Arms manufactures halt selling to STATES with UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS

I hate to tell you Dano but the continental army was formed before the constitution came into law.

True, but then it wasn't a standing army,being disbanded after the last Brit' left.

The Constitution went into effect on March 4, 1789.

"The constitution allows Congress to raise and support an army for no longer than two years, according to section 8. As opposed to the language of the next line which is to provide and maintain an provide for a navy.

The Continental Congress established the Continental Army in 1775 to fight the revolution. The Legion of the Unites States was established in 1792- 1796 to fight the Native Americans, which means it was established and renewed once.

The Congress re-raised the army for the war of 1812 and Mexican-American War from 1846-1848.

Once again for the Civil War Congress called up the state militias to form an army.

It was not until the late 19th / early 20th century that the current standing army was formed. "

:dontknow:
 

Can you show me where it says "the 2nd is not limited to black powder"?

The 2nd was null and void the moment the US got a standing army.

I disagree ,or the supreme court would not have taken it up in recent history.
Blackpowder is nice, but propellant not mentioned. Just arms.

And what was the courts decision on who,s right to bear arms?
 

Didn't they refuse to rule on any future limitations and/or restrictions too?....Welcome to the future! ;)
 

"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."


Dano problem is he is thinking of England's subjects right to protect theirselves, they gave up that right or rather the governemnt took them away.... Their crime rate shows they are paying for that...

Maybe before you attack American's right to carry arms your time would be better spent doing something about your own county's crime rate and protecting your own fellow citizens there......



England has worse crime rate than the US, says Civitas study

England and Wales has one of the worst crime rates among developed nations for rapes, burglaries and robberies, a major report has found.


Burglar-460_1014085c.jpg

Image 1 of 2
Photo: Rex Features


kennethClarke_1494802c.jpg

Image 1 of 2
Offenders are locked up for shorter periods than in comparable countries, Civitas found, raising questions about suggestions from Justice secretary Ken Clarke that too many criminals were being jailed Photo: HEATHCLIFF O'MALLEY













By Christopher Hope, Whitehall Editor

7:00AM BST 03 Aug 2010



However, offenders are locked up for shorter periods than in comparable countries – raising questions about claims made by Ken Clarke, the Justice Secretary, that too many criminals were being jailed.

The study found that England and Wales ranked highly in a survey of crime rates among more than 30 developed counries, based on the frequency of crimes recorded by police for every 100,000 people.

For burglaries and robberies England and Wales had more crimes per 100,000 people than the USA.


England and Wales was ranked sixth for burglaries – worse than Sweden, Slovenia, the Czech Republic, Turkey, Italy and Chile - and for robberies, England and Wales was seventh.

For rapes, England and Wales was ranked ninth, worse than the likes of Norway, Poland, Sweden, Australia and Germany, while for car thefts, England and Wales was eighth – worse than Slovenia, Chile, Mexico, Greece and the Czech Republic.


The figures, from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, draw together crimes recorded by police in the countries studied and is published every six years.
They date from 2006 because of difficulties in obtaining accurate comparable figures.

Civitas said, where possible, it had cross-checked with more recent pan-European figures, and the rates were broadly the same.

Among two other measures, England and Wales fared better, being ranked 16th out of 35 countries for “intentional homicides” and 19th for major assaults.

David Green, Civitas’s director, said: “England and Wales are high-crime societies compared with other developed nations. We have a lot of crime compared with other similar countries.
“Random checks of later figures for individual nations show that the ranking has not changed significantly. "

Mr Green said further analysis had shown that England and Wales had a low “punitivity ratio” compared with other countries because shorter sentences were being handed down by judges.
The ratio is calculated by contrasting the number of people convicted in a year per 100,000 population with the number of prisoners in jail as a result of a court sentence per 100,000 population.
In a speech in June, Mr Clarke had said that the debate on criminal justice had to move on from the “numbers game” of measuring the effectiveness of policies solely according to the prison population.
But Mr Green said: “Mr Clarke said he thought our system was too punitive, but the report also allows us to test the theory that our system is especially severe.

"The score for England and Wales, contrary to the claims of Kenneth Clarke, is low. The claim that our criminal-justice policies are punitive is not, therefore, supported by the best available evidence.”
A Home Office spokesman said last night: "This data is now more than four years old, but highlights that we have a high level of crime compared to other countries.
"This backs up the perceptions of many communities who have real concerns about stubbornly high level of serious crimes.

"This Government will reform the police to make them more accountable to their communities and cut bureaucracy to get officers onto the beat and fighting crime."
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said:‬‪ ‬‪"Between 1995 and 2009, the prison population in England and Wales grew by 32,500 or 66 per cent. But this rise has not had a comparative effect either on public confidence in the criminal justice system, or on reoffending.


"Nearly half of all offenders sent to prison are reconvicted within a year of release, creating a revolving door of crime.
"The Government will tackle this by conducting a full assessment of sentencing and rehabilitation policy to ensure that it is effective in deterring crime, protecting the public, punishing offenders and cutting re-offending.

“The Government is committed to intelligent sentencing which ensures appropriate punishment, rehabilitation and the protection of the public."
England has worse crime rate than the US, says Civitas study - Telegraph





England’s Crime Rate Nearly Four Times Higher than United States








I’ll give Piers Morgan credit for one thing: He’s not afraid to interview people who have strong disagreements with him. He’s giving them a platform for views that rarely see the light of day on liberal networks.

He had Alex Jones of InfoWars on a few nights ago. While Jones was a little over the top, he didn’t roll over for Morgan. Too many conservatives want to be friends with the media as if their agreeable style will somehow endear them to the liberal media establishment. It will never, never, never happen.

Morgan also had Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America on. Don’t mess with Larry Pratt. He comes to interviews prepared, and he’s a lot more measured and calm than Jones. In his December 19, 2012 interview, Pratt had said that “evil’s in our hearts. Not in the guns.” That’s probably the first time the secularist Morgan ever heard that before. Of course, it’s true. Good people, or at least people who work hard to say no to evil thoughts and desires, do not murder people. When some usually good person “snaps,” the snapping is the evil in them (James 1:13–15; Mark 7:14–15).

Pratt went on to say to Morgan in the interview:
“The problem occurs, sir, in those areas precisely where we have said ‘no guns.’ The problem doesn’t occur where the guns are allowed freely to be carried to be used by people. There we have very low murder rates.”
Pratt returned to Morgan’s show on January 9[SUP]th[/SUP] of this year. The sparks flew over crime statistics.
The vast majority of people in England do not own guns. Guns are heavily restricted. Morgan sees this as one of the reasons crime is low in England. At least that’s what he’s been trying to pass off to his low-information viewers . . . until Larry Pratt showed up for round two.

Pratt maintained that the official police homicide numbers are cooked. “The data that you are using for the murder rate in England is a sham,” Pratt countered. “There’s a monumental miss-reporting of what constitutes murder. If three people are murdered, it’s likely to be counted as one event.” In fact, an article on crime statistics in England makes the same point: “there are the official police figures (which historically under-record the true level of crime).”

Morgan couldn’t handle the truth. He accused Pratt of “deliberately lying, deliberately twisting” the data. Where did Pratt get his information? Instead of there being 39 murders in 2011 that Morgan claimed, Pratt stated there were 970. “That’s exactly what your own constabulary is saying,” insisted Pratt.

Then just yesterday, I came across an article that was published in The Telegraph on July 2, 2009:
“Analysis of figures from the European Commission showed a 77 per cent increase in murders, robberies, assaults and sexual offences in the UK since [the] Labour [Party] came to power.
The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South Africa.
“The UK had a greater number of murders in 2007 than any other EU country — 927 — and at a relative rate higher than most western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
It gets worse. “Overall, 5.4 million crimes were recorded in the UK in 2007 — more than 10 a minute — second only to Sweden. . . . It means there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the UK, making it the most violent place in Europe.”
Great Britain’s crime rate is nearly four times that of the United States. “By comparison, America has an estimated rate of 466 violent crimes per 100,000 population.”



Read more: England?s Crime Rate Nearly Four Times Higher than United States : Political Outcast



 

Last edited:
Lol, hmmm, and maybe before you go spouting all this percentage and per 100,000 people rubbish you'll actually do some real research! Unlikely i know but the opportunity is open.

A little prod in the right direction?

1/ What constitutes "a violent crime" in the UK isn't what constitutes one in other countries. For example: Throwing stones through a window. Kicking in the door of your house after your spouse locks you out during a "domestic argument". Ram Raiding (nobody involved but the criminals). All kinds of stuff that would be considered "minor" elsewhere is technically "violent" to our police.

2/ Piers was talking murder rate for guns...Pratt was talking overall murder rate!

It's been said many times before and yet you still insist on posting it - "percentages are NOT fact!".

There's no doubting the UK's become a bad place, but to say it's more violent than the US with size comparison is just ridiculous!
 

Truth hurts does it Dano....

In England most burglaries happen when residents are home, compared to U.S where they happen when people are gone, why do you suppose that is? It is because the English Subjects have been disarmed, there is no fear, where in America the people (here we are the people not subjects) have the right of self defense, they fear be confronted by our weapons so if they choose to break in they prefer the home owners are gone where there is no chance of being shot...

In America if someone breaks in our home we have the right to use deadly force to defend our lives and our property, in England you do not have that right, in fact the home owners go to jail for defending their homes.............

So you think we should be like English subjects and not have the right to defend our lives, homes and property...... NO THANK YOU!

We are fine with our rights given to us by our fore fathers, we do not need or want what you have or should I say you don't have...

In the UK, homeowners who defend themselves against burglars and violent criminals are routinely arrested and thrown in prison


(NaturalNews) There is a saying - in the U.S., anyway - that a "man's house is his castle." That saying can carry a host of meanings, not the least of which is that a man's home is his sacred sanctuary and it cannot be violated by anyone.

But that's here in the United States, where political correctness in the legal system hasn't quite reached the level it has in our cousin country, Great Britain.

There, defending your home can land you in jail, while the trespasser criminal is allowed, in some cases, to get off scot-free.

A report in the Daily Telegraph provided a glimpse into this topsy-turvy, upside-down legal precedent.

In one recent incident, a farm tenant and his wife, both of whom had suffered a number of break-ins already, were arrested and jailed after using a legally-owned firearm (not an easy thing to obtain in the gun-free zone of England) to shoot at and wound one of two burglars who surprised the couple in the night.

But wait. The outrage gets worse.

Multiple robberies, but that doesn't seem to matter

According to reports, the husband used his weapon to fire at the intruders, who then fled the isolated farmhouse before calling police.

Yes, that's right: Both of the burglars were shot and wounded, and one of them actually called the cops. But he must've known what he was doing because his victim got arrested for nothing more than defending his home.

"This is not the first time they have been broken into," said the arrested man's mother, in comments to the paper. "They have been robbed three or four times. One of them was quite nasty."

The mother went on to say the couple has never been injured during the series of robberies, but obviously they were "marked" as an "easy score" by the local thugs, and it might only have been just a matter of time before "quite nasty" turned, literally, into something quite nasty. Victims are never empowered; only criminals who are allowed to operate unchallenged are empowered.

Other farmers in the area chimed in as well. They, too, have been victimized.

"We had three Land Rovers stolen," one told the paper. "We had fitted one with a tracker and it was recovered in Birmingham."

In the case of the farm tenant, four men - the two who were wounded and two others suspected of taking part - were indeed arrested, but the victim and his wife were also charged. According to the Telegraph, the victimized couple was booked on "suspicion of causing grievous bodily harm."

Defend your home, go to jail

Without question, the case is likely to reignite a debate within Great Britain about a homeowner's right to defend his property, the paper said. That debate initially began in the late 1990s after another farmer, Tony Martin, shot two burglars at his remote home. Martin shot at Brendan Fearon, 29, and Fred Barras, 16, after they broke into his home.

He fired three times. Barras was struck in the back and although he managed to eventually escape through a window, he died moments later. Martin, meanwhile, was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison, which was later reduced to manslaughter and five years in prison. Nice of the court to cut him a break.

In 2009, millionaire businessman Munir Hussain fought back against a knife-wielding intruder with a metal pole and cricket bat; the burglar had tied up his family at their Buckinghamshire home.

For daring to defend himself and his family, Hussain was jailed for more than two years, though his attacker was spared prison.

Lucky for Hussain he eventually got an understanding judge who reduced his sentence to one year in jail, which was suspended.

What a guy.

In the UK, homeowners who defend themselves against burglars and violent criminals are routinely arrested and thrown in prison


o8lu.jpg
 

You couldn't see "the truth" if i stapled it to the end of your nose mate lol!

You start off saying most houses in the UK are burgled while owners are home. While this is probably true today, up until around 10 years ago it would be untrue! Confession time - as a sometime burglar in my mispent youth...i know ok!
The reason for the amount of burglaries while people are home now is the fact that the UK is huge on car theft. Modern cars now are too hard to steal, and so car thieves tend to break into houses for the sole reason of stealing the car keys and car while people sleep!

Shotguns are very easy to obtain legally. Especially if you're a farmer. The problems begin when burglars are disturbed. In the UK they tend to run and if you then open fire...you're shooting them in the back as with the Tony Martin case. And that TH is "murder"!! Plain and simple.

You'll find that your stolen expression originates with us and goes thus: "An Englishman's home is his castle!" Kindly find your own. :)

If your laws are soooo much better....why all the fuss over Treyvon Martin?
 

You couldn't see "the truth" if i stapled it to the end of your nose mate lol!

You start off saying most houses in the UK are burgled while owners are home. While this is probably true today, up until around 10 years ago it would be untrue! Confession time - as a sometime burglar in my mispent youth...i know ok!
The reason for the amount of burglaries while people are home now is the fact that the UK is huge on car theft. Modern cars now are too hard to steal, and so car thieves tend to break into houses for the sole reason of stealing the car keys and car while people sleep!

Shotguns are very easy to obtain legally. Especially if you're a farmer. The problems begin when burglars are disturbed. In the UK they tend to run and if you then open fire...you're shooting them in the back as with the Tony Martin case. And that TH is "murder"!! Plain and simple.

You'll find that your stolen expression originates with us and goes thus: "An Englishman's home is his castle!" Kindly find your own. :)

If your laws are soooo much better....why all the fuss over Treyvon Martin?

So 10 years ago it was safer than it is now, I am sure that is very comforting to the Subjects in England NOW....

So your an admitted exburglar and criminal..... I see now why your so against homeowners having the right to defend their homes...

Maybe 20 years ago an Englishman's home was his castle, not that way any longer, it is very easy to find stories of English citizens arrested for defending their homes.....

No thank you, we are fine here in the states with our gun laws, seems like your time would be much better spent defending your rights there than worrying about our gun rights here, I found lots of stories of English homeowners arrested for defending their homes from burglars and criminals....... It is nothing short of shameful that a homeowner goes to jail for defending their home while the criminal just goes home.......

As far as Travon Martin, it has come to light through pictures taken at the hosipital that Zimmerman did infact have facial and head injuries consistant with an attack, this fact was left out of the original story by the bias liberal media, it makes a better story line that way....
 

The Travon martin case is being twisted into a political wildcard for the liberals and their gun grab campaign. Much like so called global warming is....
 

So 10 years ago it was safer than it is now, I am sure that is very comforting to the Subjects in England NOW....

So your an admitted exburglar and criminal..... I see now why your so against homeowners having the right to defend their homes...

Maybe 20 years ago an Englishman's home was his castle, not that way any longer, it is very easy to find stories of English citizens arrested for defending their homes.....

No thank you, we are fine here in the states with our gun laws, seems like your time would be much better spent defending your rights there than worrying about our gun rights here, I found lots of stories of English homeowners arrested for defending their homes from burglars and criminals....... It is nothing short of shameful that a homeowner goes to jail for defending their home while the criminal just goes home.......

As far as Travon Martin, it has come to light through pictures taken at the hosipital that Zimmerman did infact have facial and head injuries consistant with an attack, this fact was left out of the original story by the bias liberal media, it makes a better story line that way....

"So your an admitted exburglar and criminal..... I see now why your so against homeowners having the right to defend their homes..."

From my other post:
"I believe EVERYONE should be entitled to defend and protect themselves and theirs....within reason!
1 shotgun - for home defence.
Max of 3 handguns for home defence/concealed carry.....with permits.
Hunting rifles to be allowed in rural areas and as required by legitimate hunters.

This is my belief, whether it be the US, Britain, Sweden or Guatamala."

Wrong ain't ya?

Poor Mr Zimmerman. Must have hurt a lot having to ram his own face into the wall after shooting poor Treyvon eh? A likely tale ;)
 

"So your an admitted exburglar and criminal..... I see now why your so against homeowners having the right to defend their homes..."

From my other post:
"I believe EVERYONE should be entitled to defend and protect themselves and theirs....within reason!
1 shotgun - for home defence.
Max of 3 handguns for home defence/concealed carry.....with permits.
Hunting rifles to be allowed in rural areas and as required by legitimate hunters.

This is my belief, whether it be the US, Britain, Sweden or Guatamala."

Wrong ain't ya?

Poor Mr Zimmerman. Must have hurt a lot having to ram his own face into the wall after shooting poor Treyvon eh? A likely tale ;)

Dano, we are not limited on number of guns allowed by the second and I can assure you we never will! Thanks but no thanks to your imagined European Utopia.
 

Never said you were or that you should be. Just i believe what i stated is enough guns for anyone to get the jobs you all say you need guns for...done!

And...you can't assure me you never will because that's why this whole forum was created along with all the threads before! Right? ;)
 

Never said you were or that you should be. Just i believe what i stated is enough guns for anyone to get the jobs you all say you need guns for...done!

And...you can't assure me you never will because that's why this whole forum was created along with all the threads before! Right? ;)

No Dano, it ain't going to happen.....you see us Americans don't just bend over as the govt demands...we don't take being violated lightly.....
 

As Your mates RJC and Worldtalker say a lot...."Just wait and see!" ;)
 

As Your mates RJC and Worldtalker say a lot...."Just wait and see!" ;)

Your right just wait and see what happens when they try to take our guns because this my friend won't be pretty. And I will do what ever it takes to defend this country and or rights!
 

"So your an admitted exburglar and criminal..... I see now why your so against homeowners having the right to defend their homes..."

From my other post:
"I believe EVERYONE should be entitled to defend and protect themselves and theirs....within reason!
1 shotgun - for home defence.
Max of 3 handguns for home defence/concealed carry.....with permits.
Hunting rifles to be allowed in rural areas and as required by legitimate hunters.

This is my belief, whether it be the US, Britain, Sweden or Guatamala."

Wrong ain't ya?

Poor Mr Zimmerman. Must have hurt a lot having to ram his own face into the wall after shooting poor Treyvon eh? A likely tale ;)

Again your under the mistaken impression we care what you think on the matter of our 2nd amendment rights....

Maybe that is what the burglars in England prefer the people own, but we are not England...... I keep weapons in different parts of my home so I have one close by. My home is 2 story 2400 sq feet.... I am never more than 20 feet from a weapon if it is needed and I am not carrying.... I only own 5 weapons at the moment, but will own more I assure you...

As far as Mr Zimmerman he was picked up and taken to hosipital by the police, and I am sure you would know a lot more about what criminals do to cover their trail than I would....
 

Your right just wait and see what happens when they try to take our guns because this my friend won't be pretty. And I will do what ever it takes to defend this country and or rights!

Hey don't get me wrong...I can't wait for all this "the south will rise again!!" Americans shooting dead Americans stuff to begin. Should make good TV. I'm with you. Bring it on!...as you say! :)
 

I'm happy to have given you a new record to play TH. At least it saves us from the old one of ...."shall not be infringed!". Unfortunately i foresee this new one will be just as broken and repetitive! :occasion14:
 

Hey don't get me wrong...I can't wait for all this "the south will rise again!!" Americans shooting dead Americans stuff to begin. Should make good TV. I'm with you. Bring it on!...as you say! :)

So you think American issues are for your entertainment on tv do you??
 

To begin with it would not be a North vs South issue, if anything it would be a Red vs Blue issue so your wrong again Dano......Considering the source Diesel I wouldn't lose any sleep over his opinion, the opinion of our rights by criminals in other countries do not really mean much, you know criminals always prefer their victims be unarmed.......
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom