Trump on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

[EE_]

PROTECTING OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

Donald J. Trump on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.

The Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right that belongs to all law-abiding Americans. The Constitution doesn’t create that right – it ensures that the government can’t take it away. Our Founding Fathers knew, and our Supreme Court has upheld, that the Second Amendment’s purpose is to guarantee our right to defend ourselves and our families. This is about self-defense, plain and simple.

It’s been said that the Second Amendment is America’s first freedom. That’s because the Right to Keep and Bear Arms protects all our other rights. We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment. Protecting that freedom is imperative. Here’s how we will do that:

Enforce The Laws On The Books

We need to get serious about prosecuting violent criminals. The Obama administration’s record on that is abysmal. Violent crime in cities like Baltimore, Chicago and many others is out of control. Drug dealers and gang members are given a slap on the wrist and turned loose on the street. This needs to stop.

Several years ago there was a tremendous program in Richmond, Virginia called Project Exile. It said that if a violent felon uses a gun to commit a crime, you will be prosecuted in federal court and go to prison for five years – no parole or early release. Obama’s former Attorney General, Eric Holder, called that a “cookie cutter” program. That’s ridiculous. I call that program a success. Murders committed with guns in Richmond decreased by over 60% when Project Exile was in place – in the first two years of the program alone, 350 armed felons were taken off the street.

Why does that matter to law-abiding gun owners? Because they’re the ones who anti-gun politicians and the media blame when criminals misuse guns. We need to bring back and expand programs like Project Exile and get gang members and drug dealers off the street. When we do, crime will go down and our cities and communities will be safer places to live.

Here’s another important way to fight crime – empower law-abiding gun owners to defend themselves. Law enforcement is great, they do a tremendous job, but they can’t be everywhere all of the time. Our personal protection is ultimately up to us. That’s why I’m a gun owner, that’s why I have a concealed carry permit, and that’s why tens of millions of Americans have concealed carry permits as well. It’s just common sense. To make America great again, we’re going to go after criminals and put the law back on the side of the law-abiding.

Fix Our Broken Mental Health System

Let’s be clear about this. Our mental health system is broken. It needs to be fixed. Too many politicians have ignored this problem for too long.

All of the tragic mass murders that occurred in the past several years have something in common – there were red flags that were ignored. We can’t allow that to continue. We need to expand treatment programs, because most people with mental health problems aren’t violent, they just need help. But for those who are violent, a danger to themselves or others, we need to get them off the street before they can terrorize our communities. This is just common sense.

And why does this matter to law-abiding gun owners? Once again, because they get blamed by anti-gun politicians, gun control groups and the media for the acts of deranged madmen. When one of these tragedies occurs, we can count on two things: one, that opponents of gun rights will immediately exploit it to push their political agenda; and two, that none of their so-called “solutions” would have prevented the tragedy in the first place. They’ve even admitted it.

We need real solutions to address real problems. Not grandstanding or political agendas.

Defend The Rights of Law-Abiding Gun Owners

GUN AND MAGAZINE BANS. Gun and magazine bans are a total failure. That’s been proven every time it’s been tried. Opponents of gun rights try to come up with scary sounding phrases like “assault weapons”, “military-style weapons” and “high capacity magazines” to confuse people. What they’re really talking about are popular semi-automatic rifles and standard magazines that are owned by tens of millions of Americans. Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice. The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own.

BACKGROUND CHECKS. There has been a national background check system in place since 1998. Every time a person buys a gun from a federally licensed gun dealer – which is the overwhelming majority of all gun purchases – they go through a federal background check. Study after study has shown that very few criminals are stupid enough to try and pass a background check – they get their guns from friends/family members or by stealing them. So the overwhelming majority of people who go through background checks are law-abiding gun owners. When the system was created, gun owners were promised that it would be instant, accurate and fair. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case today. Too many states are failing to put criminal and mental health records into the system – and it should go without saying that a system’s only going to be as effective as the records that are put into it. What we need to do is fix the system we have and make it work as intended. What we don’t need to do is expand a broken system.

NATIONAL RIGHT TO CARRY. The right of self-defense doesn’t stop at the end of your driveway. That’s why I have a concealed carry permit and why tens of millions of Americans do too. That permit should be valid in all 50 states. A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

MILITARY BASES AND RECRUITING CENTERS. Banning our military from carrying firearms on bases and at recruiting centers is ridiculous. We train our military how to safely and responsibly use firearms, but our current policies leave them defenseless. To make America great again, we need a strong military. To have a strong military, we need to allow them to defend themselves.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/second-amendment-rights

[midnight rambler]

Indeed, read between the lines -


What we need to do is fix the system we have and make it work as intended. What we don’t need to do is expand a broken system.

TRANSLATION: Fix NICS, THEN expand NICS to cover private sales.

The Donald has no problems whatsoever with NICS except that NICS needs to be 'fixed' before expanding NICS - NO mention of the fact that all these mass shooters were okayed by NICS, i.e. there were few instances that would have had NICS denying them the transfer EVEN IF NICS was 'fixed'.

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?85173-The-Donald-Fix-NICS-%28THEN-expand-it-to-include-private-sales%29

[palani]

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed upon. Period.
Surely. That is a limitation upon the FEDERATION. Said FEDERATION terminated in 1878 owing a debt of $347,681,016. The NATIONAL government that replaced it has few restrictions placed upon it by their constitution ... the 14th amendment.

Doubt this? Go into the U.S. Constitution (Annotated) in the bill of rights area and find just how few of these apply to NATIONAL citizens.

With my own cows I can do as I please. With my neighbors cows not so much. The Bill of Rights might be said to apply to my neighbors cows. Once I have purchased them it no longer applies.

[midnight rambler]

Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down...of course Kool-Aid can be used as a substitute.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrnoR9cBP3o

[7th trump]

Surely. That is a limitation upon the FEDERATION. Said FEDERATION terminated in 1878 owing a debt of $347,681,016. The NATIONAL government that replaced it has few restrictions placed upon it by their constitution ... the 14th amendment.

Doubt this? Go into the U.S. Constitution (Annotated) in the bill of rights area and find just how few of these apply to NATIONAL citizens.

With my own cows I can do as I please. With my neighbors cows not so much. The Bill of Rights might be said to apply to my neighbors cows. Once I have purchased them it no longer applies.

Hahahahaha..... a clown and his red rubber nose....lmao!

No clown, the federation did not terminate...its just nobody is a state citizen (We the People) any longer....they would rather, by choice, be federal US citizens enjoying what little rights they have over the private state citizen.

Ok clown.....find what a national citizen is...post it for all to see.
(the odds are you wont post it)

Hahahaha.............national huh?

The Bill of Rights only applies to state citizens where that jurisdiction rests.
Wow ....you are really lost in the law.
Your only follower is the resident bolshevic lover....midnight....lol!

[palani]

the federation did not terminate

Things that don't move in ten years deserve a decent burial of the carcass. When in doubt stick a fork in them to see if there is a response. If none they are done.

[7th trump]

Things that don't move in ten years deserve a decent burial of the carcass. When in doubt stick a fork in them to see if there is a response. If none they are done.

Thats funny...if it was dead then why is it that I dont have any deductions taken from my paycheck? Why is it that I can tell the employer that I do not wish to participate in Social Security and the IRS doesnt and cant do a damn thing about it?


Dead huh?
I think I have a response of a perfectly working Constitution you claim is dead.

[KenJackson]

A driver’s license works in every state, so it’s common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state. If we can do that for driving – which is a privilege, not a right – then surely we can do that for concealed carry, which is a right, not a privilege.

I just came here to post this, but you beat me too it.

[KenJackson]

Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down...

The midnight rambler is a Mary Poppins fan? Who'd a thunk it?

Hey MR, if the Poppinses revealed that Mary's great great grandfather was Jewish, would you still be a fan?

[midnight rambler]

The midnight rambler is a Mary Poppins fan? Who'd a thunk it?

Hey MR, if the Poppinses revealed that Mary's great great grandfather was Jewish, would you still be a fan?

I'm a Julie Andrews fan.

Go gobble on some Zionist schlong seeing as how you love it so much. Go...enjoy yourself.

[midnight rambler]

I just came here to post this, but you beat me too it.

Only a Death Cult tool would assert that the right to locomotion is a *privilege*.

[EE_]

Only a Death Cult tool would assert that the right to locomotion is a *privilege*.

I think driving is a privilege, but traveling is a right.
I sure don't think everyone should be allowed to drive. Have you seen some of the nitwits out there?

Where do you get this shit sometimes?

[midnight rambler]

I think driving is a privilege, but traveling is a right.
I sure don't think everyone should be allowed to drive. Have you seen some of the nitwits out there?

Where do you get this shit sometimes?

Where do I get it? Because it's the truth. Perhaps you should look into it.


I think driving is a privilege, but traveling is a right.

You are absolutely correct about this. 'Driving' relates to a commercial activity (it states as much in Title 18 with the definition of 'motor vehicle'*). The terms 'drive', 'driver', 'operator', 'motor vehicle', 'transportation, 'traffic', etc. are ALL commercial terms (traffic is actually defined as commerce in everyday dictionaries, not just law dictionaries). Certainly operating a business on public property** REQUIRES a license whereas traveling in one's own automobile does not. If one CONFESSES to a regulated activity by saying something stupid such as "I drive my motor vehicle in traffic." then one DESERVES to be treated like a rube.

For someone who acts a lot like they get it, you sure are lost on this one. Get a clue.

*there are very few actual "motor vehicles" on the highway since the term 'motor vehicle' is a misnomer, and the truth is it's strictly a legal term intended to deceive, because in order to be a 'motor vehicle' a vehicle could ONLY have an electric motor - internal combustion engines are not 'motors'!

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/31

**examples of needing a DRIVER LICENSE to operate a business on public property, i.e. those who are EMPLOYED in the business of 'transportation': UPS or FEDEX delivery guy or gal, taxi driver, chauffeur, moving truck driver, tow truck driver, OTR truck driver, delivery service driver, bus driver, etc.

[EE_]

Where do I get it? Because it's the truth. Perhaps you should look into it.



You are absolutely correct about this. 'Driving' relates to a commercial activity (it states as much in Title 18 with the definition of 'motor vehicle'*). The terms 'drive', 'driver', 'operator', 'motor vehicle', 'transportation, 'traffic', etc. are ALL commercial terms (traffic is actually defined as commerce in everyday dictionaries, not just law dictionaries). Certainly operating a business on public property** REQUIRES a license whereas traveling in one's own automobile does not. If one CONFESSES to a regulated activity by saying something stupid such as "I drive my motor vehicle in traffic." then one DESERVES to be treated like a rube.

For someone who acts a lot like they get it, you sure are lost on this one. Get a clue.

*there are very few actual "motor vehicles" on the highway since the term 'motor vehicle' is a misnomer, and the truth is it's strictly a legal term intended to deceive, because in order to be a 'motor vehicle' a vehicle could ONLY have an electric motor - internal combustion engines are not 'motors'!

**examples of needing a DRIVER LICENSE to operate a business on public property, i.e. those who are EMPLOYED in the business of 'transportation': UPS or FEDEX delivery guy or gal, taxi driver, chauffeur, moving truck driver, tow truck driver, OTR truck driver, delivery service driver, bus driver, etc.

So when a license is revoked for DUI, bad driving, handicap, etc., your right is being revoked?. That sounds like a privilege to me?

You are saying everyone has the right to drive unless the state revokes that right...then it's a privilege.

[midnight rambler]

Get a clue.

May I suggest a pair of Hoffman lenses?

http://i3.cpcache.com/product_zoom/1165340632/hoffman_lenses_tea_tumbler.jpg?height=250&width=250&padToSquare=true

[Dogman]

Hay Albert made the best stuff !

;D

[midnight rambler]

So when a license is revoked for DUI, bad driving, handicap, etc., your right is being revoked?. That sounds like a privilege to me?

You are saying everyone has the right to drive unless the state revokes that right...then it's a privilege.

No, simply don't have a DRIVER LICENSE in the first damn place. The DRIVER LICENSE IS the privilege. I let my DRIVER LICENSE expire 14 years ago and never renewed it. Prior to that the last time I went to renew it I tried signing with an explicit reservation of rights per UCC 1-207 (now 1-308) and they refused to renew that commercial agreement known as a DRIVER LICENSE if I persisted in asserting my rights. That told me everything I needed to know - one waives one's rights when one accepts privileges and benefits from the corporate state and the state actors WILL NOT ALLOW ANYONE TO MAKE AN EXPLICIT RESERVATION OF RIGHTS - PERIOD! (I know this to be the case 'cause I ALWAYS make an explicit reservation of rights WHENEVER I'm asked for my *signature*)

[midnight rambler]

So when a license is revoked for DUI, bad driving, handicap, etc., your right is being revoked?. That sounds like a privilege to me?

You are saying everyone has the right to drive unless the state revokes that right...then it's a privilege.

BTW, you PERSIST in using commercial terms, in this case 'drive', 'driving' and 'driver', Indeed, one absolutely needs a DRIVER LICENSE to 'drive' or be a 'driver' or to engage in the commercial activity of 'driving'.

[Cebu_4_2]

No, simply don't have a DRIVER LICENSE in the first damn place. The DRIVER LICENSE IS the privilege. I let my DRIVER LICENSE expire 14 years ago and never renewed it. Prior to that the last time I went to renew it I tried signing with an explicit reservation of rights per UCC 1-207 (now 1-308) and they refused to renew that commercial agreement known as a DRIVER LICENSE if I persisted in asserting my rights. That told me everything I needed to know - one waives one's rights when one accepts privileges and benefits from the corporate state and the state actors WILL NOT ALLOW ANYONE TO MAKE AN EXPLICIT RESERVATION OF RIGHTS - PERIOD! (I know this to be the case 'cause I ALWAYS make an explicit reservation of rights WHENEVER I'm asked for my *signature*)

So how does it go if you get pulled over?

[midnight rambler]

FWIW, if The Donald views EVERYONE who is a motorist as a 'driver' REGARDLESS of whether or not they're operating a business on public property, then he would have NO problem having everyone go through NICS to own a gun.

[midnight rambler]

So how does it go if you get pulled over?

Life as a free living soul is an adventure. You should try it sometime, I highly recommend it. Sam Adams called it "the animating contest of freedom."


“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
― Samuel Adams (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/31693.Samuel_Adams)

[KenJackson]

... I tried signing with an explicit reservation of rights per UCC 1-207 (now 1-308) and they refused ...
(I know this to be the case 'cause I ALWAYS make an explicit reservation of rights WHENEVER I'm asked for my *signature*)

Time out from the argument for a minute so you can educate me.
What does it mean to sign "with an explicit reservation of rights "?

[Dogman]

Time out from the argument for a minute so you can educate me.
What does it mean to sign "with an explicit reservation of rights "?

You will never get a straight answer, nor one that works for anybody else! Just mumbo jumbo legal terms that lead nowhere only legal crap that will not work in these times!

Just saying!

Sent from my Nexus 7

[midnight rambler]

Time out from the argument for a minute so you can educate me.
What does it mean to sign "with an explicit reservation of rights "?

I gave you EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW -


an explicit reservation of rights per UCC 1-207 (now 1-308)

You have literally at your fingertips probably the most powerful research tool in all history...are you really so lazy that you can't type or cut n' paste 'UCC 1-308' into a search engine?? ???

[midnight rambler]

You will never get a straight answer, nor one that works for anybody else!

Just saying!

Sent from my Nexus 7

There's never a suitable straight answer for anyone who's pickled their brain. lol

[Dogman]

There's never a suitable straight answer for anyone who's pickled their brain. lol

Lol

Comrade pray tell and answer kens questions and show us the way!

Also answer so the rest of us can do as you seem to be able to achieve!

Never will happen!

Doge and weave but never a straight answer!

Nuff said, I'm out of this one.

Lmfao!

Sent from my Nexus 7

[midnight rambler]

Lol

Comrade pray tell and answer kens questions and show us the way!

Also answer so the rest of us can do as you seem to be able to achieve!

Never happen !

Sent from my Nexus 7

My goal is to never engage in anymore baby-sitting, nanny, or nurse-maid work. I regard it much the same as trying to teach a pig to sing.

Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be opened to you.

"Do the thing and you will have the power." --Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Dogman]

My goal is to never engage in anymore baby-sitting, nanny, or nurse-maid work. I regard it much the same as trying to teach a pig to sing.

Seek and ye shall find, knock and the door will be opened to you.

"Do the thing and you will have the power." --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Thank you for making my point so clearly!

Hoot!

Lmfao!

Sent from my Nexus 7

[KenJackson]

...are you really so lazy that you can't type or cut n' paste 'UCC 1-308' into a search engine?? ???

Yeah, yeah, fine, OK:
(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as "without prejudice," "under protest," or the like are sufficient.

(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to an accord and satisfaction.

But what the heck does THAT mean? And what possible connection could it have with a driver's license?

If I wanted to do this, would I staple a legal document to my driver' license renewal card? What if the mail intern at Maryland DMV just tossed it? And even if someone filed it somewhere, how would it have the slightest bearing on what a cop thinks or does or can or can't do if he stops me?

In fact, what would be the purpose of any such "reservation of rights"? Should I reserve the right to drive at any speed I want? And should the cop's computer pop up a warning that he can't give me a ticket because I attached a reservation to my signature?

In recent years cops seem to sometimes be ignoring the fourth amendment to the constitution, as ratified by the states, so why do you expect they would honor a reservation signed by only you or me?

[midnight rambler]

Thank you for making my point so clearly!

Hoot!

Lmfao!

Sent from my Nexus 7

There are those who subscribe to Sam Adams take on things, and there are those who enjoy serving their betters.

[Dogman]

http://gold-silver.us/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7867&stc=1

I win !

You made my point for me !

Later gator or is that garter ?

Huge hoot !

Now I am out for sure from this thread !

Ken if you have a dog, ask the same question, you probably would get a better answer to your question from your four legged friend, if you have a cat do not even try, because they do not give a shit!

;D

[midnight rambler]

The Sam Adams quote I posted sums it up nicely. Only the highly motivated will not be cheated out of their birthright, the rest will go along to get along.


http://gold-silver.us/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7867&stc=1

Indeed, that's all you have. Betcha never do that to your betters. lol

[monty]

http://www.barefootsworld.net/

http://www.barefootsworld.net/sui_juris/uccconnection.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/general-discussion/2504-common-law-ucc-1-308-a.html

[palani]

I think I have a response of a perfectly working Constitution you claim is dead.
You are more delusional than someone who participates.

THERE IS NO SPOON!!!

NEITHER IS THERE ANY MONEY!!!

[7th trump]

You are more delusional than someone who participates.

THERE IS NO SPOON!!!

NEITHER IS THERE ANY MONEY!!!

You just dont get it do you.
Why do you believe money has anything to do with me securing my Bill of Rights?
I contacted the SSA about the voluntary nature of participating in SS and that by participating in SS it blocked me from accessing my Constitutional Bill of Rights.
You claim the Constitution is dead and if that had any sliver of truth I wouldnt have been able to stop participating. I used statute 42usc 1982 as my legal authority.
Hmmmm....42usc 1982 has some authority by the Constitution...but you claim the Constitution is dead.............hmmm...you're a damn liar and a fool.

I wish not to participate in Social Security and theres no law that says I have to and the result of that is I dont have any withholdings or deductions taken from my paycheck and I get paid in paper dollars when I go cash that check every week at the credit union.

Your problem palani is you're lost in the law because you do not understand it which is the result of believing those conspiracy fallacies you read off the internets.
You have no faith in anything except your own made up opinions.

[7th trump]

Lol

Comrade pray tell and answer kens questions and show us the way!

Also answer so the rest of us can do as you seem to be able to achieve!

Never will happen!

Doge and weave but never a straight answer!

Nuff said, I'm out of this one.

Lmfao!

Sent from my Nexus 7

Thats right it never happens.....hes no different than palani and his word salad merry-go-round circle jerk nonanswers.
You never ever get an answer from either of them....just a bunch of run around of "how dare you ask me to prove myself" bullshit from these two.

[palani]

you claim the Constitution is dead

No

1. I claim the federation is dead
2. I claim the federal government masquerading as a national government has a constitution. It is CALLED the 14th amendment and has VERY few rules written to limit this insurgent government. One rule is recognizing due process. Another rule is the citizen cannot question the NATIONAL debt.

Will you never get anything right?

[JohnQPublic]

"*there are very few actual "motor vehicles" on the highway since the term 'motor vehicle' is a misnomer, and the truth is it's strictly a legal term intended to deceive, because in order to be a 'motor vehicle' a vehicle could ONLY have an electric motor - internal combustion engines are not 'motors'!"

Such much for the Tesla, Leaf, Prius, etc.

[midnight rambler]

Such much for the Tesla, Leaf, Prius, etc.

All of those were recent developments and surely number less than 1% of all cars and trucks on the road today...which is why I said, "very few actual vehicles powered by electric motors are on the road." (the Prius was introduced in '97)

[mick silver]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dglonuLXnmI

[mick silver]

--UCC 1-308-- Our Legal Protection against all Un-Constitutional Demands of Public officials and their agents-- http://sicknesshope.com/node/610

[mick silver]

Trump's latest policy paper marks departure on gun controlhttps://media.zenfs.com/creatr-images/GLB/2015-04-20/94e89b90-e7b0-11e4-9ea9-23e8763fec68_Associated-Press.png (http://www.ap.org/) By JILL COLVIN 18 hours ago




 (https://www.tumblr.com/share/photo?clickthru=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Ftrum ps-latest-policy-paper-marks-departure-gun-control-195326462--election.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory%26soc_ trk%3Dtu&caption=MANCHESTER%2C%20N.H.%20%28AP%29%20%E2%80%9 4%20Republican%20presidential%20candidate%20Donald %20Trump%2C%20who%20once%20advocated%20certain%20g un%20control%20measures%2C%20says%20he%20is%20a%20 staunch%20supporter%20of%20the%20Second%20Amendmen t%20and%20that%20gun%20rights%20should%20not%20be% 20infringed%20upon.&source=http%3A%2F%2Fl1.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres%2 F1.2%2FhGHPLCXhHHX0RwkJjou0bA--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztpbD1wbGFuZTtxPTc1O3c9NjA w%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen_us%2FNews%2F ap_webfeeds%2Fda0613a22e647c2a820f6a706700ca4d.jpg )
 (https://www.facebook.com/dialog/feed?app_id=90376669494&redirect_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2F_xhr%2F mediacontentsharebuttons%2Fpostshare%2F%3Fsrc%3Dfb&link=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Ftrumps-latest-policy-paper-marks-departure-gun-control-195326462--election.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory%26soc_ trk%3Dfb&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fl1.yimg.com%2Fbt%2Fapi%2Fres% 2F1.2%2FhGHPLCXhHHX0RwkJjou0bA--%2FYXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztpbD1wbGFuZTtxPTc1O3c9NjA w%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Fmedia.zenfs.com%2Fen_us%2FNews%2F ap_webfeeds%2Fda0613a22e647c2a820f6a706700ca4d.jpg&name=Trump%26%2339%3Bs+latest+policy+paper+marks+d eparture+on+gun+control&description=MANCHESTER%2C+N.H.+%28AP%29+%E2%80%94+ Republican+presidential+candidate+Donald+Trump%2C+ who+once+advocated+certain+gun+control+measures%2C +says+he+is+a+staunch+supporter+of+the+Second+Amen dment+and+that+gun+rights+should+not+be+infringed+ upon.&display=popup&show_error=yes)
 (https://twitter.com/share?text=Trump%27s+latest+policy+paper+marks+dep arture+on+gun+control&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Ftrumps-latest-policy-paper-marks-departure-gun-control-195326462--election.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory%26soc_ trk%3Dtw&via=YahooNews)
 (http://news.yahoo.com/_xhr/mtf_popup/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Ftrumps-latest-policy-paper-marks-departure-gun-control-195326462--election.html%3Fsoc_src%3Dmediacontentstory%26soc_ trk%3Dma&site=news&region=US&lang=en-US&content_id=2cdfcc1b-abbd-348e-beb9-079015e980a4&alias_id=story%3Dtrumps-latest-policy-paper-marks-departure-gun-control-195326462--election)














Content preferences (https://settings.yahoo.com/interests)



Done



http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/9QmXh2EPpkd1.librAHFHg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztmaT1maWxsO2g9Mzc3O2lsPXBsYW 5lO3B4b2ZmPTUwO3B5b2ZmPTA7cT03NTt3PTY3MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/da0613a22e647c2a820f6a706700ca4d.jpg (http://news.yahoo.com/trumps-latest-policy-paper-marks-departure-gun-control-195326462--election.html#)
. View photo

In this Sept. 16, 2015 photo, Republican presidential candidate businessman Donald Trump speaks during the CNN Republican presidential debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum in Simi Valley, Calif. Trump has released his second major policy paper, this time on guns. The once-advocate of certain gun control measures now says that he is strongly in favor of the Second Amendment and says that gun rights should not be infringed upon. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill)





MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who once advocated certain gun control measures, says he is a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment and that gun rights should not be infringed upon.



In his second policy announcement of his campaign, Trump argues against expanded background checks and says the government should not place any kind of limits on the types of firearms people can own.
"The Second Amendment to our Constitution is clear," he writes in the summary, released Friday on his website. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. Period."
The position paper is the second Trump has released so far and mirrors many of the National Rifle Association's talking points. There is little disagreement among the Republican field on the topic and appears aimed at firing up his conservative base.
In the paper, Trump, who has skyrocketed to the front of early GOP polls, offers several specific policy proclamations.
He says he wants members of the military stationed at bases and recruiting centers to be able to carry firearms and wants state-issued conceal carry permits, like the one he has, to be valid throughout the country.
"A driver's license works in every state, so it's common sense that a concealed carry permit should work in every state," he writes.
He also argues against the expansion of the background check system, saying the current system must first be improved, and says he opposes all restrictions on magazine capacities and gun types.
"Law-abiding people should be allowed to own the firearm of their choice," he writes. "The government has no business dictating what types of firearms good, honest people are allowed to own."
The positions are at odds with the ones he expressed in his 2000 book, "The America We Deserve."
"I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I also support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun," he wrote then. "With today's Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72 hours if a potential gun owner has a record."
Trump has also shifted to the right in other policy areas, including abortion rights and health care.
More often, Trump sticks with vague talking points, like calling for better enforcement of laws already on the books, or describing problems without offering concrete solutions.
Under a section entitled, "Fix Our Broken Mental Health System," for instance, Trump declares, "Let's be clear about this. Our mental health system is broken. It needs to be fixed. Too many politicians have ignored this problem for too long."
But aside from calling for an expansion of treatment programs, Trump does not outline how he intends to do so.
"We need real solutions to address real problems. Not grandstanding or political agendas," he concludes.
The paper was released shortly after Trump cancelled a planned appearance at a candidate forum in South Carolina, citing a "significant business transaction" that needed his attention.


Politics & Government
Donald Trump
gun control


Click to view comments 
View Comments (1343)

[Hitch]

Life as a free living soul is an adventure. You should try it sometime, I highly recommend it. Sam Adams called it "the animating contest of freedom."

If you get pulled over driving a car without a license, you are not a free soul anymore. The cops can and most likely will take you to jail.

Question for midnight. If you are driving, sorry traveling, in your car going 100 mph past a school and run over a kid. Who's fault is it? The kid's right? Seems to me the kid would have been trying to restrict your right to travel.

[7th trump]

--UCC 1-308-- Our Legal Protection against all Un-Constitutional Demands of Public officials and their agents-- http://sicknesshope.com/node/610

This website like all the rest is approaching the problem all wrong.
You cant stand in the jurisdiction of the federal government and expect to be in the jurisdiction of the free "WE the People".

I've posted these two websites many times www.state-citizen.org and www.1215.org many times. These two websites are the ONLY two websites out there that will explain it to you the best.
Warning....you are going to have to use your head and think. One website shows the difference between a "US citizen" (federal jurisdiction) and "We the People" and the other shows proof....its the "Rights" you hold. One has "Civil Rights" from the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (as amended to present day) and the other "The Bill of Rights".

The UCC 1-308 has never worked and never will.

[7th trump]

If you get pulled over driving a car without a license, you are not a free soul anymore. The cops can and most likely will take you to jail.

Question for midnight. If you are driving, sorry traveling, in your car going 100 mph past a school and run over a kid. Who's fault is it? The kid's right? Seems to me the kid would have been trying to restrict your right to travel.
You cant reason with these people Hitch.
Rambler believes the kid is at fault and also believes speed limits can be ignored (because they think its unconstitutional) when municipalities can and do have the power and authority to limit speed in their own jurisdictions.

Met quite a few of these types in my path...they have blinders on and they will get violent with you if you try talking reasoning and or truth.
I just call them ignorant and foolish.

[Hitch]

You cant reason with these people Hitch.
Rambler believes the kid is at fault and also believes speed limits can be ignored (because they think its unconstitutional) when municipalities can and do have the power and authority to limit speed in their own jurisdictions.

Met quite a few of these types in my path...they have blinders on and they will get violent with you if you try talking reasoning and or truth.
I just call them ignorant and foolish.

You know what's ironic, I pulled over lots, I mean lots, of people who did not have drivers licenses, registered vehicles, or insurance. Basically just like midnight. They were ALL illegal immigrants. All we did was cite them, because there was too much violent crime to deal with going on at the time. I sure hope midnight doesn't look hispanic, because he could possibly be deported to Mexico if pulled over by a bored cop.

Think about it, there's no way to identify him. The cop doesn't know if he's wanted for murder or not. The cop will find midnight's identity. Usually that would be done by arresting him and having his fingerprints taken at the station, then run through the system.

[palani]

I just call them ignorant and foolish.
Yes. The ignorant and foolish frequently apply these attributes to others. Yet you and Hitch both break the law every time you stop at a STOP sign. If you actually obeyed the law you would still be stopped there waiting for it to change to GO. Instead you stop and lack the patience for it to give you permission to go.

Yes. You obey signs. Even though there is no authority for them posted. You even obey statutes just because a committee of self-appointed power mongers decided you must. And those who choose not to are ignorant and foolish.

[Hitch]

If you actually obeyed the law you would still be stopped there waiting for it to change to GO. Instead you stop and lack the patience for it to give you permission to go.

This is completely false. Read the VC, at least in California, it says stop before entering the intersection.

22450. (a) The driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign at the entrance to, or within, an intersection shall stop at a limit line, if marked, otherwise before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/?1dmy&urile=wcm:path:/dmv_content_en/dmv/pubs/vctop/vc/d11/c8/22450

[midnight rambler]

If you are driving, sorry traveling, in your car going 100 mph past a school and run over a kid.

This notion clearly indicates you're a lost soul.


Read the VC

The state is your god and the statutes are your bible.

[Hitch]

This notion clearly indicates you're a lost soul.

You think you are free to do anything you want, and that it doesn't affect other people. Who's the lost soul?

[palani]

it says stop before entering the intersection.

PRECISELY MY POINT!!! Show me where it gives you permission to GO again.

After long study of material people choose to call law I have come to the conclusion that it is not what is written that is of importance. Instead it is what is not written that contains the most interest. People read but they don't interpret.

George Gordon had one in Idaho. It irked him that his semi's had to be weighed. After a loss or two in court finally a judge pointed him in the right direction. Idaho law did not require an EMPTY truck to be weighed. So George dropped his tire pressure to make it appear the truck was loaded, locked the box so nobody could see that it was empty, plugged up all holes and proceeded to go past weigh stations. He got hauled in numerous times and the prosecution could never figure out why his cases got dismissed. The reason was his truck was empty each time and they had no proof there was ever anything in the truck.

[palani]

You think you are free to do anything you want

Perhaps this points you in the correct direction:

Bonum necessarium extra terminos necessitatis non est bonum.
Necessary good is not good beyond the bounds of necessity.

[7th trump]

PRECISELY MY POINT!!! Show me where it gives you permission to GO again.

After long study of material people choose to call law I have come to the conclusion that it is not what is written that is of importance. Instead it is what is not written that contains the most interest. People read but they don't interpret.

George Gordon had one in Idaho. It irked him that his semi's had to be weighed. After a loss or two in court finally a judge pointed him in the right direction. Idaho law did not require an EMPTY truck to be weighed. So George dropped his tire pressure to make it appear the truck was loaded, locked the box so nobody could see that it was empty, plugged up all holes and proceeded to go past weigh stations. He got hauled in numerous times and the prosecution could never figure out why his cases got dismissed. The reason was his truck was empty each time and they had no proof there was ever anything in the truck.

Nobody has ever been cited for going through the stop after stopping now have they grasshopper?
Nope!

Your reasoning.....go get it checked!

[7th trump]

You think you are free to do anything you want, and that it doesn't affect other people. Who's the lost soul?

Isnt that the truth....couldnt have said it better!

[midnight rambler]

You think you are free to do anything you want, and that it doesn't affect other people. Who's the lost soul?

According to the perfect law of liberty, aka God's Law aka the natural law aka Jus Gentium aka the Law of Nations (refer to James 1:25), why yes, I AM free to do anything I care to so long as I do not infringe upon the life, liberty, or property of anyone else.

I assert YOU are lost since you fail to comprehend, or even begin to grasp for that matter, the distinctions between full liability and limited liability. It certainly appears to me that you don't know what you don't know regarding full liability - which is why I assert your god is the state.

[Hitch]

According to the perfect law of liberty, aka God's Law aka the natural law aka Jus Gentium aka the Law of Nations (refer to James 1:25), why yes, I AM free to do anything I care to so long as I do not infringe upon the life, liberty, or property of anyone else.

People like yourself constantly infringe upon the life, liberty, or property of others. You just don't realize it. Take driving 100 mph down the road, for example. In your opinion that should be OK as long as you don't hit anyone. You get to your destination quicker, nobody got hurt, life is good.

You would not realize that by doing that, you just gave an old lady a heart attack and she died because you scared her.

People, we are all connected, often indirectly and unknowingly. Take boats for example, I work on the water. It's paradise for you, no license is needed. Anyone, without any training, can buy a boat and take it out. Untrained people doing stupid things, without realizing it, constantly endanger my life when I'm out working. They don't even know they are doing it.

If I ever get killed at work, 99% chance the person who killed me would not know they did it. At the end of their day they will have their boat at the dock, having laughs and cocktails on it.

[palani]

Nobody has ever been cited for going through the stop after stopping
What does being cited have to do with anything? I thought you were interested in obeying all laws to the letter?

Why insist an empty truck be weighted (as in my G Gordon story)? What does a cite prove or disprove anyway when you can be charged with anything at any time regardless of either fact or law? Or are you saying you are fearful of being cited and you use your fear as your law?

[palani]

Take driving 100 mph down the road, for example.

Your speed at the surface of the earth at the equator is 1,000 mph. Even better .. with respect to the sun you are traveling at 67,000 mph. Better turn yourself in.

[Hitch]

Your speed at the surface of the earth at the equator is 1,000 mph. Even better .. with respect to the sun you are traveling at 67,000 mph. Better turn yourself in.

OK, there is absolutely no point in discussing anything with you.

[midnight rambler]

People like yourself constantly infringe upon the life, liberty, or property of others. You just don't realize it. Take driving 100 mph down the road, for example. In your opinion that should be OK as long as you don't hit anyone. You get to your destination quicker, nobody got hurt, life is good.

You would not realize that by doing that, you just gave an old lady a heart attack and she died because you scared her.

People, we are all connected, often indirectly and unknowingly. Take boats for example, I work on the water. It's paradise for you, no license is needed. Anyone, without any training, can buy a boat and take it out. Untrained people doing stupid things, without realizing it, constantly endanger my life when I'm out working. They don't even know they are doing.

It appears to me that you're every bit as asinine as the worst of 'em.

ASININE - marked by an inexcusable failure to exercise intelligence or sound judgment

The reason you don't get the concept of full liability (taking responsibility for one's own actions) is because the state indoctrination centers (aka skools) have taught you well with respect to accepting the state privilege/benefit of limited liability (the #1 advantage of limited liability is not paying one's debts but rather discharging debt with limited liability, this is the one just about everyone loves so much 'cause it allows them to totally be free of actually taking responsibility for themselves as God intended. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO 'PAY' A DEBT WITH A DEBT! Anyone who thinks that is possible is certifiably insane.)

[Hitch]

It appears to me that you're every bit as asinine as the worst of 'em.

ASININE - marked by an inexcusable failure to exercise intelligence or sound judgment

By resorting to comments like this one, and completely ignoring my point, just proves I'm correct.

[Hitch]

The reason you don't get the concept of full liability (taking responsibility for one's own actions)

You are not taking responsibility for your actions. That's the point I'm making. You can't take responsibility when you don't realize your actions are harming others.

[palani]

OK, there is absolutely no point in discussing anything with you.

Discussing is one thing. Dictating another.

[palani]

You can't take responsibility when you don't realize your actions are harming others.
Purchasing insurance (health/liability/fire/earthquake) harms others and you are not being responsible when you purchase insurance. Yet most people believe purchasing insurance is the 'responsible' thing to do. If nobody had insurance the medical profession would be more reasonable and people would be more careful with their traveling practices.

[7th trump]

OK, there is absolutely no point in discussing anything with you.

Thats the remarks you get from someone intellectually defeated.
Actually he defeated himself by arguing an issue he has very little knowledge of.

Hes basically infected with being illogical.

[midnight rambler]

(the #1 advantage of limited liability is not paying one's debts but rather discharging debt with limited liability, this is the one just about everyone loves so much 'cause it allows them to totally be free of actually taking responsibility for themselves as God intended. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO 'PAY' A DEBT WITH A DEBT! Anyone who thinks that is possible is certifiably insane.)

To 'pay' a debt means substance for substance, value for value, and 'paying' a debt actually extinguishes the debt, any debt 'paid' no longer exists. Using a debt instrument as a tender can ONLY result in DISCHARGE of the debt, and on their face Federal Reserve Notes are debt. There is one and only one lawful way to 'pay' a debt under the Constitution and that is the use of gold and silver coin.

[7th trump]

Purchasing insurance (health/liability/fire/earthquake) harms others and you are not being responsible when you purchase insurance. Yet most people believe purchasing insurance is the 'responsible' thing to do. If nobody had insurance the medical profession would be more reasonable and people would be more careful with their traveling practices.

Care to elaborate more?
I dont see any correlation between the two. Accidents happen and luckily we have hospitals around to help mend a person back to a healthier status.

[midnight rambler]

You can't take responsibility when you don't realize your actions are harming others.

The truth is you're most likely not taking responsibility for your own actions and harming others in the process.

I submit you're harming others by your own use of FRNs, i.e. you're cheating whomever you're tendering those notes to if you don't give them fair warning (I usually do so by asking something like, "Do you take counterfeit money?" or "You do realize I'm cheating you when I give you these FRNs, right?" or "Are you a Federal Reserve agent?")

[midnight rambler]

Purchasing insurance (health/liability/fire/earthquake) harms others and you are not being responsible when you purchase insurance. Yet most people believe purchasing insurance is the 'responsible' thing to do. If nobody had insurance the medical profession would be more reasonable and people would be more careful with their traveling practices.

Additionally, purchasing insurance is a form of gambling where you're betting against yourself.

Also, the insurance schemes are absolutely the most glaring example of limited liability for most people to see, although the limited liability involved with Federal commercial paper (e.g. FRNs) is the biggest example of all.

The insurance schemes are a swell deal for anyone seeking to shirk their responsibilities by not accepting full liability.

Full liability is a completely foreign and strange concept to those steeped in limited liability their entire lives.

[7th trump]

To 'pay' a debt means substance for substance, value for value, and 'paying' a debt actually extinguishes the debt, any debt 'paid' no longer exists. Using a debt instrument as a tender can ONLY result in DISCHARGE of the debt, and on their face Federal Reserve Notes are debt. There is one and only one lawful way to 'pay' a debt under the Constitution and that is the use of gold and silver coin.

Just more bullshit conspiracy.
My grand parents used frn's to pay off a farm back in the 60's. When they sold it to move back to southern Illinois they didnt have an existing farm mortgage that was never paid off...they used sale frn's to buy a nice little house and traveled.

So your logic doesnt compute.

[7th trump]

The truth is you're most likely not taking responsibility for your own actions and harming others in the process.

I submit you're harming others by your own use of FRNs, i.e. you're cheating whomever you're tendering those notes to if you don't give them fair warning (I usually do so by asking something like, "Do you take counterfeit money?" or "You do realize I'm cheating you when I give you these FRNs, right?" or "Are you a Federal Reserve agent?")

Really?
So working a 40 hour week is cheating someone somewhere somehow.........................huh?

I suspect you have a hand with a finger deep down your nasal passage picking boogers and a hotdog in the other hand.

[7th trump]

Additionally, purchasing insurance is a form of gambling where you're betting against yourself.

Also, the insurance schemes are absolutely the most glaring example of limited liability for most people to see, although the limited liability involved with Federal commercial paper (e.g. FRNs) is the biggest example of all.

A foolish conspiratist logic.

Insurance is exactly what it is.
Its there so when an accident does happen you have a means to correct your damages to others property.

[mick silver]

http://memecrunch.com/meme/1XK4G/only-one-thing-counts-in-this-world-get-them-to-sign-on-the-line-which-is-dotted/image.jpg

[midnight rambler]

Just more bullshit conspiracy.
My grand parents used frn's to pay off a farm back in the 60's. When they sold it to move back to southern Illinois they didnt have an existing farm mortgage that was never paid off...they used sale frn's to buy a nice little house and traveled.

So your logic doesnt compute.

I submit your grandparents were delusional and they passed on their delusions to you.

Notes are debt instruments. FRNs are promissory notes on their face. It is NOT possible to 'pay' a debt with a debt...but we all know you're certifiable.


PROMISSORY NOTE, contracts. A written promise to pay a certain sum of money, at a future time, unconditionally. 7 Watts & S. 264; 2 Humph. R. 143; 10 Wend. 675; Minor, R. 263; 7 Misso. 42; 2 Cowen, 536; 6 N. H. Rep. 364; 7 Vern. 22. A promissory note differs from a mere acknowledgment of debt, without any promise to pay, as when the debtor gives his creditor an I 0 U. (q. v.) See 2 Yerg. 50; 15 M. & W. 23. But see 2 Humph. 143; 6 Alab. R. 373. In its form it usually contains a promise to pay, at a time therein expressed, a sum of money to a certain person therein named, or to his order, for value received. It is dated and signed by the maker. It is never under seal.

[7th trump]

http://memecrunch.com/meme/1XK4G/only-one-thing-counts-in-this-world-get-them-to-sign-on-the-line-which-is-dotted/image.jpg

Yep.....anyone understand what that means to sign on the dotted line?

It means they need your permission. You sign up for Social Security, even to participate in Social Security (the only reason behind the W4), you sign up for a drivers license...ect.

[Hitch]

I submit you're harming others by your own use of FRNs, i.e. you're cheating whomever you're tendering those notes to if you don't give them fair warning (I usually do so by asking something like, "Do you take counterfeit money?" or "You do realize I'm cheating you when I give you these FRNs, right?" or "Are you a Federal Reserve agent?")

I won't disagree with this point, but...you hint that you, yourself, exist in this country without using FRNs. If you use them yourself, to buy food, pay bills, etc, then you admit that you are part of the problem.

I submit that I didn't make this corrupt financial system. I know FRNs are debt, but as long as someone is willing to accept them, they are not being harmed by me. People use FRNs to benefit themselves, survive, and to get ahead in life. That is a current fact.

Another fact, is that they will indeed be victims of a crime when the whole system crashes.

[7th trump]

I submit your grandparents were delusional and they passed on their delusions to you.

Notes are debt instruments. FRNs are promissory notes on their face. It is NOT possible to 'pay' a debt with a debt...but we all know you're certifiable.

So you are saying when I get a frn and change that into 100 pennies which is not a debt instrument because they are minted by the US Treasury I'm harming someone?

Keep sticking your finger up your nose and eating that hot dog.
You dont even know what debt instrument means.

[EE_]

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/061/348/awesome_thread.jpg

[KenJackson]

Purchasing insurance (health/liability/fire/earthquake) harms others and you are not being responsible when you purchase insurance. Yet most people believe purchasing insurance is the 'responsible' thing to do. If nobody had insurance the medical profession would be more reasonable and people would be more careful with their traveling practices.
There's a point here.

The concept of insurance is thoroughly abused today. To illustrate, some people will probably take blood pressure medicine for the rest of their lives. It's a maintenance need, just like food and soap. So why or why are the medication and the totally predictable doctor visits covered by insurance? Why is it illegal to sell insurance that only covers things that need to be insured? It was bad enough before Obamacare, but now it's worse by a multiple.

Similarly, I choose to self insure my dental care. But when I step into my dentist's office and they ask if I have insurance and I say "I self insure", they haven't a clue what I mean. So I have to say it a way they can grasp, "I don't have insurance." This excites them because "no insurance" means I have to pay full price. You might think it would be fair if we would split the saved cost of insurance payments between us. But no--the dentist demands it all. (I'm currently looking for a more fair dentist.)

[midnight rambler]

they are not being harmed by me.

Wrong. You're being disingenuous. You're not telling people the truth, you're going along to get along. Omission is lying, and by lying you're assisting in facilitating the biggest con game ever perpetuated on the people of the world. Worse yet, not only is this con game responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people, there's also the massive suffering and destruction that goes along with it. FRNs are the currency of the Death Cult.

Going along to get along with the Death Cult = harming others.

[midnight rambler]

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/061/348/awesome_thread.jpg

Which one is you, EE_?

[Hitch]

Wrong. You're being disingenuous. You're not telling people the truth, you're going along to get along. Omission is lying, and by lying you're assisting in facilitating the biggest con game ever perpetuated on the people of the world.

Give me a break and get off your high horse. What are YOU doing that is different from me? You use FRNs too! To say you don't, would make you a big liar.

Not ONCE have you ever explained how to live in our country without using FRNs. Not once. Because it's impossible. We are all stuck in the same corrupt system. The best we can do is limit our usage.

By your logic, it would be corrupt to even buy gold and silver. You'd be harming the person you bought it from. Do you mine all your own gold and silver? If not, you harm others.

[midnight rambler]

There are steps one can take in order to avoid being a Federal Reserve agent. One of those steps is full disclosure to the other party.

Have you read 12 USC 411? Congress established FRNs for one purpose and for one purpose only. Do you get it?

Precisely how one goes about it is a personal thing and it definitely can vary from individual to individual. What works for some may not work at all for others. The bottomline is, what is one's INTENT.

[Dogman]

Give me a break and get off your high horse. What are YOU doing that is different from me? You use FRNs too! To say you don't, would make you a big liar.

Not ONCE have you ever explained how to live in our country without using FRNs. Not once. Because it's impossible. We are all stuck in the same corrupt system. The best we can do is limit our usage.

By your logic, it would be corrupt to even buy gold and silver. You'd be harming the person you bought it from. Do you mine all your own gold and silver? If not, you harm others. Truly if this country was ran the way these guys here and elsewhere, dream of many people will be harmed.

It would/could turn into a survival of the fittest and quickest, there has not one example in history that a people have lived the way they want without falling apart.

Theory vs reality is a cold hearted bitch !

One general rule from the dawn of time is that any actions have consequences for the good and also for the very bad when dealing with people.

And in I suspect their dream world is the bigger gun rules.

Think "Road warrior" because people will group into like minded , for lack of a better word, "Tribes" !

Hell I remember back in the late 50's and for dam sure 60's during high school sports games , there ALWAYS was a fight!
And if you are from a rival town, better lay low, and GASP date a local girl. Because you seriously run the risk of having your ass beat.

Which is tribal in nature! And all of that was with normal rules and laws!

Think of a world with no rules or laws..

Mis dos centavos

[7th trump]

There are steps one can take in order to avoid being a Federal Reserve agent. One of those steps is full disclosure to the other party.

Have you read 12 USC 411? Congress established FRNs for one purpose and for one purpose only. Do you get it?

Precisely how one goes about it is a personal thing and it definitely can vary from individual to individual. What works for some may not work at all for others. The bottomline is, what is one's INTENT.

Ohhh bullshit.
And what is that one purpose that Congress has made for the frn that is mysteriously in 12usc 411?

[Ares]

Ohhh bullshit.
And what is that one purpose that Congress has made for the frn that is mysteriously in 12usc 411?


Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/411

[midnight rambler]

Ohhh bullshit.
And what is that one purpose that Congress has made for the frn that is mysteriously in 12usc 411?

I see at least two problems here:

1) someone is as fucking lazy as they come;
2) someone (acts like they?) cannot comprehend plain English

[7th trump]

I see at least two problems here:

1) someone is as fucking lazy as they come;
2) someone (acts like they?) cannot comprehend plain English

No seriously...Ive reproduced that statute many times (which you have never) on this forum. What mysterious language is in it?

You brought it up....now dont pull a palani by not answering...ohh wait a minute you already pulled a palani.

Hahahaha....its just so freaken humorous to watch these two goons doing the bait and then switch jewish trick.

[7th trump]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/411

You do realize theres three parts to that statute dont you? One doesnt relate to the other.

I guess you never looked up what a "reserve agent" is....huh!


Federal Reserve agent
noun
Definition of FEDERAL RESERVE AGENT
: the director who is designated by the board of governors of the Federal Reserve system as chairman of the board of directors of a Federal Reserve bank and who acts as official representative of the board of governors to the bank


The Federal Reserve Agent

The federal reserve agent must be a man of tested banking experience. As indicated by his other title mentioned above, he acts as chairman of the board of directors of the reserve bank and maintains the office of the board on the premises of the reserve bank. He makes regular reports to the Federal Reserve Board, and acts as its official representative for the performance of its functions. His compensation is fixed by the Federal Reserve Board but paid by the reserve bank. Subject to the approval of the Federal Reserve Board he may appoint assistants, who must likewise be persons of tested banking experience, and who assist him and act in his name and stead during his absence or disability. The assistants are put under such bonds as the Federal Reserve Board may deem necessary for the protection of the United States, and receive a compensation fixed by the Federal Reserve Board but paid by the reserve bank. The minimum bonds fixed by the Federal Reserve Board are $100,000 for the federal reserve agents and $50,000 for the assistant federal reserve agents, but the board of directors of the reserve bank may require higher bonds if they deem it desirable.

One of the most important duties of a federal reserve agent is to issue federal reserve notes to the reserve banks, holding gold and commercial paper against the issue of such notes and handling a portion of the gold settlement fund. These moneys, of course, reach into millions. The duties of the official may be described by enumerating the four departments among which the federal reserve agent of the New York bank has divided his functions, as follows:

Read more: http://chestofbooks.com/finance/banking/Banking-Principles-And-Practice-2/The-Federal-Reserve-Agent.html#.Vf9HxJdOncs#ixzz3mKIcoIuD

Nothing in there suggest any joe six pack now does it.
The only fools here is palani, midnight and anyone else who thinks theres more to 12usc 411....they all look for conspiracy to lie to you because they both would rather beleive a lie than any truth.

[Ares]

You do realize theres three parts to that statute dont you? One doesnt relate to the other.

I guess you never looked up what a "reserve agent" is....huh!





Nothing in there suggest any joe six pack now does it.
The only fools here is palani, midnight and anyone else who thinks theres more to 12usc 411....they all look for conspiracy to lie to you because they both would rather beleive a lie than any truth.

You make too many assumptions. I know what a Federal Reserve Agent is. The very clause itself says that no other use are authorized. So why is Joe Six pack using Federal Reserve notes when he is not authorized to do so?

[midnight rambler]

You make too many assumptions. I know what a Federal Reserve Agent is. The very clause itself says that no other use are authorized. So why is Joe Six pack using Federal Reserve notes when he is not authorized to do so?

Because he's been hornswoggled along with just about everyone else, and of course (pretty much*) NO ONE likes to admit they've been made a fool of.

*the term 'pretty much' in use as only one example -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh-7WQr_daM

[palani]

you hint that you, yourself, exist in this country without using FRNs. If you use them yourself, to buy food, pay bills, etc, then you admit that you are part of the problem.
That is true. But FRNs aren't used to buy things in a Common Law sense. There is no property ownership transferred. Instead you are involved in a trust relationship where you might have the use but not the usufruct. The usufruct is the enjoyment.

An FRN might be a corporate instrument but more likely it is a trust instrument. I do believe though you have to be a corporation or a corporate agent to handle them. That is how I deal with the situation. I let an LLC handle all corporate affairs concerned with trusts while I settle for the use of things the LLC provide.

This is not 'being part of the problem' but merely a tool to deal with the situation without a major confrontation with delusional people. You are free to return to Kansas at any time but even when you do you are likely to bump into folks who insist upon domicile in OZ.

[midnight rambler]

This is not 'being part of the problem' but merely a tool to deal with the situation without a major confrontation with delusional people.

I've found that some delusional people can be extremely dangerous when you bring to light their cherished delusions.

[palani]

I've found that some delusional people can be extremely dangerous when you bring to light their cherished delusions.

You only have to look at 7th_trump. He can't stand to have his delusions questioned. He has less intent to become enlightened than to defend his most cherished perspectives.

[palani]

My grand parents used frn's to pay off a farm back in the 60's. When they sold it to move back to southern Illinois they didnt have an existing farm mortgage that was never paid off...they used sale frn's to buy a nice little house and traveled.

So your logic doesnt compute.
Ponzi schemes work better when you buy in early.

http://www.bewilderedbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/donkey-and-carrot.jpg

[7th trump]

You make too many assumptions. I know what a Federal Reserve Agent is. The very clause itself says that no other use are authorized. So why is Joe Six pack using Federal Reserve notes when he is not authorized to do so?

Do you know what a semicolon is for?

[7th trump]

Ponzi schemes work better when you buy in early.

http://www.bewilderedbug.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/donkey-and-carrot.jpg

hahahaha.....coming from a guy that everyone on this forum knows is someone who doesnt answer direct questions related to his topics.

[palani]

hahahaha.....coming from a guy that everyone on this forum knows is someone who doesnt answer direct questions related to his topics.

I have no ownership of any topic. Feel free to be educated or entertained as the spirit moves you. I assume no obligation to either move you or to answer any of your questions.

[Dogman]

It is a hoot when a certain poster bites the bait ,hook , line and sinker!

That is certainly in the forefront in replying compared to others here!

When another certain member here has posted in replying to a thread topic!

Imagine that!

;D

Hoot!

Abbsorootly.

A huge grin!

[KenJackson]

Instead you are involved in a trust relationship where you might have the use but not the usufruct. The usufruct is the enjoyment.

I was SURE you just made that word up, but darn if it's not in Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/usufruct) (though Firefox's spell checker doesn't recognize it).

Are you guys a bunch of lawyers?

[Dogman]

I was SURE you just made that word up, but darn if it's not in Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/usufruct) (though Firefox's spell checker doesn't recognize it).

Are you guys a bunch of lawyers?

Let sleeping dogs alone, and not opening that particular can of worms!

;D

Sent from my Nexus 7

[midnight rambler]

Are you guys a bunch of lawyers?

Must you resort to pejorative language?

[midnight rambler]

Do you know what a semicolon is for?

Do you know what the term 'grasping at straws' means?

[7th trump]

Do you know what the term 'grasping at straws' means?

Apparently you dont when reading statute 12usc 411.
Heres a hint for you (since you dont have a clue) read the header of the statute and see what section that particular statute is in the title.
I ask because people dont look for peanut butter in the frozen food section.

For your education.


The semicolon or semi-colon
(;) is a punctuation mark that separates major sentence elements. A semicolon can be used between two closely related independent clauses, provided they are not already joined by a coordinating conjunction. Semicolons can also be used in place of commas to separate items in a list, particularly when the elements of that list contain commas.

Undoubtedly you are saying you cant properly understand plain English when reading a statute.


12 U.S. Code § 411 - Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

See there clown theres three (3) sections to 12usc 411. The publishers and Congress are telling you something about 12usc 411. Theres three independent sections to 12usc 411 that you cannot combine and think they are one.
But I'm guessing your soviet education didnt teach you that about English grammar nor how to read properly American law.

[Ares]

Apparently you dont when reading statute 12usc 411.
Heres a hint for you (since you dont have a clue) read the header of the statute and see what section that particular statute is in the title.
I ask because people dont look for peanut butter in the frozen food section.

For your education.


Undoubtedly you are saying you cant properly understand plain English when reading a statute.



See there clown theres three (3) sections to 12usc 411. The publishers and Congress are telling you something about 12usc 411. Theres three independent sections to 12usc 411 that you cannot combine and think they are one.
But I'm guessing your soviet education didnt teach you that about English grammar nor how to read properly American law.

Except for the minor fact that there are no semicolons in the actual text of the code.

Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.

The only place I see a semicolon is in the title of 411.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title12/html/USCODE-2011-title12-chap3-subchapXII-sec411.htm

[palani]

Theres three independent sections to 12usc 411
How can they be independent if they are referred to as '12 USC 411'?

[midnight rambler]

The only place I see a semicolon is in the title of 411.

And of course any serious researcher KNOWS that what is relevant is the text of the statute, NOT the title. The titles are often used to mislead since the titles are really of no real consequence and are often used as misdirection for the naive (aka the rubes).

[7th trump]

Isnt any coincidence that the only two guys that promote conspiracy fallacies and anti American/pro-communist propaganda cannot properly read the English language?

You stupid fools aren't "federal reserve agents".

This is just like Palani yapping his mouth off about coroners being the law of the land above the Sheriff office itself.....So I went and ask a Sheriff about it.....and behold the Sheriff said Palani is delusional. The coroners office is not above the Sheriff's office. The Sheriff will only look into a death when murder is suspected because the Sheriff isn't a qualified medical examiner like the coroner is.

Ares I suspect your intelligence level is do to being CtC'er where Pete Hendrickson is proven completely bat shit delusional in his interpretation of the tax code. Hence why hes spent two terms in the federal penetration and his wife is going in for her first stint in the federal pen.

You just cant fix some peoples delusional dogma.
You believe theres a conspiracy because that's what you want to believe and that's what you look for instead of the truth.

[7th trump]

And of course any serious researcher KNOWS that what is relevant is the text of the statute, NOT the title. The titles are often used to mislead since the titles are really of no real consequence and are often used as misdirection for the naive (aka the rubes).

What do you know about statutes.
Like I said people don't look for peanut butter in the frozen food section.
All 50 titles are written in such a way its easy to look up what you are needing to research...its in block form that a 3rd grader can understand.

[7th trump]

How can they be independent if they are referred to as '12 USC 411'?

You really are hell bent on showing everyone your intelligence level are you?

[Ares]

Ares I suspect your intelligence level is do to being CtC'er where Pete Hendrickson is proven completely bat shit delusional in his interpretation of the tax code. Hence why hes spent two terms in the federal penetration and his wife is going in for her first stint in the federal pen.

You just cant fix some peoples delusional dogma.
You believe theres a conspiracy because that's what you want to believe and that's what you look for instead of the truth.


Ummm, no. I'm asking where are you seeing the semicolon outside of the actual title of the code which summarizes the code itself?

Semicolon:



Rule 1. A semicolon can replace a period if the writer wishes to narrow the gap between two closely linked sentences.

Examples:
Call me tomorrow; you can give me an answer then.
We have paid our dues; we expect all the privileges listed in the contract.

Rule 2. Use a semicolon before such words and terms as namely, however, therefore, that is, i.e., for example, e.g., for instance, etc., when they introduce a complete sentence. It is also preferable to use a comma after these words and terms.

Example: Bring any two items; however, sleeping bags and tents are in short supply.

Rule 3. Use a semicolon to separate units of a series when one or more of the units contain commas.

Incorrect: The conference has people who have come from Moscow, Idaho, Springfield, California, Alamo, Tennessee, and other places as well.

Note that with only commas, that sentence is hopeless.

Correct: The conference has people who have come from Moscow, Idaho; Springfield, California; Alamo, Tennessee; and other places as well.

Rule 4. A semicolon may be used between independent clauses joined by a connector, such as and, but, or, nor, etc., when one or more commas appear in the first clause.

Example: When I finish here, and I will soon, I'll be glad to help you; and that is a promise I will keep.

http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/semicolons.asp

The only delusion is you seeing shit that isn't there. You still haven't even answered the question about what Joe Six Pack is doing with Federal Reserve Notes when he's not even authorized to have them?

[palani]

You really are hell bent on showing everyone your intelligence level are you?
Why would I desire this when it is much easier to expose your delusions?

[palani]

I went and ask a Sheriff about it.....and behold the Sheriff said Palani is delusional. The coroners office is not above the Sheriff's office.
Now that is laughable. I challenge you next to go to the county attorney and ask him why he holds the title when the office was abolished by constitutional amendment back in the '70s. If there is no office who does he represent?

You have to have a mind to reason. You have demonstrated that you have none. In OZ you would be the strawman.

[7th trump]

Now that is laughable. I challenge you next to go to the county attorney and ask him why he holds the title when the office was abolished by constitutional amendment back in the '70s. If there is no office who does he represent?

You have to have a mind to reason. You have demonstrated that you have none. In OZ you would be the strawman.

Only fooling yourself palani....only talking yourself into believing a lie.
Duties of a coroner and it varies with jurisdictions so no ....you're wrong. They might be in some instances being part of the sheriffs debt....but they are not above the sheriff.



Duties[edit]

Duties always include determining the cause, time, and manner of death. This uses the same investigatory skills of a police detective in most cases, because the answers are available from the circumstances, scene, and recent medical records. In many American jurisdictions, any death not certified by the person's own physician must be referred to the medical examiner. If an individual dies outside of his/her state of residence, the coroner of the state in which the death took place issues the death certificate. Only a small percentage of deaths require an autopsy to determine the time, cause and manner of death.

In some states, additional functions are handled by the coroner. For example, in Louisiana, coroners are involved in the determination of mental illness of living persons. In Georgia, the coroner has the same powers as a county sheriff to execute arrest warrants and serve process, and in certain situations where there is no sheriff.,[21] s/he officially acts as sheriff for the county. This is also the case in Colorado.[22] In Kentucky, section 72.415 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes gives coroners and their deputies the full power and authority of peace officers. This includes the power of arrest and the authority to carry firearms. In New York City, the office of coroner was actually abolished in 1915,[23] since before that time, having medical knowledge was not actually a requirement, leading to much abuse of position.[24]

[7th trump]

Now that is laughable. I challenge you next to go to the county attorney and ask him why he holds the title when the office was abolished by constitutional amendment back in the '70s. If there is no office who does he represent?

You have to have a mind to reason. You have demonstrated that you have none. In OZ you would be the strawman.
Hahahahahaha...........using a separate office to justify your coroners bullshit.
The games with you just don't stop do they nut case fallacy boy?

[palani]

Only fooling yourself palani....only talking yourself into believing a lie.
Duties of a coroner and it varies with jurisdictions so no ....you're wrong. They might be in some instances being part of the sheriffs debt....but they are not above the sheriff.

The war against the People started in 1868 (if not sooner). You are reading code and discussion of code as if it were fact when it is really the winning side re-defining history.

Government was established with checks and balances. The coroner is the check on the power of the sheriff.

You surely don't believe a sheriff has power of life or death over you ... do you? He has a superior and he has subordinates. His superior is NOT the county attorney because there is no such office. The office of coroner was established as a political rather than a medical office and the warring power in charge has morphed it over to being equivalent to a medical examiner.

But then I wouldn't care to burst your bubble. I expect you have no concept that there has been a war going on for over 150 years. You would rather collect those FRNs and commit fraud upon your fellow man. Just like any good agent of the Federal Reserve board doing his job ... as in Nuremberg.

[palani]

using a separate office to justify your coroners bullshit.

Ever stop to ask yourself WHY DID IOWA ABOLISH THE OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY IN 1971? Why was this amendment needed?

[7th trump]

The war against the People started in 1868 (if not sooner). You are reading code and discussion of code as if it were fact when it is really the winning side re-defining history.

Government was established with checks and balances. The coroner is the check on the power of the sheriff.

You surely don't believe a sheriff has power of life or death over you ... do you? He has a superior and he has subordinates. His superior is NOT the county attorney because there is no such office. The office of coroner was established as a political rather than a medical office and the warring power in charge has morphed it over to being equivalent to a medical examiner.

But then I wouldn't care to burst your bubble. I expect you have no concept that there has been a war going on for over 150 years. You would rather collect those FRNs and commit fraud upon your fellow man. Just like any good agent of the Federal Reserve board doing his job ... as in Nuremberg.

Hahahahahahaha..............then I have won that war.
I do not pay taxes that feeds the beast to wage war against the People.

You?
Yes, you do pay taxes, lost within the law and spread fallacy and conspiracy.....and help along the beast to wage war.

No the coroner is not the check on the sheriff.......a lot of coroners are part of the sheriffs debt/office..so your logic is again..........illogical!

I'm well aware of the war and, in fact, know the biggest hidden secret they are denying "The People".....their knowledge of how to be the People once again. The People have the power over the government..."US citizens" dont ...they are subjects.
Imagine the devastation the elite would have when the People rise up over the corporations and government that's kept them enslaved as US citizens?
That's a big secret to keep hidden from the population and one secret you don't want them to ever to knowledgable of.
You don't believe it because you're still going the direction of fools believing every damn conspiracy that hits your screen. Chasing phantoms is what you do best....and by the non-answers you give it appears you haven't been able to find or prove one yet.

[7th trump]

Ever stop to ask yourself WHY DID IOWA ABOLISH THE OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY IN 1971? Why was this amendment needed?

Nope...could careless about the coroner.
I have bigger things to research than the coroner. (I do have to ask though....why do you want to know about minute little things like that? Do you think theres an answer to one of your conspiracies hidden somewhere deep within the coroners office?)
Another thing here Palani.........not all coroners offices have been abolished...Iowa has state-wide so ....big deal. I mean really its on a state level...who cares!
Heres an idea Palani. Instead of just saying that....why not just give the answer to your question?
You know like the game show Jeopardy
It will make you look more intelligent instead of looking like the non-answering fool you've made yourself famous for.
Give it a try sometime!!

[palani]

I have won that war.
I do not pay taxes that feeds the beast to wage war against the People.
Do you believe the High Priest of the Federal Reserve pays taxes? Your admission is that you fit in the same category with HIM!!!


you do pay taxes
If I don't accept a FRN how could I possibly pay any tax?

[palani]

No the coroner is not the check on the sheriff.......a lot of coroners are part of the sheriffs debt/office..so your logic is again..........illogical!

http://i39.tinypic.com/2vaxlk2.jpg

[7th trump]

http://i39.tinypic.com/2vaxlk2.jpg

Hey imagine that a 1784 statute.....do you think it has much of anything relating to todays amended duties?
And again you leave out crucial information....which state and county does this 1784 statute apply to because most likely it doesn't apply nation wide.
Besides you yourself just said Iowa no longer has an office of coroner.

The games you play palani......don't tell all the truth and hide crucial information and then apply local jurisdiction as if its national jurisdiction.

I suggest you give up researching law Palani.....you aren't impartial enough to conclude a proper outcome (not truly honest at the core).

I didn't trust you after the second email between us years ago.

[palani]

which state and county does this 1784 statute apply to because most likely it doesn't apply nation wide.
If you had the ability to READ you would see Massachusetts in that bit of legislation.


Besides you yourself just said Iowa no longer has an office of coroner.
If you had the ability to REMEMBER you would know I made that statement about the county ATTORNEY.


I didn't trust you after the second email between us years ago.
If you had the ability to THINK I would be worried about this statement.