On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>
>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>
>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot
>>>> define the word 'infringe'.
>>>
>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades
>>> and practice using them in my backyard! And what's with
>>> the stupid difficulty buying fully automatic large bore
>>> machine guns? Then there are the disgusting vehicle
>>> regulations that make it so hard to drive an Abrams tank
>>> on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>
>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people
>>> protesting? NO!
>>>
>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about
>>> little "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb
>>> Owners of America to _finally_ guarantee our rights to
>>> _real_ arms! Then men can finally feel manly!
>>>
>>
>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not
>> be infringed'. A perusal of period military reports,
>> especially quartermaster reports after captured sites,
>> distinguishes between 'guns' (artillery, field pieces,
>> mountain guns etc) and borne or small arms (rifles mostly
>> but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good luck with an
>> argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>
> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the
> arms that a "perusal of the period military reports" show
> could be "borne"?
>
> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>
>

Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers'
era to understand their text.

Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all
definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/18/2024 8:11 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:05:16 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 1/18/2024 7:58 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 19:26:41 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 4On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 06:20:40 -0500, Catrike Ryder
>>>> <Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 03:04:33 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
>>>>> <funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
>>>>>>> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
>>>>>
>>>>> I sometimes repond because I enjoy seeing you rant and rave about
>>>>> things you can't deal with. Other times I open your posts and see
>>>>> your hateful rhetoric and just roll my eyes.
>>>>
>>>> Think of it as doing a kindness. After all he has to nag someone, how
>>>> else to demonstrate his superiority? And if you didn't respond he'd be
>>>> reduced to nagging poor old Tom.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Even though I was all grown up before the "flowers_in_your_hair,
>>> flowers_everywhere" generation, I don't understand all the hatred.
>>
>> Serious introspection would be a good place to start.
>
> I don't hate you, Junior, but I do pity you a bit. All that anger...
> Tsk, tsk, tsk....

In your case, it's your prideful and willful ignorance I pity.

--
Add xx to reply

On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>
>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the word
>>>>> 'infringe'.
>>>>
>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and practice
>>>> using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid difficulty
>>>> buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are the
>>>> disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard to drive an
>>>> Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>>
>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>
>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew pew
>>>> pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally
>>>> feel manly!
>>>>
>>>
>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good luck
>>> with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>
>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms that a
>> "perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
>>
>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>
>>
>
> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
> understand their text.
>
> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all definitions are
> fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>
> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/

Of course he is!....or not:

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533

"There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement, the
Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a range of
weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While former President
Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019, the U.S.
technically remains a signatory. The agreement was never ratified by the
Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any further action on it."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/

"The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not establish an
international gun registry."

(Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any claim
from kunich or shitstain)

--
Add xx to reply

On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot
>>>>>> define the word 'infringe'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades
>>>>> and practice using them in my backyard! And what's with
>>>>> the stupid difficulty buying fully automatic large bore
>>>>> machine guns? Then there are the disgusting vehicle
>>>>> regulations that make it so hard to drive an Abrams
>>>>> tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>>>
>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people
>>>>> protesting? NO!
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about
>>>>> little "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb
>>>>> Owners of America to _finally_ guarantee our rights to
>>>>> _real_ arms! Then men can finally feel manly!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not
>>>> be infringed'. A perusal of period military reports,
>>>> especially quartermaster reports after captured sites,
>>>> distinguishes between 'guns' (artillery, field pieces,
>>>> mountain guns etc) and borne or small arms (rifles
>>>> mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good luck with
>>>> an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>>
>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the
>>> arms that a "perusal of the period military reports" show
>>> could be "borne"?
>>>
>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the
>> Framers' era to understand their text.
>>
>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all
>> definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>>
>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
>
> Of course he is!....or not:
>
> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
>
> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N.
> agreement, the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the
> international trade of a range of weapons. It does not track
> domestic gun sales. While former President Donald Trump
> symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019, the U.S.
> technically remains a signatory. The agreement was never
> ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any further
> action on it."
>
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
>
> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a
> State Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade
> Treaty, which appears to be the treaty referenced in the
> post, would not establish an international gun registry."
>
> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as
> any claim from kunich or shitstain)
>

And you can believe them! After all, this administration
repeats daily that 'the border is secure'.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the
>>>>>>> word 'infringe'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and
>>>>>> practice using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid
>>>>>> difficulty buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then
>>>>>> there are the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard
>>>>>> to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew
>>>>>> pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
>>>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can
>>>>>> finally feel manly!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
>>>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
>>>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good
>>>>> luck with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms that
>>>> a "perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
>>>>
>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
>>> understand their text.
>>>
>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all definitions
>>> are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>>>
>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
>>
>> Of course he is!....or not:
>>
>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
>>
>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement, the
>> Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a range of
>> weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While former President
>> Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019, the U.S.
>> technically remains a signatory. The agreement was never ratified by
>> the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any further action on it."
>>
>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
>>
>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
>> Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
>> appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not establish
>> an international gun registry."
>>
>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any claim
>> from kunich or shitstain)
>>
>
> And you can believe them!  After all, this administration repeats daily
> that 'the border is secure'.

Do they?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/

Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.

Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release stating the
border is secure, and/or there are no issues with border security? I'd
be interested in reading that.

--
Add xx to reply

On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 3:24:32 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 3:12 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> You really aren't paying attention. I would have thought dumbing it down
> >> for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
> >> thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
> >> mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
> >> might get it.)
> >>
> >>
> >> I wrote:
> >> The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
> >> restricted further sales."
> >>
> >> You wrote:
> >>
> >> " [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
> >> one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
> >> clause."
> >>
> >> Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
> >
> > <EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
> > government not taking guns away.
> Yes, it was. The ban wouldn't have taken any legally purchase weapons.
> >
> > My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
> > took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
> > place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
> >
> > Of course they're different.
> No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
> your ass so badly over the AR15
> >
> > Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
> in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
>
> Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
> purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
> confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
> ban, dumbass.
> --
> Add xx to reply
You "burned" nothing. You found a left wing site that claimed an M16 was an AR15.

On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 6:31:23 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 2:51 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 7:08:41 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 1/17/2024 7:15 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:37:54 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 1/16/2024 4:40 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:22:27 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 1/16/2024 4:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 1/16/2024 2:49 PM, sms wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 1/16/2024 9:14 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I haven't laughed this hard in weeks. Generally speaking I won't miss
> >>>>>>>>> tommy when he can't post here any more, but I _will_ miss gems like
> >>>>>>>>> this.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That was the best!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> FWIW, the great bicycle tube and tire shortage was during the Trump
> >>>>>>>> administration.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Trump should have gotten an award from the National Bicycle Dealers
> >>>>>>>> Association (NBDA) because it was his horrible botching of the
> >>>>>>>> response to the Covid epidemic that led to the spectacular sales of
> >>>>>>>> bicycles, parts, and accessories.
> >>>>>>>> <https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/16/857157196/bike-sales-gear-up-as-the-homebound-try-socially-distant-exercise>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Biden, with his competent response to Covid, ended the pandemic and
> >>>>>>>> bicycle sales plunged as people could go back to other activities.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> During the pandemic, there was a big shortage to tubes and tires and
> >>>>>>>> prices skyrocketed. Now tubes and tires are readily available and
> >>>>>>>> prices have fallen. I just bought 27.5" Kenda tubes for less than $4
> >>>>>>>> each <https://www.ebay.com/itm/296093855956>.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Obama's competent handling of the economy ended the recession caused
> >>>>>>>> by W. "The economy improved markedly under former President Barack
> >>>>>>>> Obama, from the start of 2009 through the end of 2016. Faced with the
> >>>>>>>> specter of another Great Depression in winter 2009, President Obama
> >>>>>>>> enacted a series of policies that helped the economy avoid that fate.
> >>>>>>>> The economy was growing again by the second half of 2009, and jobs
> >>>>>>>> followed suit by early 2010. Economic growth continued apace for the
> >>>>>>>> rest of President Obama’s time in office, and job growth logged its
> >>>>>>>> longest expansion on record by early 2017, dating back to 1939.1
> >>>>>>>> Employment opportunities improved, the unemployment rate fell, wages
> >>>>>>>> eventually increased, and household debt dropped sharply."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Biden is reversing the failures of the Trump economy, with spectacular
> >>>>>>>> job growth, low unemployment, and a record stock market. The inflation
> >>>>>>>> caused by the spending during the pandemic is coming down nicely..
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for firearms
> >>>>>>> sales?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Indirectly - A large number of people bought into the lie spread by the
> >>>>>> NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> During his presidency, Obama called for stricter gun laws and urged
> >>>>> Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
> >>>>
> >>>> Which wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted
> >>>> further sales.
> >>>
> >>> <SNIP>
> >>>
> >>> Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
> >>> grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
> >>> gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
> >>> ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
> >>> the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Ask our contributor Mr Ridesalot about the permanence of
> >> such assurances.
> >> --
> >> Andrew Muzi
> >> a...@yellowjersey.org
> >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> >
> > As I said before my best childhood friend is still alive and retired from the US Marine Corp. Ask him about the Democrats belief in the Constitution since he spent the WW II years in the Manzanar Concentration Camp. Without access to what medical care there was, his father died there. Flunky will not be appreciative should we ever meet, with his belief that Obama's full intent was to get a foot in the door and take all guns away and Flunky's claim otherwise. Were the phrase "NRA" to pass his lips it would be months of plastic surgery before he would be capable of saying anything.
> NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA
> NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA
>
> It's going to be fun watching you _try_ to follow up on that threat (and
> no, it has nothing to do with the fact that you live across the country.
>
> ..
> All of my guns are gone because my younger brother had undue effect on
> me while I was concussed. But now that I have the Loto and a complete 10
> speed group for the Fondriest, I will sell off everything else which
> will give me room in the garage. And I will rearm myself. With the
> return of common sense cops will see the return of honest judges.
> --
> Add xx to reply
Sleazy cowards are always happy to hide behind anonymity so you/ve positioned yourself right where you belong - nothing more than the laughing stock of the group who denies that because of inflation and lack of income that people are driving their tires too long and wearing them out and throwing the steel core particles on the roads. And since it is winter and you can't ride you simply lie about it because that is what you are,.

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 4:58:14 AM UTC-8, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 19:26:41 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >4On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 06:20:40 -0500, Catrike Ryder
> ><Sol...@old.bikers.org> wrote:
> >
> >>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 03:04:33 -0800 (PST), "funkma...@hotmail.com"
> >><funkma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> I think Junior doesn't quite understand that I generally consider his
> >>>> nonsense posts to be not worth reading,
> >>>
> >>>Sure dumbass, that's why you keep responding, right? <eyeroll>
> >>
> >>I sometimes repond because I enjoy seeing you rant and rave about
> >>things you can't deal with. Other times I open your posts and see
> >>your hateful rhetoric and just roll my eyes.
> >
> >Think of it as doing a kindness. After all he has to nag someone, how
> >else to demonstrate his superiority? And if you didn't respond he'd be
> >reduced to nagging poor old Tom.
> >
> Even though I was all grown up before the "flowers_in_your_hair,
> flowers_everywhere" generation, I don't understand all the hatred.

Flunky hates it that we all have his number and know that he is an engineer in name only and nothing more than a sign off Flunky,

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 7:15:36 AM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Well right now today:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the
> >>>>>>> word 'infringe'.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and
> >>>>>> practice using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid
> >>>>>> difficulty buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then
> >>>>>> there are the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard
> >>>>>> to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew
> >>>>>> pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
> >>>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can
> >>>>>> finally feel manly!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
> >>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
> >>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
> >>>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
> >>>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely). Good
> >>>>> luck with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms that
> >>>> a "perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
> >>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
> >>> understand their text.
> >>>
> >>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all definitions
> >>> are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
> >>>
> >>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
> >>
> >> Of course he is!....or not:
> >>
> >> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
> >>
> >> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement, the
> >> Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a range of
> >> weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While former President
> >> Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019, the U.S.
> >> technically remains a signatory. The agreement was never ratified by
> >> the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any further action on it."
> >>
> >> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
> >>
> >> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
> >> Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
> >> appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not establish
> >> an international gun registry."
> >>
> >> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any claim
> >> from kunich or shitstain)
> >>
> >
> > And you can believe them! After all, this administration repeats daily
> > that 'the border is secure'.
> Do they?
>
> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
>
> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
>
> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release stating the
> border is secure, and/or there are no issues with border security? I'd
> be interested in reading that.
> --
> Add xx to reply

The normal sleaze of Biden - saying one thing while doing another. The border patrol is ORDERED by the President not to turn ANYONE including criminals and drug runners back.

On 1/18/2024 6:04 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.

Gosh! You mean the tricycle rider from Florida posted something that
wasn't _documented_? Why, how can that be? He demands perfect
documentation from others!

:-)

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>
>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the word
>>>>> 'infringe'.
>>>>
>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and practice
>>>> using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid difficulty
>>>> buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are the
>>>> disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard to drive an
>>>> Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>>
>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>
>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew pew
>>>> pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally
>>>> feel manly!
>>>>
>>>
>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good luck
>>> with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>
>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms that a
>> "perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
>>
>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>
>>
>
> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
> understand their text.

Good! Since the common usage in the framers era had no concept of 30
round magazines that can be emptied in a few seconds into rooms full of
innocents, perhaps we can use that to move toward rational gun policies.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 11:52:51 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/18/2024 6:04 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.
>
>Gosh! You mean the tricycle rider from Florida posted something that
>wasn't _documented_? Why, how can that be? He demands perfect
>documentation from others!
>
> :-)

Unlike you and Junior, I don't attempt to claim my opinions are facts.
They're just my opinons. Take 'em or leave 'em.

On 1/18/2024 9:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot
>>>>>>>> define the word 'infringe'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand
>>>>>>> grenades and practice using them in my backyard! And
>>>>>>> what's with the stupid difficulty buying fully
>>>>>>> automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are the
>>>>>>> disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard
>>>>>>> to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want one for
>>>>>>> my _safety_!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people
>>>>>>> protesting? NO!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about
>>>>>>> little "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a
>>>>>>> Bomb Owners of America to _finally_ guarantee our
>>>>>>> rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally feel manly!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall
>>>>>> not be infringed'. A perusal of period military
>>>>>> reports, especially quartermaster reports after
>>>>>> captured sites, distinguishes between 'guns'
>>>>>> (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne
>>>>>> or small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if
>>>>>> rarely).  Good luck with an argument for hand grenades
>>>>>> or mobile artillery.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to
>>>>> the arms that a "perusal of the period military
>>>>> reports" show could be "borne"?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the
>>>> Framers' era to understand their text.
>>>>
>>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all
>>>> definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
>>>
>>> Of course he is!....or not:
>>>
>>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
>>>
>>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N.
>>> agreement, the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the
>>> international trade of a range of weapons. It does not
>>> track domestic gun sales. While former President Donald
>>> Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019, the
>>> U.S. technically remains a signatory. The agreement was
>>> never ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any
>>> further action on it."
>>>
>>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
>>>
>>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according
>>> to a State Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms
>>> Trade Treaty, which appears to be the treaty referenced
>>> in the post, would not establish an international gun
>>> registry."
>>>
>>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect
>>> as any claim from kunich or shitstain)
>>>
>>
>> And you can believe them!  After all, this administration
>> repeats daily that 'the border is secure'.
>
>
> Do they?
>
> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
>
> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
>
> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release
> stating the border is secure, and/or there are no issues
> with border security? I'd be interested in reading that.
>

Start at 0:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMon6O_zSj4
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:04:31 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>
>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the word
>>>>>> 'infringe'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and practice
>>>>> using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid difficulty
>>>>> buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are the
>>>>> disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard to drive an
>>>>> Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>>>
>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew pew
>>>>> pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
>>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally
>>>>> feel manly!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
>>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
>>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good luck
>>>> with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>>
>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms that a
>>> "perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
>>>
>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
>> understand their text.
>
>Good! Since the common usage in the framers era had no concept of 30
>round magazines that can be emptied in a few seconds into rooms full of
>innocents, perhaps we can use that to move toward rational gun policies.
Banning "assault weapons" was tried. It didn't accomplish what it was
supposed to do.

On 1/18/2024 11:54 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:04:31 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the word
>>>>>>> 'infringe'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and practice
>>>>>> using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid difficulty
>>>>>> buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are the
>>>>>> disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so hard to drive an
>>>>>> Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my _safety_!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew pew
>>>>>> pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
>>>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally
>>>>>> feel manly!
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
>>>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
>>>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good luck
>>>>> with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms that a
>>>> "perusal of the period military reports" show could be "borne"?
>>>>
>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
>>> understand their text.
>>
>> Good! Since the common usage in the framers era had no concept of 30
>> round magazines that can be emptied in a few seconds into rooms full of
>> innocents, perhaps we can use that to move toward rational gun policies.
>
> Banning "assault weapons" was tried. It didn't accomplish what it was
> supposed to do.

For some odd reason, assaults and murders with stolen
pistols by repeat felons were not affected by that. Who
could have guessed that?
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/18/2024 12:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 9:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define the
>>>>>>>>> word 'infringe'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and
>>>>>>>> practice using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid
>>>>>>>> difficulty buying fully automatic large bore machine guns? Then
>>>>>>>> there are the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so
>>>>>>>> hard to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my
>>>>>>>> _safety_!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little "pew
>>>>>>>> pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of America to
>>>>>>>> _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then men can
>>>>>>>> finally feel manly!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>>>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>>>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes between
>>>>>>> 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and borne or
>>>>>>> small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if rarely).  Good
>>>>>>> luck with an argument for hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms
>>>>>> that a "perusal of the period military reports" show could be
>>>>>> "borne"?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era to
>>>>> understand their text.
>>>>>
>>>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all definitions
>>>>> are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
>>>>
>>>> Of course he is!....or not:
>>>>
>>>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
>>>>
>>>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement,
>>>> the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a range
>>>> of weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While former
>>>> President Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in
>>>> 2019, the U.S. technically remains a signatory. The agreement was
>>>> never ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken any further
>>>> action on it."
>>>>
>>>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
>>>>
>>>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
>>>> Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
>>>> appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not establish
>>>> an international gun registry."
>>>>
>>>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any
>>>> claim from kunich or shitstain)
>>>>
>>>
>>> And you can believe them!  After all, this administration repeats
>>> daily that 'the border is secure'.
>>
>>
>> Do they?
>>
>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
>>
>> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
>>
>> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release stating the
>> border is secure, and/or there are no issues with border security? I'd
>> be interested in reading that.
>>
>
> Start at 0:45
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMon6O_zSj4

I gave up halfway through. Nothing I heard proved your point. Try again?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/18/2024 12:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 12:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 1/18/2024 9:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet
>>>>>>>>>> cannot define the word 'infringe'.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand
>>>>>>>>> grenades and practice using them in my backyard!
>>>>>>>>> And what's with the stupid difficulty buying fully
>>>>>>>>> automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are
>>>>>>>>> the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so
>>>>>>>>> hard to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want
>>>>>>>>> one for my _safety_!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people
>>>>>>>>> protesting? NO!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about
>>>>>>>>> little "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a
>>>>>>>>> Bomb Owners of America to _finally_ guarantee our
>>>>>>>>> rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally feel
>>>>>>>>> manly!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall
>>>>>>>> not be infringed'. A perusal of period military
>>>>>>>> reports, especially quartermaster reports after
>>>>>>>> captured sites, distinguishes between 'guns'
>>>>>>>> (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and
>>>>>>>> borne or small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as
>>>>>>>> well, if rarely).  Good luck with an argument for
>>>>>>>> hand grenades or mobile artillery.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to
>>>>>>> the arms that a "perusal of the period military
>>>>>>> reports" show could be "borne"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>>>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the
>>>>>> Framers' era to understand their text.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and
>>>>>> all definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course he is!....or not:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
>>>>>
>>>>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N.
>>>>> agreement, the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the
>>>>> international trade of a range of weapons. It does not
>>>>> track domestic gun sales. While former President Donald
>>>>> Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019,
>>>>> the U.S. technically remains a signatory. The agreement
>>>>> was never ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t
>>>>> taken any further action on it."
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
>>>>>
>>>>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according
>>>>> to a State Department spokesperson. Experts said the
>>>>> Arms Trade Treaty, which appears to be the treaty
>>>>> referenced in the post, would not establish an
>>>>> international gun registry."
>>>>>
>>>>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as
>>>>> suspect as any claim from kunich or shitstain)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And you can believe them!  After all, this
>>>> administration repeats daily that 'the border is secure'.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do they?
>>>
>>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
>>>
>>> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
>>>
>>> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release
>>> stating the border is secure, and/or there are no issues
>>> with border security? I'd be interested in reading that.
>>>
>>
>> Start at 0:45
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMon6O_zSj4
>
> I gave up halfway through. Nothing I heard proved your
> point. Try again?
>

Mayorkas has claimed that repeatedly, including in House
testimony. An NBC News interview video is here:
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/05/05/mayorkas-not-worried-about-title-42-ending-the-border-is-secure-because-we-are-maximizing-our-resources-for-most-effective-results/

Try 1:06 of the two minute video.
The super cute and hot Press Secretary says the same stupid
stuff BTW.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 11:00:27 AM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 3:24:32 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> > On 1/17/2024 3:12 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> > > On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:01:14 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> You really aren't paying attention. I would have thought dumbing it down
> > >> for you would have worked, but I see I'll have to go even simpler with a
> > >> thought exercise (try hard little kitty, I know it's tough without your
> > >> mommy here to help you, but if you go slow a read carefully you just
> > >> might get it.)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I wrote:
> > >> The legislation "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have
> > >> restricted further sales."
> > >>
> > >> You wrote:
> > >>
> > >> " [a]person who thought they might ever want one, went out and bought
> > >> one, assuming a reinstatement of the ban would have the same grandfather
> > >> clause."
> > >>
> > >> Can you spot the difference in those two statements?
> > >
> > > <EYEROLL> Your statement was a not completely true statement about the
> > > government not taking guns away.
> > Yes, it was. The ban wouldn't have taken any legally purchase weapons.
> > >
> > > My statement was about why people bought guns before the potential ban
> > > took place, hoping they would be able to keep them after the ban took
> > > place, as the earlier ban had allowed.
> > >
> > > Of course they're different.
> > No, they aren't, you're trying to play a semantic game because I burned
> > your ass so badly over the AR15
> > >
> > > Are you confused about what the "grandfather clause" was?
> > in this context it's "wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away"
> >
> > Of course, dumbass, I mean 'legally acquired', not weapons that were
> > purchased illegally (after the ban), of course those would be
> > confiscated if found, but I wasn't referring to guns purchased after a
> > ban, dumbass.
> > --
> > Add xx to reply
> You "burned" nothing. You found a left wing site that claimed an M16 was an AR15.

HAH!!! Sure sparky, a declassified DOD report is a "left wing site"....HAHA!! I guess that means the rumors about Taylor Swift working with the CIA Psy Ops units are also true!!!

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 11:08:28 AM UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 6:31:23 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> > On 1/17/2024 2:51 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, January 17, 2024 at 7:08:41 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> > >> On 1/17/2024 7:15 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 07:37:54 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 1/16/2024 4:40 PM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
> > >>>>> On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 16:22:27 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkm...@hotmail.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 1/16/2024 4:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 1/16/2024 2:49 PM, sms wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On 1/16/2024 9:14 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> I haven't laughed this hard in weeks. Generally speaking I won't miss
> > >>>>>>>>> tommy when he can't post here any more, but I _will_ miss gems like
> > >>>>>>>>> this.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> That was the best!
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> FWIW, the great bicycle tube and tire shortage was during the Trump
> > >>>>>>>> administration.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Trump should have gotten an award from the National Bicycle Dealers
> > >>>>>>>> Association (NBDA) because it was his horrible botching of the
> > >>>>>>>> response to the Covid epidemic that led to the spectacular sales of
> > >>>>>>>> bicycles, parts, and accessories.
> > >>>>>>>> <https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/05/16/857157196/bike-sales-gear-up-as-the-homebound-try-socially-distant-exercise>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Biden, with his competent response to Covid, ended the pandemic and
> > >>>>>>>> bicycle sales plunged as people could go back to other activities.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> During the pandemic, there was a big shortage to tubes and tires and
> > >>>>>>>> prices skyrocketed. Now tubes and tires are readily available and
> > >>>>>>>> prices have fallen. I just bought 27.5" Kenda tubes for less than $4
> > >>>>>>>> each <https://www.ebay.com/itm/296093855956>.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Obama's competent handling of the economy ended the recession caused
> > >>>>>>>> by W. "The economy improved markedly under former President Barack
> > >>>>>>>> Obama, from the start of 2009 through the end of 2016. Faced with the
> > >>>>>>>> specter of another Great Depression in winter 2009, President Obama
> > >>>>>>>> enacted a series of policies that helped the economy avoid that fate.
> > >>>>>>>> The economy was growing again by the second half of 2009, and jobs
> > >>>>>>>> followed suit by early 2010. Economic growth continued apace for the
> > >>>>>>>> rest of President Obama’s time in office, and job growth logged its
> > >>>>>>>> longest expansion on record by early 2017, dating back to 1939..1
> > >>>>>>>> Employment opportunities improved, the unemployment rate fell, wages
> > >>>>>>>> eventually increased, and household debt dropped sharply."
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Biden is reversing the failures of the Trump economy, with spectacular
> > >>>>>>>> job growth, low unemployment, and a record stock market. The inflation
> > >>>>>>>> caused by the spending during the pandemic is coming down nicely.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Does the Obama Team (2009~16 and 2021~present) get credit for firearms
> > >>>>>>> sales?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Indirectly - A large number of people bought into the lie spread by the
> > >>>>>> NRA/GOP that Obama was going to take everyone's guns.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> During his presidency, Obama called for stricter gun laws and urged
> > >>>>> Congress to reinstate the assault weapons ban
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Which wouldn't have taken anyone's guns away, it would have restricted
> > >>>> further sales.
> > >>>
> > >>> <SNIP>
> > >>>
> > >>> Yes, Dummy, you see, the original assault weapons ban had a
> > >>> grandfather clause that allowed a person to keep the weapon if he'd
> > >>> gotten it before the ban, so, a wise person who thought they might
> > >>> ever want one, went out and bought one, assuming a reinstatement of
> > >>> the ban would have the same grandfather clause.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Ask our contributor Mr Ridesalot about the permanence of
> > >> such assurances.
> > >> --
> > >> Andrew Muzi
> > >> a...@yellowjersey.org
> > >> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
> > >
> > > As I said before my best childhood friend is still alive and retired from the US Marine Corp. Ask him about the Democrats belief in the Constitution since he spent the WW II years in the Manzanar Concentration Camp. Without access to what medical care there was, his father died there. Flunky will not be appreciative should we ever meet, with his belief that Obama's full intent was to get a foot in the door and take all guns away and Flunky's claim otherwise. Were the phrase "NRA" to pass his lips it would be months of plastic surgery before he would be capable of saying anything.
> > NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA
> > NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA NRA
> >
> > It's going to be fun watching you _try_ to follow up on that threat (and
> > no, it has nothing to do with the fact that you live across the country..
> >
> > ..
> > All of my guns are gone because my younger brother had undue effect on
> > me while I was concussed. But now that I have the Loto and a complete 10
> > speed group for the Fondriest, I will sell off everything else which
> > will give me room in the garage. And I will rearm myself. With the
> > return of common sense cops will see the return of honest judges.
> > --
> > Add xx to reply
> Sleazy cowards are always happy to hide behind anonymity so you/ve positioned yourself right where you belong - nothing more than the laughing stock of the group who denies that because of inflation and lack of income that people are driving their tires too long and wearing them out and throwing the steel core particles on the roads. And since it is winter and you can't ride you simply lie about it because that is what you are,.

Yes, Tommy, I do in fact deny that because of inflation and lack of income that people are driving their tires too long and wearing them out and throwing the steel core particles on the roads. I have yet to hear anyone laughing at me for that claim.

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 12:16:45 PM UTC-5, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 11:52:51 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 1/18/2024 6:04 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.
> >
> >Gosh! You mean the tricycle rider from Florida posted something that
> >wasn't _documented_? Why, how can that be? He demands perfect
> >documentation from others!
> >
> > :-)
> Unlike you and Junior, I don't attempt to claim my opinions are facts.
> They're just my opinons. Take 'em or leave 'em.

So your claim that every AR-15 ever bought by the military was just an opinion?

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 12:16:45 PM UTC-5, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 11:52:51 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 1/18/2024 6:04 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.
> >
> >Gosh! You mean the tricycle rider from Florida posted something that
> >wasn't _documented_? Why, how can that be? He demands perfect
> >documentation from others!
> >
> > :-)
> Unlike you and Junior, I don't attempt to claim my opinions are facts.

Give me an example of something I've stated as fact that was proven to be an opinion

> They're just my opinons. Take 'em or leave 'em.

So your claim that every AR-15 bought by the military was in fact bought as an M16 is just an opinion?

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 1:58:13 PM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 12:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 1/18/2024 12:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >> On 1/18/2024 9:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >>> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Well right now today:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet
> >>>>>>>>>> cannot define the word 'infringe'.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand
> >>>>>>>>> grenades and practice using them in my backyard!
> >>>>>>>>> And what's with the stupid difficulty buying fully
> >>>>>>>>> automatic large bore machine guns? Then there are
> >>>>>>>>> the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it so
> >>>>>>>>> hard to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want
> >>>>>>>>> one for my _safety_!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people
> >>>>>>>>> protesting? NO!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about
> >>>>>>>>> little "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a
> >>>>>>>>> Bomb Owners of America to _finally_ guarantee our
> >>>>>>>>> rights to _real_ arms! Then men can finally feel
> >>>>>>>>> manly!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall
> >>>>>>>> not be infringed'. A perusal of period military
> >>>>>>>> reports, especially quartermaster reports after
> >>>>>>>> captured sites, distinguishes between 'guns'
> >>>>>>>> (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and
> >>>>>>>> borne or small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as
> >>>>>>>> well, if rarely). Good luck with an argument for
> >>>>>>>> hand grenades or mobile artillery.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to
> >>>>>>> the arms that a "perusal of the period military
> >>>>>>> reports" show could be "borne"?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
> >>>>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the
> >>>>>> Framers' era to understand their text.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and
> >>>>>> all definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Of course he is!....or not:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U..N.
> >>>>> agreement, the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the
> >>>>> international trade of a range of weapons. It does not
> >>>>> track domestic gun sales. While former President Donald
> >>>>> Trump symbolically withdrew from that treaty in 2019,
> >>>>> the U.S. technically remains a signatory. The agreement
> >>>>> was never ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t
> >>>>> taken any further action on it."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according
> >>>>> to a State Department spokesperson. Experts said the
> >>>>> Arms Trade Treaty, which appears to be the treaty
> >>>>> referenced in the post, would not establish an
> >>>>> international gun registry."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as
> >>>>> suspect as any claim from kunich or shitstain)
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And you can believe them! After all, this
> >>>> administration repeats daily that 'the border is secure'.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Do they?
> >>>
> >>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
> >>>
> >>> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
> >>>
> >>> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release
> >>> stating the border is secure, and/or there are no issues
> >>> with border security? I'd be interested in reading that.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Start at 0:45
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMon6O_zSj4
> >
> > I gave up halfway through. Nothing I heard proved your
> > point. Try again?
> >
> Mayorkas has claimed that repeatedly, including in House
> testimony. An NBC News interview video is here:
> https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/05/05/mayorkas-not-worried-about-title-42-ending-the-border-is-secure-because-we-are-maximizing-our-resources-for-most-effective-results/
>
> Try 1:06 of the two minute video.
> The super cute and hot Press Secretary says the same stupid
> stuff BTW.

ooookaaaay....that was from May of 2023, Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't qualify that as "this administration repeats daily that 'the border is secure'. "

To be clear, I'm not denying some administration officials my claim the border is secure, I'm questioning "this administration repeats daily that 'the border is secure'. "

> --
> Andrew Muzi
> a...@yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 1/18/2024 1:58 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 12:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 1/18/2024 12:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2024 9:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well right now today:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define
>>>>>>>>>>> the word 'infringe'.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and
>>>>>>>>>> practice using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid
>>>>>>>>>> difficulty buying fully automatic large bore machine guns?
>>>>>>>>>> Then there are the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it
>>>>>>>>>> so hard to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my
>>>>>>>>>> _safety_!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little
>>>>>>>>>> "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of
>>>>>>>>>> America to _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then
>>>>>>>>>> men can finally feel manly!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
>>>>>>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
>>>>>>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes
>>>>>>>>> between 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and
>>>>>>>>> borne or small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if
>>>>>>>>> rarely).  Good luck with an argument for hand grenades or
>>>>>>>>> mobile artillery.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms
>>>>>>>> that a "perusal of the period military reports" show could be
>>>>>>>> "borne"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
>>>>>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era
>>>>>>> to understand their text.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all
>>>>>>> definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course he is!....or not:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement,
>>>>>> the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a
>>>>>> range of weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While
>>>>>> former President Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that
>>>>>> treaty in 2019, the U.S. technically remains a signatory. The
>>>>>> agreement was never ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken
>>>>>> any further action on it."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
>>>>>> Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
>>>>>> appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not
>>>>>> establish an international gun registry."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any
>>>>>> claim from kunich or shitstain)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And you can believe them!  After all, this administration repeats
>>>>> daily that 'the border is secure'.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do they?
>>>>
>>>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
>>>>
>>>> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release stating
>>>> the border is secure, and/or there are no issues with border
>>>> security? I'd be interested in reading that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Start at 0:45
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMon6O_zSj4
>>
>> I gave up halfway through. Nothing I heard proved your point. Try again?
>>
>
> Mayorkas has claimed that repeatedly, including in House testimony.  An
> NBC News interview video is here:
> https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/05/05/mayorkas-not-worried-about-title-42-ending-the-border-is-secure-because-we-are-maximizing-our-resources-for-most-effective-results/
>
> Try 1:06 of the two minute video.
> The super cute and hot Press Secretary says the same stupid stuff BTW.

ooookaaaay....that was from May of 2023, Maybe it's just me, but I
wouldn't qualify that as "this administration repeats daily that 'the
border is secure'. "

To be clear, I'm not denying some administration officials may claim the
border is secure, I'm questioning the "this administration repeats daily
that 'the border is secure'. " hyperbole.
--
Add xx to reply

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 9:16:45 AM UTC-8, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 11:52:51 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >On 1/18/2024 6:04 AM, funkma...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> I quote from the official government report, dumbass. You state nothing but contrived opinion. Yes, I know, it kitty world, the contrived opinion of a floriduh dumbass is more accurate and valid than a government report referencing the actual transactions that states the history of the program.
> >
> >Gosh! You mean the tricycle rider from Florida posted something that
> >wasn't _documented_? Why, how can that be? He demands perfect
> >documentation from others!
> >
> > :-)
> Unlike you and Junior, I don't attempt to claim my opinions are facts.
> They're just my opinons. Take 'em or leave 'em.
The Frames of the Constitution were 100% FOR the most modern firearms available. Frank believes that we should be reduced to clubs. Were that do, Frank would already be dead.

On Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 12:50:23 PM UTC-8, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 1/18/2024 1:58 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> > On 1/18/2024 12:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >> On 1/18/2024 12:17 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>> On 1/18/2024 9:15 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >>>> On 1/18/2024 9:33 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>> On 1/18/2024 8:24 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> >>>>>> On 1/18/2024 9:06 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 7:37 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 8:24 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 2:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 1/17/2024 3:32 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Well right now today:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2024/1/5/24023878/assault-weapons-ban-illinois-registered-legal
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> there are purported English speakers who yet cannot define
> >>>>>>>>>>> the word 'infringe'.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Right! I'm really peeved that I can't own hand grenades and
> >>>>>>>>>> practice using them in my backyard! And what's with the stupid
> >>>>>>>>>> difficulty buying fully automatic large bore machine guns?
> >>>>>>>>>> Then there are the disgusting vehicle regulations that make it
> >>>>>>>>>> so hard to drive an Abrams tank on the road! I want one for my
> >>>>>>>>>> _safety_!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> All that stuff is infringement! But are people protesting? NO!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Here's the real problem: The NRA is all upset about little
> >>>>>>>>>> "pew pew pew" small caliber guns. We need a Bomb Owners of
> >>>>>>>>>> America to _finally_ guarantee our rights to _real_ arms! Then
> >>>>>>>>>> men can finally feel manly!
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The relevant document says 'right to bear arms shall not be
> >>>>>>>>> infringed'. A perusal of period military reports, especially
> >>>>>>>>> quartermaster reports after captured sites, distinguishes
> >>>>>>>>> between 'guns' (artillery, field pieces, mountain guns etc) and
> >>>>>>>>> borne or small arms (rifles mostly but pistols as well, if
> >>>>>>>>> rarely). Good luck with an argument for hand grenades or
> >>>>>>>>> mobile artillery.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hmm. So you're saying the second amendment applies to the arms
> >>>>>>>> that a "perusal of the period military reports" show could be
> >>>>>>>> "borne"?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'm all for that interpretation. So is Jim Jeffries:
> >>>>>>>> https://youtu.be/a9UFyNy-rw4?t=421
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes, I am. Generally we look to common usage of the Framers' era
> >>>>>>> to understand their text.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Others seem to think that words have no meaning and all
> >>>>>>> definitions are fluid, depending on one man's whim:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/1676898/biden-aims-to-sign-on-to-uns-global-gun-registration-treaty/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Of course he is!....or not:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-biden-arms-trade-treaty-registry-551206015533
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "There is no “U.N. Small Arms Treaty.” A separate U.N. agreement,
> >>>>>> the Arms Trade Treaty, regulates the international trade of a
> >>>>>> range of weapons. It does not track domestic gun sales. While
> >>>>>> former President Donald Trump symbolically withdrew from that
> >>>>>> treaty in 2019, the U.S. technically remains a signatory. The
> >>>>>> agreement was never ratified by the Senate, and Biden hasn’t taken
> >>>>>> any further action on it."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/10/26/fact-check-false-claim-us-joining-international-gun-registry/10530099002/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "The U.S. is not set to join any such treaty, according to a State
> >>>>>> Department spokesperson. Experts said the Arms Trade Treaty, which
> >>>>>> appears to be the treaty referenced in the post, would not
> >>>>>> establish an international gun registry."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> (Any washington examiner claim is immediately as suspect as any
> >>>>>> claim from kunich or shitstain)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And you can believe them! After all, this administration repeats
> >>>>> daily that 'the border is secure'.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Do they?
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/press-briefings/2024/01/16/press-briefing-by-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-and-nsc-coordinator-for-strategic-communications-john-kirby-38/
> >>>>
> >>>> Nothing there even remotely close to 'the border is secure'.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you have a link to a Biden quote or a WH press release stating
> >>>> the border is secure, and/or there are no issues with border
> >>>> security? I'd be interested in reading that.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Start at 0:45
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMon6O_zSj4
> >>
> >> I gave up halfway through. Nothing I heard proved your point. Try again?
> >>
> >
> > Mayorkas has claimed that repeatedly, including in House testimony. An
> > NBC News interview video is here:
> > https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/05/05/mayorkas-not-worried-about-title-42-ending-the-border-is-secure-because-we-are-maximizing-our-resources-for-most-effective-results/
> >
> > Try 1:06 of the two minute video.
> > The super cute and hot Press Secretary says the same stupid stuff BTW.
> ooookaaaay....that was from May of 2023, Maybe it's just me, but I
> wouldn't qualify that as "this administration repeats daily that 'the
> border is secure'. "
>
> To be clear, I'm not denying some administration officials may claim the
> border is secure, I'm questioning the "this administration repeats daily
> that 'the border is secure'. " hyperbole.
> --
> Add xx to reply

How does it feel to be on the losing side? Nobody likes your opinion and nobody thinks that you have even a passing idea of what is going on round you.. I also have the idea that if management didn't need an engineer to sign papers off, you would be very long gone.