Go Back   TeamTalk > Off Topic > Off Topic Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2631  
Old 08-07-2019, 11:58 AM
John Johnson John Johnson is offline
MC Fanatic
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Boat: 2018 NXT22 Prior 2002 Maristar 230 VRS
Location: Southeast
Posts: 534
plus two
Reply With Quote
  #2632  
Old 08-07-2019, 01:05 PM
LDA6339 LDA6339 is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: May 2016
Boat: 2016 Mastercraft X-30 6.0L
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 2,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain planet View Post
Today's lesson...
Thats a great meme! Gonna share it for sure.
__________________
2016 X-30 6.0L
"YoU CaNt FiT 4 Rev10's oN a ZFT4"

2017 Nissan Maxima SL

Lonestar Masterbash
https://www.mastercraft.com/teamtalk...d.php?t=100065

Texas A&M '21

I lead the fight to ban the swimsuit thread, help me bring it back: https://teamtalk.mastercraft.com/sho...58#post1494758

2019 Stanley Cup Champions
Reply With Quote
  #2633  
Old 08-08-2019, 10:26 AM
captain planet's Avatar
captain planet captain planet is online now
MC Platinum
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Boat: 2003 PS197, MCX, Powerslot
Location: Canton, Ohio
Posts: 8,006
Government out of control....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtHa...em-uploademail
__________________
2003 ProStar 197, MCX and Powerslot.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the american public believes is false." william casey, cia director 1984.
Reply With Quote
  #2634  
Old 08-14-2019, 01:14 PM
captain planet's Avatar
captain planet captain planet is online now
MC Platinum
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Boat: 2003 PS197, MCX, Powerslot
Location: Canton, Ohio
Posts: 8,006
By Andrew P. Napolitano - - Wednesday, August 7, 2019

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Last weekend’s mass murders in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, have produced a flood of words about everything from gun control to mental illness to white nationalism. Most of those words have addressed the right to keep and bear arms as if it were a gift from the government. It isn’t.

The U.S. Supreme Court has twice ruled in the past 11 years that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual pre-political liberty. That is the highest category of liberty recognized in the law. It is akin to the freedoms of thought, speech and personality. That means that the court has recognized that the framers did not bestow this right upon us. Rather, they recognized its pre-existence as an extension of our natural human right to self-defense and they forbade government — state and federal — from infringing upon it.

It would be exquisitely unfair, profoundly unconstitutional and historically un-American for the rights of law-abiding folks — “surrender that rifle you own legally and use safely because some other folks have used that same type of weapon criminally” — to be impaired in the name of public safety.

It would also be irrational. A person willing to kill innocents and be killed by the police while doing so surely would have no qualms about violating a state or federal law that prohibited the general ownership of the weapon he was about to use.

With all of this as background, and the country anguishing over the mass deaths of innocents, the feds and the states face a choice between a knee-jerk but popular restriction of some form of gun ownership, and the rational and sound realization that more guns in the hands of those properly trained means less crime and more safety.

Can the government constitutionally outlaw the types of rifles used by the El Paso and Dayton killers? In a word: No. We know that because in the first Supreme Court opinion upholding the individual right to keep and bear arms, the court addressed what kind of arms the Second Amendment protects. The court ruled that the Second Amendment protects individual ownership of weapons one can carry that are of the same degree of sophistication as the bad guys have — or the government has.

The government? Yes, the government. That’s so because the Second Amendment was not written to protect the right to shoot deer. It was written to protect the right to shoot at tyrants and their agents when they have stolen liberty or property from the people. If you don’t believe me on this, then read the Declaration of Independence. It justifies violence against the British government because of such thefts.

Governments are the greatest mass killers on the planet. Who can take without alarm any of their threats to emasculate our right to defend our personal liberties?

In theory, all of this was known by President Donald Trump when he addressed the nation last Monday and attributed the weekend slaughters to mental illness, the freedom to express hateful ideas on the Internet and violent video games. He should have consulted his lawyers before he spoke.

Federal law prohibits records of mental deficiencies, unless they result in involuntary institutionalization, from entering the government’s databases that are consulted in background checks. And the Supreme Court has already ruled that the government cannot censor, ban or punish opinions expressed on the Internet or games played there.

Then he condemned hate. Do you believe his condemnations? He has, after all, praised the white supremacists at Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 as “good people,” even though one of them pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder of a young black woman, and even though, as a candidate and later as president, he argued that the Southwest United States was being “invaded” and “infested” by Hispanics.

That white supremacy ideology — “let’s repel the Hispanic invaders because the feds won’t do so” — resonates in the El Paso killer’s manifesto, which he published about 20 minutes before he began killing. That ideology is far more widespread than most Americans realize. The FBI recently demonstrated as much. This form of hatred of people because of their immutable characteristics breeds violence.

We know that some among us love to hate. That is their right, but they have no right to act violently beyond their perverse thoughts. And all people have the right to repel such violence by using guns to do so.

The president also offered his support for “red flag” laws. These horrific statutes permit police or courts to seize guns from those deemed dangerous. Red flag laws are unconstitutional. The presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of demonstrable fault as a precondition to any punishment or sanction together prohibit the loss of liberty on the basis of what might happen in the future.

In America, we do not punish a person or deprive anyone of liberty on the basis of a fear of what the person might do. When the Soviets used psychiatric testimony to predict criminal behavior, President Ronald Reagan condemned it. Now, the president wants it here.

The United States is not New Zealand, where a national legislature, animated by fear and provoked by tragedy, can impair fundamental liberties by majority vote. In America, neither Congress nor the states can outlaw whatever handguns or rifles they want to outlaw or infringe upon the right to own them.

The government can no more interfere with Second Amendment rights than it can infringe upon any other rights. If this were not so, then no liberty — speech, press, religion, association, self-defense, privacy, travel, property ownership — would be safe from the reach of a fearful majority.

That’s why we have a Constitution.
__________________
2003 ProStar 197, MCX and Powerslot.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the american public believes is false." william casey, cia director 1984.
Reply With Quote
  #2635  
Old 08-14-2019, 04:32 PM
Taco47001 Taco47001 is offline
TT Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Boat: Mastercraft X2 2007, MCX
Location: Two streets from nowhere
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain planet View Post
By Andrew P. Napolitano - - Wednesday, August 7, 2019

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Last weekend’s mass murders in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, have produced a flood of words about everything from gun control to mental illness to white nationalism. Most of those words have addressed the right to keep and bear arms as if it were a gift from the government. It isn’t.

The U.S. Supreme Court has twice ruled in the past 11 years that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual pre-political liberty. That is the highest category of liberty recognized in the law. It is akin to the freedoms of thought, speech and personality. That means that the court has recognized that the framers did not bestow this right upon us. Rather, they recognized its pre-existence as an extension of our natural human right to self-defense and they forbade government — state and federal — from infringing upon it.

It would be exquisitely unfair, profoundly unconstitutional and historically un-American for the rights of law-abiding folks — “surrender that rifle you own legally and use safely because some other folks have used that same type of weapon criminally” — to be impaired in the name of public safety.

It would also be irrational. A person willing to kill innocents and be killed by the police while doing so surely would have no qualms about violating a state or federal law that prohibited the general ownership of the weapon he was about to use.

With all of this as background, and the country anguishing over the mass deaths of innocents, the feds and the states face a choice between a knee-jerk but popular restriction of some form of gun ownership, and the rational and sound realization that more guns in the hands of those properly trained means less crime and more safety.

Can the government constitutionally outlaw the types of rifles used by the El Paso and Dayton killers? In a word: No. We know that because in the first Supreme Court opinion upholding the individual right to keep and bear arms, the court addressed what kind of arms the Second Amendment protects. The court ruled that the Second Amendment protects individual ownership of weapons one can carry that are of the same degree of sophistication as the bad guys have — or the government has.

The government? Yes, the government. That’s so because the Second Amendment was not written to protect the right to shoot deer. It was written to protect the right to shoot at tyrants and their agents when they have stolen liberty or property from the people. If you don’t believe me on this, then read the Declaration of Independence. It justifies violence against the British government because of such thefts.

Governments are the greatest mass killers on the planet. Who can take without alarm any of their threats to emasculate our right to defend our personal liberties?

In theory, all of this was known by President Donald Trump when he addressed the nation last Monday and attributed the weekend slaughters to mental illness, the freedom to express hateful ideas on the Internet and violent video games. He should have consulted his lawyers before he spoke.

Federal law prohibits records of mental deficiencies, unless they result in involuntary institutionalization, from entering the government’s databases that are consulted in background checks. And the Supreme Court has already ruled that the government cannot censor, ban or punish opinions expressed on the Internet or games played there.

Then he condemned hate. Do you believe his condemnations? He has, after all, praised the white supremacists at Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 as “good people,” even though one of them pleaded guilty to the first-degree murder of a young black woman, and even though, as a candidate and later as president, he argued that the Southwest United States was being “invaded” and “infested” by Hispanics.

That white supremacy ideology — “let’s repel the Hispanic invaders because the feds won’t do so” — resonates in the El Paso killer’s manifesto, which he published about 20 minutes before he began killing. That ideology is far more widespread than most Americans realize. The FBI recently demonstrated as much. This form of hatred of people because of their immutable characteristics breeds violence.

We know that some among us love to hate. That is their right, but they have no right to act violently beyond their perverse thoughts. And all people have the right to repel such violence by using guns to do so.

The president also offered his support for “red flag” laws. These horrific statutes permit police or courts to seize guns from those deemed dangerous. Red flag laws are unconstitutional. The presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of demonstrable fault as a precondition to any punishment or sanction together prohibit the loss of liberty on the basis of what might happen in the future.

In America, we do not punish a person or deprive anyone of liberty on the basis of a fear of what the person might do. When the Soviets used psychiatric testimony to predict criminal behavior, President Ronald Reagan condemned it. Now, the president wants it here.

The United States is not New Zealand, where a national legislature, animated by fear and provoked by tragedy, can impair fundamental liberties by majority vote. In America, neither Congress nor the states can outlaw whatever handguns or rifles they want to outlaw or infringe upon the right to own them.

The government can no more interfere with Second Amendment rights than it can infringe upon any other rights. If this were not so, then no liberty — speech, press, religion, association, self-defense, privacy, travel, property ownership — would be safe from the reach of a fearful majority.

That’s why we have a Constitution.
Can't figure out how to delete my reply......
Reply With Quote
  #2636  
Old 08-14-2019, 04:59 PM
captain planet's Avatar
captain planet captain planet is online now
MC Platinum
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Boat: 2003 PS197, MCX, Powerslot
Location: Canton, Ohio
Posts: 8,006
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/08/...your-children/

Interesting article.
__________________
2003 ProStar 197, MCX and Powerslot.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the american public believes is false." william casey, cia director 1984.
Reply With Quote
  #2637  
Old 08-15-2019, 03:43 PM
1redTA's Avatar
1redTA 1redTA is offline
MC Devotee
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Boat: 1981 MasterCraft 351W slot
Location: Pace, FL
Posts: 1,550
CP, I agree with what you posted about rights given by the maker... but people who are willing to have the government provide all don’t mind giving up liberties for the ill promised “protection.” When a majority of the population feels and votes this way the rest of us are screwed.
__________________
1981 MasterCraft
19' Skier 351W PowerSlot
Long gone is the Trans AM waiting for another
Reply With Quote
  #2638  
Old 08-15-2019, 04:30 PM
lakedrum03's Avatar
lakedrum03 lakedrum03 is offline
MC Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Boat: 2003 X-Series MCX
Location: Ohio
Posts: 947
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1redTA View Post
CP, I agree with what you posted about rights given by the maker... but people who are willing to have the government provide all don’t mind giving up liberties for the ill promised “protection.” When a majority of the population feels and votes this way the rest of us are screwed.
Hate to break it to you, my friend, but we are already screwed. The entitlement state is already well rooted.
__________________
Being on a boat that's moving through the water, it's so clear. Everything falls into place in terms of what's important and what's not. - James Taylor
Reply With Quote
  #2639  
Old 08-15-2019, 04:42 PM
captain planet's Avatar
captain planet captain planet is online now
MC Platinum
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Boat: 2003 PS197, MCX, Powerslot
Location: Canton, Ohio
Posts: 8,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1redTA View Post
CP, I agree with what you posted about rights given by the maker... but people who are willing to have the government provide all don’t mind giving up liberties for the ill promised “protection.” When a majority of the population feels and votes this way the rest of us are screwed.
Having the government provide for you is very much the anti-Libertarian stance and thus is the very opposite for what Ron Paul stands. Libertarians, which is a majority of us, are fiscally conservative, socially liberal, and don't want government in our lives or being our baby sitter. Sadly our youth, my kids aside, aren't taught what true liberty looks like because it isn't what we have, so you may be correct. But I'm not going down without trying.
__________________
2003 ProStar 197, MCX and Powerslot.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the american public believes is false." william casey, cia director 1984.
Reply With Quote
  #2640  
Old 08-16-2019, 01:18 PM
captain planet's Avatar
captain planet captain planet is online now
MC Platinum
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Boat: 2003 PS197, MCX, Powerslot
Location: Canton, Ohio
Posts: 8,006
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFdzCnTeIdw

Ron Paul on Larry King Politicking. Interview lasts through 13:00.

6:55. The moment for which I've been waiting.

WWW.TULSI2020.COM
__________________
2003 ProStar 197, MCX and Powerslot.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the american public believes is false." william casey, cia director 1984.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
aric is spelled wrong, this thread is cancer, to liberal sheeple

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:23 AM.


2018