-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Alan Dershowitz claims you must take vaccination.
- Thread starter Xshot
- Start date
Actually, I see that I did not respond to your underlying point. Yes, it appears that he is factually correct and that you are correct about it.
Having said that, he can still go fuck himself. He's grandstanding and propagandizing, all for the sake of promoting the agenda that he has bought into and to get a little recognition. You might want to look into his history as it pertains to "ethical" behavior a bit though.
I really don't have the bandwidth to go very far down this rabbit hole, but let me ask you a hypothetical question; If the good people in the house/senate and the president passed a law that commanded everyone to go out and kill as many people of a specific race as possible, would you comply ? I sure the hell wouldn't.
As far as me being an "Anti-Vaxxer", nothing could be further from the truth. However, recent events have caused me to lose a great deal of faith in the scientific and medical communities, such that I am now very hesitant to take any vaccine. It has become far, far too politicized and follows a very well defined, underlying agenda. It is an agenda that I vehemently disagree with. As far as where I get my information to base my opinions on, it sure the hell isn't CNN/MSM. Is the information that I get/pay attention to "bad" or inaccurate ? Sure, it's possible. The one thing that I am certain of though, is that in spite of the possibility, it's one hell of a lot more accurate information than what the MSM has to offer.
Last edited:
Clearly a law as you suggest would be illegitimate on it's face, that's not even close to the same thing.
There are presently laws on the books that many people in this country disagree with, take abortion for example. Additionally, there are laws that come very close to exceeding (or already exceed) what is allowed by the Constitution, Second Amendment infringements being a prime example. I would think that would be obvious to you, based upon your signature.
My point is that we are not only rapidly approaching, but have already arrived at a point where either existing laws, or new laws do not actually benefit or represent a significant segment of society. In fact, they infringe on a large portion of the population's Constitutionally guaranteed rights, but those that pass them keep right on doing it. And, there appears to be little recourse. Which, calls Justice, Equality and the value of the Constitution/BOR's into question. I believe that the percentage of people who rightfully believe/know their rights are being infringed upon continues to grow. And, that infringement itself continues to grow.
I'm not really sure what your point in all of this is. It appears you enjoy fulfilling the "contrarian" role, along with a splash of superiority. But, that is your right, just like every other person that has, or will post here.
Boiling it all down, I have lost a huge amount of faith in the government, the media and now the medical/scientific community. Just because there is a "law" that demands that I get this week's flavor of "immunization", doesn't mean that I will comply. You appear to be championing compliance with all laws, no matter how draconian or unjust. Just because the law exists and that you can successfully prove that it does, does not make that law just and equitable to all of those that it affects. That was my point in my previous post.
My point is that we are not only rapidly approaching, but have already arrived at a point where either existing laws, or new laws do not actually benefit or represent a significant segment of society. In fact, they infringe on a large portion of the population's Constitutionally guaranteed rights, but those that pass them keep right on doing it. And, there appears to be little recourse. Which, calls Justice, Equality and the value of the Constitution/BOR's into question. I believe that the percentage of people who rightfully believe/know their rights are being infringed upon continues to grow. And, that infringement itself continues to grow.
I'm not really sure what your point in all of this is. It appears you enjoy fulfilling the "contrarian" role, along with a splash of superiority. But, that is your right, just like every other person that has, or will post here.
Boiling it all down, I have lost a huge amount of faith in the government, the media and now the medical/scientific community. Just because there is a "law" that demands that I get this week's flavor of "immunization", doesn't mean that I will comply. You appear to be championing compliance with all laws, no matter how draconian or unjust. Just because the law exists and that you can successfully prove that it does, does not make that law just and equitable to all of those that it affects. That was my point in my previous post.
Last edited:
This is true. But as explanation, I was thinking more along the lines of the Jewish and part-Jewish families who had themselves declared Aryan, some by decree of Hitler himself, and had members who served in the SS.
How did I even suggest you comply with all laws, no matter what? I asked a number of questions, all of which have been basically ignored, which seek to outline the limits of government in such cases. Someone quote back something where anyone with the reading comprehension of a 5 year old could say that I even implied you must comply with any law, every time, in every case?
I clearly stated that making this vaccine, for this virus, a mandatory thing is not warranted. The Feds have also clearly, at least to some of us, exceeded their authority in more that an few areas. Currently, the solution to that still lies in the ballot box. Since none of you blowhards has started the revolution yet, voting will have to do.
I clearly stated that making this vaccine, for this virus, a mandatory thing is not warranted. The Feds have also clearly, at least to some of us, exceeded their authority in more that an few areas. Currently, the solution to that still lies in the ballot box. Since none of you blowhards has started the revolution yet, voting will have to do.
In the interest of public safety there is no point where the state I live in should have the authority to force me to get a c19 vaccine. The state i live in people shit on the sidewalks. The state passes out needles to drug users. The state I live in actually put c19 patients in assisted living facilities with disastrous results.
The state I live in lets violent criminals out of prison early but puts citizens in jail just because they want to go back to work. " In the interest of public safety " are you serious?
I have thought the matter through. Perhaps you mist my earlier post so I will make it simple for you. Go get your c19 vaccine . You are now SAFE from me and the others who won't get one. Problem solved.
To use your analogy of storing 5000 pounds of black powder at your neighbors house. My neighbor has " THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS" . If he chooses black powder firearms for self defense so be it. Read the Second Amendment to the Constitution if you don't have a copy PM me your address I will send you one. On a side note, if my neighbor is that prepared for the coming boogaloo it would be awesome. He thinks like me.
Lets remember a key element in the founding of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The freedom you have here is based on individual rights, not the rights of the collective.
Unfortunately , you have been indoctrinated into thinking like a commie and don't even know it.
This action (vaccination forcing) will demand,... for export only,... to be brought home,... in spades.
This is no different than stealing your money via taxes to house an feed those who in the natural world mother nature would cull, quickly,... A fake problem for more enslavement,... I would suggest you bring you lunch, for a few days,... plus plenty of toe tags and body bags.
This is no different than stealing your money via taxes to house an feed those who in the natural world mother nature would cull, quickly,... A fake problem for more enslavement,... I would suggest you bring you lunch, for a few days,... plus plenty of toe tags and body bags.
The population of the United States is 328,200,000. So if only 1% of the population dies as a result of the vaccine that would be 3,282,000 people that we would have to bury.
According to the CDC there were 2,813,503 deaths in the US in 2017. If the vaccine killed people at a 1% rate, more people would die as a result of the cure than do already from other causes.
Let's say that vaccine only had a rate of killing .001% per year. Yes that 1/1000 of a percent. So only 3,282 people could die as a result of the vaccine. If that were to happen, the leftists would blame the Republicans and Trump then say that the vaccine is racist.
Would anyone here want to put themselves or their kids at risk if they had a .001% chance of dying or being crippled?
A friend of mine passed away at the age of 54. He was only three feet tall and had been in a wheel chair since the age of six. He was born normal but some shot he had to take as a child messed him up for the rest of his life.
I remember too many cases in the military when folks suffered from the side effects of the vaccine. I was lucky that it only made me sick for a week or two. Others that I know suffer from a lifetime of occasional seizures and a "thank you for your service" BS.
So it would be better then to have 40 to 60 percent of the population get a disease that's 90% fatal? Check my math, but 90% of 40% is more than 1% of 100%. Like about 40 times more. I think that might be a worse outcome.
If you are worried about a .001% chance of dying, I guess you never get in a car or plane? You have about a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car crash. The utility of a car makes it worth the risk.
Can a medical treatment result in a bad outcome? Certainly, but one tries to balance that against the outcome of not having the treatment at all. When it affects only you, and no one else, you have a choice to make. When it affects EVERYONE else, WE have a choice to make. It's no different than a battle plan in wartime.
Obviously, COVID-19 is not even close to the threshold to make a vaccine mandatory, even if you could somehow prove it was 100% safe and effective, which is impossible. The principal however, still holds. Childhood vaccinations are mandatory (with few exceptions) for a reason, and the good far outweighs the harm. Small consolation if your child suffers of course, but if you went back in time and offered a polio vaccination to people in the 1920's or 30's you'd have them standing in line pretty quick. Jonas Salk was hailed as a hero. They paralyzed over 200 kids and killed 10 with a defective vaccine, but when's the last time you heard of someone getting polio?
If the population were sufficiently educated, you would never need to create a mandatory vaccine law, people would line up in numbers great enough all on their own. Some would opt out, but you'd have enough to matter, and that's all that really counts.
If you are worried about a .001% chance of dying, I guess you never get in a car or plane? You have about a 1 in 100 chance of dying in a car crash. The utility of a car makes it worth the risk.
Can a medical treatment result in a bad outcome? Certainly, but one tries to balance that against the outcome of not having the treatment at all. When it affects only you, and no one else, you have a choice to make. When it affects EVERYONE else, WE have a choice to make. It's no different than a battle plan in wartime.
Obviously, COVID-19 is not even close to the threshold to make a vaccine mandatory, even if you could somehow prove it was 100% safe and effective, which is impossible. The principal however, still holds. Childhood vaccinations are mandatory (with few exceptions) for a reason, and the good far outweighs the harm. Small consolation if your child suffers of course, but if you went back in time and offered a polio vaccination to people in the 1920's or 30's you'd have them standing in line pretty quick. Jonas Salk was hailed as a hero. They paralyzed over 200 kids and killed 10 with a defective vaccine, but when's the last time you heard of someone getting polio?
If the population were sufficiently educated, you would never need to create a mandatory vaccine law, people would line up in numbers great enough all on their own. Some would opt out, but you'd have enough to matter, and that's all that really counts.
Those that are hawking this seem to be lacking the ability to think things thru. If you think it's just a vaccine for a fake public health issue you don't have a clue as to the real end game. I'd suggest you get out more an see what they really plan on injecting,... "WITH" the "VACCINE" The amount of stupid, an wanted/liking knee living here, grows everyday.
I want to be clear that I understand you correctly: are you saying COVID19 is 90% fatal?
If you are living in a nursing home that has been sent Covid + people, you are 88, morbidly obese, Type 2, smoked your entire life and lick door knobs.......
You can be 24 yo a break you neck riding a 4 wheeler an not be found for a week, an the listed COD was C-19,..what part of the game that is being ran on the public don't some of you understand. Like all lies an plans there has to be some truth for the sheep to latch on to an believe it's for their own safety, to 100% buy in.
NO, what ever gave you that idea? It's not even 1%, probably more like .7, maybe less. This has nothing to do with this particular virus, I'm speaking to the general principal. It's a hypothetical question is all. I've stated multiple time that COVID-19 does not warrant such an approach, even you think it's real and every bit as bad as the MSM says.
The point is rights are not absolute. The guy who thinks his next door neighbor gets to put 5000 lbs of black powder in open 50cal drums in the garage of his condo because he has a right to bear arms is simply wrong. He's welcome to buy it, can't say he's not. The state CAN however, require he store it in a safe and approved manner/location. That's not an infringement. What they CAN'T do is tell you you can only have 1 ounce, or you need a 1 Million dollar permit.
Freedom of religion does not mean you get to conduct human sacrifice to the feathered serpent god. Freedom of speech does not mean you can publish kiddie porn. The right to life does not mean the state can't execute you as punishment for various crimes. The right to bear arms does not cover you making a stockpile of VX in your bathtub.
If the electorate can't be bothered to choose representation that understands, but just promises free shit, well,you get the government you deserve. At one time you needed to be a free landowner in order to vote. Now illegal immigrants vote. When people are outraged that someone else might be worth a trillion dollars rather than aspiring to equal such success the road is downhill.
Look it up. Over your lifetime, it's in that area or worse. In any given year it's between 1 in 4K and 1 in 8K. People are really bad at odds and probability, public education and teaching to a minimum standard. Hell, unintentional poisoning is about 1 in 90. People worry about their kid being killed in a school shooting when it's far more likely for a child to be killed by their parents, or on their bicycle on the way to school..
Im glad you see things my way. There is absolutely no point at which " the state has a compelling interest in public safety " to force me to get a c19 vaccine or any other vaccine for that matter. However, at what point would you say I should be forced to get one? How should the Government force it on me? Swat team? Break down my front door at 4 am? Jail time? If I still refuse then what? Don't forget now you already got your c19 vaccine you are safe from me.
YOU are the one who asked the question "can someone store 5000 pounds of black powder in your garage". I was using YOUR analogy. I offered to send you a copy of the Constitution. Black powder firearms and the powder to use them is a Constitutional right. If YOU believe that the Government has the authority to place regulations on your Constitunal Right to keep and bear arms then its not a Right . YOU are asking for permission. Get it?
If you went back in time and gave them all access to clean water, and stopped dumping shit in the river, you would have eradicated polio without a vaccine.
Wait till the infrastructure fails. You WILL see all our old pathogenic friends again.
No vaccine alone ever eradicated a disease.
Your numbers are skewed.
Maybe you can show the mathematics here.
You sound like one of those Lifelock commercials. "Three people every second have their identity stolen" figure out the mathematics on that.
For the record. I will tell people how lucky they are to know me. They are very unlikely to die in a car accident. Except that now the odds may cause a rash of people that I know to die in car accidents. Just to keep the statistics in line.
Maybe you can show the mathematics here.
You sound like one of those Lifelock commercials. "Three people every second have their identity stolen" figure out the mathematics on that.
For the record. I will tell people how lucky they are to know me. They are very unlikely to die in a car accident. Except that now the odds may cause a rash of people that I know to die in car accidents. Just to keep the statistics in line.
Especially if you are in or going into EMS. Our hospital allows us to wave the flu shot if we sign a declaration form but I was not allowed to do any of my clinical time if I did not get the flu shot. I can see this being forced upon me if I want to do clinical's as a paramedic, that will be fun.
So I DO get to conduct human sacrifice to Quetzalcotal? Scalia's opinion in Heller is wrong? I can make as much VX as I like? Jeff Bezos can afford his very own fast breeder reactor, does he get to keep nukes at home, just for emergencies? Feel free to print libel on anyone you want? After all, freedom of speech don't you know.
Officially for 2018 your lifetime odds of death in an automobile accident are 1 in 106. Opioid overdose is 1 in 98 and suicide is 1 in 86.
Current avg life expectancy for a person born in the US in 2018 is 78.7 years. At approx. 40K deaths per year, you are between 1 in 6700 and 1 in 9600 in any given year.
Insurance companies do this all the time. How to you think they calculate rates? The numbers are out there for anyone to see, try searching for 'odds of death'.
California
Dreaming Hogwash. Good for Franklin armory. I love their binary triggers.
www.snipershide.com
In this thread you said you left CA because you need a permit to buy standard capacity magazines. See my point? When you need permission form the government to to buy magazines you no longer have RIGHTS. You are asking for permission . It was you who brought up black powder and felt you need a permit( government permission) to store black powder at your house. So how much black powder should you be able to have at your house with out a Government permit?
Also, in regard to my last post. If I refuse to get the c19 vaccine, how should the Government, "in the interest of public safety" force me to get one? Swat team ? Jail time? Kick down my front door at 4 am?
I'm not a fire safety expert, the current Federal limit is 50lbs, in excess of that you'd need a permit and meet storage requirements. Smokeless powder is more or less unrestricted, excepting DOT regulations for transport. That hardly seems unreasonable. Fixed ammunition is also unrestricted. Black powder is a low explosive, smokeless is a propellant. Storing large quantities of explosives in a residence seems unwise.
Clearly a restriction on magazines is outside the power of government to regulate. It's a sheet metal box, so what? Storage of explosive materials is another matter. Pretty reasonable to have the state regulate nerve gas, don't you agree?
Again, COVID-19 is not a vaccine that should be mandated. In the case of something that's 90% fatal and 10% asymptomatic carriers that infect everyone they touch, I doubt we'd need to use much force.
Clearly a restriction on magazines is outside the power of government to regulate. It's a sheet metal box, so what? Storage of explosive materials is another matter. Pretty reasonable to have the state regulate nerve gas, don't you agree?
Again, COVID-19 is not a vaccine that should be mandated. In the case of something that's 90% fatal and 10% asymptomatic carriers that infect everyone they touch, I doubt we'd need to use much force.
In the 90/10 case, it's more or less a self correcting issue. Anyone capable of thought would probably fight to get a spot in line, 90 percent of the remainder die and no great loss.
And you actually believe that statistic?
1 in 98 among users? If you never use opiates the statistic doesn't apply to you at all.
If I've already had Covid, no Covid statistic applies.
Public safety huh?
5000lbs of BP.
Bezos keeps plutonium in his chest of drawers.
Billy Bob the millionaire hillbilly has an M1 Abrams.
Cory has a 40 round magazine.
I'm thinking you would like there to be some middle ground, you know...common sense.
Now you are in here accusing people who like dangerous liberty, of being anarchists. One thing is sure. There's a bunch of men who formed this Republic that you wouldn't have liked.
You sure do build lovely straw men though. They must grow a lot of wheat where you are from.
Math is math, that's the death rate. Obviously if you never take an opioid you won't be one od the dead, just as if you never get in a motor vehicle you won't die in a crash.
Yes, there is some middle ground. Let's refer to the document the men who formed the Republic signed, specifically Section 8, Article 1
Section 8
1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
If you don't think prohibiting unrestricted ownership of nerve agent is providing for the general welfare of the United States, what exactly does that clause cover?
You miss the importance of the commas in the sentence.
Pretty much the same way lots of folks conveniently miss the comma in the second amendment.
If you read it correctly it is saying the congress has the power to raise taxes for the purposes of "pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States".
There is nothing about them using taxes to destroy rights much like the government has done ever since the evil folks figured out they could do it a hundred years ago.
Taxes were to be collected for the purposes only of "pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"
The whole using taxes as a way to ban and restrict everything and destroy rights is the exact opposite of what was clearly written and is much like exactly what the revolutionary war was fought over.
Also your constant yakking on about fringe fantasy scenarios and hypothetical disease statistics that have no basis in reality in recorded human history really gets tiring. It's about the same as every democrat ever screaming, you are just like Hitler anytime they don't agree with something.
Oh and fission has been done to death, nobody really cares about it as much any more if you have billions and a vision, it's all in fusion stuff now and how to get everything done without any of that pesky fissile material. Lots of people are funding that research all over the world, from groups of the wealthy to groups of governments, because it's a bit too expensive to do on your own. (I mean you can build a fusion reactor in your garage, but it will just be a toy that uses more energy than it produces so it's pointless).
So exactly what laws can any government create? How does a tax stamp and subsequent regulation of VX nerve agent NOT have anything to do with the common defense and general welfare of the United States? Can the state insist you have brake lights on your car? Either we have a nation of laws, enacted by representatives of the people or we don't. Think the state is overreaching? Vote those reps out and put better people in their place.
Extremes are used to define limits. I presume you have heard of a hypothetical problem. The fact that the described disease does not exist does not mean it can't. So far, none of the antis seem to be willing to describe just what, if any, powers the state may have. All I get is "well, if you think I can't own as much Pu-239 as I want, you must be a communist!"
How about fire safety codes? Traffic regulations? Building codes? Is the FAA a legitimate Federal agency?
Rights are either universal and unlimited or they are not. If there are no limits whatsoever exactly what is the role of government? Are we limited to the Ten Commandments? Where does that leave Buddhists?
Seriously, some people here seem to be triggered in the same way as a bunch of #MeToo women at a replay of the Kavanaugh hearings. OMG, someone agreed with Dershowitz! Burn them at the stake now!
Asking a question is not a straw man argument. I'm not refuting the premise. I'm asking if we can limit ownership of a weapon of mass destruction by an individual in spite of the 2A. That's a yes/no question. If you answer no, then the question is are there any restrictions you would find acceptable? What are the ramifications of such a position? Can a society exist where your neighbor can kill millions of people because he has a bad day at the office?
On one side are the Democrats/Communists who want to control every facet of your existence. The opposite extreme is the Anarchist, who wants no controls whatsoever. Somewhere in between is the line where individual liberty is preserved, but a civilized society exists. That line is WAY closer to anarchy than to the Democrats, but it IS there somewhere. Murder is a violation of law. There, we just moved left of anarchy, still right of freedom though. You can't own a handgun. We moved WAY left of liberty. Where's your line?
The pendulum always swings to the opposite extreme before reverting to center, once major damage has been done to one side or the other. The left has enjoyed their fruits from the mid 60's to-date, that is about to change. People can talk all they want about right an wrong, but the folks who have always put in on the table, are about to get their turn. Kick a dog long enough he will bite,...hurt him long enough or damage his family,... when he's had enough he will hunt the oppressor/tyrant down in the dead of night.
CoryT said:
Murder is a violation of law.
So you are suggesting murder is not something the state can prohibit by law?
And still you don't want to answer any of the questions. Are there any laws that are acceptable? Is there a line between despotism and anarchy? If not, how is it you've not started the revolution? Obviously you are compliant with the current system, though you might rail against it. Unless you are writing from a prison cell somewhere.
Look, I don't like where we are either. I'm hopeful it can be resolved at the ballot box, but that seems less and less likely. The next election will be telling I think. either we jump off the bridge, go full retard and elect a Democrat, or enough sane people vote and reject that outcome. Not that Trump represents full on freedom and a return to the Constitution, but we have a chance of recovery as we move along. Every little push to the right improves our position. Some believe we are too far gone. I hope not, civil war is not going to be pretty.
Murder is a violation of law.
So you are suggesting murder is not something the state can prohibit by law?
And still you don't want to answer any of the questions. Are there any laws that are acceptable? Is there a line between despotism and anarchy? If not, how is it you've not started the revolution? Obviously you are compliant with the current system, though you might rail against it. Unless you are writing from a prison cell somewhere.
Look, I don't like where we are either. I'm hopeful it can be resolved at the ballot box, but that seems less and less likely. The next election will be telling I think. either we jump off the bridge, go full retard and elect a Democrat, or enough sane people vote and reject that outcome. Not that Trump represents full on freedom and a return to the Constitution, but we have a chance of recovery as we move along. Every little push to the right improves our position. Some believe we are too far gone. I hope not, civil war is not going to be pretty.
Tax stamps have nothing at all do to with common defense of this country from enemies, or the general welfare, they never have. They are simply an attempt at another stupid prohibition due to idiot sheep that wound up becoming ineffective due to the government itself. (Look up what the actual yearly wages were back when the NFA was passed and inflate the cost of that tax stamp to match percentage wise wages today, and you'll understand it was never about taxing stuff it was about banning stuff using twisted tax laws)
You are also conflating 2 very different issues.
I'll put it simply in SJW speak so you could understand it. "My body, My Choice".
Some want to feel the warm comfort of doing whatever they are told.
Others prefer dangerous freedom.
You seem to be firmly in the first camp.
I refuse to be forced to be given some "vaccine" that the makers of have absolute immunity for damages from and where I am not given every bit of information regarding the processes and ingredients.
It must be a choice or if others decide that it's not my choice over what I do with my body, then I'll assume they also agree that I can start choosing what I do to their bodies.
I mean if we are worried about deaths, we can easily pump the population numbers up more than enough to cover it if we stop caring about people's sovereignty over their own bodies and minds.......
It's telling that the same folks pushing the vaccine business are the same that actually want less people around..... makes you wonder....
Perhaps we start getting heavy handed with the medical industry about all the deaths / injuries from medical malpractice and hospital / doctor mistakes, that counts for more each year than this corona cold business...
And... the corona cold was more deadly than it should have been due to the medical industry treating it wrong and then refusing for political reasons to quickly get onboard with the latest research. I mean better to have folks die than to give Trump a win right?
If someone gets sick, with something easily communicated to others, it may be reasonable to ask them to stay home till they get better or stay in the hospital.
(However the flu kills several hundred thousand worldwide each year..... crickets on telling folks to stay home, lots of employers were forcing people to come to work regardless of being sick or risk loosing their jobs.)
That is a far cry from what is being done now or stripping the rights to your body away over some hypothetical thing that may not even work.
And yes, I'm also against things like the draft and such where the state claims they have the right to enslave you.
These discussions are important, in the hopes that when the chips come down, enough folks understand the concept of personal freedom to avoid it all breaking down to the base level which as ALWAYS in history comes down to rights being determined by who kills their fellow man the most efficiently.
Force Gates & companies, rushed vaccine and tracking / identification implants on folks by force or trying to make it impossible to carry on your life without it, and you'll get to see the base level option come into play. Even if your side wins at that, you'll find you won't like the world that makes for.
W54/XM-388 said
Tax stamps have nothing at all do to with common defense of this country from enemies, or the general welfare, they never have. They are simply an attempt at another stupid prohibition due to idiot sheep that wound up becoming ineffective due to the government itself. (Look up what the actual yearly wages were back when the NFA was passed and inflate the cost of that tax stamp to match percentage wise wages today, and you'll understand it was never about taxing stuff it was about banning stuff using twisted tax laws)
You are also conflating 2 very different issues.
I'll put it simply in SJW speak so you could understand it. "My body, My Choice".
Some want to feel the warm comfort of doing whatever they are told.
Others prefer dangerous freedom.
You seem to be firmly in the first camp.
unquote
Umm, not hardly. Was the NFA an end run around the Constitution? Absolutely . Most of it is unenforceable by any reasonable reading of the 2A. That said, do I think that the Feds should probably have some restrictions on NBC weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.? Hell yes. The mere existence of the United States depends on it. It's probably bad policy to have the guys in the mosque downtown stockpiling chlorine gas, blister agent and anthrax in a bunch of storage units around town in case someone wants to try and infringe on their first amendment right to freedom of religion. On the other hand, if the members of the Antioch Baptist Church think everyone of their congregation should own an M16 and 5000 rounds of ammo, that seems squarely inside the lines of the 2A. See, there are certain restrictions that don't qualify as an infringement. Individual arms are most certainly covered. Where things start to get blurry is crew served weapons, high explosives and up the chain. The town used to own cannon, and JP Jones had his own armed warship, pursuant to letters of marque. I know a guy that owns a BP cannon, pretty cool. You want to park an M3 howitzer in your backyard with all the shells? That may need some paperwork. That paperwork just can't amount to a defacto ban.
I know Allan Cors, he has a bunch of tanks. That's great, nice collection. Still need some paperwork on the guns installed. Can the tax be 1 Million dollars each? No, that's obviously a pretense to an outright ban. Can it be $50? in today's economy, sure. Way back when, you used to send in the Form 4 when you sold the gun, guy went home with it, Feds processed the registration change. Now, wait months for approval. That's not legitimate.
I appreciate the thought that we make sick people stay home. Only problem is how do they know they are sick if they have no symptoms? Make everyone take a test? There we go again with some medical procedure requirement. I don't think requiring a vaccine for a case like this would ever be something the government needed to do. If it was in fact that bad, like I said, enough people would volunteer and make it a non-issue.
All this is why representatives need to be chosen with care. You can't vote for Dudley Do-Gooder, who thinks they can make the world totally safe if you'd just do what they said. On the other hand, telling people eveyone should have their very own nuke tipped Tomahawk is most lilkey to get suggestions you be committed for observation.
Tax stamps have nothing at all do to with common defense of this country from enemies, or the general welfare, they never have. They are simply an attempt at another stupid prohibition due to idiot sheep that wound up becoming ineffective due to the government itself. (Look up what the actual yearly wages were back when the NFA was passed and inflate the cost of that tax stamp to match percentage wise wages today, and you'll understand it was never about taxing stuff it was about banning stuff using twisted tax laws)
You are also conflating 2 very different issues.
I'll put it simply in SJW speak so you could understand it. "My body, My Choice".
Some want to feel the warm comfort of doing whatever they are told.
Others prefer dangerous freedom.
You seem to be firmly in the first camp.
unquote
Umm, not hardly. Was the NFA an end run around the Constitution? Absolutely . Most of it is unenforceable by any reasonable reading of the 2A. That said, do I think that the Feds should probably have some restrictions on NBC weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.? Hell yes. The mere existence of the United States depends on it. It's probably bad policy to have the guys in the mosque downtown stockpiling chlorine gas, blister agent and anthrax in a bunch of storage units around town in case someone wants to try and infringe on their first amendment right to freedom of religion. On the other hand, if the members of the Antioch Baptist Church think everyone of their congregation should own an M16 and 5000 rounds of ammo, that seems squarely inside the lines of the 2A. See, there are certain restrictions that don't qualify as an infringement. Individual arms are most certainly covered. Where things start to get blurry is crew served weapons, high explosives and up the chain. The town used to own cannon, and JP Jones had his own armed warship, pursuant to letters of marque. I know a guy that owns a BP cannon, pretty cool. You want to park an M3 howitzer in your backyard with all the shells? That may need some paperwork. That paperwork just can't amount to a defacto ban.
I know Allan Cors, he has a bunch of tanks. That's great, nice collection. Still need some paperwork on the guns installed. Can the tax be 1 Million dollars each? No, that's obviously a pretense to an outright ban. Can it be $50? in today's economy, sure. Way back when, you used to send in the Form 4 when you sold the gun, guy went home with it, Feds processed the registration change. Now, wait months for approval. That's not legitimate.
I appreciate the thought that we make sick people stay home. Only problem is how do they know they are sick if they have no symptoms? Make everyone take a test? There we go again with some medical procedure requirement. I don't think requiring a vaccine for a case like this would ever be something the government needed to do. If it was in fact that bad, like I said, enough people would volunteer and make it a non-issue.
All this is why representatives need to be chosen with care. You can't vote for Dudley Do-Gooder, who thinks they can make the world totally safe if you'd just do what they said. On the other hand, telling people eveyone should have their very own nuke tipped Tomahawk is most lilkey to get suggestions you be committed for observation.
Last edited:
There you go again. So if we don't want someone to strip us of control of our bodies we are for murder?
Nice one...
Oh and many states actively promote the murder of the unborn or the just being born because "rights".....
Now if you want someone to kill you or want to kill yourself.... interestingly enough that's becoming the next "human right" championed by the same SJW Elites and Communists that want to force the vaccine on you... Just watch Europe to see what will be here in about 20 years... Suffer from crippling anxiety, sure go ahead get someone to kill you, no problem....
The ones on the conservative side who are all about keeping sovereignty over their own bodies and minds are actually the ones most concerned with protecting life at all stages and levels. The ones pushing for forced vaccines and everything else are the ones who are more interested in killing off anybody inconvenient or not useful enough..... That should tell you what side you are parroting.
The brain dead, sheep fight to get in line for their masters, the rest of us survive and begin correcting the problems of the brain dead libtard rats.
Similar threads
