I would like to see them locked up forever, but that is not going to happen in any foreseeable scenario.

And if we are going to campaign for the RTKABA, having gun rights for violent criminals on our platform hurts us. I get tired of self-proclaimed "Constitutional scholars" spouting theory that takes us in the opposite direction we should be going.
Get as weary as you wish. It won't change the fact the constitution gives no authority to gov to remove a free persons rights.

If we gave up the stupid drug war , and a host of other victimless crimes we call felonies, housing ttuely violent criminals would be easy.

In any case a freed prisoners has the right to be armed.
They will get a gun if they wish anyway.

So which is better. Stop making everything a felony And keep truely violent criminals locked up, or turn them loose with a useless constitution violating law that says they can't be armed? "

May 14th, 2019, 10:26 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
"
Quote Originally Posted by Arejay View Post
What about repeat offenders ?
Every time this topic is brought up I feel it's pertaining to a one time offense.
Still simple . If they are in the street legally they have the RTKABA. Even in Heller, and I'm paraphrasing a bit , it was stated in that opinion that any law repugnant to the 2A is null and void.

By that opinion the laws prohibiting freed prisoners RTKABA is already null and void.

Repeat offenders ? Don't turn them lose to reoffend.

The only legal and constitutional answer is full restoration of the RTKABA. "

May 14th, 2019, 10:12 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Felon and GCA 1968: Actress cries as she pleads guilty in college admissions scandal.
" Turned out of prison to walk on society , all rights restored.
Anything else is not within gov constitutional authority.

If we are to regain our RTKABA , then we must fight to regain everyones RTKABA. Not just those we want to have it. "

May 14th, 2019, 09:36 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jeanlouise View Post
But that threat of not being re-elected keeps people in office by continuing to promise them free stuff, race baiting, sanctuary cities etc.

Knowing your time in office will be up in 2 years no matter what...maybe some of those people would start voting responsibly because they don't have to fear the masses vote.
Unlikely. One has to assume elected officials in either party respect the COTUS , and want to honor the restrictions it placed on them.

Problem is , even under threat of being voted out , ZBOTH parties want to disarm the citizenry, give KEW sweeping powers to control the public with intimidation , and steal as,much money and property as possible.

Term limits would be like taking a badly behaved child to church with the promise that no matter what it does , no punishment will occur.

If Trump gets a,2nd term, watch him change drastically.

Obama did the same. He didn't start coming after guns until his 2nd.

All 2nd term presidents put forth proposals,they would not dare do in their first because they have nothing to lose.

Term limits is a horrible idea.
There is the ability to vote the bums out. That's all that needs to be in place on that issue IMO. "

May 14th, 2019, 08:15 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Here's the problem I see. If there were such a convention, what are the possibilities that things would turn out like we would want? I am not talking about a "runaway" convention, I am just talking about the trend toward liberal progressivism winning out on more points than people with true libertarian views. Personally, I like our Constitution the way it is. I think it's a brilliant document. I can't see today's political actors having what it takes to improve on it.

The problem is the government is not following the Constitution we have. Who is to say the government would follow the improved one any better? I see the probability of unintended consequences to be very high.

To me the solution is not to say COTUS is broken. The public is always looking for some "one and done" It is to take responsibility for the fact that we, the people, are not using it to its best advantage. When we have such low turnout at the polls, how can we expect any constitution to be effective? The government is the way it is because the voters let it get that way. In any system of government that elects its leaders, that will always be so.

I too believe the constitution is perfect.

Only one amendment need be ratified at a Convention of States. That would be one that put long prison sentences for any government officials seeking to violate it as written.

Removing a gazillion acres of illegally held Fed land would also be good. "

May 14th, 2019, 08:03 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jeanlouise View Post
I can't think of one politician that I couldn't do without after say...10 or 12 years in office.

I can think of a lot that have outlived they welcome but keep getting re-elected because the incumbent has a big advantage.

Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Robert Byrd, Joe Biden, John McCain all come immediately to mind. Reid finally quit but Byrd and McCain were there till the end and I don't see Pelosi or Biden going anywhere soon.

Politics was never meant to be a life time career. They were supposed to go to DC, serve their country for a couple of terms and go home.

Agreed. And the people can vote them out.

But the threat of not being elected tends to keep them honest to a point.

A lame duck that holds any office with much power is more dangerous to our rights than any terrorist group. "

May 13th, 2019, 10:27 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
" Personally I think term limits are a horrible idea.

You get a good person in office you can't keep him thre.

And it's historically proven fact there is nothing more dangerous to our rights than a politician in office with no re election to worry about.

There is nothing to keep any amendment from being proposed once a COS is called.
But the high hurdle of an amendment being ratified prevents a runaway convention.

I would imagine SCOTUS would be seriously limited in power as a result . "

May 13th, 2019, 07:26 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Sell Privately or Use FFL?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by TRX View Post
Nothing, unless the PD and prosecutor's office wanted to set themselves up for a lawsuit.
Exactly.

There is alot more to connecting a person to a crime than just who owned the gun.

You have to be able to place a person at the crime scene for one. That's a tall order when the person who owned the gun at one time wasn't there. "

May 13th, 2019, 07:17 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Not what the Constitutional experts are saying, in fact they say exactly the opposite. The scope would be narrow and limited. The agendas would have to be clearly specific on what they want to do and what the states voted on.

There are no "constitutional experts " concerning a Convention of States. Since the birth of the nation there has never been one to produce "experts"

However had there been one the civil war might well have been avoided.

History tends to repeat itself.

Take your pick.
One thing is as certain as the daybreak. Voting isn't going to get it done.

No matter who gets elected to what , as long as we are a,two party system, it only gets worse.

More infringement, more oppresion, more outright gov theviery and yes murders.

So we are left with a Convention of states, or what this nations people historically have done when gov gets too big for its britches. I know the choice Id RATHER be used.
But it's not up to me or the millions like me. Only the end result is. "

May 13th, 2019, 05:52 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Actually the site shows as I said. 15 where both state houses have approved CoS, 7 where one house has voted affirmative, and 12 other states that have active legislation. They don't mention such things as the active movement in some of the affirmative states to rescind their previous vote to affirm and the growing movement that is concerned with who is backing the CoS with large amounts of money. A large number of billionaires, some with dubious agendas, have been pumping large amounts of money into the movement. There is general consensus that the effort has hit a wall and beginning to crumble.

Just exactly how do you think this convention, with one of its stated agendas being to reign in Federal Government with no mention of doing away with all of the various gun control acts passed over the years, will somehow restore the purity of the 2nd? In fact I can name 7 of those states that wil pull their active legislation or will never sign on to support the CoS if doing away with NFA is even mentioned as part of the convention's agenda.

If a CoS ever does happen it will not be with the goal of restoring the 2nd but rather the narrow efforts to enforce fiscal restraint, term limits and "some" restriction of the federal government in regards to mandating laws that the COTUS does not give them, but rather leaves the power to the states to pass them. In my opinion there won't be but a very few (if any) States that will rescind laws such as the NFA. Well over 50% of the voting public either supports these infringements, or even if they don't, they support things such as abortion, unions and buying votes more than they support the 2nd.

Again doesn't mean I would not support a CoS, but I am a realist about the possible outcomes.
That would be your opinion. But your states calling for a Convention of States is off by quite a bit.

Polls tell nothing but what the polster wants.
And you would have no more idea what states will do if the repealing all gun laws is proposed.

Here is what conservatives can't accept.

If Trump has ran as a conservative in the primary Cruz would have been nominated.

But he didn't . He never said he was a conservative, just a democrat that became a republican.
He was elected because he was seen as an outsider , he ran as a champion of constitutional rights. He won because his winning was supposed to send the message ,fly over country has had enough of rights grabbing lying pieces of trash in the Fed. And SCOTUS.

Trump turned out to be anything but what he ran as.

He can't pull that wool hood out again.
He may be elected again. Its far from certain.
People are fed up, Trump wasn't what he claimed to be.

As I said . I've come to the point I am sick of the whole thing. No matter who gets in of the two parties the result will be the same. Just different smoke and mirrors.

If we can't break the 2 party stranglehold , soon, convention of states or otherwise, this nation will be Venezula or worse in a decade. "

May 13th, 2019, 05:06 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
Based on your explanation, I am not only not praying for it, I would be totally against it. You make it sound like a complete crapshoot.
No. Proposed amendments have to be ratified by such a large number of states to pass its far from a crap shoot.

Look I'm getting old. Not everything but most of what I held dear is dead.
So if everyone wants to excuse Trump as the savior of our rights that's ok. He's not . But I'm past caring.
And if irrational fear of the last option we have to save this nation from imploading again as it has once in the past won't let an A5 happen, I'm almost past caring about that.

If waiting until active physical resistance or bowing to tyrants is all that's left , personally I've less to lose than most and am ok with that too. "

May 13th, 2019, 04:20 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
If 2A is not even one of the pillars of the COS movement, I am surprised you would be for it. I would not be. If they are not going to strengthen IA and 2A, the whole thing is a sham.
Its not an election with a platform.
Nor can a cc be held to just one specfic proposal.

It cant runaway as some fear because the ratification process is to steep.

I'm for it because we are quickly moving to a gov that feels it can take people's property, guns , on the basis of rumor.

That LE should be able to stop and frisk anyonr they want.

And worse to come.
Most Americans outside of big cities will not peaceably submit to being stomped on ,homes invaded , property stolen on a whim.

Anybody wanting at least a chance to avoid something all citizens want to avoid should be praying for Convention of States.

We simply cannot continue to exist as even the appearance of a,free nation for another decade the way we are headed. And frankly Trump is no help at all . He supports all the above. "

May 13th, 2019, 04:04 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
" There is no chance of a "runaway " convention of states.

Honestly not a whole lot would make it thru the ratification process.

But putting if only one amendment made it thru to atrip the Fed gov of unconstitutional powers it's claimed it would be worth it.

Might want to check your count again of states calling for a A5.

May 2018, there were 27 active calls for an A5 specfic to a balanced budget amendment.
34 states if you count the ones that call for one but not for a bba.
1 shy. "

May 13th, 2019, 03:27 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
" There is no chance of a "runaway " convention of states.

Honestly not a whole lot would make it thru the ratification process.

But putting if only one amendment made it thru to atrip the Fed gov of unconstitutional powers it's claimed it would be worth it. "

May 13th, 2019, 03:17 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by jmf552 View Post
I am disappointed in Trump also, for the reasons you mentioned. But to say he is as bad as anyone running provably not true. The Dems would give us an "assault weapons" ban, UBCs, mandatory gun storage, even more and tougher red flag laws, just to get started. All those will breeze through the House, get approved by the RINO Senate and signed by the Dem president. You want that? Really?

And there is no chance of the Libertarians winning the election. They can't even run their own party. Their candidate last time was soft on guns and was even crazier than Trump or any of the Dems. The best they could do is spoil it for Trump and allow the Dems to win.

The convention of states will not happen. The numbers are just not there. Research it. Do the math. It is a pipe dream. And even if it did happen, it might not turn out the way you would want it to.

Trump is the least of all evils in 2020, by a wide margin.
Did the math . I give it six years max of the type of gov we have had for the past 20 yes and there will be one.

Only six states why of it now. "

May 13th, 2019, 11:06 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
"
Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
Trump can do nothing that will elect a 3rd party candidate. The only thing that might change that is if there is a 4th party candidate but I would still bet either a Socialist Democrat (a new oxymoron) or Trump wins even if there are 4 (5 if you count the Libertarians) candidates (2 left and 2 right and one left/right). Whether you want to admit it or not there is no large amount of voters that will abstain from voting for Trump over bump stocks, fix NICS, or red flag laws, because they know doing so will elect a Socialist Democrat who also supports doing all 3 of those things plus banning ARs, banning handguns, putting FFLs out of business, confiscation of all guns, banning high capacity magazines, semi-automatics, taxing ammunition to the hilt, etc., just to name a few of the agendas put forth by the Democrat candidates.

If the never Trump Rinos are able to field a candidate it will guarantee a Democrat win unless the Democrats also field a candidate in opposition to whoever wins their primary, and that makes it a tossup. I still don't believe either of these two parties will poll more than the Rs or Ds but it might throw the election into the House which would probably give it to the Democrat.

Anyone, whose primary agenda is the RTKAB or pro-gun, who casts a vote for anyone other than Trump or abstains from voting at all is hurting the very cause they claim to support. Luckily the majority of gun owners know that. There will be no mass walkout of gun owners in this election. The Democrats have made sure of that by making it clear what they will do to the 2nd Amendment if they are elected into power in all 3 branches. It is not the pro-gun people who will hurt Trump's chances, it is the never Trump people who still claim to be Republicans. These are powerful, rich elitists ho will be joined by other powerful rich people such as Soros and Steyer who want nothing more than to undermine the Republican Party and the COTUS.

If the people are irrational they don't deserve a rational Federal Government.
I don't believe I mentioned guns etc in the post you quoted. At, all.



If you believe there is not massive resistance to red flag laws in most of the country your IMO are,dreaming.

Trump has angered practically everyone except his core base,who think he can do no wrong. And that core base wasn't and isn't enough to elect him.

He may well be the next POTUS. Though we would be better off with a conditionally minded libertarian by far.


I personally no longer give a hoot . Trump is as bad on gun issues, stop and frisk, and red flag as anyone running .

That a A5 convention of states,is long overdue is,obvious, regardless who is the chief potato head. "

May 13th, 2019, 08:19 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 replied to the thread Possible 3rd party in 2020 election?.
" Trump , though I voted for him, has set the stage for a successful third party run if the right candidate is found.

The left is,way to far left to win, and Trump is a,renamed older style Democrat who has angered alot of people who voted for him that he had to have, but won't again .

There are times I think we may lose any semblance of rational gov before or directly after the election. "

May 12th, 2019, 10:22 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Name anyplace in the U. S. where citizens have the RTKABA.
" Totally serious request. The NRA, GOA, etc and tons of gun owners constantly speak of defending the 2A and the RTKABA.

Name a place in this nation where the RTKABA exists. "

April 17th, 2019, 10:23 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread This case should be dropped..
" Actually should never have been charged.

If someone shoots at you, LE or not, you have the right to fire back.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.owe...-shooting/amp/ "

April 13th, 2019, 12:33 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Been retraining a skill I'd abandoned..
" Years ago I was taught the CAR [center axis relock] form of pistol tactics.

Over the years I gradually just stopped using it or practicing it. My need to clear buildings etc was over and I frankly got lazy 8 guess.

Now I know some will boo hiss at CAR.
And it's not the be all end all for all situations. Or even most. But it at least to me is worth my resharpening as a skill for close quarters and speed.

No room to go into the actual technique here but JMO any skill that allows 3 shot groups at speed that I can cover with my thump at 10 yrds while keeping my pistol close to me and quick multiple target aquistion is probably worth my repracticing again as I age. "

April 12th, 2019, 06:40 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Barretta Spanish 1911 ?.
" Need a quick answer if possible.

My son is Being offered a so called Beretta Spanish 1911?

Never heard of one.

I'm thinking it's probably a Star the guy is making sound fancy.

Anybody ever heard of one. "

April 9th, 2019, 04:11 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread All sheriff's in all states should do this concerning all gun regs.
" Officers willing to honor their oath are rare as unicorns. Much less to this level.

If they would there would be no gun control in short order.

https://news.google.com/articles/CAI...S&ceid=US%3Aen "

March 31st, 2019, 03:20 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Prayer badly needed..
" Right now I'm sitting with a very good friend in ICU.

10 days ago he and his wife had a car crash.

He is able to get around some. I've been driving him back and forth to the hospital for 10 days.

She is at this moment fighting for her life.

Please pray for Carolyn. She and her husband are kind, Christian people.

Docs are doing all they can. But not offering much hope.

Thank you all. Phil "

March 11th, 2019, 06:49 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Bad Ky Campus Carry Bill being snuck thru..
" I do not have the number as the proponents are hush hush.

Bottom line the bill would make campus carry OC, legal by statute.

Which would be fine except to do that a ky ccdw permit would be required .

Short and sweet.
Any bill that requires a permit to OC anywhere violates the Ky constitution .
The General Assembly is granted only authority to prevent CC . That's it and that's all.

Any permit requirement to OC anywhere in ky is outside the scope of legislative power.

The bill is an attempt to do an end run around the ky constitution and attempt to set precedence of permitting OC .

I urge every ky gun owner to call their reps and remind them they have no constitutional authority to pass such a requirement for OC in ky.

Thanks. "

March 2nd, 2019, 05:49 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread KY permitless carry bill passes House goes to Gov..
" KY permitless concealed carry passed the house and heads for Gov Bivens desk.

I do not THINK any of the proposed amendments were adopted.

Remember, you can thank a handful of Dems and 2 Republicans almost all from Jefferson county district for doing their best to derail the bill with junk amendments.

And the KY Fraternal Order of police and Louisville Metro PD for opposing the bill "

March 1st, 2019, 03:14 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Ky permitless carry 2019 being screwed up..
" Three amendments are being filed in the house to the bill.

Together they amount to a ccdw that is only good in KY and still the need to carry a training certification.

Call your reps and demand they pass the senate version unaltered or kill the bill.

It will be heard Wed.

Thanks "

February 23rd, 2019, 06:33 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Lot of gun bills being proposed in KY..
" One very good one and several "pro gun " bills being put forth by republicans who are either wolves in sheep's clothing or simply ignorant.

One example is the campus carry bill.
Another is the bill I posted put forth by Rep Goforth .

IMHO any bill proposed in KY that requires a permit to OC ANYWHERE should be opposed.

OC has needed nothing since statehood.
The KY constitution gives no authority to the general assembly to regulate OC in anyway.

Any bill like the campus carry bill, or Goforths bill that makes a permit nessacary to carry openly at any location in this state is an end run around the KY constitution and an effort to set precedence that the atate can regulate OC by requiring a permit.

These bills sound great until one reads them enough to see the connection being made.

Read these proposed bills carefully.

The only one I've seen so far that's a honest to goodness pro gun bill is the "constitutional carry "bill that repeals the requirement for concealed carry permits in KY. "

February 13th, 2019, 10:02 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread Help, stumped Marlin mod 60 22 rifle won't fire..
" Help! Lol.

I've taken a friends Marlin model 60/99 22 rifle to repair and I'm stumped.

He took it apart to clean it, removed the action and it fell apart. He put it back in but had pieces reversed etc.

I brought it home put everything back in correctly but it still has a problem.

It feeds, ejects, fine. Pulling the bolt cocks the hammer. And I can trip it to fire by gentle pressure with my finger on the sear.

However when I put the stock back on it acts like the trigger isn't touching anything. Won't reset, nor trip the hammer. Just pulls and nothing.

I have noticed if I pull it very hard with the stock on but the mounting screws not in pulling the trigger hard seems to move the action barrel assembly forward a tiny bit.

So I lay this maddening problem here at the source of all firearm wisdom. "

February 12th, 2019, 08:59 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread KY constitutional carry bill introduced 2019.
" I've read all 7 pages of the bill.
It's a NRA sponsored bill, but they seem to have learned their lesson from the last time around as there is no FOL signage or expanded no carry zones in this bill.
Basically it's the long way around the barn to say permitless CC legal anywhere open carry is.

Link to the bill.

https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/reco.../orig_bill.pdf "

February 11th, 2019, 09:56 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread The right to keep and bear arms..
" As guaranteed by the 2A.

A few days ago while I was in the woods alone cutting firewood, a realization came to me.

We speak of defending our RTKABA. Support this pro gun organization or that one to defend our RTKABA. Which is great as we cannot simply roll over and give up.

But we who support the RTKABA, have been, including myself, conditioned by gov in spite of ourselves.

The right to keep and bear arms has already been taken. We are not defending it but trying to regain it.

The gov has no authority to interfere with the RTKABA. No such authority is even hinted at in the 2A.

But. Even if one can think of a state that requires nothing for any free person to buy own and carry firearms, the Fed still has restrictions and regulations as to what type of firearms we may possess. And who can and cannot posses them.

That is NOT the RTKABA that the founders strove to protect.

Friends we stopped defending our RTKABA when the first gun regulation was passed. We lost it outright.

From that point forward we have had the GPTKABA the government's permission to keep and bear arms.

And IMO it's clear as crystal voting, going to courts, SCOTUS etc will never enable us to regain it.

We in reality only have 2 options left to regain our RTKABA .
The next peaceful step is massive non compliance combined with a convention of states.

An individual who will not surrender his or her weapons , whatever type they may be, even if he dies in that effort, holds into his RTKABA.

But collectively? Our RTKABA was taken long ago.

The question is do we collectively have what it takes to get it back? "

January 20th, 2019, 04:38 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread KY crush this bill..
" This proposed bill is horrendous.

Red flag, illegal private sales, estate must register any firearms, safe storage bill, about every anti gun regulation you can dream up is in this bill.

It has been assigned to the house judiciary committee as HB 76.

Call the members of the house judiciary committee to snuff this bill and your house reps to oppose it.

And those of you in the lexington area districts need to get on the ball to kick clowns like this guy out of office.

You can read a summary of the bill here. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/19RS/prefiled/BR349.htm. "

January 18th, 2019, 06:10 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread THIS is how all armed citizens should treat gun regulations..
" Bless these NH lawmakers.
Everyone should treat all gun regulations just like this.

https://www.concordmonitor.com/Group...n-ban-22616660 "

January 16th, 2019, 06:34 PM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite

Ghost1958 created the thread KY call to action.
" I urge all KY gun owners to call their reps and the house judiciary members to pass
BR 97 which removes almost all GFZ in KY.

The bill can be seen here.

KY House Bill 30 (HB30, previously BR97) -- AN ACT relating to concealed deadly weapons, sponsored by Representative R. Goforth.

Amends KRS 527.020, 237.110, 237.115, 244.125, and 527.070 to remove location restrictions for persons with a concealed deadly weapon license.

Oct 05, 2018 - Prefiled by the sponsor(s).
Jan 08, 2019 - introduced in House
Jan 10, 2019 - to Judiciary (H)


Thanks "

January 4th, 2019, 09:24 AM   0 Comment(s)   Favourite