Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > Off-topic > The Lounge
Fluid Motor Union
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #211  
Old 01-25-2013, 11:25 PM
noncom23's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Big D
Posts: 6,521
noncom23 is on a distinguished road
The Real Story:




CHEAT SHEET
MORE

Gun Laws and the Fools of Chelm†
by David MametJan 29, 2013 12:00 AM EST
The individual is not only best qualified to provide his own personal defense, he is the only one qualified to do so. By David Mamet. Get the full issue of Newsweek today on your iPad and other editions.

facebook
twitter
google plus
email
† A city in eastern Poland.
Karl Marx summed up Communism as “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” This is a good, pithy saying, which, in practice, has succeeded in bringing, upon those under its sway, misery, poverty, rape, torture, slavery, and death.


‘In announcing his gun control proposals, President Obama said that he was not restricting Second Amendment rights, but allowing other constitutional rights to flourish.’
For the saying implies but does not name the effective agency of its supposed utopia. The agency is called “The State,” and the motto, fleshed out, for the benefit of the easily confused must read “The State will take from each according to his ability: the State will give to each according to his needs.” “Needs and abilities” are, of course, subjective. So the operative statement may be reduced to “the State shall take, the State shall give.”

All of us have had dealings with the State, and have found, to our chagrin, or, indeed, terror, that we were not dealing with well-meaning public servants or even with ideologues but with overworked, harried bureaucrats. These, as all bureaucrats, obtain and hold their jobs by complying with directions and suppressing the desire to employ initiative, compassion, or indeed, common sense. They are paid to follow orders.

Rule by bureaucrats and functionaries is an example of the first part of the Marxist equation: that the Government shall determine the individual’s abilities.

As rules by the Government are one-size-fits-all, any governmental determination of an individual’s abilities must be based on a bureaucratic assessment of the lowest possible denominator. The government, for example, has determined that black people (somehow) have fewer abilities than white people, and, so, must be given certain preferences. Anyone acquainted with both black and white people knows this assessment is not only absurd but monstrous. And yet it is the law.

President Obama, in his reelection campaign, referred frequently to the “needs” of himself and his opponent, alleging that each has more money than he “needs.”

But where in the Constitution is it written that the Government is in charge of determining “needs”? And note that the president did not say “I have more money than I need,” but “You and I have more than we need.” Who elected him to speak for another citizen?

It is not the constitutional prerogative of the Government to determine needs. One person may need (or want) more leisure, another more work; one more adventure, another more security, and so on. It is this diversity that makes a country, indeed a state, a city, a church, or a family, healthy. “One-size-fits-all,” and that size determined by the State has a name, and that name is “slavery.”

The Founding Fathers, far from being ideologues, were not even politicians. They were an assortment of businessmen, writers, teachers, planters; men, in short, who knew something of the world, which is to say, of Human Nature. Their struggle to draft a set of rules acceptable to each other was based on the assumption that we human beings, in the mass, are no damned good—that we are biddable, easily confused, and that we may easily be motivated by a Politician, which is to say, a huckster, mounting a soapbox and inflaming our passions.

The Constitution’s drafters did not require a wag to teach them that power corrupts: they had experienced it in the person of King George. The American secession was announced by reference to his abuses of power: “He has obstructed the administration of Justice … he has made Judges dependant on his will alone … He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution, and unacknowledged by our Laws … He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass out people and to eat out their substance … imposed taxes upon us without our consent… [He has] fundamentally altered the forms of our government.”


Who threatens American society most: law-abiding citizens or criminals? (Matt Rourke/AP)
This is a chillingly familiar set of grievances; and its recrudescence was foreseen by the Founders. They realized that King George was not an individual case, but the inevitable outcome of unfettered power; that any person or group with the power to tax, to form laws, and to enforce them by arms will default to dictatorship, absent the constant unflagging scrutiny of the governed, and their severe untempered insistence upon compliance with law.

The Founders recognized that Government is quite literally a necessary evil, that there must be opposition, between its various branches, and between political parties, for these are the only ways to temper the individual’s greed for power and the electorates’ desires for peace by submission to coercion or blandishment.

Healthy government, as that based upon our Constitution, is strife. It awakens anxiety, passion, fervor, and, indeed, hatred and chicanery, both in pursuit of private gain and of public good. Those who promise to relieve us of the burden through their personal or ideological excellence, those who claim to hold the Magic Beans, are simply confidence men. Their emergence is inevitable, and our individual opposition to and rejection of them, as they emerge, must be blunt and sure; if they are arrogant, willful, duplicitous, or simply wrong, they must be replaced, else they will consolidate power, and use the treasury to buy votes, and deprive us of our liberties. It was to guard us against this inevitable decay of government that the Constitution was written. Its purpose was and is not to enthrone a Government superior to an imperfect and confused electorate, but to protect us from such a government.

Many are opposed to private ownership of firearms, and their opposition comes under several heads. Their specific objections are answerable retail, but a wholesale response is that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. On a lower level of abstraction, there are more than 2 million instances a year of the armed citizen deterring or stopping armed criminals; a number four times that of all crimes involving firearms.

The Left loves a phantom statistic that a firearm in the hands of a citizen is X times more likely to cause accidental damage than to be used in the prevention of crime, but what is there about criminals that ensures that their gun use is accident-free? If, indeed, a firearm were more dangerous to its possessors than to potential aggressors, would it not make sense for the government to arm all criminals, and let them accidentally shoot themselves? Is this absurd? Yes, and yet the government, of course, is arming criminals.

Violence by firearms is most prevalent in big cities with the strictest gun laws. In Chicago and Washington, D.C., for example, it is only the criminals who have guns, the law-abiding populace having been disarmed, and so crime runs riot.

Cities of similar size in Texas, Florida, Arizona, and elsewhere, which leave the citizen the right to keep and bear arms, guaranteed in the Constitution, typically are much safer. More legal guns equal less crime. What criminal would be foolish enough to rob a gun store? But the government alleges that the citizen does not need this or that gun, number of guns, or amount of ammunition.

But President Obama, it seems, does.

He has just passed a bill that extends to him and his family protection, around the clock and for life, by the Secret Service. He, evidently, feels that he is best qualified to determine his needs, and, of course, he is. As I am best qualified to determine mine.

For it is, again, only the Marxists who assert that the government, which is to say the busy, corrupted, and hypocritical fools most elected officials are (have you ever had lunch with one?) should regulate gun ownership based on its assessment of needs.

Q. Who “needs” an assault rifle?

A. No one outside the military and the police. I concur.

An assault weapon is that which used to be called a “submachine gun.” That is, a handheld long gun that will fire continuously as long as the trigger is held down.

These have been illegal in private hands (barring those collectors who have passed the stringent scrutiny of the Federal Government) since 1934. Outside these few legal possessors, there are none in private hands. They may be found in the hands of criminals. But criminals, let us reflect, by definition, are those who will not abide by the laws. What purpose will passing more laws serve?

My grandmother came from Russian Poland, near the Polish city of Chelm. Chelm was celebrated, by the Ashkenazi Jews, as the place where the fools dwelt. And my grandmother loved to tell the traditional stories of Chelm.

Its residents, for example, once decided that there was no point in having the sun shine during the day, when it was light out—it would be better should it shine at night, when it was dark. Similarly, we modern Solons delight in passing gun laws that, in their entirety, amount to “making crime illegal.”

What possible purpose in declaring schools “gun-free zones”? Who bringing a gun, with evil intent, into a school would be deterred by the sign?

Ah, but perhaps one, legally carrying a gun, might bring it into the school.


If President Obama determines a need to defend his family, why can’t we defend our own? (Jonathan Ernst, Reuters/Landov)
Good.

We need more armed citizens in the schools.

Walk down Madison Avenue in New York. Many posh stores have, on view, or behind a two-way mirror, an armed guard. Walk into most any pawnshop, jewelry story, currency exchange, gold store in the country, and there will be an armed guard nearby. Why? As currency, jewelry, gold are precious. Who complains about the presence of these armed guards? And is this wealth more precious than our children?

Apparently it is: for the Left adduces arguments against armed presence in the school but not in the wristwatch stores. Q. How many accidental shootings occurred last year in jewelry stores, or on any premises with armed security guards?

Why not then, for the love of God, have an armed presence in the schools? It could be done at the cost of a pistol (several hundred dollars), and a few hours of training (that’s all the security guards get). Why not offer teachers, administrators, custodians, a small extra stipend for completing a firearms-safety course and carrying a concealed weapon to school? The arguments to the contrary escape me.


Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre rattles off a list of places protected by armed guards at an NRA press conference.
Why do I specify concealed carry? As if the weapons are concealed, any potential malefactor must assume that anyone on the premises he means to disrupt may be armed—a deterrent of even attempted violence.

Yes, but we should check all applicants for firearms for a criminal record?

Anyone applying to purchase a handgun has, since 1968, filled out a form certifying he is not a fugitive from justice, a convicted criminal, or mentally deficient. These forms, tens and tens of millions of them, rest, conceivably, somewhere in the vast repository. How are they checked? Are they checked? By what agency, with what monies? The country is broke. Do we actually want another agency staffed by bureaucrats for whom there is no funding?

The police do not exist to protect the individual. They exist to cordon off the crime scene and attempt to apprehend the criminal. We individuals are guaranteed by the Constitution the right to self-defense. This right is not the Government’s to “award” us. They have never been granted it.

The so-called assault weapons ban is a hoax. It is a political appeal to the ignorant. The guns it supposedly banned have been illegal (as above) for 78 years. Did the ban make them “more” illegal? The ban addresses only the appearance of weapons, not their operation.

Will increased cosmetic measures make anyone safer? They, like all efforts at disarmament, will put the citizenry more at risk. Disarmament rests on the assumption that all people are good, and, basically, want the same things.

But if all people were basically good, why would we, increasingly, pass more and more elaborate laws?

The individual is not only best qualified to provide his own personal defense, he is the only one qualified to do so: and his right to do so is guaranteed by the Constitution.

President Obama seems to understand the Constitution as a “set of suggestions.” I cannot endorse his performance in office, but he wins my respect for taking those steps he deems necessary to ensure the safety of his family. Why would he want to prohibit me from doing the same?
__________________
Mike F
Current: 2017 Grand Cherokee HEMI
2017 Kawasaki ZX-14r
2017 Harley RG Ultra
2017 Harley Fatboy S
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #212  
Old 01-26-2013, 01:58 AM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
The real story? Not even close. Read one of many rebuttals, like this one. I was interested to read where the statistic about the two million instances per year of armed citizens stopping criminals came from.

Put That Coffee Down: David Mamet Drinks The NRA Kool-Aid | Mediaite
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue
Reply With Quote
  #213  
Old 01-26-2013, 03:18 AM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,735
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
"Who elected him to speak for another citizen?"

we did... twice...

"He has just passed a bill that extends to him and his family protection, around the clock and for life, by the Secret Service. He, evidently, feels that he is best qualified to determine his needs, and, of course, he is. As I am best qualified to determine mine."

OMG, the USSS is NOT protecting Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Carter, Clinton... but protects Obama?

"Why not then, for the love of God, have an armed presence in the schools? It could be done at the cost of a pistol (several hundred dollars), and a few hours of training (that’s all the security guards get). Why not offer teachers, administrators, custodians, a small extra stipend for completing a firearms-safety course and carrying a concealed weapon to school? The arguments to the contrary escape me."

Alternative idea: give the gun holding citizen a crush course in chemistry, so they can teach too... would be much better...

"The government, for example, has determined that black people (somehow) have fewer abilities than white people..."

that is unwarranted jab against black people that discredits this entire rant - not fewer abilities, but FEWER opportunities, that were put in place by the same laws that later were changed as not being adequate... now, the has come for the gun laws to change, as not being adequate - you can't continuously drag us in dark past, just because you were comfortable there... I was fine with rotary phones too, they worked fine... but, we all had to move...
Reply With Quote
  #214  
Old 01-26-2013, 10:23 AM
noncom23's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Big D
Posts: 6,521
noncom23 is on a distinguished road
» Communists Cheer On Obama


At some point the people will figure out what obama is doing.
Usually, too late.
The boiled frog theory is working perfectly.
He is a Marxist, through and through. Wanna smell
some coffee? Wait till the guns are gone.
Ever hear of Marshal Law? At least look at
China, N.Korea and their atrocities toward
their people. But as Tx said, obama
was elected twice. The people elected
a dictatator.

The people won a great case against him yesterday
for overstepping his power. I hope it continues.
But when the guns are gone, the government has full
control. If this is what the people want, hello Russia.

Its amazing how people fear private ownership
of weapons, but not the gov't. Yes, people are
killed by the insane with weapons. Freedom comes
at a high cost.

In the end , we won't agree. The younger generation
in th US is taught to welcome communal life,
not individualism. Its sad, but inevitable. Just so is
the failure of the communal gov't. Its been done
over and over and always fails.

The US people have millions of guns. Come and get 'em.
__________________
Mike F
Current: 2017 Grand Cherokee HEMI
2017 Kawasaki ZX-14r
2017 Harley RG Ultra
2017 Harley Fatboy S

Last edited by noncom23; 01-26-2013 at 12:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #215  
Old 01-26-2013, 12:56 PM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,735
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
Mike,

I am totally for freedom of speech, and even ok with you keeping your guns to protect yourself against criminals, as i said on numerous occassions. i am gladly going to continue the debate on and on, but your rants start looking more like a call to depose the duly elected US government, and I am looking into my manuals as an employee of a Federal Law Enforcement agency, to see if I have a duty and obligation to report this to my superiors - this is the last thing I want to do, as it will drag me into being investigated by internal affairs but if i have to report and i don't do it - i am in a deeper trouble.

my suggestion - as we already established that the guns are there to protect against criminals, lets stick to that, as nobody is planning to overthrow the US government.

ok?

Reply With Quote
  #216  
Old 01-26-2013, 01:07 PM
noncom23's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Big D
Posts: 6,521
noncom23 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerminatorX5 View Post
Mike,

I am totally for freedom of speech, and even ok with you keeping your guns to protect yourself against criminals, as i said on numerous occassions. i am gladly going to continue the debate on and on, but your rants start looking more like a call to depose the duly elected US government, and I am looking into my manuals as an employee of a Federal Law Enforcement agency, to see if I have a duty and obligation to report this to my superiors - this is the last thing I want to do, as it will drag me into being investigated by internal affairs but if i have to report and i don't do it - i am in a deeper trouble.

my suggestion - as we already established that the guns are there to protect against criminals, lets stick to that, as nobody is planning to overthrow the US government.

ok?

A personal jab again and a threat. Tx, your inability to discern rant from
information is not surprising. You only make my point.
You see one side only. I covered this already as above.
I leave you to your plight.

As with your threat to have me investigated what are your credentials to do that ? I believe by law you have identify yourself to me before
you can indicate me. So who are you? If you are a federal agent please ID yourself. Or are you here to entrap people?

Probably time to get Admin in here on this thread.
__________________
Mike F
Current: 2017 Grand Cherokee HEMI
2017 Kawasaki ZX-14r
2017 Harley RG Ultra
2017 Harley Fatboy S

Last edited by noncom23; 01-26-2013 at 01:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #217  
Old 01-26-2013, 01:53 PM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,735
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by noncom23 View Post
A personal jab again and a threat. Tx, your inability to discern rant from
information is not surprising. You only make my point.
You see one side only. I covered this already as above.
I leave you to your plight.

As with your threat to have me investigated what are your credentials to do that ? I believe by law you have identify yourself to me before
you can indicate me. So who are you? If you are a federal agent please ID yourself. Or are you here to entrap people?
threat?? how can i threaten you with a law? besides, i did not say anything about investigating you, i said, they will investigate me... as far you go - it is up to the agency, not me... moreover, i have not reported anything to anyone yet, this is just a friendly notice, that i may have a certain obligation as an employee (note, an employee, not an agent) of LE agency... as far as anyone concerned, i am just a janitor there...

don't make something out of nothing - there are certain obligations that i have, and i just forewarned you... US gov-t is duly elected and if you don't like it, we have democratic processes to replace our representatives - not resorting to guns...
you would have gotten no warning should it had been a trap.

so, lets stick to guns against criminals theme...
__________________
E53 X5 4.6iS
147K mi - Sold May 2013
Tireprints left in:
USA, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Russia

E53 X5 4.8iS built 2005-10-17
66200 mi - June 2012
96000 mi - June 2013
112000 mi - June 2014
OEM fire extinguisher
OE first aid kit
OE tow hitch
OE TV module
OE aspheric mirror
K&N air filter
black/white badges
rear camera
4-channel video recorder

Here is the list of things I have done to the X
Reply With Quote
  #218  
Old 01-28-2013, 02:53 AM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,735
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
so?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:29 AM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.