|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 7:56:55 GMT -5
Solomon,
Sorry, I disagree. The old lady was not rational from what I saw on the video and considering the environment she was in. The same goes for all the other people that refused to leave an environment that had no water, electricity, dwindling food, medical facilities but did have rotting bodies and a potentially toxic moat around if not in their homes.
You need to have some common sense about the situation in New Orleans. As a police officer, is it not your duty to remove people from a situation that you deem unsafe for them, that it is your duty to protect when you are in a capacity to do so? I would say the answer is yes and that you have done it many, many times. It wasn't a matter of you asking people to obey your orders, you may have done it in a polite manner but you did it and it was because of your lawful obligations.
As far as going through the homes with arms raised. Come on man! You can't be a police officer, no police officer is going to tell me that they would be walking around in that area, under that environment, doing that job and going into those houses without being in a defensive posture and preparing for the unknown. You need to go back to the academy if you're telling me that your gun wouldn't have left your holster, Mr. Fife.
|
|
|
Post by Dale Jackson on Apr 28, 2007 9:53:30 GMT -5
The way things are going our troops are enforcing UN law and are becoming more and more foreign. We might not have to be invaded by foreigners if the National Guard and Police are willing to commit treason against their own citizens. ok we are doing the UNs bidding... Now the rest of the world hates us, which I agree with. So I am just wondering how you can you both as justification for stockpiling IEDs and other explosives. Also you seem to think militia in general are good things. You think the government was out of control in Waco. What do you think about the incidents surrounding Oklahoma City?
|
|
|
Post by billt on Apr 28, 2007 10:32:57 GMT -5
have you seen the testimony from cavanaugh about waco and the helicopters?
if not watch it then tell me whether or not that man can be trusted on any level?
he claims that because guns were not "mounted" on the helicopters that no shots came from them, BUT he admits agents with rifles were in the copters, there were holes in the roofs from rounds coming in and rounds were found inside the compund fired from those copters and video tapes show them being fired, yet cavanaugh STILL claims no shots came from the copters because they didnt have weapons "mounted" on the copters.
he actually looks rather silly throughout his testimony.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 28, 2007 12:05:58 GMT -5
w.o.m.i. be one of the 50 people. You may find some answers here. The answer to your question is in there. Let me know if you don't see it. It's an interesting read. www.rkba.org/research/miller/Miller.htmlThankee for the link, phin. If we're on the same page here, one need really read only the summary that the author posts at the very top of the page- or at least recounts in the first few paragraphs. I guess the phrase "Right challenge; wrong challenger" mihgt be appropriate here, right?
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 28, 2007 12:11:45 GMT -5
So which is it solomon?
How is it that we're "enforcing the UN law" but at the same time "went against the UN"?
You know that I share your disdain for the United Nations and probably 99.975% of what they do.
I realize that Bush went to the UN to get their 'blessing' for us to put teeth into the UN's own resolutions- there's no doubt they wouldn't do so because they were getting very rich from looking the other way. Bush was, in my estimation, wrong to have dignified the UN by going to it to secure their "permission". If the US ever has a leader that puts the interests of ANY NGO above the interest of the United States, we's in deep DEEP doo doo.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 12:26:02 GMT -5
w.o.m.i - Actually the answer to the question you had in regards to why Miller "dropped" the case, was because he was dead.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Apr 28, 2007 14:55:35 GMT -5
the charges against them were "conspiracy to make a firearm" ? doesnt smith & wessons manufacture firearms? what about colt? since when is it against the law to try to make a legal product?
|
|
|
Post by brandon on Apr 28, 2007 17:36:03 GMT -5
since when is it against the law to try to make a legal product? Just like it's illegal to make moonshine when you can buy alcohol at the liquor store. Just like it's illegal to offer medical services when you're not a doctor. Just like it's illegal to sell morphine without being a lawful pharmaceutical distributor. TITLE 18 § 922.
(a) It shall be unlawful— (1) for any person— (A) except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 28, 2007 17:55:25 GMT -5
w.o.m.i - Actually the answer to the question you had in regards to why Miller "dropped" the case, was because he was dead. Ack! I seem to have missed that little tidbit. Have you ever noticed that I occasionally- just occasionally- tend to overanalyze things?
|
|
|
Post by Dale Jackson on Apr 28, 2007 17:56:20 GMT -5
I believe that would be under-analyzing.
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 28, 2007 18:12:17 GMT -5
>ponders<
Could be yer right, Dale.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Apr 28, 2007 18:36:16 GMT -5
personal use is NOT "engaging in the business of".
you CAN brew your own beer for your own comsumption.
you can practice medicine on yourself.
|
|
|
Post by brandon on Apr 28, 2007 18:40:35 GMT -5
personal use is NOT "engaging in the business of". you CAN brew your own beer for your own comsumption. you can practice medicine on yourself. Perhaps you could be these guys' attorney and win. But I'd bet that even with a professional attorney, they're gonna lose that one.
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 28, 2007 18:53:05 GMT -5
since when is it against the law to try to make a legal product? Just like it's illegal to make moonshine when you can buy alcohol at the liquor store. Just like it's illegal to offer medical services when you're not a doctor. Just like it's illegal to sell morphine without being a lawful pharmaceutical distributor. TITLE 18 § 922.
(a) It shall be unlawful— (1) for any person— (A) except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearmsIs that quote from the US Constitution? What would the founding Fathers think about that little "law"? There are plenty of "laws" but when they contradict or attempt to supercede the the constittution they should be null and void. If we were to filter all of the laws in America we would easily sift out thousands if not into the millions. Brandon it is legal to make your own alcohol up to five gallons I believe. I'll try to get you some references on that later if you want. Guys this country has been removed so far away from the constitution. Its time for it to return back a whole lot closer than what it is. If you were to look and re-examine numerous laws under the constitution and judge whether most laws interferred with someone else's life, liberty or pursuit of happieness you would surprise yourself without any help from me.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Apr 28, 2007 18:54:06 GMT -5
society needs to take a look at some of these "laws"...it is legal to go buy a firearm, BUT it isnt to make one yourself? WHY please?
|
|
|
Post by brandon on Apr 28, 2007 19:04:59 GMT -5
Is that quote from the US Constitution? What would the founding Fathers think about that little "law"? There are plenty of "laws" but when they contradict or attempt to supercede the the constittution they should be null and void. It doesn't contradict the Constitution. Here's the whole section of law: (A) except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerceUnder Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, the U.S. Constitution authorizes the Congress the authority "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States" This is why so many federal laws contain the verbage, "In or affecting interstate or foreign commerce." If those guys bought any of the components for their grenades that were manufactured out-of-state, then it's "in or affecting interstate commerce." The Constitution allows the Congress the power to regulate commerce amongst the states. That's why this law is not unconstitutional. Perhaps it's a loophole that the Founding Fathers never intended. I'm sure it likely is, but they indeed put into place the loophole and the Congress uses it all the time.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 19:09:29 GMT -5
Brandon, wouldn't it be against some law to have explosives of this type, handmade or not? I thought there were laws that stated you had to be licensed to possess dynamite. Not saying that these grenades and IEDs were that strong but obviously they were not weak firecrackers but extremely dangerous.
Regardless of the guns, I would have assumed the grenades, rocket launcher and IEDs would have been the bigger issue.
What is the "firearm" they manufactured? The rocket launcher?
|
|
|
Post by billt on Apr 28, 2007 19:26:57 GMT -5
"Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, the U.S. Constitution authorizes the Congress the authority "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States"
they did NOT conduct business with any foregin nation or any state.
that clause has been ABUSED for years to pass UNconstitutional laws....congress was given the power to regulate commerce with foregin nations and among the several states.....one citizen in alabama buying something from another person in a different state is NOT commerce among those 2 state entities.....congress was given power to regulate commerce BY the states, NOT commerce of the citizens of the various states.
IF congress was granted the power to control ALL commerce, then the constition could have been reduced to many fewer words.....simple, congress has the POWER to regulate ALL aspects of the citizens lives!
the INTENT of that clause was to keep the states from engaging in commerce with foregin nations on their own and to keep one state from trying to control commerce with another state....tariffs on goods as they cross state lines as example....a treaty between a state and a foreign nation as another example.
the founding fathers would LAUGH at the concept of the federal government telling someone they cant plant a seed they got from another state on their own land because congress controls interstate commerce....again interstate commerce means commerce between the states, NOT between the citizens of the states!
the NCAA for example it has rules governing intercollegiate athletics...but 2 guys from UCLA can play 2 guys from USC in a pickup game and the NCAA has no role in that contest!
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 28, 2007 19:37:32 GMT -5
ok we are doing the UNs bidding... Now the rest of the world hates us, which I agree with. So I am just wondering how you can you both as justification for stockpiling IEDs and other explosives. Also you seem to think militia in general are good things. You think the government was out of control in Waco. What do you think about the incidents surrounding Oklahoma City? Oklahoma City was highly suspicious to me. The geological seismology center discovered two seperate signatures indicating explosives powerful enough to register on the instruments they use to measure earthquakes. This would contradict the official explanation of only the Ryder truck exploding. A retired government explosives expert from the military critiqued the single bomb line and explained how the truck was not able to do all of the damage by itself. Numerous witness heard 2 explosions. Numerous news clips from that day had footage of bomb squads hauling away unexploded devices and there were confirmed reports from law enforcement on that day. Timothy was captured on around 12 separate tapes exiting the Ryder truck but none of those tapes were used to prosecute him. If I had a tape of a murderer killing someone that would be one of the biggest pieces of evidences I would use against him in court. Some say that there was a middle eastern male with him exiting the truck in front of the Murrow building. Something else that is suspicious is why was not the intended targets (ATF) not in the building? They were out in a domestic terrorism drill that was similar in nature to the incident that happened on that day. It is very similar to the terror drills and war games on 9/11. For example on 9/11 the National Reconnaissance Office had drills of responding to planes crashing into buildings. War Game Vigilant Guardian on 9/11 was testing our response against hijackings. The drill Amalgam Warrior was a large live-fly air defense and air intercept, tracking surveillance. These very coincidental examples indicates something way deeper than the official stories of the terrorist incidents that occurred on those days. It is extremely weird that McVeigh was never allowed or never made any comment to the public during the entire process. Maybe he was the patsie or fall guy. There was also a book written by the Governor of Oklahoma's Brother a couple of years or so prior to the Oklahoma City Bombing. The name of it was The Final Jihad by Martin Keating. The book had a domestic terrorist named Thomas McVeigh blowing up a federal building in it. That is all I can think of right now off the top of my head. In a documentary called 9/11 The Road to Tyranny it discusses the Oklahoma City bombing for around 10 minutes during the first part of the film. Here is a link to that documentary video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1358726890127819985I do believe in militias in general. I do not support groups than plan on starting racial wars like the Neo Nazis, KKK or black extremists groups. I believe they have the right to peacefully assemble though. A couple of more documentaries Waco: Rules of Engagement video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4298137966377572665video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5510108493532885562and Waco: A New Revelation These influenced my perception a great deal on this government.
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 28, 2007 19:48:23 GMT -5
And Ruby Ridge showed the true colors even more. Imagine 2 Border Patrol Agents go to prison for shooting a Mexican drug trafficker while FBI Sniper, Lon Horiuchi could shoot an unarmed Mother holding her child in the head with a .308 (blowing skull fragments in the child's hair). I could maybe understand this if it occurred in the middle of exchanging fire but this was not the case. Horiuchi has not seen the first day in jail.
The situation in America is not just the result of incompetent mistakes, it is the result of a design. America is being destroyed by design.
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 28, 2007 19:48:53 GMT -5
the charges against them were "conspiracy to make a firearm" ? doesnt smith & wessons manufacture firearms? what about colt? since when is it against the law to try to make a legal product? Amen.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 19:48:57 GMT -5
"I do believe in militias in general. I do not support groups than plan on starting racial wars like the Neo Nazis, KKK or black extremists groups. I believe they have the right to peacefully assemble though."
Do you think this militia had a inkling of intent to do harm to the hispanic population in the area?
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 19:50:31 GMT -5
the charges against them were "conspiracy to make a firearm" ? doesnt smith & wessons manufacture firearms? what about colt? since when is it against the law to try to make a legal product? Amen. Solomon, is it against the law or not? If it is, as an officer, would you enforce it?
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 28, 2007 19:54:56 GMT -5
"I do believe in militias in general. I do not support groups than plan on starting racial wars like the Neo Nazis, KKK or black extremists groups. I believe they have the right to peacefully assemble though." Do you think this militia had a inkling of intent to do harm to the hispanic population in the area? Do you have any evidence that they did? In America you should be INNOCENT until proven guilty.
|
|
|
Post by lawman on Apr 28, 2007 19:56:46 GMT -5
And Ruby Ridge showed the true colors even more. Imagine 2 Border Patrol Agents go to prison for shooting a Mexican drug trafficker while FBI Sniper, Lon Horiuchi could shoot an unarmed Mother holding her child in the head with a .308 (blowing skull fragments in the child's hair). I could maybe understand this if it occurred in the middle of exchanging fire but this was not the case. Horiuchi has not seen the first day in jail. The situation in America is not just the result of incompetent mistakes, it is the result of a design. America is being destroyed by design. You nailed it here.....broke the Code!
|
|
|
Post by solomon on Apr 28, 2007 19:56:58 GMT -5
Solomon, is it against the law or not? If it is, as an officer, would you enforce it? No. It is not even in my jurisdiction if it violates a "federal law".
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 20:04:07 GMT -5
"I do believe in militias in general. I do not support groups than plan on starting racial wars like the Neo Nazis, KKK or black extremists groups. I believe they have the right to peacefully assemble though." Do you think this militia had a inkling of intent to do harm to the hispanic population in the area? Do you have any evidence that they did? In America you should be INNOCENT until proven guilty. I believe there were several statements reported that could be construed as threats by individuals of this militia towards hispanics. They did have an ATF agent that was a "part" of that militia, so I guess it will come out in court.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 20:05:17 GMT -5
Solomon, is it against the law or not? If it is, as an officer, would you enforce it? No. It is not even in my jurisdiction if it violates a "federal law". So, there is no State law? They are being charged under a Federal law? Edit: "Sources told FOX News that the six suspects were involved in manufacturing homemade weapons and explosives, and that one of the suspects had tried to sell hand grenades to undercover federal agents. The group has also allegedly been involved in the sales and distribution of other types of explosive devices and weapons, but the nature of these has not yet been revealed."Today's arrest and search warrants have been significant due to the success of the combined efforts by ATF, as well as our state, local and federal partners," Cavanaugh said Thursday. "The communities in the area are safer, considering the fact that large quantities of live grenades and other explosive materials have been safely removed. Excellent investigative team work led us to this point in our investigation." Ok, so it appears to be Federal laws only...that being the case, would you, as a State Police or Local Police Officer, not sure what you are, assist in enforcing Federal law? Would you refuse?
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Apr 28, 2007 20:37:29 GMT -5
The Law Enforcement involved in "enforcing" laws were: This investigation involved numerous federal, state and local law enforcement. ATF is the lead agency assisted by the Bomb Squads from Huntsville Police Department, Jefferson County, and Gadsden County Sheriffs' Departments and Alabama Department of Public Safety Bomb Squad who worked with ATF Bomb Techs in securing the IED's. Other Agencies include, The U.S. Marshal Service, The Alabama State Fire Marshals, The Alabama FBI, and the Sheriff's Offices and District Attorneys' Offices of DeKalb, Etowah, Marshall, and Jefferson Counties. www.pr-inside.com/six-arrested-after-explosives-recovered-in-r106699.htm
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Apr 28, 2007 21:07:25 GMT -5
At one time I knew the specific case name but, within a few years of the passage of this federal firearms law, SCOTUS made a ruling that basically expanded the legal definition of "interstate commerce" to me >ALL< commerce (or, indeed, anything Congress wanted it to mean).
This particular iron has long grown too cold to strike.
|
|