Who are Mitt Romney's 47 percent? A breakdown

[Openmind]

Interesting. So NOW if something happens to your husband and you re-elect Obama, you will get to "gift" 55% of his share of the wealth to Obama in taxes. That's very admirable.

You really seem to have difficulties with understanding simple concepts!

That's okay. . . Take it easy, you wouldn't want to stretch your mind . . .it might make it hard for you to think!

Tata!

 

[Centrehalf]

To tell you the truth, I have only a vague idea of what a M-16 is. I hate guns, every gun. But I respect the Constitution so I accept that guns are a way of life in this country. However, I do believe that the type of weapons that are today sold to individuals go far beyond the intent of the law.
I don't think you want to get me involved in a debate about the 2nd amendment! I respect it as a law. . .as an individual, I disagree with it and I never have and NEVER will own a gun.

I think you have a good enough idea what an M-16 is to be able to answer the question. You are having a discussion about intent, this is why I asked you about the M-16. I just want a better idea of where you're coming from. I am not trying to trap you or start a debate on the 2nd Amendment.

 

[dogtowner]

To tell you the truth, I have only a vague idea of what a M-16 is. I hate guns, every gun. But I respect the Constitution so I accept that guns are a way of life in this country. However, I do believe that the type of weapons that are today sold to individuals go far beyond the intent of the law.
I don't think you want to get me involved in a debate about the 2nd amendment! I respect it as a law. . .as an individual, I disagree with it and I never have and NEVER will own a gun.

The M16 (officially Rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm, M16) is the United States military designation for the AR-15 rifle adapted for semi-automatic, three-round burst and full-automatic fire.[5] Colt purchased the rights to the AR-15 from ArmaLite, and currently uses that designation only for semi-automatic versions of the rifle. The M16 fires the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge. The rifle entered United States Army service and was deployed for jungle warfare operations in South Vietnam in 1963,[6] becoming the U.S. military's standard service rifle of the Vietnam War by 1969,[7] replacing the M14 rifle in that role. The U.S. Army retained the M14 in CONUS, Europe, and South Korea until 1970. Since the Vietnam War, the M16 rifle family has been the primary service rifle of the U.S. armed forces.

 

[Texas_tea]

Though there is no civilian definition [for small arms] within the U.S., any firearm utilizing a projectile greater than 1/2 inch (.50 caliber or 12.7 mm) in diameter is legally defined as a "destructive device," while anything .50 caliber or less is normally considered "small arms." The so-called "1/2 inch rule" does not apply to shotguns, sporting cartridge big bore rifles (such as rifles chambered in .600 Nitro Express) or muzzleloading black powder firearms, many of which are larger than .50 caliber.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_arms

All small arms should remain protected under the 2nd Amendment with few exceptions. Military weapons are not necessary for civilian use, again with few exceptions. This continues to come down to simple common sense government, as I stated before.

 

[dogtowner]

Though there is no civilian definition [for small arms] within the U.S., any firearm utilizing a projectile greater than 1/2 inch (.50 caliber or 12.7 mm) in diameter is legally defined as a "destructive device," while anything .50 caliber or less is normally considered "small arms." The so-called "1/2 inch rule" does not apply to shotguns, sporting cartridge big bore rifles (such as rifles chambered in .600 Nitro Express) or muzzleloading black powder firearms, many of which are larger than .50 caliber.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_arms

All small arms should remain protected under the 2nd Amendment with few exceptions. Military weapons are not necessary for civilian use, again with few exceptions. This continues to come down to simple common sense government, as I stated before.

I'm reminded of this "shall not be infringed"...

 

[Texas_tea]

I'm reminded of this "shall not be infringed"...

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

This concerns me as well. How does this fall into context with Obama's DOJ suing states like Arizona and others for trying to protect their citizens from the invasion of illegal aliens across our southern border?

How could anyone who believes in America and supports the Constitution vote for this tyrant?

 

[dogtowner]

How could anyone who believes in America and supports the Constitution vote for this tyrant?

I do not see how its possible to.
Kinda wish the Framers had specified a penalty for breaking the oath of office.

 

[Texas_tea]

I do not see how its possible to.
Kinda wish the Framers had specified a penalty for breaking the oath of office.

They did! It's called treason but, like so many other things in our government including the Constitution itself, they are intentionally and illegally ignored!

 

[dogtowner]

They did! It's called treason but, like so many other things in our government including the Constitution itself, they are intentionally and illegally ignored!

nah treason is a bit different, impeachment is about al we have.

 

[Texas_tea]

nah treason is a bit different, impeachment is about al we have.

treason : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.

 

[dogtowner]

treason : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.

which is not occurring. far closer to high crimes or misdemeanors.

 

[dogtowner]

treason : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family.

which is not the case. closer to high crimes.

 

[Openmind]

I guess I should thank you for the information. . . but really, this is a moot point for me, as I think all guns are made to kill (and obviously to make gun makers rich!) and therefore are evil.

And. . .please note that I say that when many of those guns are actually designed and produced in my country. . .better yet, in my home town!

 

[Texas_tea]

I guess I should thank you for the information. . . but really, this is a moot point for me, as I think all guns are made to kill (and obviously to make gun makers rich!) and therefore are evil.

And. . .please note that I say that when many of those guns are actually designed and produced in my country. . .better yet, in my home town!

Weapons like these are made all over the world. In the Middle East, the weapon of choice is the Russian made AK-47. Absolutely more people are killed by that weapon than any other, considering the violence in those areas. But there are also Chinese weapons as well.

In Mexico too, with the exception of the American made weapons that Obama supplied to the cartel through "Fast and Furious".

Yes ... weapons are made for profit, and that's OK assuming you don't have a problem with capitalism but, the weapons that are in the hands of warring nations are made abroad!

American made weapons ares not necessarily a bad thing, and there is certainly not an alternative at this point. If the US stopped all manufacture of weapons, it would not stop Americans or others from possessing weapons.

 

[dogtowner]

I guess I should thank you for the information. . .

you're welcome, can't have you living in ignorance.