Member since: Tue Jul 26, 2011, 07:22 PM
Number of posts: 158
Number of posts: 158
I went on a local forum today and made a comment.
Here is the forum.
Here is my post;
Everyone who is interpreting the second amendment to mean that they can own any type of weapon that they wish including so called "Assault Weapons" are TOTALLY wrong.
All they are seeing are the words "shall not be infringed". That is well and good. It means that as citizens we are well within our rights to own guns and the government can't stop that. From everything I have seen the government has no intention of stopping qualified citizens from owning guns.
What they are missing or as I think refusing to see, though are two very important words right at the beginning of the second amendment. These are two words that arr just as important as the above quoted words if not more important. Those two VERY important words are "WELL REGULATED" What those tow words mean and do is allow the government to set and decree regulations as to which type of firearm a citizen may possess. Along with any other pertinent regulation.
Do those two words say that the government may stop qualified citizens from owning guns? NO!! All they say is that guns, and owners may and must be regulated.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Posted by bakpakr | Sat Jan 26, 2013, 11:31 AM (31 replies)
This may get a bit long so please bear with me.
Here is my idea on gun control.
We all are aware that gun ownership is covered by the constitution under the second amendment. That does not change.
All current laws relating to guns stay as they are.
No restrictions on type of guns owned or able to be purchased other than those already on the books.
Now if you decide you wish to exercise your right to own firearms go right ahead. But understand that exercising that right also comes with a great deal of responsibility and accountability.
Prior to being able to purchase a weapon you must complete an approved course of instruction on the safe handling and care of weapons. Also including an exhaustive medical and psychological examination. At the end of the class you must pass an examination showing proficiency in safe handling, care and marksmanship. No plopping down cash sitting for a few hours and getting a certificate. YOU MUST PASS THE TEST.
The class and test must be retaken yearly. Also any law enforcement officer, LEO agency, medical personnel may file papers to have you retake the class and test as they deem appropriate at anytime.
Failure to complete the course, pass the test results in loss of weapon ownership privileges. ALL weapons registered to you must be turned into the authorities until such time as you complete and pass the test. Once you pass the test all weapons are returned.
Once test is passed and prior to taking ownership of new weapon you must submit to an in home inspection on the safe storage of the weapon or weapons. Once completed satisfactorily you are issued a License to own weapons and now may take possession.
During the year that the license is in effect you must fire a minimum number of rounds to demonstrate proficiency in marksmanship with each weapon owned. Records must be maintained documenting same.
Records must be kept as to type of weapon make, model, caliber, S/N. Records must be maintained as to number, type, caliber for ammunition on hand for each weapon owned.
All records, weapons available for inspection upon demand.
All weapons registered in your name.
If you wish to sell a weapon registration of the weapon must be transferred to new owner who meets the above specifications. Failure to do results in permanent loss of weapon ownership privileges. Also jail time is possible.
Loss of a weapon other than theft results in permanent loss of gun ownership privileges. Any crime committed with lost weapon you will be subject to the same penalties as imposed for such crime up to and including incarceration. Regardless if you committed the crime or not.
Any crime committed with a weapon you own you will be subject to the same penalties as imposed for crime committed up to and including incarceration. Regardless if you committed the crime or not.
Any theft of a weapon must be reported within 24 hours. Failure to do so will result in permanent loss of weapon ownership privileges.
That's just a start.
Posted by bakpakr | Mon Dec 17, 2012, 01:38 PM (3 replies)
Whenever we talk about laws allowing certain things, nothing specific, the first things we hear are "What about the children".
So we make laws that put restrictions on adults to diminish the access of items and conduct to children. We also enact laws that deny access to children. All in the name of protecting children.
So what I want to say about the gun laws we have currently in this country and those being proposed. What about the children?.
Posted by bakpakr | Mon Dec 17, 2012, 07:44 AM (0 replies)
That has to be one of the saddest things I have heard in a long time.
Posted by bakpakr | Sun Dec 16, 2012, 07:58 PM (4 replies)
OK here is my situation.
I am about to become homeless. I currently have a job but do not make enough to pay for rent and utilities. I am working to get a better job.
My current place of residence I only have to pay rent no utilities. The owners of the property have informed me that they plan on walking away from the mortgage (abandoning the property). They are just stopping paying the mortgage and renting an apartment of their own.
I am a vet and have contacted the VA. The VA has programs that I can enter but they will force me to move away from my family and force me to quit my job. Also I must abandon most of my personal possessions. Staying with family is not an option due to their living arrangement's. I have explored that avenue. I really don't want to do either BUT if need be will. I am just looking for other options. The homeless programs in my locality are full and thus not an option. HUD here has a two year waiting list.
The VA does have a program that would be the perfect fit for me. I inquired about that program during my meeting with the VA. The program is called HUD-VASH. It is basically a voucher system where they will pay a portion of the rent on an apartment based on my income and also work with me on getting a better paying job. But I was told that that program is for the chronically homeless.
Any and all advice is greatly appreciated.
Posted by bakpakr | Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:56 AM (20 replies)
Parking was at a premium. Line was fairly long. Wait time to get to poll table was about 30 minutes. Once there sign in was problematic. I knew that an ID was going to be asked for but not required. When asked I told them I did not have an ID on me. The book with my name said that ID was required. They were going to turn me away. I did not put up a stink I just reiterated that I did not have ID on me. I did have ID but was going to test the waters. The supervisor came over and I told her I did not have ID on me. She asked if I had anything with my name on it. I had my work ID badge that has no picture and does not have my given name on it. I showed that with the expectation that it was not adequate. To my surprise they excepted it as ID and allowed me to vote. Straight democratic ticket. All told It took me 40 minutes to vote today. This happened in Carlisle PA.
Here is a pic of my ID that I used;
<a href="http://smg.beta.photobucket.com/user/bakpakr/library/" target="_blank"><img src="" border="0" alt="Photobucket"/></a>
Posted by bakpakr | Tue Nov 6, 2012, 09:27 AM (1 replies)
Not sure if this is the right place for this. If it isn't please move or delete as needed.
Ok I have a neighbor (friend) who is 51 years old and due to financial concerns. The parents own the home with a mortgage. Well today the home was sold at a tax sale for 4k.
I was visiting when one of the bidders showed up prior to the sale. He informed the parents that they should stop paying the mortgage and tell the high bidder to pound sand and they are not moving. They are in their 80's and he told them it will take years for the high bidder to get them removed from the home. Not sure how true this all is but does not sound right. This is in PA by the way.
Now to my friends problem. Like I said he is 51 single male and not disabled no drug or alcohol abuse. Honorably discharged vet. Has no car, can't afford one.
He has a job but is actively looking for a better job. He works 6 hours a week at his present job. Brings home $200 a month net. I have driven him to many places to apply. He uses my phone number as a contact and so far no calls for interviews. This has been going on for over a year.
Went to all the homeless shelters as he is about to lose his home due to the tax sale. All are either full or only take females or families. Contacted county vet rep. No help there as he is not a vet of a conflict and has no substance or health issues. Went to hud they have a two year waiting list.
Also he applied for medical assistance and food stamps and has been turned down twice, now get this. I saw the denial letter myself and this blows me away. He was turned down because he does not make enough money. I called and was informed that there is a minimum that you must make to qualify for benefits. Also he was turned down for cash assistance because he does not have minor children and he is not female.
As it stands he will be homeless and no way to get help as there is none.
I have exhausted all my ideas and hope that someone here has ideas. i would let him move in with me but we don't have room for him.
Posted by bakpakr | Thu Sep 20, 2012, 02:02 PM (8 replies)
My client who I care for is a faux (news) entertainment network 24-7 watcher. Has totally bought into their views hook, line, and sinker.
Well today he got into a rant about President Obama being not being eligible to be president because he was born in Kenya. As he was ranting I broke into the rant with "Where he was born is irrelevant."
He stopped and says that it is relevant because you have to be a natural born citizen to be president. I asked him where President Obama's dad was born. He said Kenya. I then asked him where Pres. Obama's mother was born. He said here in the United States. I then said there you go, because that makes him eligible to be president. He said no it doesn't because he was born in Kenya. I replied with it does not matter where he was born. He could have been born on Mars. Because his mother was a US citizen and that under US law that makes him automatically a US citizen. He had no comeback for that at all. Stopped him dead in his tracks. I just sat there with a smarmy smirk on my face.
Section 1 of Article Two of the United States Constitution;
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term "natural born" citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship "by birth" or "at birth", either by being born "in" the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship "at birth". Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an "alien" required to go through the legal process of "naturalization" to become a U.S. citizen. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42097.pdf
Posted by bakpakr | Thu Sep 13, 2012, 07:04 PM (33 replies)
On Faux news just call Bill Clinton a lair.
Posted by bakpakr | Wed Sep 5, 2012, 11:28 PM (3 replies)
I actually heard bones crunch when Elizabeth Warren slammed Mittster and his cronies.
Posted by bakpakr | Wed Sep 5, 2012, 10:32 PM (2 replies)