- This topic has 150 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
svelte.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 6, 2009 at 3:09 PM #454466September 6, 2009 at 4:13 PM #453679
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]Where is the legislation that says it is illegal to own a gun in CA? I have one and do not recall seeing anything that was passed saying I could not have it?
Even if there was I would not give it up. Protect what is yours in any way you need to be it family or assets. Just deal with whatever comes of it afterwards.
This level of paranoia though is the beginning of a bottom. It does seem awfully risky to have your life savings at home, it could be stolen when you are not there.
Barry and the commies could decide to come take it from you the way they are heading. If it is beyond a certain amount they might deem it is more than what you really need, and somebody else more deserving might be able to use some of it.[/quote]
Chris: There is NO legislation in California criminalizing gun ownership. To the contrary, not only is gun ownership legal, but California is consistently one of the more conservative leaning states when it comes to protection of life and property and the use of deadly force.
If someone comes onto your property with the clear intention of causing you or yours harm, or trying to rob you, you can use deadly force.
During the Fallbrook fires, I was advised by both SDSO and CHP to use lethal force if I felt I was in danger from looters and they made it clear that anyone in a neighborhood they didn’t live in was a looter.
September 6, 2009 at 4:13 PM #453873Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]Where is the legislation that says it is illegal to own a gun in CA? I have one and do not recall seeing anything that was passed saying I could not have it?
Even if there was I would not give it up. Protect what is yours in any way you need to be it family or assets. Just deal with whatever comes of it afterwards.
This level of paranoia though is the beginning of a bottom. It does seem awfully risky to have your life savings at home, it could be stolen when you are not there.
Barry and the commies could decide to come take it from you the way they are heading. If it is beyond a certain amount they might deem it is more than what you really need, and somebody else more deserving might be able to use some of it.[/quote]
Chris: There is NO legislation in California criminalizing gun ownership. To the contrary, not only is gun ownership legal, but California is consistently one of the more conservative leaning states when it comes to protection of life and property and the use of deadly force.
If someone comes onto your property with the clear intention of causing you or yours harm, or trying to rob you, you can use deadly force.
During the Fallbrook fires, I was advised by both SDSO and CHP to use lethal force if I felt I was in danger from looters and they made it clear that anyone in a neighborhood they didn’t live in was a looter.
September 6, 2009 at 4:13 PM #454212Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]Where is the legislation that says it is illegal to own a gun in CA? I have one and do not recall seeing anything that was passed saying I could not have it?
Even if there was I would not give it up. Protect what is yours in any way you need to be it family or assets. Just deal with whatever comes of it afterwards.
This level of paranoia though is the beginning of a bottom. It does seem awfully risky to have your life savings at home, it could be stolen when you are not there.
Barry and the commies could decide to come take it from you the way they are heading. If it is beyond a certain amount they might deem it is more than what you really need, and somebody else more deserving might be able to use some of it.[/quote]
Chris: There is NO legislation in California criminalizing gun ownership. To the contrary, not only is gun ownership legal, but California is consistently one of the more conservative leaning states when it comes to protection of life and property and the use of deadly force.
If someone comes onto your property with the clear intention of causing you or yours harm, or trying to rob you, you can use deadly force.
During the Fallbrook fires, I was advised by both SDSO and CHP to use lethal force if I felt I was in danger from looters and they made it clear that anyone in a neighborhood they didn’t live in was a looter.
September 6, 2009 at 4:13 PM #454284Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]Where is the legislation that says it is illegal to own a gun in CA? I have one and do not recall seeing anything that was passed saying I could not have it?
Even if there was I would not give it up. Protect what is yours in any way you need to be it family or assets. Just deal with whatever comes of it afterwards.
This level of paranoia though is the beginning of a bottom. It does seem awfully risky to have your life savings at home, it could be stolen when you are not there.
Barry and the commies could decide to come take it from you the way they are heading. If it is beyond a certain amount they might deem it is more than what you really need, and somebody else more deserving might be able to use some of it.[/quote]
Chris: There is NO legislation in California criminalizing gun ownership. To the contrary, not only is gun ownership legal, but California is consistently one of the more conservative leaning states when it comes to protection of life and property and the use of deadly force.
If someone comes onto your property with the clear intention of causing you or yours harm, or trying to rob you, you can use deadly force.
During the Fallbrook fires, I was advised by both SDSO and CHP to use lethal force if I felt I was in danger from looters and they made it clear that anyone in a neighborhood they didn’t live in was a looter.
September 6, 2009 at 4:13 PM #454477Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]Where is the legislation that says it is illegal to own a gun in CA? I have one and do not recall seeing anything that was passed saying I could not have it?
Even if there was I would not give it up. Protect what is yours in any way you need to be it family or assets. Just deal with whatever comes of it afterwards.
This level of paranoia though is the beginning of a bottom. It does seem awfully risky to have your life savings at home, it could be stolen when you are not there.
Barry and the commies could decide to come take it from you the way they are heading. If it is beyond a certain amount they might deem it is more than what you really need, and somebody else more deserving might be able to use some of it.[/quote]
Chris: There is NO legislation in California criminalizing gun ownership. To the contrary, not only is gun ownership legal, but California is consistently one of the more conservative leaning states when it comes to protection of life and property and the use of deadly force.
If someone comes onto your property with the clear intention of causing you or yours harm, or trying to rob you, you can use deadly force.
During the Fallbrook fires, I was advised by both SDSO and CHP to use lethal force if I felt I was in danger from looters and they made it clear that anyone in a neighborhood they didn’t live in was a looter.
September 6, 2009 at 4:49 PM #4536844plexowner
Participantsome of the confusion about guns in CA comes from the ‘assault rifle’ related laws – there is a laundry list of firearms that are illegal in CA because they are classified as ‘assault weapons’ – things like bayonet lugs, muzzle flash guards and collapsible stocks can categorize a weapon as being ‘assault’
there are lots of legal firearms in CA – certainly enough for all of us to exercise our 2nd amendment rights
September 6, 2009 at 4:49 PM #453878Participantsome of the confusion about guns in CA comes from the ‘assault rifle’ related laws – there is a laundry list of firearms that are illegal in CA because they are classified as ‘assault weapons’ – things like bayonet lugs, muzzle flash guards and collapsible stocks can categorize a weapon as being ‘assault’
there are lots of legal firearms in CA – certainly enough for all of us to exercise our 2nd amendment rights
September 6, 2009 at 4:49 PM #454217Participantsome of the confusion about guns in CA comes from the ‘assault rifle’ related laws – there is a laundry list of firearms that are illegal in CA because they are classified as ‘assault weapons’ – things like bayonet lugs, muzzle flash guards and collapsible stocks can categorize a weapon as being ‘assault’
there are lots of legal firearms in CA – certainly enough for all of us to exercise our 2nd amendment rights
September 6, 2009 at 4:49 PM #454289Participantsome of the confusion about guns in CA comes from the ‘assault rifle’ related laws – there is a laundry list of firearms that are illegal in CA because they are classified as ‘assault weapons’ – things like bayonet lugs, muzzle flash guards and collapsible stocks can categorize a weapon as being ‘assault’
there are lots of legal firearms in CA – certainly enough for all of us to exercise our 2nd amendment rights
September 6, 2009 at 4:49 PM #454482Participantsome of the confusion about guns in CA comes from the ‘assault rifle’ related laws – there is a laundry list of firearms that are illegal in CA because they are classified as ‘assault weapons’ – things like bayonet lugs, muzzle flash guards and collapsible stocks can categorize a weapon as being ‘assault’
there are lots of legal firearms in CA – certainly enough for all of us to exercise our 2nd amendment rights
September 6, 2009 at 5:31 PM #453700Effective Demand
Participant[quote=BuyerWillEPB]@ Effective Demand.
The Fed is a Ponzi Scheme. The FDIC is out of funds. The Treasury Secretary thinks he is NOT a regulator (@16:00) and can’t even pay his own taxes…
And you think I’m the dupe?
Go back to your ‘love in’ at your california commune you shroom suckin’ left winger.[/quote]
A) Dupe, means duplicate post. Since we can’t erase posts I edited it and put Dupe in.
B) So if the Fed is a ponzi scheme why are you so proud you are protecting your US DOLLARS. After all they can print those at will.
As i pointed out before the FDIC insurance fund could be out of funds (they aren’t currently, the supposition is they could be in 2010) and that wouldn’t interfere with their ability to make good on bank deposits since they have a $100 billion LOC with the Treasury. Your opinion of the treasury secretary doesn’t change the fact that the FDIC still has the LOC.
Like i said, pulling your money out the bank make no sense having the opinions you clearly have. Dollars will be useless if what you think will happen, happens. Only guns, land, food and water would matter. Think nuclear winter or zombie apocalypse.
But yeah I’m the left wing hippy for pointing out, if your worried about what you are worried about… you are preparing for it wrong.
It is very hard (and expensive) to prepare for societal breakdown, since it hasn’t happened yet. Pulling money out of the bank really doesn’t do anything. I think reasonably prudent people can prepare for short stints (couple of weeks) of societal breakdown (earthquake, riots) and if something more happens well we are all screwed anyways.
September 6, 2009 at 5:31 PM #453893Participant[quote=BuyerWillEPB]@ Effective Demand.
The Fed is a Ponzi Scheme. The FDIC is out of funds. The Treasury Secretary thinks he is NOT a regulator (@16:00) and can’t even pay his own taxes…
And you think I’m the dupe?
Go back to your ‘love in’ at your california commune you shroom suckin’ left winger.[/quote]
A) Dupe, means duplicate post. Since we can’t erase posts I edited it and put Dupe in.
B) So if the Fed is a ponzi scheme why are you so proud you are protecting your US DOLLARS. After all they can print those at will.
As i pointed out before the FDIC insurance fund could be out of funds (they aren’t currently, the supposition is they could be in 2010) and that wouldn’t interfere with their ability to make good on bank deposits since they have a $100 billion LOC with the Treasury. Your opinion of the treasury secretary doesn’t change the fact that the FDIC still has the LOC.
Like i said, pulling your money out the bank make no sense having the opinions you clearly have. Dollars will be useless if what you think will happen, happens. Only guns, land, food and water would matter. Think nuclear winter or zombie apocalypse.
But yeah I’m the left wing hippy for pointing out, if your worried about what you are worried about… you are preparing for it wrong.
It is very hard (and expensive) to prepare for societal breakdown, since it hasn’t happened yet. Pulling money out of the bank really doesn’t do anything. I think reasonably prudent people can prepare for short stints (couple of weeks) of societal breakdown (earthquake, riots) and if something more happens well we are all screwed anyways.
September 6, 2009 at 5:31 PM #454232Participant[quote=BuyerWillEPB]@ Effective Demand.
The Fed is a Ponzi Scheme. The FDIC is out of funds. The Treasury Secretary thinks he is NOT a regulator (@16:00) and can’t even pay his own taxes…
And you think I’m the dupe?
Go back to your ‘love in’ at your california commune you shroom suckin’ left winger.[/quote]
A) Dupe, means duplicate post. Since we can’t erase posts I edited it and put Dupe in.
B) So if the Fed is a ponzi scheme why are you so proud you are protecting your US DOLLARS. After all they can print those at will.
As i pointed out before the FDIC insurance fund could be out of funds (they aren’t currently, the supposition is they could be in 2010) and that wouldn’t interfere with their ability to make good on bank deposits since they have a $100 billion LOC with the Treasury. Your opinion of the treasury secretary doesn’t change the fact that the FDIC still has the LOC.
Like i said, pulling your money out the bank make no sense having the opinions you clearly have. Dollars will be useless if what you think will happen, happens. Only guns, land, food and water would matter. Think nuclear winter or zombie apocalypse.
But yeah I’m the left wing hippy for pointing out, if your worried about what you are worried about… you are preparing for it wrong.
It is very hard (and expensive) to prepare for societal breakdown, since it hasn’t happened yet. Pulling money out of the bank really doesn’t do anything. I think reasonably prudent people can prepare for short stints (couple of weeks) of societal breakdown (earthquake, riots) and if something more happens well we are all screwed anyways.
September 6, 2009 at 5:31 PM #454304Participant[quote=BuyerWillEPB]@ Effective Demand.
The Fed is a Ponzi Scheme. The FDIC is out of funds. The Treasury Secretary thinks he is NOT a regulator (@16:00) and can’t even pay his own taxes…
And you think I’m the dupe?
Go back to your ‘love in’ at your california commune you shroom suckin’ left winger.[/quote]
A) Dupe, means duplicate post. Since we can’t erase posts I edited it and put Dupe in.
B) So if the Fed is a ponzi scheme why are you so proud you are protecting your US DOLLARS. After all they can print those at will.
As i pointed out before the FDIC insurance fund could be out of funds (they aren’t currently, the supposition is they could be in 2010) and that wouldn’t interfere with their ability to make good on bank deposits since they have a $100 billion LOC with the Treasury. Your opinion of the treasury secretary doesn’t change the fact that the FDIC still has the LOC.
Like i said, pulling your money out the bank make no sense having the opinions you clearly have. Dollars will be useless if what you think will happen, happens. Only guns, land, food and water would matter. Think nuclear winter or zombie apocalypse.
But yeah I’m the left wing hippy for pointing out, if your worried about what you are worried about… you are preparing for it wrong.
It is very hard (and expensive) to prepare for societal breakdown, since it hasn’t happened yet. Pulling money out of the bank really doesn’t do anything. I think reasonably prudent people can prepare for short stints (couple of weeks) of societal breakdown (earthquake, riots) and if something more happens well we are all screwed anyways.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.