Palin showing her true colours when it comes to personal freedom..

[Osceola]

I may not be a fan of Obama's policy towards guns (and his attempt to bring back the biggest failure of the Clinton administration, the 1992 Assault Weapons Ban) but it doesn't look like Palin is all that concerned with personal freedom and liberty either..

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081021/...n_gay_marriage

So, before she's even elected, she's demonstrating how she wants to amend our Constitution, to permanently infringe on the freedom of others, it would seem the Christian in her comes before the American.

What an irritating little woman.

[Gauvin]

Yes, that should be decided at the state level.

[Viking Prince]

She will rethink and hopefully come to the obvious conclusion that this should be a state and local issue only if it is to be a government issue at all. Just as abortion should be if it is even to be a government issue at all. There are many issies like this that I wish both Reublicans and Democrats would keep out of the federal debate. One way to get the government smaller and more local.

[Pious Agnost]

She needs her own Zapruder film, it's a terrible thing to wish on someone, but that woman... Gah, how is it even possible that someone like that can get so close to being President of a Superpower... War of Austrian Succession, anyone?

[Gauvin]

She needs her own Zapruder film, it's a terrible thing to wish on someone

Yeah... it is........ wierd.

[Pious Agnost]

Yeah... it is........ wierd.

Yes, it's gotten to the point at which people in countries which you've probably never heard of are hoping that your Vice-Presidents to hopefully never be are assassinated. You know she said "Perhaps so" When asked if she would've gone to war with Russia over Georgia, right? That is good for NO-ONE... Except maybe China

[craziii]

Yes, it's gotten to the point at which people in countries which you've probably never heard of are hoping that your Vice-Presidents to hopefully never be are assassinated. You know she said "Perhaps so" When asked if she would've gone to war with Russia over Georgia, right? That is good for NO-ONE... Except maybe China :shifty:

you know china would join the american side right if they join at all right? time to get those northern territories back is what they will be thinking. those regions are rich with oil :P

[Platomasso]

Not being a citizen of the USA mysef I was wondering: If gay marriage or adoption is legal in one state but not in the state next to it wouldt people just go to another state to get things done and then go back to their own state? Kinda like an abortion holliday or a weddingtrip?

If this is possible aren't these topics that should be discussed on a national level?

[Viking Prince]

Not being a citizen of the USA mysef I was wondering: If gay marriage or adoption is legal in one state but not in the state next to it wouldt people just go to another state to get things done and then go back to their own state? Kinda like an abortion holliday or a weddingtrip?

If this is possible aren't these topics that should be discussed on a national level?

The federal government passed a bit ago the "Defense of Marriage Act" which exempts states from the reciprocity requirement regarding marriage contracts such as gay marriage. I think a civil contract is possible though -- just do not try to call it marriage. Contract enforcement is always a question without an answer until challanged in court though.

[whhyy]

the 1992 Assault Weapons Ban

Why the would anyone need one of those anyway? So they get to massacre a school of children even more efficiently?

[pericles_plato]

Why the would anyone need one of those anyway? So they get to massacre a school of children even more efficiently?

Someon i know said he wanted to keep his assault weapon. He's never going to use it so no point in having it. There is no point for keeping an assault weapon. Kids have more of a chance to shoot them selves and their friends.

[Gaidin]

Why the would anyone need one of those anyway? So they get to massacre a school of children even more efficiently?

You do realize that the cosmetic features that defined something as an assault weapon did not make those weapons any more dangerous than they already were right?

It's not like they were fully automatic and thus already covered under the National Firearms Act of 1934.

[Samuel Adams]

Why the would anyone need one of those anyway? So they get to massacre a school of children even more efficiently?

Someon i know said he wanted to keep his assault weapon. He's never going to use it so no point in having it. There is no point for keeping an assault weapon. Kids have more of a chance to shoot them selves and their friends.

There is a great point to having assault weapons. Defense against government.

As an American I have 110% loyalty to the nation. This sometimes means that I am against the governing body of the nation, because they are traitors and power mongers. The Assault Weapon ban was not meant to keep kids safe- most people I know with AW's are bachelors or older men with no kids around, and those with kids around (no matter what weapon) teach their kids how to responsibly use those weapons. I was one such child; my parents never put locks on their firearms, and even though they were inaccessible to me as a very small child, I was always taught how to use them in a safe, responsible way. My kids will be the same way.

Parents who's kids fall prey to any firearms accident have only themselves to blame. They failed to teach them the fundamentals of firearms safety.

A government that fears the people is usually a just ruler; a people that fear their government are slaves. I know that many here have decided for themselves that they would rather cower in the shadows of the legislation of the land, and take one more breath of life, waiting for the meager scraps the government throws them like ravenous, starving dogs, but some people actually enjoy the idea of having a free nation, with a government who's sole purpose is to protect those self-evident rights we hold so dear. That is a cause worth fighting for.

[ivan_the_terrible]

Parents who's kids fall prey to any firearms accident have only themselves to blame. They failed to teach them the fundamentals of firearms safety.

Wait a minute. How is it your fault, as a parent, if your kid goes to school one day and gets shot by another kid?

A government that fears the people is usually a just ruler; a people that fear their government are slaves. I know that many here have decided for themselves that they would rather cower in the shadows of the legislation of the land, and take one more breath of life, waiting for the meager scraps the government throws them like ravenous, starving dogs, but some people actually enjoy the idea of having a free nation, with a government who's sole purpose is to protect those self-evident rights we hold so dear. That is a cause worth fighting for.

So, more guns = greater government accountability. Then why is it that the US government is not anymore accountable to its people than say the UK government? Gun ownership is clearly not the deciding factor, and arguably not a factor at all.

[Osceola]

Well thats irrelevant, because the weapons targeted were not actual assault weapons.

Thats for another topic though.

[Bovril]

Is it a real possibility that 2/3 of the senate and the house of representative and 3/4 of the states would agree to such an amendment?

[Admiral Piett]

Well, when the hits the fan, it's a good thing to have. It's really fun to unload one at a gun range, too. But it's not like they're real easy to get.

Even in Texas, you have to submit two fingerprint and give a recent photo ID. You will also go through background checks and charged $200 in tax fees and whatnot. They're not as easy to get as some liberals make it out to be. Not many people have the money and patience to get one.

[Osceola]

I think your talking about a Class III, not what democrat politicians erroneously refer to as "assault weapons."

[Sphere]

Not being a citizen of the USA mysef I was wondering: If gay marriage or adoption is legal in one state but not in the state next to it wouldt people just go to another state to get things done and then go back to their own state? Kinda like an abortion holliday or a weddingtrip?

If this is possible aren't these topics that should be discussed on a national level?

Yeah, this is a tricky subject in US law. Basically the Federal government does not do licensing, certifying, codifying etc. That is all left up to the states. So each state has a different licence plate, different legal exam, different marriage license, different building code, different drivers license etc. Technically, the Constitution requires states to recognize others states "documentation", but there are some inconsitencies.

For example, in my field you can become certified by my state as a 'Professional Engineer', which allows you to approve building designs. However, if I drive an hour south into the next state, you need a 'Structural Engineer' certification as well as a 'Professional Engineer' certification in order to approve building designs. My state offers no such 'Structural Engineer' certification, so I would have to jump through some beaurocratic hoops if I wanted to design in another state.

For everyday things it works fairly smoothly (vehical registration, license plates, drivers licenses), for more complicated things it gets jumbled. And the Defense of Marriage act certainly didn't help matters.

[Iscariott]

I think your talking about a Class III, not what democrat politicians erroneously refer to as "assault weapons."

BINGO! i was about to bring this up. The "assault weapons ban" took out things like rail systems(think m4 attachments), bayonette mounts, and iirc certain grips on shottys/rifles. Full auto was never a part of it, thats covered under class III licencing.