165
Connecticut School Shootings : Swingers Discussion 21343910131
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsConnecticut School Shootings
TOPIC: Connecticut School Shootings
GoTo Page: Less ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ... More 
Start   131 to 140 of 712   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Dufus have you bothered to read the Dick Act instead of going to Wiki.

Liberals could not find their own ass if it was not attached.

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19237 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Actually if you bother to read the Dick Act you would find it reaffirms the Militia Acts of 1792, and the Militia Act of 1862. The Dick act only created a national guard.

Liberals are ignorant!

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19237 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Here's another reference, it's from a web site called wikipedia, from an article entitled, Militia Acts of 1792:

"The authority to call forth the militia was first invoked by George Washington to put down the Whiskey rebellion in Western Pennsylvania in 1794, just before the law granting that authority expired. Congress quickly passed the Militia Act of 1795, which made the provisions of the 1792 act permanent. These Militia Acts were amended by the Militia Act of 1862, which allowed African-Americans to serve in the militias of the United States. THEY WERE REPLACED by the Militia Act of 1903, which established the United StatesNational Guard as the chief body of organized military reserves in the United States." (Emphasis Added)

Amherst Canada
Username hidden
(2362 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
You are making the claims the Dick Act invalidates the act of 1792, put up or shut up.

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19237 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
FJ, I have not asked you to prove anything.

I have just asked you to provide a citation to the U.S. Code provisions memorializing the 1792 Militia Act. Surely a brilliant legal scholar like you knows that acts of Congress are codified in the U.S. Statutory Code and should be able to quickly identify where the 1792 act remains in effect. Yes, it was amended several times, but according to the sources I have seen, the last of its provisions were superseded by the Dick Act. If those sources are incorrect, why the fuck would I care? Just tell me where in the law to find the Act, as amended or otherwise.

Amherst Canada
Username hidden
(2362 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Dufus, if it has not been repealed it is still in effect. In fact it was updated during the civil war to include slaves. I don't need to cite a negative that is not there, that is downright dumb on your part. The act was not negated by the act of 1903, and in fact militias are still very much recognized.

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19237 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Please cite where the act of 1792 was repealed. The act of 1903 only established a national guard. You really need to learn to read."

FJ, perhaps I should turn your question around and ask you to cite where in the U.S. Statutory Code any provision of the 1792 Militia Act remains.

Amherst Canada
Username hidden
(2362 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Good I don't know about a 125.00 gun but I do know that 700-1000.00 guns are grabbing 3000- 4000.00 depending on what the weapon is

People are running scared buying them up.

Burlingham NY
Username hidden
(9680 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
The push makes guns that retailed for $125 when new worth almost $3,000.00 today.

Some people are smiling all the way to the dark alley they are headed for to sell said guns.

Brooklyn Park MN
Username hidden
(3843 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Part of Greg Sargent article in Washington Post:

Joe Biden vowed today that the White House was prepared to use executive actions to push through gun law reforms without the cooperation of Congress. Biden didn’t tell us what those might be, but this is interesting, because it’s a reminder that a lot of the outcome here will turn on the legislative strategy the White House and Democrats settle on.

Along those lines, one idea that you may be hearing more about soon is the possibility of introducing separate gun control measures as individual bills, rather than as a whole package. Individual members of Congress have already introduced, or are planning to introduce, measures to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines (Dianne Feinstein), to close the gun show loophole and improve the background check system (Frank Lautenberg), and improving law enforcement’s ability to crack down on illegal gun trafficking (Kirsten Gillibrand).

It’s not impossible that the White House, when it releases its package of reforms, will opt to introduce such measures separately. The virtue of that is it makes it easier to highlight the popularity of individual measures (some of the above ideas have strong majority support) and harder to dismiss (unlike one massive legislative package) as a frightful Big Government usurpation of freedom.

Flat Rock NC
Username hidden
(2984 posts)
GoTo Page: Less ... 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ... More 
Start   131 to 140 of 712   End
TOPIC: Connecticut School Shootings