What's new
By:

Million Mom March counter measures

P

Pyroxy

Established Talker
PF Member
Messages
91
Highlights
0
Reaction score
0
Points
62
Call the IRS Fraud Hotline at 1-800-829-0433 and tell them The Million Mom March has probably violated the terms of their 501c3 tax exempt status in regard to political activity and you want them to investigate them for such. The MMM will therefore be forced to give up their tax exempt status and their contributors will no longer be able to write off the donations they give them.

Any IRS agent who does not act on this complaint WILL supposedly be fired for not looking into it under recently enacted legislation regarding tax fraud.

End of MMM

HAND

------------------

Regards,

Pyroxy

Is it time for another Tea Party?

[Edited by Pyroxy @ May 17, 2000 (edited 1 time)]

[Edited by Pyroxy @ May 17, 2000 (edited 2 times)]
 
Pardon me for my ignorance but what is the Million Mom March?

-bp
 
Diesel Dan, that is not sensible that anyone would imply that a person likes shooting children. I have 2 kids myself and I would hope like hades that if a gunman came into 1 of my childrens' schools that a teacher would have broken law and brought their own gun to school to deal with such a scenario. Better to be a felon than to be dead.

Now, find the 3rd instance of "destruction" on the following webpage at the United Nations and read that paragraph, then try tell me if I have no reason to be biased against ANY and ALL anti-2nd amendment forces.

http://srch1.un.org:80/plweb-cgi/fa...r=adj&Te mplateName=predoc.tmpl&setCookie=1

"ban on the use or transfer of past stocks or unmarked small arms and light weapons, and the destruction of
such stocks"

Mothers are sacred and I hear their words but they are VERY naive to the ulterior motives of the forces that are supporting them monetarily. It's a nice concept, unfortunately it is not sensible though.

------------------


Regards,

Pyroxy

Is it time for another Tea Party?

[Edited by Pyroxy @ May 29, 2000 (edited 2 times)]
 
I've never been one to squelch on the rights of others, provided they do me no harm. However, teachers bringing in guns to school?!? Seek help!
If your suggestions were anywhere in the ballpark of sensible, I'd probably support them aside you. But that article you posted from Harry Browne is completely ridiculous.
I was especially impressed by his analogy using assault weapons and mortars. Good idea to use those if your store is threatened by looters. Let's see: lose material possessions, or kill someone... that's a really tough choice.

I hope you don't share his views, because you're living in a very special reality seperate from the rest of us in the "normal world" if you do.

I have a very simple solution to the gun problem in this country: If you're caught with an illegal gun, you're shot with it.



------------------
From another BBS:
"hmm... Cyrix III, huh? You can put syrup on sh*t, but that don't make it pancakes."
 
http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/04/06/million.mom.march.ap/

I see no reason to go on a witch hunt against the MMM. That's just incredibly short sighted on the part of the gun lobby, since their motives and intentions seem to be well-placed.
The more appropriate thing would've been to contact your legislative representatives and call for more appropriate gun legislation that would alleviate the need for such marches.

Unless shooting children is something that you particularly enjoy, why would you be against a protest calling for action that would prevent this from happening?

Edit: Pyroxy, how interesting that you choose a very biased article as an example, rather than finding one that's unbiased and gives multiple aspects of the story.

------------------
From another BBS:
"hmm... Cyrix III, huh? You can put syrup on sh*t, but that don't make it pancakes."

[Edited by Diesel Dan @ May 18, 2000 (edited 1 time)]
 
Before they can bring in MORE gun laws they need to enforce the laws already in place.
 
I have to agree with Diesel Dan on this one. Although I am an avid hunter and i enjoy shooting as much as the next red neck I do support *reasonable* gun control and I have no problem with the MMM. All they are is a group of Mothers that want to express their opinion. I just dont see any thing wrong with that. And Pyroxy that article you pointed us too is so full of s*** I thought it was a septic tank.
"So it's time to face reality and repeal these laws -- all of them."
What is he trying to say that every citizen should be alowed to oan a m16 with armor piercing bullets. i hope not. but hey that is just my opinion.



------------------
uh yeah . . .

[Edited by Prox @ May 27, 2000 (edited 1 time)]
 
Well the article is just a counter to the bull$hit of people trying to infringe on CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED rights. The MMM's intent is to infringe these rights and they are breaking the law in doing so (violating the 501c3 exemption rules).
Does this seem right to break the law by lobbying to infringe the rights of others? Hmmm...
Do not let the "For the kids" hypnotic trick misguide you.

How many laws will it take saying robbing a liquor store is illegal before the criminals no longer rob liquor stores?

How many gun laws will it take before the criminals no longer violate the laws we have now?

------------------


Regards,

Pyroxy

Is it time for another Tea Party?
 
Save your rhetoric, since you do appear to be blowing smoke straight out of your ****.

For you to call their motives a "hyponotic trick" makes you shortsighted. There's no harm in modifying regulations to be inline with what's "reasonable and rational". Having what's necessary to defend oneself and one's family is reasonable. Having assault rifles handy for such a purpose is not.
The fact is that I lost 2 friends due to the fact that the twisting of the meaning of the Constitution by the pro-gun lobby made it too easy for some gang members to get their hands on some guns.

Personally, I think you should take your Constitutional right and shove it straight up your ****. The 2nd Amendment was written to ensure that people have the right to take up arms against their aggressors and defend themselves, not make use of assault weapons to preserve their right to hunt small woodland creatures.

I'd gladly have your rights to own weapons taken away if it meant that I could have my friends back. My feelings are that what you perceive to be your rights have already severly infringed on my quality of life.


------------------
From another BBS:
"hmm... Cyrix III, huh? You can put syrup on sh*t, but that don't make it pancakes."

[Edited by Diesel Dan @ May 28, 2000 (edited 1 time)]
 
Ouch

A few interesting *statistics* with references...

Starting in 1984 the prosecution rates for weapons offenses among
youths between the ages of 10 to 17 years doubled by the end of 1987. From 1987 until 1993 those prosecution rates had dropped 24%.

(1) According to University of Chicago economics studies, if those states without right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, all available data indicates that 1,500 fewer murders, 4,000 less rapes, 11,000 less robberies, and over 60,000 fewer assaults would have been committed. It is estimated that right-to-carry laws would have saved the American taxpayer at least $5.74 billion in 1992 alone.

(2) If you want statistics, just pure numbers to crunch, in order to put these things in their proper perspective, how about this; according to the Center for Disease Control, there have been a total of 81 children killed by firearms in public schools between 1982 and 1999... including all those killed at Columbine High School. 81 deaths over the past 17 years or less than 4.8 kids per year.

By comparison, National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration
reports that since 1993 there have been 97 children killed by
government mandated air bags in our automobiles! Now, that equates to over 16 kids per year killed by government regulation. I might also add that we have no doubt as to the intent of these laws...

(3) Aren't laws and regulations wonderful?

If you really believe that gun control leads to lower death rates, then where is just one global example which the gun control lobby can use to support their argument? I haven't been able to locate anything except data to support the opposite...

Want a specific example of gun control being an out right failure? The argument today from the gun control people concludes that our founding fathers had no reason to be as provocative about the right to keep and bear arms as 2nd Amendment advocates boast of them.

In 1775, King George III, ordered his troops to seize the firearms of British colonists in the 'New World'. Gun Control fell flat on it's **** for the first time in America, as an out of control colonist fired the "Shot heard 'round the world". Thus, the forefathers had more personal knowledge on the issue than the gun control lobby can possibly fathom.

Since the gun control lobby has yet to provide any promising examples of the benevolent outcome of any past gun control measure, allow me to provide a few to prove the counter...

The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. From 1929 to 1953, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(4)Turkey established gun control in 1911. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, without firearms to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(5) Germany established gun control in 1938. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill people, and other "mongrelized peoples", all without firearms to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(6)China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, without firearms to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(7)Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, without firearms to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(8)Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, without firearms to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(9)Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, 1 million "educated people", without firearms to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

(10)Now you may ask, would the legal arming of citizens have prevented these events? The historical answer is a resounding yes!


==========Citations=============
(1) US Department of Justice, Juvenile Arrest Rates for Weapons Law Violations, 1981-1997.

(2) The Journal of Legal Studies, Volume 26, Number 1, January 1997 http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS/abstracts/261lot.html

(3) Confirmed Air Bag Deaths (as of 10/01/99) http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/airbags/factsheets/numbers.html

(4) 1929 Art. 182, Penal Code

(5) 1911 Art. 166, Penal Code

(6) 1928 Law on Firearms & Ammunition, 4/12
1938 Weapons Law, 5/18

(7) 1935 Arts. 186-7, Penal Code
1957 Art. 9, Security Law, 10/22

(8) 1871 Decree 36, 11/25
1964 Decree 283, 10/27

(9) 1955 Firearms Ordinance
1970 Firearms Act

(10) 1956 Arts. 322-8, Penal Code
------------------


Regards,

Pyroxy

Is it time for another Tea Party?

[Edited by Pyroxy @ May 29, 2000 (edited 1 time)]
 
Okay gentlemen...

We need to compose ourselves here.
smile.gif
I see both sides on this issue, however a long post at this time from myself isn't forthcoming, due to a major cold I seemed to have developed today, and I'm due for my NyQuil.

Let's take a breath (or for me, a tissue). Discussions are welcome, but let's try not to make any personal comments on one another.

Apparently this is a very intense issue felt very deeply within both of you. As it is a very core issue felt by millions of other Americans as well. People have fought and died to hold up our ability to debate each other. Perhaps it's time to 'agree to disagree' on this one however?

------------------
Alien - Administrator / Owner
["Everything was true. God was an alien. Oz really is over the
rainbow. ...and Midian is where the monsters live." -Nightbreed]
 
That's all we need, "Corky In... Rambo IV! A John Woo Film. Check your local listings."

smile.gif


------------------
Alien - Administrator / Owner
["Everything was true. God was an alien. Oz really is over the
rainbow. ...and Midian is where the monsters live." -Nightbreed]
 
Diesel Dan

It's always refreshing to see someone counter verfiable facts with "I feel..."

You also didn't answer Pyroxy's mention of the University of Chicago's study relating Right to Concealed Carry laws with much lower violent crime rates.

Ski Bum

[Edited by Ski Bum @ May 29, 2000 (edited 1 time)]
 
DD:

Where are YOUR FACTS and citations?

You say "I feel", yet you have nothing to back it up other than your thoughts. I am not saying that mentally ill people should own firearms, but your selective response to the mentally ill cite is unfair. I imagine only a small number of the 13 million were mentally ill and the remainder (who had all their marbles) would have protected those people as they were obviously related. If you had a mentally ill family member and they came for them, would you not protect them with your life and any arms you posessed or would you rely on those mentally ill people to protect themselves?


As far as the holocaust goes, have a look at what the Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership have to say about Gun Control, genocide and the holocaust:
http://www.jpfo.org/genocide.htm

Furthermore, I hear that Hillary Clinton herself packs in addition to her bodyguards:
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/4/26/60041

In fact, 1 of her entourage recently left a gun in between the seats at a school auditorium after some sort of convention only to be found by a parent or someone a few weeks later. I can't find the link to that article right now and it is out there from a reputable news source. I apologize for not having the cite on this point.


Also, Rosie O'Donnells' bodyguard just applied for a gun permit for use in protecting her
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty/20000526_xnjdo_rosies_arm.shtml

How extremely hypocritical these people are, condemn everyone else for gun ownership, yet surrounding themselves with the same.
http://www.guntruths.com/I_Support_Gun_Control.htm
------------------


Regards,

Pyroxy

Is it time for another Tea Party?

(edited !@#$ times)

[Edited by Pyroxy @ May 29, 2000 (edited 5 times)]
 
My citations are your own posts.
I say "you feel" because you said it yourself. How can you say that my "selective response is unfair" when you clearly printed each of the things I responded to?!?

If you think my using those items is unfair in forming a rebuttal to your statements, then don't say them.

Of all people, you're the last one who should be referring to to "selective responses". That Harry Browne article took the cake.


------------------
From another BBS:
"hmm... Cyrix III, huh? You can put syrup on sh*t, but that don't make it pancakes."
 
Dan,

You can put syrup on your logic too...

Ski Bum

Originally posted by Diesel Dan:
My citations are your own posts.
I say "you feel" because you said it yourself. How can you say that my "selective response is unfair" when you clearly printed each of the things I responded to?!?

If you think my using those items is unfair in forming a rebuttal to your statements, then don't say them.

Of all people, you're the last one who should be referring to to "selective responses". That Harry Browne article took the cake.

From another BBS:
"hmm... Cyrix III, huh? You can put syrup on sh*t, but that don't make it pancakes."


Click to expand...
 
Alien> I think it's very clear from this thread that Pyroxy and I will agree to disagree, on this topic at least.

Pyroxy> I feel your point #10 is a false conclusion. Likewise, your points #4-9 completely remove any socio-political factors from the equation and you just run with assumptions from there on out.
Are you seriously expecting us to believe that the Holocaust would never have happened if European Jews had the legal right to own handguns?!?
In that same line, you're saying that if the mentally ill had the right to possess firearms, they Holocaust could've been avoided. Personally, I shudder to think of a mentally ill person in this country possessing a firearm of any kind.



------------------
From another BBS:
"hmm... Cyrix III, huh? You can put syrup on sh*t, but that don't make it pancakes."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top