Our gift to the UN
Denny Church
Enthusiasts' Protest, a friend of mine and I talked about sending a
Double-Sided Gonzalez Flag to them as a gift. If anyone wishes to read
the article it is posted here in tx.guns under the article title.
Joel Jacobs read the article and accursed me of seeing monsters under
the bed and I asked him if he wanted to join us and sign it too- he
declined. (All of this can also be read in the post thread). However,
several of you posted and E-mailed me stating that you wanted to sign
too. I then E-mailed a few more folks and now the ball is rolling and
U.N. Undersecretary-General for Disarmament Jayantha Dhanapala is
going to get one of these flags.
I am now asking for signatures. I would like at least 56 signatures
and if you want to join us, then post publicly or E-mail me and I will
fill you in on the particulars so far.
If you wish to see what the flag looks like, you can see it here:
http://www.comeandtakeit.com/histricl.html#1
Scroll down to the: Double Sided Come and Take It Flags: Duo-Print
Denny
Maurice
It would really be a "gift" to the UN if you would accept Denny's offer to
join the signing. Also, for those that have "connections" to other forums
that are frequented by patriots believing in the Second Amendment and
RKBA, please post it there, too, and help Denny collect more signatures.
Yes, I know it is a TEXAS flag, and Denny did NOT ask me to recruit
outside Texas, nor did I ask him if I could write this note... but I
believe most of you should be strong enough on gun rights to put your name
on the list.
Maurice
==========================
Joel Jacobs
"Denny Church" <alm...@almaco.vt.com> wrote in message
news:bf4dktcsta3l88363...@4ax.com...
> Last night, after reading the AP article titled: U.N. Probes Gun
> Enthusiasts' Protest, a friend of mine and I talked about sending a
> Double-Sided Gonzalez Flag to them as a gift. If anyone wishes to read
> the article it is posted here in tx.guns under the article title.
>
> Joel Jacobs read the article and accursed me of seeing monsters under
> the bed and I asked him if he wanted to join us and sign it too- he
> declined. (All of this can also be read in the post thread). However,
> several of you posted and E-mailed me stating that you wanted to sign
> too. I then E-mailed a few more folks and now the ball is rolling and
> U.N. Undersecretary-General for Disarmament Jayantha Dhanapala is
> going to get one of these flags.
One of the things both of my grandfathers -one a veteran of World War I, the
other a veteran of World II - agreed on was to let sleeping dogs lie.......
Joel
Jim Nicholson
This dog ain't sleeping, Joel.
--
Jim Nicholson -- http://www.tsra.com/
Randal Bowen
Count me in Denny. I'll e-mail you for details.
--
Randal Bowen
Degero licens aut abolesco !
S. R. Sheffield
wrote:
"War is an ugly thing but not the ugliest of things;
the decayed and degraded state of moral and
patriotic feelings which thinks that nothing is worth
war is much worse. A man who has nothing for
which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more
important than his own personal safety, is a miserable
creature and has no chance of being free unless made
and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
John Stuart Mill
(thanks to Mark2101)
While I think we are a ways from having to go down to the UN building
and shoot out the windows, I do think we are at the point to send a
few emails to let the UN know that we are concerned about our right to
bear arms. While it may be unique in the world, it is our right and
we will defend it.
...and just because the UN says we are misinformed, doesn't
necessarily mean we are.
If the dogs were asleep, I would agree, Joel, but the UN dogs ARE NOT
sleeping and neither should we be.
Later,
SRS
Education is the best safety device there is.
Denny Church
wrote:
Thanks Maurice.
Here is a bit of side reading on this very topic:
http://www.pistolsmith.com/viewtopic.php?topic=2037&forum=9&4
Poster JLM has a link to an online petition towards the bottom of this
thread similar to the K-Mart petition. It is fourth down from my
original post.
And the next is about the UN Gun Control treaty itself:
http://www.pistolsmith.com/viewtopic.php?topic=1834&forum=9&6
Pay close attention David DaFabio's posts. If you have spent anytime
at this web forum, then you are familiar with Mr. DaFabio and the
excellent information that he posts.
I also wanted to say thanks for the E-mails I received so far and will
post more this afternoon when I get back from work.
Denny
Joel Jacobs
"Jim Nicholson" <jam...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3B46C35E...@worldnet.att.net...
Well, let's see if I can get my point across this way... . "I fear you may
well awake a sleeping giant."
Jim Nicholson
>
> "Jim Nicholson" <jam...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:3B46C35E...@worldnet.att.net...
> > Joel Jacobs wrote:
> > >
> > > "Denny Church" <alm...@almaco.vt.com> wrote in message
> > > news:bf4dktcsta3l88363...@4ax.com...
> > > > Last night, after reading the AP article titled: U.N. Probes
However,
> > > > several of you posted and E-mailed me stating that you wanted to sign
> > > > too. I then E-mailed a few more folks and now the ball is rolling and
> > > > U.N. Undersecretary-General for Disarmament Jayantha Dhanapala is
> > > > going to get one of these flags.
> > >
> > > One of the things both of my grandfathers -one a veteran of World War I,
> the
> > > other a veteran of World II - agreed on was to let sleeping dogs
> lie.......
> > >
> > > Joel
> >
> > This dog ain't sleeping, Joel.
>
> Well, let's see if I can get my point across this way... . "I fear you may
> well awake a sleeping giant."
If that's the case, he ain't gonna sleep forever . . . if that's the
case.
Rick Bowen
He's already up. We're the ones asleep at the wheel.
Rick Bowen
TSRA Life Member
NRA Member
"Molon Labe"
Member of PETA
(People Eating Tasty Animals)
B.A.S.T.A.R.D.
(Bad American Standing
Tall Among Radically
Dependant Sheeple)
Jeffersonian
Jim Nicholson wrote in message <3B46C35E...@worldnet.att.net>...
>Joel Jacobs wrote:
[sniiiip]
>> One of the things both of my grandfathers -one a veteran of World War I,
the
>> other a veteran of World II - agreed on was to let sleeping dogs
lie.......
>>
>> Joel
>
>This dog ain't sleeping, Joel.
Indeed. Does the name Neville Chamberlain ring any bells?
I would sign - but I'm way the hell out here in Oregon. I suppose I could
scan my unintelligible signature and e-mail it for duplication on the
flag....
--
Criminals prefer unarmed victims.
Politicians prefer unarmed peasants.
I am none of the above.
http://members.shootersinet.com/jeffer...@shootersinet.com
Joel Jacobs
> > > This dog ain't sleeping, Joel.
> >
> > Well, let's see if I can get my point across this way... . "I fear you
may
> > well awake a sleeping giant."
>
> If that's the case, he ain't gonna sleep forever . . . if that's the
> case.
Jim,
I'm reposting this reply to Denny and Steve of a couple of days ago, I think
it addresses the issue....
Denny, Steve,
I know that you guys are truly sincere in your beliefs that UN wants to take
your guns - and mine - and the guy's next door, and the guy's in Kansas, and
the woman's in.....but that's just not the case.
Now, I know for a fact, from reading posts from both you guys on this forum,
that you are intelligent and articulate. But you two do seem to possess an
inordinate bit of a knee-jerk when you read _anything_ that even appears to
_maybe_ speak of firearms confiscation that might somehow, someway, some day
spread over to the United States of America.
If you have not done so, go into the UN pages and read about the proposals
regarding MILITARY small arms and the elimination, confiscation, and
destruction of same in Third World Countries. Perhaps, if you couple that
with the knowledge of the wars, civil wars, and genocide taking place on at
least three continents you might begin to understand the why behind these
proposals.
I don't know if either of you guys have ever witnessed genocide, civil war,
and flat-out war first hand, but many of us on this group have. I have seen
genocide, war, civil war and civil unrest on three continents, and I can
well understand why groups within the UN has proposed to remove small arms
from so many Third World Countries. <snip>
Joel
brooks n. texas
jja...@koyote.com says...
>
> and I can
> well understand why groups within the UN has proposed to remove small arms
> from so many Third World Countries. <snip>
>
> Joel
>
BT
--
Results from animal tests are not transferable between species, and
therefore cannot guarantee product safety for humans...In reality these
tests do not provide protection for consumers from unsafe products, but
rather they are used to protect corporations from legal liability.
-Herbert Gundersheimer, M.D., member, PCRM (Physicians Committee for
Responsible Medicine), Baltimore, Maryland, 1988
Jeffersonian
><snip>
>
>> > > This dog ain't sleeping, Joel.
>> >
>> > Well, let's see if I can get my point across this way... . "I fear you
>> >may well awake a sleeping giant."
[snip]
(sigh) This reminds me of a really dark joke I heard some years ago:
Two Jews are in the concentration camp and the Nazis come to take them to
the gas chamber.
The first Jew struggles and shouts, "You can't do this, you Nazi bastards,
this is murder!"
The second Jew turns to the first and says, "Quiet. Don't make trouble."
Mr. Jacobs, your head is *way* too deep in the sand.
Maurice
Joel Jacobs wrote:
===================================
I notice you put the last phrase in quotes... As I seem to recall, the once
great Adm. Yamamoto was at least the most famous purveyor of that quote... the
lack of attribution was probably an oversight... AND, for the record, we ALL
know how that little fracas came out and the good Adm. probably got his last
peek at the action in WW II out the window of that Jap bomber, looking up the
nose of a P-38 "Lightening" making blink-blink in his direction.
But, on the other hand, the quote sans attribution was made by no less an
intellectual giant than the great and wonderful Dizzy Dean in commenting on the
poor judgment of some pitcher who blew one right by Mickey Mantle's nose during
a period "The Mick" was in a dreadful slump... Probably "Ole Diz" had more
common sense than most the folks running this nation, world and, for sure, the
UN.
Actually, and in reality, I THINK "Ole Diz" (in the Mantle scenario) said
something like... "It's ain't smart to kick a sleeping dog...." (Diz loved
using "ain't".. and there IS a funny story to go with that...) No doubt someone
older than I can correct me and we'll have another hundred or so contributors.
Maurice
=============================
Now, folks, please start sending Denny your signature and support!
Kevin Craig
Jacobs <jja...@koyote.com> wrote:
> (...) I can well understand why groups within the UN has proposed to
> remove small arms from so many Third World Countries.
Oh, okay. Gun control is perfectly okay as long as you're taking guns
away from *those* people, eh? Because we all know how *they* act,
right?
Are you sure you're not an Alabama Dixiecrat?
Kevin
Stephan Rothstein
>
> Joel Jacobs wrote in message ...
> ><snip>
> >
> >> > > This dog ain't sleeping, Joel.
> >> >
> >> > Well, let's see if I can get my point across this way... . "I fear you
> >> >may well awake a sleeping giant."
>
> [snip]
>
> (sigh) This reminds me of a really dark joke I heard some years ago:
>
> Two Jews are in the concentration camp and the Nazis come to take them to
> the gas chamber.
> The first Jew struggles and shouts, "You can't do this, you Nazi bastards,
> this is murder!"
> The second Jew turns to the first and says, "Quiet. Don't make trouble."
>
> Mr. Jacobs, your head is *way* too deep in the sand.
Having grown up with being indoctrinated about the Holocaust, and
recently having talked with a relative that survived Aushwitz, this is
why I firmly believe in the theory of "Never Again". The best way to
prevent this from happening is to promote the private ownership of
military grade weapons by civilians around the world.
When Joel first posted his reply, I was going to let the matter drop as
an agreement to disagree. Maybe that was a tactical error, but I
honestly don't see him as a bad guy, just one who believes differently
than I do.
I will try to explain why the UN gun treaty is so bad and is a direct
threat to MY personal ownership of weapons. The UN wants to eliminate
the illegal trade in firearms around the world. One reason that they
publicly state for this is to promote the stability of the current
government in all countries around the world. Their belief is based on
the hope that even the "bad" governments can be changed by non-violent
means, or by having other bigger countries step in to change it.
I disagree that the people of any country should be forced to wait until
the UN, or another country, wants to change their government to help
them. I firmly believe that the right to a revolution is a natural
right, and that this applies to every human being on the Earth, not just
in the US. This is one reason i do not want to see the flow of firearms
stopped around the world.
Now, as to how this affects me directly. The UN wants to stop the
"illegal" trade in firearms. The Secretary General has said that they do
not want to interfere with any individual's legal possession of a
firearm. Of course, this means that the government gets to decide what
is legal and what is not. So, when the US decides to ban the import of
certain evil looking firearms (like has happened already), they can look
to the UN for support in stopping the weapons from coming in. If the US
decides to try to ban all (or almost all) firearms, like has happened in
Canada, Great britain, and Australia, they can look to the UN for
support. This means that the UN will support the US government in its
attempts to step on my rights. I honestly think the current US
government, while better than its predecessor, will not protect my
rights. It may not further erode them, but it won't remove any of the
laws which do infringe. I do not want the current or future US
governments having any support in eroding my rights.
Also, I would point out that I was not a fan of the UN, but certainly
not dead set against them, until their recent court decision. A couple
week ago, the International Court decided that its rulings had the force
of law. This was in a case where the US was disobeying the court. Does
anyone here actually believe that the US government will not obey a
legal order from the International Court if it erodes our rights?
I have come to the conclusion that, at least on this issue, hdlinnebur
was correct. We need to get out of the UN (and other world organizations
like WTO and OAS) and regain our national sovereignty. And we need to do
it NOW.
Steve Rothstein
Maurice
For those who were not alive in the 1930s, have not read the history of the
Warsaw Ghetto, et seq., there is a lesson to be learned here.
Those that don't study and learn history are DOOMED to repeat it. It can NOT be
more plain, nor true, nor obvious.
IF not today, tomorrow or sometime... but it WILL happen. So sorry to burst the
bubble of naiveté..
Stephan is just uncomfortably, for some, all to aware and correct. Sorry, again.
Maurice
Rick Bowen
<srot...@swbell.net> wrote:
>
>Now, as to how this affects me directly. The UN wants to stop the
>"illegal" trade in firearms. The Secretary General has said that they do
>not want to interfere with any individual's legal possession of a
>firearm. Of course, this means that the government gets to decide what
>is legal and what is not. So, when the US decides to ban the import of
>certain evil looking firearms (like has happened already), they can look
>to the UN for support in stopping the weapons from coming in. If the US
>decides to try to ban all (or almost all) firearms, like has happened in
>Canada, Great britain, and Australia, they can look to the UN for
>support. This means that the UN will support the US government in its
>attempts to step on my rights. I honestly think the current US
>government, while better than its predecessor, will not protect my
>rights. It may not further erode them, but it won't remove any of the
>laws which do infringe. I do not want the current or future US
>governments having any support in eroding my rights.
That's ok. Those blue beanies make great targets.
>Also, I would point out that I was not a fan of the UN, but certainly
>not dead set against them, until their recent court decision. A couple
>week ago, the International Court decided that its rulings had the force
>of law. This was in a case where the US was disobeying the court. Does
>anyone here actually believe that the US government will not obey a
>legal order from the International Court if it erodes our rights?
>
>I have come to the conclusion that, at least on this issue, hdlinnebur
>was correct. We need to get out of the UN (and other world organizations
>like WTO and OAS) and regain our national sovereignty. And we need to do
>it NOW.
>
>Steve Rothstein
Gray Ghost
news:kFx17.12455$F%5.95...@e420r-atl2.usenetserver.com:
Dude, that dog is sniffing around your lawn looking for a place to take a
dump.
--
No quarter asked, no quarter given.
Frank
Warning - all emails that are sent to me in response to postings on this
newsgroup that are harrassing or hostile in nature or are contrary to
public postings or assertions by senders are subject to public postings to
refute senders claims otherwise.
Michael Ellis
Count me in, I'll be glad to sign on the dotted line. Are you sending a
physical flag? If so I will be glad to help defray the expenses.
I suspect the end result of the UN initiative on small arms will be
more death and suffering, not less. The 3rd world conflicts that they
believe will pass away if the small arms trade is restricted have been going
on for decades now. As seen in Rwanda, lack of access to firearms is not a
serious impediment to slaughter.
The _current_ UN initiative probably won't affect the USA very much.
But we know beyond a shadow of a doubt there will be more to come, and
considering the attitude of much of the world toward the USA the political
pressure to "make an example of us" will continue to build.
I didn't pay much attention to this debate until I heard on the radio
that the UN leadership were going to investigate US protestors with an eye
toward prosecution, apparently having received some communications that they
found "threatening". In any investigation of that sort, invevitably the
focus expands from the few who made specific threats to the larger group of
those who protest their policies in general - looking for evidence of that
"vast right wing conspiracy" no doubt (grin).
If the UN leadership has any plans for future initiatives that will affect
our RKBA, I have no problem letting them know right up front that I will
oppose them. I'm not ashamed of the principles I stand for. That's why
I'll be happy to sign your petition. Might as well get the cards out on the
table right now, and let people know where we stand.
Mike
Denny Church
wrote:
><snip>
Joel, lets use your entire original post and my response as an answer
back. What I wrote still stands:
>>Denny, Steve,
>>
>>I know that you guys are truly sincere in your beliefs that UN wants to take
>>your guns - and mine - and the guy's next door, and the guy's in Kansas, and
>>the woman's in.....but that's just not the case.
>>
>>Now, I know for a fact, from reading posts from both you guys on this forum,
>>that you are intelligent and articulate. But you two do seem to possess an
>>inordinate bit of a knee-jerk when you read _anything_ that even appears to
>>_maybe_ speak of firearms confiscation that might somehow, someway, some day
>>spread over to the United States of America.
>>
>>If you have not done so, go into the UN pages and read about the proposals
>>regarding MILITARY small arms and the elimination, confiscation, and
>>destruction of same in Third World Countries. Perhaps, if you couple that
>>with the knowledge of the wars, civil wars, and genocide taking place on at
>>least three continents you might begin to understand the why behind these
>>proposals.
>>
>>I don't know if either of you guys have ever witnessed genocide, civil war,
>>and flat-out war first hand, but many of us on this group have. I have seen
>>genocide, war, civil war and civil unrest on three continents, and I can
>>well understand why groups within the UN has proposed to remove small arms
>>from so many Third World Countries. So, no, I won't sign your petition, I
>>won't ship a flag, and I won't contribute money to this particular cause,
>>for it's the wrong one.
>>
>>Joel
>>
>>
>
>Joel,
>
>I did not think you would.
>
>I realize that the UN wanted it both ways from the begining:
>
>UN Charter
>
>Article 2
>
>Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United
>Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the
>domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to
>submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this
>principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures
>under Chapter Vll.
>
>(In other words, we will not respect anything or anyone if we disagree
>and intefere with you no matter what if we choose to do so
>irrespective of what claptrap we just wrote.)
>
>
>CHAPTER VII
>ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THREATS TO THE PEACE, BREACHES OF THE PEACE,
>AND ACTS OF AGGRESSION
>
>The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to
>the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make
>recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance
>with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace
>and security.
>
>(In other words, we know what is best for you. Your stupid reach for
>liberty is nonsensical and you shall do what we say. Understand
>Serfs!)
>
>And after reading many of your posts over the years, I have come to
>the conclusion that you "sort-of" agree with this
>
>As for genocide taking place on three continents, I cannot think of
>anything better than for those getting killed to have inexpensive
>reliable small arms with which to defend themselves. (It's not like
>civil wars are fought with machetees, is it?)
>
>But hey take them away and their "elected leaders for life" will
>protect them, won't they? It is not like governments have killed the
>most over the years now, is it? Self-determination is something that
>just shouldn't get out of hand now, should it?
>
>Oh, and as for Stephan having knee-jerk reactions, I never have had
>that impression. But then again, didn't Barry Goldwater say something
>about this? I think his quote is:
>
>"I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no
>vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of
>justice is no virtue!"
>
>So Joel, care to re-think your position?
>
>Denny
Denny Church
Great Micahel, and yes a physical flag. I will E-mail a bit later on
with more details.
Denny
GunHack
> Enthusiasts' Protest, a friend of mine and I talked about sending a
> Double-Sided Gonzalez Flag to them as a gift.
... lines deleted ...
>I then E-mailed a few more folks and now the ball is rolling and
> U.N. Undersecretary-General for Disarmament Jayantha Dhanapala is
> going to get one of these flags.
>
> I am now asking for signatures.
... lines deleted ...
> Denny
I'm in, Denny... what do I need to do?
Regards;
Sam A. Kersh
wrote:
>Denny, Steve,
>
>I know that you guys are truly sincere in your beliefs that UN wants to take
>your guns - and mine - and the guy's next door, and the guy's in Kansas, and
>the woman's in.....but that's just not the case.
>
>Now, I know for a fact, from reading posts from both you guys on this forum,
>that you are intelligent and articulate. But you two do seem to possess an
>inordinate bit of a knee-jerk when you read _anything_ that even appears to
>_maybe_ speak of firearms confiscation that might somehow, someway, some day
>spread over to the United States of America.
>
>If you have not done so, go into the UN pages and read about the proposals
>regarding MILITARY small arms and the elimination, confiscation, and
>destruction of same in Third World Countries. Perhaps, if you couple that
>with the knowledge of the wars, civil wars, and genocide taking place on at
>least three continents you might begin to understand the why behind these
>proposals.
>
Gun banning and confiscation began in the U.S, with so-called "assault
weapons." Now there's a move in both the U.S, Senate and Californicate to
outlaw "snipers weapons." With the Senate, it's Fineswine's attempt to
outlaw the Barret Rifle. This was originally a civilian firearm that Uncle
Sam's Misguided Children aka USMC adopted. Out in the land of Fruits and
Nuts, they are looking at outlawing scoped bolt-action hunting rifles.
Joel, it s**t like this that cause many in this newsgroup to consider
arguments that the U.N. (pushed by anti-gun Japan) is merely out to end
genocide, civil wars, etc as specious
>I don't know if either of you guys have ever witnessed genocide, civil war,
>and flat-out war first hand, but many of us on this group have. I have seen
>genocide, war, civil war and civil unrest on three continents, and I can
>well understand why groups within the UN has proposed to remove small arms
>from so many Third World Countries. <snip>
I have a very hard time accepting the U.S.'s abetting the disarmament of
factions as a condition of "peace." Slaves are unarmed, freemen aren't.
Japan climbed on their "Let's ban guns" horse with the killing of exchange
student Hatari over in Lousiana. While it's a shame the kid died, truth
is,, he worked to earn the Darwin Award.
I know this won't change your opinion or position, but it's some of the
rational behind the distrust of the U.N.
Sam A. Kersh
NRA Endowment Member
L.E.A.A. Life Member
TSRA Life Member
GOA, JPFO, SAF
http://www.flash.net/~csmkersh/
===============================================================
Read Jeff Snyder's unabridged analysis of the S&W/HUD sellout
at http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/jeffsnyder.html
Sam A. Kersh
wrote:
>"BINGO"! (a Catholic ritual chant :) on ALL the issues below!
>For those who were not alive in the 1930s, have not read the history of the
>Warsaw Ghetto, et seq., there is a lesson to be learned here.
>
It's not well known, but a small group of armed Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto
held the Nazi's at bay with small arms fire. The German's finally ended
the stalemate by torching the Ghetto. Jews in Israel early learned the
value of an armed populace; unfortunately, this is a lesson that seems to
be lost on the vast majority of American, both Jew and Gentile. Shame.
>Those that don't study and learn history are DOOMED to repeat it. It can NOT be
>more plain, nor true, nor obvious.
>
>IF not today, tomorrow or sometime... but it WILL happen. So sorry to burst the
>bubble of naiveté..
>
>Stephan is just uncomfortably, for some, all to aware and correct. Sorry, again.
>
>Maurice
>
Hdlinnebur
>If you have not done so, go into the UN pages and read about the proposals
>regarding MILITARY small arms and the elimination, confiscation, and
>destruction of same in Third World Countries. Perhaps, if you couple that
>with the knowledge of the wars, civil wars, and genocide taking place on at
>least three continents you might begin to understand the why behind these
>proposals.
One of my numerous weapons is a MILITARY small arm. It's a 1911 pistol.
THAT IS A MILITARY SMALL ARM.
William Hughes
> Joel wrote:
>
>
> >If you have not done so, go into the UN pages and read about the proposals
> >regarding MILITARY small arms and the elimination, confiscation, and
> >destruction of same in Third World Countries. Perhaps, if you couple that
> >with the knowledge of the wars, civil wars, and genocide taking place on at
> >least three continents you might begin to understand the why behind these
> >proposals.
>
> One of my numerous weapons is a MILITARY small arm. It's a 1911 pistol.
>
> THAT IS A MILITARY SMALL ARM.
Good point. If you follow the comments of UN officials, you find that they
define "military small arms" as any small arm that has ever been used by a
military force. That includes, for example, the six-shot Colt .45 revolver.
William Hughes, San Antonio, Texas - email: cvp...@texas.net
website: The Carrier Project, http://cvproj.home.texas.net/
Sam A. Kersh
That means I've 4 pistols and 2 revolvers on the U.N.'s must confiscate
list..
Gray Ghost
> Gun banning and confiscation began in the U.S, with so-called "assault
> weapons." Now there's a move in both the U.S, Senate and
> Californicate to outlaw "snipers weapons." With the Senate, it's
> Fineswine's attempt to outlaw the Barret Rifle. This was originally a
> civilian firearm that Uncle Sam's Misguided Children aka USMC adopted.
> Out in the land of Fruits and Nuts, they are looking at outlawing
> scoped bolt-action hunting rifles.
I think this is very funny. One of the things that turned me off on being
an activist was the hunters not wanting to get involved. Cain't hunt deer
with an AK, they said. Don't own no assault weapons they said. Won't bother
us they said.
And 6 or more years ago I said "scoped, bolt action sniper weapons".
God I hate being right all the time.
Maurice
Gray Ghost wrote:
> > Gun banning and confiscation began in the U.S, with so-called "assault
> > weapons." Now there's a move in both the U.S, Senate and
> > Californicate to outlaw "snipers weapons." With the Senate, it's
> > Fineswine's attempt to outlaw the Barret Rifle. This was originally a
> > civilian firearm that Uncle Sam's Misguided Children aka USMC adopted.
> > Out in the land of Fruits and Nuts, they are looking at outlawing
> > scoped bolt-action hunting rifles.
>
> I think this is very funny. One of the things that turned me off on being
> an activist was the hunters not wanting to get involved. Cain't hunt deer
> with an AK, they said. Don't own no assault weapons they said. Won't bother
> us they said.
>
> And 6 or more years ago I said "scoped, bolt action sniper weapons".
================================
And remember, 12 gauge pump shotguns are (and in WW I) called "trench guns"..
but, not to worry, slick said he did not want our duck guns... Not a bad
suggestion would be "DUCK!!"
(I have a cousin that would not even accept the NRA membership I offered him..
said "janet reno might check on him...") He hunts, his boys hunt ... someone
please explain.
> Maurice
================================
Volcano
>
> On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 03:04:47 GMT, William Hughes <cvp...@texas.net> wrote:
> >
> >Good point. If you follow the comments of UN officials, you find that they
> >define "military small arms" as any small arm that has ever been used by a
> >military force. That includes, for example, the six-shot Colt .45 revolver.
>
> list..
>
And I have 2 rifles and 3 handguns on that list. 4 handguns if you
count my replica Confederate Model Colt 1851 Navy.
--
,~~~~
/ \
/ \ Volcano
Joe Shaw
On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Maurice wrote:
> (I have a cousin that would not even accept the NRA membership I
> offered him.. said "janet reno might check on him...") He hunts, his
> boys hunt ... someone please explain.
>
> Maurice
Some people are just more paranoid than others. It's a shame, but most
people who own guns wouldn't dream of joining the NRA because they
perceive a rift in political ideologies, and there's definitely a certain
social stigma attached to the NRA by the mainstream media. People are
being brainwashed into thinking that an organization that attempts to
protect their rights as evil because they do not agree with it. Sadly,
the lesson taught to us by our own history is being widely ignored.
I wonder how many leftists have considered how long an organization like
the ACLU would last if the NRA were to fall.
Regards,
--
Joseph W. Shaw II
Network Security Specialist/CCNA
Unemployed. Will hack for food. God Bless.
Apparently I'm overqualified but undereducated to be employed.
Sam A. Kersh
wrote:
>(I have a cousin that would not even accept the NRA membership I offered him..
>said "janet reno might check on him...") He hunts, his boys hunt ... someone
>please explain.
Is he a poacher or does he have a license? If he's an honest hunter, then
he is already on some list somewhere...
Sam A. Kersh
Oh, damn, I forgot my 1860 Army... 8-(
Jeffrey C. Dege
>
>Some people are just more paranoid than others. It's a shame, but most
>people who own guns wouldn't dream of joining the NRA because they
>perceive a rift in political ideologies, and there's definitely a certain
>social stigma attached to the NRA by the mainstream media.
True enough, but polls seem to indicate that most of the country has
a higher opinion of the NRA's integrity that they do of the mainstream
media.
--
Neutiquam erro.
Maurice
"Sam A. Kersh" wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2001 23:24:26 -0500, Maurice <qpr...@interconnect.net>
> wrote:
>
> >(I have a cousin that would not even accept the NRA membership I offered him..
> >said "janet reno might check on him...") He hunts, his boys hunt ... someone
> >please explain.
>
> Is he a poacher or does he have a license? If he's an honest hunter, then
> he is already on some list somewhere...
==========================
He's definitely NOT a poacher... has friends (physicians) who own "ranches" where
game is plentiful... sons are good friends of the doctor's sons. And yes,
absolutley, the name is in many lists and available. You are so right. But to
reason with folks like that? (We see them right here in this forum..... <G>)
Maurice
==========================
Joe Shaw
That's the most comforting thing I've heard all day. Of course, then it
bears asking what group was polled, and what, if any, qualifying questions
were asked before the poll was given.
Che'Gu Maru
news:3o7ikt45em8f9j4o2...@4ax.com...
> define "military small arms" as any small arm that has ever been used by a
> military force. That includes, for example, the six-shot Colt .45
revolver.
>
>
> William Hughes, San Antonio, Texas - email: cvp...@texas.net
> website: The Carrier Project, http://cvproj.home.texas.net/
That means that every gun I own but one -- a Ruger Old Army BP revolver--
would be declared illegal. Funny thing about that, in that the BATF seems
to think that C&R category weapons are somehow "safer" than those not so
categorized. (Otherwise, why bother with the distinction, and one which
allows us crufflers to buy C&R weapons directly?) The UN apparently thinks
they are somehow MORE dangerous than "regular" weapons.
Can you believe it? We now have a group of fanatics who can out BATF the
BATF!
Yale Woodford
Sam A. Kersh wrote in message
<06ohktgsenf5i9upt...@4ax.com>...
>It's not well known, but a small group of armed Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto
>held the Nazi's at bay with small arms fire. The German's finally ended
>the stalemate by torching the Ghetto. Jews in Israel early learned the
>value of an armed populace; unfortunately, this is a lesson that seems to
>be lost on the vast majority of American, both Jew and Gentile. Shame.
>
>
The real situation was even worse, Sam. The ghetto uprising began as the
Soviet armies approached, the Jews figuring they'd have a better chance with
the Germans fighting in two directions. But Stalin, knowing that he'd also
have trouble with the Jews, deliberately halted his armies -- and quietly
leaked that news to the Germans. This let the Germans devote their full
attention to the Warsaw ghetto. Despite the odds, the ghetto defenders
inflicted amazing casualties on the Germans, holding off two or three SS
armies for the better part of three months. Only after the Germans overcame
the Jewish resistance did Stalin resume the Red armies' advance.
-- Yale
Jeffersonian
>On Mon, 09 Jul 2001 03:04:47 GMT, William Hughes <cvp...@texas.net> wrote:
[snip]
>>Good point. If you follow the comments of UN officials, you find that they
>>define "military small arms" as any small arm that has ever been used by a
>>military force. That includes, for example, the six-shot Colt .45
revolver.
>
>That means I've 4 pistols and 2 revolvers on the U.N.'s must confiscate
>list..
That would be one of my shotguns (590) and *all* my rifles (Mauser, Mosin,
two SMLEs) - and a whole stack I haven't been able to afford yet.
Many nations already outlaw civilian ownership of military-*caliber*
weapons, no matter how they're designed, which is why the .38 Super is
popular overseas compared to 9x19mm or .45 ACP. Colt made a whole series of
.38 Super 1911s for the Mexican market; "El Toro", "El Senador", etc; I
think Hoplite Inc. advertises them in Shotgun News.
I'm sure some bureaucrat would happily stretch this to include sporterized
Mausers, '03s, etc.; reproduction muzzleloaders like the Brown Bess and
Charleville, '53 Enfield, and '61 Springfield; my repro 1861 Colt percussion
revolver....
--
Criminals prefer unarmed victims.
Politicians prefer unarmed peasants.
I am none of the above.
http://members.shootersinet.com/jeffer...@shootersinet.com
David Rackley
Dave
Hdlinnebur
wrote:
>I believe we just told the UN Small Arms group to go pound sand...
>
>Dave
Yes, yes, so I have heard. But does anyone REALLY believe it? We are talking
about Retreads here aren't we?
I hate to be the fly in your ointment but I must point out to you and others
that the US Const. gives Congress sole authority over the District of Columbia.
That being said I would hope that some might see just a tad bit of hypocrisy in
the eloquent verbiage tossed around by 'our' representatives to this UN
meeting.
Last I heard you can not legally own a pistol in D.C., and even if you are one
of the rare individuals to own a long gun it must be broken down and
essentially made inoperable.
So, before anyone jumps up and down with glee in their eyes I would suggest
that the female-like FEELINGS be put aside and this incedent be looked at more
rationally.
In all of what was spoken in 'our' behalf did anyone happen to hear anything
about
_self defense_ and not just recreation and hunting?
PS I really don't hate being the "fly in your ointment", I see that as being my
role. :)