New AWB Coming...Feinstein has issued her gun control agenda please read.

[cloudcroft]

"For the record, that's not who I was asking. Check the quote in my post. " -- MainelyGlock

Sorry...wasn't addressing you, I was addressing others who MAY have thought shastadude17 (SD) posted a picture of Ron Paul thinking it was one of Romney.

Secondly, your post appeared while I was working on mine (so I didn't see yours it until I was finished).

As for "foreigner," does that mean SD actually voted for ""foreigner" Obama? Now I'm really confused! ;-)

...not a good start to the New Year.


Whatever, one more reason we all should be sure people don't misunderstand what we're saying...

 

[MainelyGlock]

"For the record, that's not who I was asking. Check the quote in my post. " -- MainelyGlock

I wasn't addressing you, I was adressing others who MAY have thought shastadude17 (SD) posted a picture of Ron Paul thinking it was one of Romney.

Secondly, your post appeard while I was working on mine (so I didn't see yours it until I was finished).

As for "foreigner," does that mean SD voted for Obama? Now I'm really confused! ;-)


Whatever, one more reason we all should be sure people don't misunderstand what we're saying...

Roger that. Clarification never hurts!

For instance, I should clarify to some that there's nothing wrong with being a foreigner. In fact, chances are you derive from one!

 

[cloudcroft]

...unless you continue to act like a foreigner and don't assimilate, then you're still a foreigner, and your government-issued "citizenship" papers mean nothing.

I'm 2nd generation American, and I don't care about nor "celebrate" my heritage or where I came from...I'm an American, period. Not even a "Texan" since ALL states are "my" state -- as an American.

Foreigners are fine here in America -- as tourists, who then leave -- but not as Americans who live here. That's ONE of the country's huge problems...

 

[MainelyGlock]

...unless you continue to act like a foreigner and don't assimilate, then you're still a foreigner, and your government-issued "citizenship" papers mean nothing.

Foreigners are fine here in America -- as tourists -- but not as Americans. That's ONE of the country's huge problems...

Are you talking about foreigners, or illegal immigrants? There is a difference, and it's a big one.

 

[cloudcroft]

There's no difference between the two catagories...they still don't assimilate so the RESULT of their presence is the very same.

I don't get why people come here -- legally or not -- from some sorry, backwards, poor, corrupt, oppressive (you name the negative) country, then try to change HERE to be like THERE. Very counter-intuitive and counter-productive but they do it anyway.

I mean why try to make the "land of freedom & opportunity" into a "land of repression & inopportunity" whence they came? If it was so great THERE then why come HERE? Then, why try to change HERE to what they were getting away from?

Whatever, it is being done very successively...with home-grown/domestic Liberals aiding & abetting them under the "slogan" of "embracing diversity." Soon, with so much "diversity," even what an "American" is will be undefinable. Probably already is.

I, for one, don't like it. At all.

 

[Aknazer]

There's no difference between the two catagories...they still don't assimilate so the RESULT of their presence is the very same.

My great-grandfather fled Czechoslovakia with my grandfather when the Communists were taking over. Both of them were foreigners in a foreign country when they got to the US. They assimilated so well that my father along with my aunt and uncles don't really know anything about our family history and none of them learned the language. One of them has started doing research to find out more about our family, but it was NOT something that was taught to them.

So while there might be little/no difference between the catagories, saying that they don't assimilate as a blanket statement is NOT true. It comes down to each family and some do assimilate while others don't.

 

[MainelyGlock]

There's no difference between the two catagories...they still don't assimilate so the RESULT of their presence is the very same.

I don't get why people come here -- legally or not -- from some sorry, backwards, poor, corrupt, oppressive (you name the negative) country, then try to change HERE to be like THERE. Very counter-intuitive and counter-productive but they do it anyway.

I mean why try to make the "land of freedom & opportunity" into a "land of repression & inopportunity" whence they came? If it was so great THERE then why come HERE? Then, why try to change HERE to what they were getting away from?

Whatever, it is being done very successively...with home-grown/domestic Liberals aiding & abetting them under the "slogan" of "embracing diversity." Soon, with so much "diversity," even what an "American" is will be undefinable. Probably already is.

I, for one, don't like it. At all.

There's a huge difference. One group is mooching off of our country, while the other has actually earned the rights to the jobs/healthcare/etc. that they are receiving, and in a fair way.

I've never seen any ethnic group try to change our entire country. Within the city I live, there is a huge Sudanese population. They have brought over many aspects of their culture to the neighborhoods that the majority of them reside in, and you know what? There's nothing wrong with that. For some, especially those who are old enough to remember why they were forced to escape in the first place, it's all they have to remember where they are from. Are they not allowed to enjoy this place while still hanging on to parts of their own country, which ties into who they are? It's very un-American to think so.

An "American" is kind of a subjective term, so it's hard to define in the first place. And why would you want to? That's boring. There's certain traits that we will always have, but that doesn't mean it's our way or the highway.

 

[cloudcroft]

We disagree on this subject (which isn't surprising).

And as always, I never post something in order to persuade or change others' opinions, just registering mine like everyone else here (and as marginalized as my opinions may be).

Besides, what we think means nothing anyway.

 

[MainelyGlock]

We disagree on this subject (which isn't surprising).

And as always, I never post something in order to persuade or change others' opinions, just registering mine like everyone else here (and as marginalized as my opinions may be).

Besides, what we think means nothing anyway.

Why do you find it unsurprising?

 

[cloudcroft]

Aknazer,

...nevermind...it would have nothing to do with the AWB, as per the OP topic.

 

[Tactical9mm]

shastadude17,

Yes, but that would be expected since most here are actually liberals. It's just that they are gun-owning liberals -- the only so-called "conservative characteristic" they have.

Liberal on all the social, cultural, moral and other issues America faces...

I disagree with that assertion. Based on what I've seen since I've been reading these forums, I would break it down in these percentages:

60% republican or constitution party (a clear majority)
30% Libertarian
10% democrat or green party

And as a Libertarian, (a classical liberal), I am fiscally more conservative then modern republicans. As far as "cultural" goes, I have zero tolerance for ANY illegal immigration. I feel that legal immigration should only be allowed when our unemployment rate falls below at least five percent nationally, and even then only for positions that can't be filled by US citizens. So I guess that also makes me "conservative" in that area.

As for the "social" and "moral", which I take it you mean that government should have the authority to tell us how we live our lives (and with whom), or what we can or can't do with our own bodies? I do indeed have problems with that.

Main point of my statement is that most people here at OCDO are NOT pure liberals.

 

[motoxmann]

Lol my lack of knowledge apparently started some bickering haha. the guy (ron paul) looked familar, but I wasn't quite sure to be honest, as the only two on the ballot were obama (foreigner) and romney. which is why I was confused when he said he voted for liberty.

for the record, I have no issues with foreigners either, except when they are US presidents under fraudulent documentation, especially for more than 1 term, and ESPECIALLY when they try to take away our rights

 

[unreconstructed1]

the only two on the ballot were obama (foreigner) and romney. which is why I was confused when he said he voted for liberty.

unless you live in Michigan or Oklahoma, there were at least three candidates listed. The Libertarian party had ballot access in 48 States and in the District of Criminals. The problem is the "lesser of two evils" mentality wins out, and regardless of who wins, we still get the evil one. For the record, Romney supported the '94 ban, and signed the Massachusetts ban when it came across his desk.

As for the topic at hand, I have a solution. If Feinstein gets her way, Montana, Tennessee, and the few other States that passed their own versions of the "Firearms freedom Act" a few years ago should an amendment to that legislation. Based upon the second amendment, 10 U.S.C. § 311 and comparable State law if it exists. Tennesse, for instance has Art. I, § 24 and 26 of the State constitution, as well as TCA 58-1-104 (d). States should declare that in accordance with the Constitution, State, and Federal law, each citizen of the State is subsequently enrolled in the unorganized militia. Pursuant to that declaration, the law should declare that State officials can not execute any law or order infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and that any Federal official who attempts such would be immediately arrested.

Yes, I am well aware that it will never happen, but it's definitely what should happen, and I would begin to write my State legislators immediately if her bill passed.

 

[Johnny W]

Here's the ballot you saw

Lol my lack of knowledge apparently started some bickering haha. the guy (ron paul) looked familar, but I wasn't quite sure to be honest, as the only two on the ballot were obama (foreigner) and romney. which is why I was confused when he said he voted for liberty.

for the record, I have no issues with foreigners either, except when they are US presidents under fraudulent documentation, especially for more than 1 term, and ESPECIALLY when they try to take away our rights

If you voted in Middletown, here's the ballot you saw, from the CT Secretary of the State's site:

http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/lib/sots/electionservices/town_ballots/2012/middletown.pdf

Note the inclusion of the Johnson and Gray ticket under the Libertarian Party, as well as Anderson and Rodriguez as independents. This is not including the write-ins.

If you'd like to become more involved and informed about atlernatives to the Duopoly parties here in CT, check out the CT Libertarian Party. They have some really good e-mail lists which notify us of opportunities for activism and where very knowledgable people can answer questions. http://www.lpct.org/

 

[MainelyGlock]

Lol my lack of knowledge apparently started some bickering haha. the guy (ron paul) looked familar, but I wasn't quite sure to be honest, as the only two on the ballot were obama (foreigner) and romney. which is why I was confused when he said he voted for liberty.

for the record, I have no issues with foreigners either, except when they are US presidents under fraudulent documentation, especially for more than 1 term, and ESPECIALLY when they try to take away our rights

We have a birther! I had Ron Paul on my ballot in Maine, but I'm not sure about other states.

 

[marshaul]

We disagree on this subject (which isn't surprising).

Why do you find it unsurprising?

When it comes to matters of political theory and practice, disagreement, it should be assumed, is the default state. Discussion (and/or debate), then, is the tool by which we identify those points on which agreement, between any two individuals, may be found.

It's rather collectivist to expect anything more.

 

[MainelyGlock]

States should declare that in accordance with the Constitution, State, and Federal law, each citizen of the State is subsequently enrolled in the unorganized militia. Pursuant to that declaration, the law should declare that State officials can not execute any law or order infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and that any Federal official who attempts such would be immediately arrested.

Yes, I am well aware that it will never happen, but it's definitely what should happen, and I would begin to write my State legislators immediately if her bill passed.

If only!

I honestly don't think the bill will even make it out of Congress, more specifically the House. Despite the fact that a lot of people are very gung-ho after all of the recent shootings, even some GOP members, the NRA still has a lot of money invested in making sure things like this don't happen. If it passes, it'll be the beginning of the end. I've tried to convince gun owners and gun haters alike the impact these new laws could have. The destruction of our Constitution and our country had to begin somewhere, and unfortunately the second amendment seems to have been chosen as the target.

 

[motoxmann]

We have a birther! I had Ron Paul on my ballot in Maine, but I'm not sure about other states.

lol. not intentionally

but anyway, yeah, I'm well into my adulthood but only recently have actually become strongly interested in politics. I have much to learn, and often take every opportunity possible to do just that

 

[MainelyGlock]

lol. not intentionally

but anyway, yeah, I'm well into my adulthood but only recently have actually become strongly interested in politics. I have much to learn, and often take every opportunity possible to do just that

Well hey, better late than never. It affects all of us, in one way or another, so it's good to learn as much as possible. That's why I like coming on here and hearing others opinions. A little perspective is always good!