On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Bert Hyman  wrote in news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@
> 216.250.184.7:
>
> > Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nraclaptrap
> > <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the criminals from
> >> the law-abiding citizens?  You wait until they murder somebody, right
> >> Spaniel?
>
> > That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you have to wait
> > until a crime's actually been committed before locking someone up.
>
> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on every gun
> transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big step in the right
> direction.  So anybody who has a gun who hasn't had a background check is
> automatically a criminal.  


And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:36:20 -0500, nraclaptrap
<nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>news:2i9nc5hc8ptbmbd985m45gubm762tkv2bp@4ax.com: 
>
>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:06:38 -0500, nraclaptrap
>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>>Daniel  wrote in
>>>news:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe 
>>>> fd0fa6e5@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>> > wrote: 
>>>>> >> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>> >> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nraclap
>>>>> >> > tr ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>> >> >> criminals from the law-abiding citizens?  You wait until they
>>>>> >> >> murder somebody, righ
>>>>> > t
>>>>> >> >> Spaniel?
>>>>>
>>>>> >> > That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you have
>>>>> >> > to wait until a crime's actually been committed before locking
>>>>> >> > someone up.
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
>>>>> >> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
>>>>> >> step in the right direction.  So anybody who has a gun who
>>>>> >> hasn't had a background check
>>>>> > is
>>>>> >> automatically a criminal.  
>>>>>
>>>>> > And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>
>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one.  Period...
>>>> 
>>>> Exactly.
>>>
>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want
>>> eh Spaniel?
>> 
>>No, Haynes says that felons don't have to incriminate themselves.
>
>That's how we'll know they're criminals Jeffyjug.  They won't have 
>background checks associated with their gun ownership.  That would be the 
>law they violated, the Universal Firearm Transaction Background Check Act 
>og 2010.  Then when we investigate further and find out they're felons.  
>
>BTW, are you a felon Weenieboy?  Is that why you're so afraid of getting 
>a background check?

No, I do not fear a background check.  I have had many a background
check due to previous security clearances, being a currently licensed
security guard and having a current Florida CHL.


Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your real
objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered so that you and
your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate all of
the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over of the
government or swear allegiance to the government or leader?  


"I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on.  
 Our ultimate goal -- total control of handguns in the United States
--
 is going to take time.  My estimate is from seven to ten years.  The
 problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in
this
 country.  The second problem is to get them all registered.  And the
 final problem is to make the possession of *all* handguns and *all*
 handgun ammunition -- except for the military, policemen, licensed
 security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors
 -- totally illegal."
 -- Nelson T. "Pete" Shields; Chairman, HCI
    "A Reporter At Large: Handguns",
    _The New Yorker_, July 26, 1976, 57-58

jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
news:93bnc5pnjrvi1jjs7f0u0o0uuilrsrfi07@4ax.com: 

> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:36:20 -0500, nraclaptrap
> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>>news:2i9nc5hc8ptbmbd985m45gubm762tkv2bp@4ax.com: 
>>
>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:06:38 -0500, nraclaptrap
>>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>Daniel  wrote in
>>>>news:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.co
>>>>m: 
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe 
>>>>> fd0fa6e5@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>> > wrote: 
>>>>>> >> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>>> >> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> > Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nracl
>>>>>> >> > ap tr ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>>> >> >> criminals from the law-abiding citizens?  You wait until
>>>>>> >> >> they murder somebody, righ
>>>>>> > t
>>>>>> >> >> Spaniel?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> > That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
>>>>>> >> > have to wait until a crime's actually been committed before
>>>>>> >> > locking someone up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
>>>>>> >> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
>>>>>> >> step in the right direction.  So anybody who has a gun who
>>>>>> >> hasn't had a background check
>>>>>> > is
>>>>>> >> automatically a criminal.  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one.  Period...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>
>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you
>>>> want eh Spaniel?
>>> 
>>>No, Haynes says that felons don't have to incriminate themselves.
>>
>>That's how we'll know they're criminals Jeffyjug.  They won't have 
>>background checks associated with their gun ownership.  That would be
>>the law they violated, the Universal Firearm Transaction Background
>>Check Act og 2010.  Then when we investigate further and find out
>>they're felons.  
>>
>>BTW, are you a felon Weenieboy?  Is that why you're so afraid of
>>getting a background check?
> 
> No, I do not fear a background check.  I have had many a background
> check due to previous security clearances, being a currently licensed
> security guard and having a current Florida CHL.
> 
> Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your real
> objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered 

Yes.

> so that you and
> your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate all of
> the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over of the
> government or swear allegiance to the government or leader?  

Yes.


-- 


NRACLAPTRAP

jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:36:20 -0500, nraclaptrap
> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>> news:2i9nc5hc8ptbmbd985m45gubm762tkv2bp@4ax.com: 
>>
>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:06:38 -0500, nraclaptrap
>>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Daniel  wrote in
>>>> news:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe 
>>>>> fd0fa6e5@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>>> wrote: 
>>>>>>>> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>>>>> Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nraclap
>>>>>>>>> tr ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>>>>>>> criminals from the law-abiding citizens?  You wait until they
>>>>>>>>>> murder somebody, righ
>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
>>>>>>>>> That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you have
>>>>>>>>> to wait until a crime's actually been committed before locking
>>>>>>>>> someone up.
>>>>>>>> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
>>>>>>>> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
>>>>>>>> step in the right direction.  So anybody who has a gun who
>>>>>>>> hasn't had a background check
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> automatically a criminal.  
>>>>>>> And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one.  Period...
>>>>> Exactly.
>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want
>>>> eh Spaniel?
>>> No, Haynes says that felons don't have to incriminate themselves.
>> That's how we'll know they're criminals Jeffyjug.  They won't have 
>> background checks associated with their gun ownership.  That would be the 
>> law they violated, the Universal Firearm Transaction Background Check Act 
>> og 2010.  Then when we investigate further and find out they're felons.  
>>
>> BTW, are you a felon Weenieboy?  Is that why you're so afraid of getting 
>> a background check?
> 
> No, I do not fear a background check.  I have had many a background
> check due to previous security clearances, being a currently licensed
> security guard and having a current Florida CHL.
> 
> 
> Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your real
> objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered so that you and
> your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate all of
> the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over of the
> government or swear allegiance to the government or leader?  

Background checks do fuck-all nothing for the state when investigating 
those who already own guns.  I've had to go through the bullshit 
paperwork eight times this year alone.

<snip>


-- 
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana

Daniel  wrote in news:2c2bdc09-3e2a-42cc-8152-
a9acc14668bd@d23g2000vbm.googlegroups.com:

> On Oct 6, 11:19 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
> 
>> > Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your real
>> > objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> > so that you and
>> > your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate all of
>> > the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over of the
>> > government or swear allegiance to the government or leader?  
>>
>> Yes.
>  
> Too bad the Second Amendment won't allow you to do that.

The Second Amendment has nothing to do with the states' reserved police 
power, which includes the power to enact and enforce laws affecting 
public safety.

Your fake knowledge of the Second Amendment is like a tea-bagger's fake 
knowledge of "death panels" and "Obama was born in Kenya".  It's 
something you can choose to believe but it's not something you can make 
true.

And we have tons of recorded history and law that proves it.

Now, if the right wing of the US Supreme Court keeps lying about the 
Second Amendment, at least one justice will be impeached and removed.  
Guess who, Spaniel.  The issue here isn't left vs right, but rather the 
Constitutionally mandated preservation and efficiency of the National 
Guard, aka the well-regulated militia of the Second Amendment.

So it's not about you as an individual, Spaniel; it's about the whole 
body of the people, and how the National Guard is necessary to the 
security of our respective states.


-- 


NRACLAPTRAP

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:19:06 -0500, nraclaptrap
<nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>news:93bnc5pnjrvi1jjs7f0u0o0uuilrsrfi07@4ax.com: 
>
>> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:36:20 -0500, nraclaptrap
>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>>jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>>>news:2i9nc5hc8ptbmbd985m45gubm762tkv2bp@4ax.com: 
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:06:38 -0500, nraclaptrap
>>>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>Daniel  wrote in
>>>>>news:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.co
>>>>>m: 
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe 
>>>>>> fd0fa6e5@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>>> > wrote: 
>>>>>>> >> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>>>> >> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> > Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nracl
>>>>>>> >> > ap tr ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> >> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>>>> >> >> criminals from the law-abiding citizens?  You wait until
>>>>>>> >> >> they murder somebody, righ
>>>>>>> > t
>>>>>>> >> >> Spaniel?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> > That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
>>>>>>> >> > have to wait until a crime's actually been committed before
>>>>>>> >> > locking someone up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
>>>>>>> >> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
>>>>>>> >> step in the right direction.  So anybody who has a gun who
>>>>>>> >> hasn't had a background check
>>>>>>> > is
>>>>>>> >> automatically a criminal.  
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one.  Period...
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you
>>>>> want eh Spaniel?
>>>> 
>>>>No, Haynes says that felons don't have to incriminate themselves.
>>>
>>>That's how we'll know they're criminals Jeffyjug.  They won't have 
>>>background checks associated with their gun ownership.  That would be
>>>the law they violated, the Universal Firearm Transaction Background
>>>Check Act og 2010.  Then when we investigate further and find out
>>>they're felons.  
>>>
>>>BTW, are you a felon Weenieboy?  Is that why you're so afraid of
>>>getting a background check?
>> 
>> No, I do not fear a background check.  I have had many a background
>> check due to previous security clearances, being a currently licensed
>> security guard and having a current Florida CHL.
>> 
>> Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your real
>> objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered 
>
>Yes.
>
>> so that you and
>> your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate all of
>> the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over of the
>> government or swear allegiance to the government or leader?  
>
>Yes.

So, you'd like to institute a government like that of Germany around
1939 or so then.  You'd send all of us republicans off to the showers
and then to the delousing chambers.

jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in news:q9ppc5d5vjvnb35sfbjgkn1a0jhdt0c1d5@
4ax.com:

> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 22:19:06 -0500, nraclaptrap
> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>>news:93bnc5pnjrvi1jjs7f0u0o0uuilrsrfi07@4ax.com: 
>>
>>> On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 15:36:20 -0500, nraclaptrap
>>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>jfma@ix.netcom.com wrote in
>>>>news:2i9nc5hc8ptbmbd985m45gubm762tkv2bp@4ax.com: 
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:06:38 -0500, nraclaptrap
>>>>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>Daniel  wrote in
>>>>>>news:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8
@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups.co
>>>>>>m: 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe 
>>>>>>> fd0fa6e5@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>>>> > wrote: 
>>>>>>>> >> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>>>>> >> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >> > Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@
216.196.97.131nracl
>>>>>>>> >> > ap tr ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >> >> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>>>>> >> >> criminals from the law-abiding citizens?  You wait until
>>>>>>>> >> >> they murder somebody, righ
>>>>>>>> > t
>>>>>>>> >> >> Spaniel?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >> > That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
>>>>>>>> >> > have to wait until a crime's actually been committed before
>>>>>>>> >> > locking someone up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
>>>>>>>> >> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
>>>>>>>> >> step in the right direction.  So anybody who has a gun who
>>>>>>>> >> hasn't had a background check
>>>>>>>> > is
>>>>>>>> >> automatically a criminal.  
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> > And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one.  Period...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you
>>>>>> want eh Spaniel?
>>>>> 
>>>>> No, Haynes says that felons don't have to incriminate themselves.
>>>>
>>>> That's how we'll know they're criminals Jeffyjug.  They won't have 
>>>> background checks associated with their gun ownership.  That would
>>>> be the law they violated, the Universal Firearm Transaction
>>>> Background Check Act og 2010.  Then when we investigate further and
>>>> find out they're felons.  
>>>>
>>>> BTW, are you a felon Weenieboy?  Is that why you're so afraid of 
>>>> getting a background check? 
>>> 
>>> No, I do not fear a background check.  I have had many a background
>>> check due to previous security clearances, being a currently licensed
>>> security guard and having a current Florida CHL.
>>> 
>>> Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your real
>>> objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered 
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> so that you and
>>> your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate all of
>>> the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over of the
>>> government or swear allegiance to the government or leader?  
>>
>> Yes.
> 
> You'd send all of us republicans off to the showers
> and then to the delousing chambers.

If you're that lousy we'd better run you through delousing first, then 
the showers.  First you'll clip all the hair off your body, then you 
stand in a trench filled with louse, tick & flea dip for about 15 
minutes.  

Then you hit the showers.  Soap will be placed on the floor for your 
convenience.


-- 


NRACLAPTRAP

Daniel  wrote in
news:ba859483-2cca-40fd-908d-8aa14569d33e@r36g2000vbn.googlegroups.com: 

> On Oct 7, 1:07 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> Daniel  wrote in
>> news:2c2bdc09-3e2a-42cc-8152- 
>> a9acc1466...@d23g2000vbm.googlegroups.com: 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 6, 11:19 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>> > wrote: 
>>
>> >> > Why do you want me to get another check?  Is it because your
>> >> > real objective is to get all guns and gun owners registered
>>
>> >> Yes.
>>
>> >> > so that you and
>> >> > your Progressives can set the next law in place to confiscate
>> >> > all of the guns of those that don't approve of your taking over
>> >> > of the government or swear allegiance to the government or
>> >> > leader?   
>>
>> >> Yes.
>>
>> > Too bad the Second Amendment won't allow you to do that.
>>
>> The Second Amendment has nothing to do with the states' reserved
>> police power, which includes the power to enact and enforce laws
>> affecting public safety.
> 
> Of course you're wrong, but that's nothing new.

Prove it, Spaniel.

>> Your fake knowledge of the Second Amendment is like a tea-bagger's
>> fake knowledge of "death panels" and "Obama was born in Kenya".  It's
>> something you can choose to believe but it's not something you can
>> make true.
>>
>> And we have tons of recorded history and law that proves it.
> 
> No, you don't.

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/constpap.asp

Prove your point or heel, Spaniel.

>> Now, if the right wing of the US Supreme Court keeps lying about the 
>> Second Amendment, at least one justice will be impeached and removed. 
>> Guess who, Spaniel.  The issue here isn't left vs right, but rather 
>> the Constitutionally mandated preservation and efficiency of the 
>> National Guard, aka the well-regulated militia of the Second 
>> Amendment. 
> 
> Newsflash, dumbfuck. You're the only uninformed one here. There is NO
> link between military service and the RKBA. 

There is, but you'll never understand it.  It's too much mental work for 
you to sort out.

> I have asked you time and
> time again to prove your allegation, and you have run like a bitch
> every time.

You ask for proof and yet you're incapable of critical reasoning, which 
is the only way you could understand the truth.

If that's the best you can do you'll make a fine tea-bagger.

>> So it's not about you as an individual, Spaniel; it's about the whole
>> body of the people,
> 
> Hint: the Second Amendment IS and individual right.

How would you know?  You're incapable of doing your own homework so you 
get it from the NRA and other rightwing propagandists.

Without an independent mind you'll never be free.

>> and how the National Guard is necessary to the
>> security of our respective states.
> 
> The National Guard has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.

And you just showed how ignorant you are, Spaniel.

This poster killfiled 21 days for being too ignorant to make fun of.


-- 


NRACLAPTRAP

In , nraclaptrap
<nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Daniel  wrote in
>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: 
>
>> On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want
>>> eh Spaniel? 
>> 
>> How many felons buy their guns legally?
>
>They all do until they're caught.  That's what I'm trying to tell you.

ALL felons buy their guns legally???

What universe are you living in?

Shane Daly  wrote in 
news:0j8qc5ti4crr3o0ulioptfv7ssg2cnffd0@4ax.com:

> In , nraclaptrap
> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>Daniel  wrote in
>>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: 
>>
>>> On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you 
want
>>>> eh Spaniel? 
>>> 
>>> How many felons buy their guns legally?
>>
>>They all do until they're caught.  That's what I'm trying to tell you.
> 
> ALL felons buy their guns legally???

How would you know the difference if you don't get a background check, eh 
slick?

Next loon please. 


-- 


NRACLAPTRAP

In , nraclaptrap
<nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Shane Daly  wrote in 
>news:0j8qc5ti4crr3o0ulioptfv7ssg2cnffd0@4ax.com:
>
>> In , nraclaptrap
>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> 
>>>Daniel  wrote in
>>>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com: 
>>>
>>>> On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>>> catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you 
>want
>>>>> eh Spaniel? 
>>>> 
>>>> How many felons buy their guns legally?
>>>
>>>They all do until they're caught.  That's what I'm trying to tell you.
>> 
>> ALL felons buy their guns legally???
>
>How would you know the difference if you don't get a background check, eh 
>slick?

A convicted felon is specifically prohibited from buying or owning a gun. So
kindly 'splain to me how they would go about buying one legally as you
claimed above. 

>Next loon please. 

Yeah. Right. I guess it's pretty much impossible for you to carry on a
conversation with anyone who questions you without your whipping out the
insults immediately.

Shane Daly  wrote in
news:k7qsc59fjsgbfd9hre6bpv12ft4f7eh6gt@4ax.com: 

> In , nraclaptrap
> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>>Shane Daly  wrote in 
>>news:0j8qc5ti4crr3o0ulioptfv7ssg2cnffd0@4ax.com:
>>
>>> In , nraclaptrap
>>> <nraclaptrap@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>Daniel  wrote in
>>>>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.co
>>>>m: 
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>> wrote: 
>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you
>>>>>> can't catch any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly
>>>>>> what you 
>>want
>>>>>> eh Spaniel? 
>>>>> 
>>>>> How many felons buy their guns legally?
>>>>
>>>>They all do until they're caught.  That's what I'm trying to tell
>>>>you. 
>>> 
>>> ALL felons buy their guns legally???
>>
>> How would you know the difference if you don't get a background check,
>> eh slick?
> 
> A convicted felon is specifically prohibited from buying or owning a
> gun. So kindly 'splain to me how they would go about buying one
> legally as you claimed above. 

How do you know if a felon buys a gun illegally?  He gets caught - right?

So why do you want felons to buy guns and not get caught, Shame?  

>> Next loon please. 
> 
> Yeah. Right. 

How would you know the difference without background checks on every gun 
sale private & FFL and without universal gun registration?

You wouldn't.  Which means if you oppose universal gun registration and 
background checks on every gun transaction, you're just helping felons 
get guns easily.

No relation to Alan Ladd, are you.


-- 


NRACLAPTRAP

"Daniel"  wrote in message 
news:6a3fe2c2-1846-484b-9a07-971f61808263@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 9, 9:57 pm, Bama Brian  wrote:
> Daniel wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 10:39 am, Bama Brian  wrote:
> >> Daniel wrote:
> >>> On Oct 7, 1:27 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>>> Daniel  wrote 
> >>>> innews:8c5a27d4-d14d-480f-9c87-4576cece3136@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com:
> >>>>> On Oct 6, 11:21 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
> >>>>>> "Daniel"  wrote in message
> >>>>>>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com
> >>>>>> ... On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
> >>>>>>> innews:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups
> >>>>>>> .co
> >>>>> m:
> >>>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
> >>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
> >>>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe
> >>>>>>>> fd0fa...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Bert Hyman  wrote in
> >>>>>>>>>>> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nrac
> >>>>>>>>>>>> lap
> >>>>> tr
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal
> >>>>> s
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from the law-abiding citizens? You wait until they murder
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> somebody, righ
> >>>>>>>>>> t
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
> >>>>>>>>>>>> have t
> >>>>> o
> >>>>>>>>>>>> wait until a crime's actually been committed before locking
> >>>>>>>>>>>> someone up.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
> >>>>>>>>>>> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
> >>>>>>>>>>> ste
> >>>>> p
> >>>>>>>>>>> in the right direction. So anybody who has a gun who hasn't
> >>>>>>>>>>> had a background check
> >>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>> automatically a criminal.
> >>>>>>>>>> And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
> >>>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one. Period...
> >>>>>>>> Exactly.
> >>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
> >>>>>>> catc
> >>>>> h
> >>>>>>> any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want eh
> >>>>>>> Spaniel?
> >>>>>> #
> >>>>>> # How many felons buy their guns legally?
> >>>>>> #
> >>>>>> <whisper on>
> >>>>>> Do you think he can figure out that since felons can NOT legally
> >>>>>> posess firearms, the very act of purchasing one is an illegal act ?
> >>>>>> <whisper off>
> >>>>> He can't figure out if the sun is shiniing or not.
> >>>> When felons buy guns through private sellers there's no way to tell 
> >>>> if
> >>>> the sale is legal or illegal because there's no background check. So 
> >>>> the
> >>>> default assumption is that the sale is legal.
> >>> If a felon buys a gun, it is an UNLAWFUL PURCHASE, and both the felon
> >>> AND the seller face criminal charges.
> >>> So I ask you dipshits AGAIN, How many felons buy guns legally?
> >> Shit, who cares what you ask? You're nothing but a troll.
>
> > You should take your own adice. Learn who you are insulting.
>
> At the moment you're just another troll. That you believe in the 2nd
> Amemdment is a good thing - but it's just a start towards maintaining
> your status as a free citizen. The last hundred years in the US have
> been an accelerated march to outright tyranny, beginning with the War On
> (Some) Drugs back in the 1930's. (Look up Henry J. Anslinger for some
> information on the fedgov's beginning drug war.) So unless you are
> willing to stand up for all the rights that the fedgov is trying to take
> away, you're just another part of the problem.
>
> So as to who you are, tell us, Daniel. Drop the Ad Hominems and talk to
> us as a civil person does. If you can't do that, expect more abuse
> until you get tired of it and go annoy some other group.
#
# I serve my fucking country. What the fuck do you do, you stupid piece
# of shit.

Oh do tell, how exactly do you serve your country ?
By acting the ignorant fool and calling those who prove you wrong a variety 
of names ?
That's not service sonny
That's just being a big mouth

nraclaptrap wrote:
> Bama Brian  wrote in
> news:haopn5$qvg$1@news.eternal-september.org: 
> 
>> Daniel wrote:
>>> On Oct 8, 10:39 am, Bama Brian  wrote:
>>>> Daniel wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 7, 1:27 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>> innews:8c5a27d4-d14d-480f-9c87-4576cece3136@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups
>>>>>> .com: 
>>>>>>> On Oct 6, 11:21 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Daniel"  wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroup
>>>>>>>> s.com ... On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap
>>>>>>>> <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>>>>> innews:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegr
>>>>>>>>> oups .co
>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe
>>>>>>>>>> fd0fa...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap
>>>>>>>>>>>> <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nra
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> c lap
>>>>>>> tr
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal
>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the law-abiding citizens? You wait until they murder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> somebody, righ
>>>>>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have t
>>>>>>> o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wait until a crime's actually been committed before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> locking someone up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a big ste
>>>>>>> p
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the right direction. So anybody who has a gun who hasn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> had a background check
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> automatically a criminal.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one.
>>>>>>>>>>> Period... 
>>>>>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you
>>>>>>>>> can't catc
>>>>>>> h
>>>>>>>>> any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want
>>>>>>>>> eh Spaniel?
>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> # How many felons buy their guns legally?
>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> <whisper on>
>>>>>>>> Do you think he can figure out that since felons can NOT legally
>>>>>>>> posess firearms, the very act of purchasing one is an illegal
>>>>>>>> act ? <whisper off>
>>>>>>> He can't figure out if the sun is shiniing or not.
>>>>>> When felons buy guns through private sellers there's no way to
>>>>>> tell if the sale is legal or illegal because there's no background
>>>>>> check.  So the default assumption is that the sale is legal.
>>>>> If a felon buys a gun, it is an UNLAWFUL PURCHASE, and both the
>>>>> felon AND the seller face criminal charges.
>>>>> So I ask you dipshits AGAIN, How many felons buy guns legally?
>>>> Shit, who cares what you ask?  You're nothing but a troll.
>>> You should take your own adice. Learn who you are insulting.
>> At the moment you're just another troll.  That you believe in the 2nd 
>> Amemdment is a good thing - but it's just a start towards maintaining 
>> your status as a free citizen.  The last hundred years in the US have 
>> been an accelerated march to outright tyranny, beginning with the War
>> On (Some) Drugs back in the 1930's.  (Look up Henry J. Anslinger for
>> some information on the fedgov's beginning drug war.)  So unless you
>> are willing to stand up for all the rights that the fedgov is trying
>> to take away, you're just another part of the problem.
>>
>> So as to who you are, tell us, Daniel.  Drop the Ad Hominems and talk
>> to us as a civil person does.  If you can't do that, expect more abuse
>> until you get tired of it and go annoy some other group.
> 
> If you want Daniel to kiss your ass just say so.  We know you can think 
> critically, CrammaJamma, yet you choose not to when it comes to gun 
> issues.
> 
> Why would you do that?

Why do you want Daniel to kiss my ass when I'd rather deal with him as 
an equal, Jabba?  Now you I'd rather put in the killfile in my computer, 
under my desk.  While you're down there, you know what to kiss.


-- 
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana

Daniel wrote:
> On Oct 9, 9:57 pm, Bama Brian  wrote:
>> Daniel wrote:
>>> On Oct 8, 10:39 am, Bama Brian  wrote:
>>>> Daniel wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 7, 1:27 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> Daniel  wrote innews:8c5a27d4-d14d-480f-9c87-4576cece3136@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>> On Oct 6, 11:21 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
>>>>>>>> "Daniel"  wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>> ... On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>>>>> innews:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups
>>>>>>>>> .co
>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
>>>>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe
>>>>>>>>>> fd0fa...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bert Hyman  wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nrac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lap
>>>>>>> tr
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal
>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the law-abiding citizens? You wait until they murder
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> somebody, righ
>>>>>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have t
>>>>>>> o
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wait until a crime's actually been committed before locking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone up.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ste
>>>>>>> p
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the right direction. So anybody who has a gun who hasn't
>>>>>>>>>>>>> had a background check
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> automatically a criminal.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
>>>>>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one. Period...
>>>>>>>>>> Exactly.
>>>>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
>>>>>>>>> catc
>>>>>>> h
>>>>>>>>> any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want eh
>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> # How many felons buy their guns legally?
>>>>>>>> #
>>>>>>>> <whisper on>
>>>>>>>> Do you think he can figure out that since felons can NOT legally
>>>>>>>> posess firearms, the very act of purchasing one is an illegal act ?
>>>>>>>> <whisper off>
>>>>>>> He can't figure out if the sun is shiniing or not.
>>>>>> When felons buy guns through private sellers there's no way to tell if
>>>>>> the sale is legal or illegal because there's no background check.  So the
>>>>>> default assumption is that the sale is legal.
>>>>> If a felon buys a gun, it is an UNLAWFUL PURCHASE, and both the felon
>>>>> AND the seller face criminal charges.
>>>>> So I ask you dipshits AGAIN, How many felons buy guns legally?
>>>> Shit, who cares what you ask?  You're nothing but a troll.
>>> You should take your own adice. Learn who you are insulting.
>> At the moment you're just another troll.  That you believe in the 2nd
>> Amemdment is a good thing - but it's just a start towards maintaining
>> your status as a free citizen.  The last hundred years in the US have
>> been an accelerated march to outright tyranny, beginning with the War On
>> (Some) Drugs back in the 1930's.  (Look up Henry J. Anslinger for some
>> information on the fedgov's beginning drug war.)  So unless you are
>> willing to stand up for all the rights that the fedgov is trying to take
>> away, you're just another part of the problem.
>>
>> So as to who you are, tell us, Daniel.  Drop the Ad Hominems and talk to
>> us as a civil person does.  If you can't do that, expect more abuse
>> until you get tired of it and go annoy some other group.
> 
> I serve my fucking country. What the fuck do you do, you stupid piece
> of shit.

I served my country both as enlisted and as an officer.  I am a Vietnam 
vet, and a proud member of the DAV.

Now go fuck yourself, you ignorant pissant.

-- 
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana

On Oct 10, 3:54 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
> "Daniel"  wrote in message
>
> news:6a3fe2c2-1846-484b-9a07-971f61808263@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 9, 9:57 pm, Bama Brian  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Daniel wrote:
> > > On Oct 8, 10:39 am, Bama Brian  wrote:
> > >> Daniel wrote:
> > >>> On Oct 7, 1:27 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>> Daniel  wrote
> > >>>> innews:8c5a27d4-d14d-480f-9c87-4576cece3136@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>> On Oct 6, 11:21 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
> > >>>>>> "Daniel"  wrote in message
> > >>>>>>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com
> > >>>>>> ... On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
> > >>>>>>> innews:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups
> > >>>>>>> .co
> > >>>>> m:
> > >>>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
> > >>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
> > >>>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe
> > >>>>>>>> fd0fa...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Bert Hyman  wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>>>> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nrac
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> lap
> > >>>>> tr
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal
> > >>>>> s
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> from the law-abiding citizens? You wait until they murder
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> somebody, righ
> > >>>>>>>>>> t
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> have t
> > >>>>> o
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wait until a crime's actually been committed before locking
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> someone up.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks on
> > >>>>>>>>>>> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a big
> > >>>>>>>>>>> ste
> > >>>>> p
> > >>>>>>>>>>> in the right direction. So anybody who has a gun who hasn't
> > >>>>>>>>>>> had a background check
> > >>>>>>>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>>>>> automatically a criminal.
> > >>>>>>>>>> And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
> > >>>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one. Period.> > >>>>>>>> Exactly.
> > >>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you can't
> > >>>>>>> catc
> > >>>>> h
> > >>>>>>> any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want eh
> > >>>>>>> Spaniel?
> > >>>>>> #
> > >>>>>> # How many felons buy their guns legally?
> > >>>>>> #
> > >>>>>> <whisper on>
> > >>>>>> Do you think he can figure out that since felons can NOT legally
> > >>>>>> posess firearms, the very act of purchasing one is an illegal act ?
> > >>>>>> <whisper off>
> > >>>>> He can't figure out if the sun is shiniing or not.
> > >>>> When felons buy guns through private sellers there's no way to tell
> > >>>> if
> > >>>> the sale is legal or illegal because there's no background check. So
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> default assumption is that the sale is legal.
> > >>> If a felon buys a gun, it is an UNLAWFUL PURCHASE, and both the felon
> > >>> AND the seller face criminal charges.
> > >>> So I ask you dipshits AGAIN, How many felons buy guns legally?
> > >> Shit, who cares what you ask? You're nothing but a troll.
>
> > > You should take your own adice. Learn who you are insulting.
>
> > At the moment you're just another troll. That you believe in the 2nd
> > Amemdment is a good thing - but it's just a start towards maintaining
> > your status as a free citizen. The last hundred years in the US have
> > been an accelerated march to outright tyranny, beginning with the War On
> > (Some) Drugs back in the 1930's. (Look up Henry J. Anslinger for some
> > information on the fedgov's beginning drug war.) So unless you are
> > willing to stand up for all the rights that the fedgov is trying to take
> > away, you're just another part of the problem.
>
> > So as to who you are, tell us, Daniel. Drop the Ad Hominems and talk to
> > us as a civil person does. If you can't do that, expect more abuse
> > until you get tired of it and go annoy some other group.
>
> #
> # I serve my fucking country. What the fuck do you do, you stupid piece
> # of shit.
>
> Oh do tell, how exactly do you serve your country ?
> By acting the ignorant fool and calling those who prove you wrong a variety
> of names ?
> That's not service sonny
> That's just being a big mouth


So in other words, you don't do anything but talk shit on Usenet.

"Daniel"  wrote in message 
news:b87f93a7-6102-4022-8e6a-ef1e562c1148@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 10, 3:54 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
> "Daniel"  wrote in message
>
> news:6a3fe2c2-1846-484b-9a07-971f61808263@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 9, 9:57 pm, Bama Brian  wrote:
>
>
>
> > Daniel wrote:
> > > On Oct 8, 10:39 am, Bama Brian  wrote:
> > >> Daniel wrote:
> > >>> On Oct 7, 1:27 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>> Daniel  wrote
> > >>>> innews:8c5a27d4-d14d-480f-9c87-4576cece3136@g1g2000vbr.googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>> On Oct 6, 11:21 pm, "SaPeIsMa"  wrote:
> > >>>>>> "Daniel"  wrote in message
> > >>>>>>news:c932a16e-1ade-4a83-8775-68d5ca8323e2@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.com
> > >>>>>> ... On Oct 5, 9:06 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
> > >>>>>>> innews:c64ce367-2725-4fc3-95b9-d896473d18e8@j19g2000vbp.googlegroups
> > >>>>>>> .co
> > >>>>> m:
> > >>>>>>>> On Oct 4, 6:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)
> > >>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Daniel  wrote
> > >>>>>>>>> innews:44b98dc4-d0b0-4f18-aed9-fbfe
> > >>>>>>>> fd0fa...@m20g2000vbp.googlegroups.com:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2:32 pm, nraclaptrap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid>
> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Bert Hyman  wrote in
> > >>>>>>>>>>> news:Xns9C947EFFAE7DBVeebleFetzer@ 216.250.184.7:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Innews:Xns9C8E753094C71piotu0345go2r3ndec@216.196.97.131nrac
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> lap
> > >>>>> tr
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> ap <nraclapt...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well if everybody's carrying guns how do you tell the
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> criminal
> > >>>>> s
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> from the law-abiding citizens? You wait until they murder
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> somebody, righ
> > >>>>>>>>>> t
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Spaniel?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> That's the way the law works in a civilized society; you
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> have t
> > >>>>> o
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wait until a crime's actually been committed before locking
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> someone up.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Actually, preventing crimes by requiring background checks 
> > >>>>>>>>>>> on
> > >>>>>>>>>>> every gun transaction, whether FFL or private, would be a 
> > >>>>>>>>>>> big
> > >>>>>>>>>>> ste
> > >>>>> p
> > >>>>>>>>>>> in the right direction. So anybody who has a gun who hasn't
> > >>>>>>>>>>> had a background check
> > >>>>>>>>>> is
> > >>>>>>>>>>> automatically a criminal.
> > >>>>>>>>>> And how many criminals bother to legally purchase a gun?
> > >>>>>>>>> If they are felons, they cannot legally purchase one. 
> > >>>>>>>>> Period...
> > >>>>>>>> Exactly.
> > >>>>>>> If you don't get background checks on private gun sales, you 
> > >>>>>>> can't
> > >>>>>>> catc
> > >>>>> h
> > >>>>>>> any felons who buy those guns, and that's exactly what you want 
> > >>>>>>> eh
> > >>>>>>> Spaniel?
> > >>>>>> #
> > >>>>>> # How many felons buy their guns legally?
> > >>>>>> #
> > >>>>>> <whisper on>
> > >>>>>> Do you think he can figure out that since felons can NOT legally
> > >>>>>> posess firearms, the very act of purchasing one is an illegal act 
> > >>>>>> ?
> > >>>>>> <whisper off>
> > >>>>> He can't figure out if the sun is shiniing or not.
> > >>>> When felons buy guns through private sellers there's no way to tell
> > >>>> if
> > >>>> the sale is legal or illegal because there's no background check. 
> > >>>> So
> > >>>> the
> > >>>> default assumption is that the sale is legal.
> > >>> If a felon buys a gun, it is an UNLAWFUL PURCHASE, and both the 
> > >>> felon
> > >>> AND the seller face criminal charges.
> > >>> So I ask you dipshits AGAIN, How many felons buy guns legally?
> > >> Shit, who cares what you ask? You're nothing but a troll.
>
> > > You should take your own adice. Learn who you are insulting.
>
> > At the moment you're just another troll. That you believe in the 2nd
> > Amemdment is a good thing - but it's just a start towards maintaining
> > your status as a free citizen. The last hundred years in the US have
> > been an accelerated march to outright tyranny, beginning with the War On
> > (Some) Drugs back in the 1930's. (Look up Henry J. Anslinger for some
> > information on the fedgov's beginning drug war.) So unless you are
> > willing to stand up for all the rights that the fedgov is trying to take
> > away, you're just another part of the problem.
>
> > So as to who you are, tell us, Daniel. Drop the Ad Hominems and talk to
> > us as a civil person does. If you can't do that, expect more abuse
> > until you get tired of it and go annoy some other group.
>
> #
> # I serve my fucking country. What the fuck do you do, you stupid piece
> # of shit.
>
> Oh do tell, how exactly do you serve your country ?
> By acting the ignorant fool and calling those who prove you wrong a 
> variety
> of names ?
> That's not service sonny
> That's just being a big mouth
#
# So in other words, you don't do anything but talk shit on Usenet.

You made the claim you serve your country
    Which country and how do you serve ?
Although in your case cleaning latrines would be acceptable.