[Huckleberry]

Gun registration is such a BAD idea on so many levels…

First:
You have armed service members, 10’s of millions of them that feel the same way as this guy:
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-902515

Second:
You have media outlets such as these clowns posting your address in the newspaper so that criminal elements can come to your house, kill you and steal your guns. Then instead of the guns being in safe hands, they ARE now being used for lawlessness.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/02/16305432-ny-newspaper-that-outed-gun-owners-hires-armed-guards?lite

Third:
As livinincali stated on this thread:
http://piggington.com/ot_repeal_the_2nd_amendment#comment-224303

“The bills rights was primarily adopted to prevent tyranny of government. The colonists had just fought a revolution war against perceived acts of tyranny (I.e. taxes without representation). Almost everything in the bill of rights is a check and balance against acts of tyranny by the government. Free speech, rights to bear arms, protection against unwarranted search and seizure, etc. Obviously we’ve been pretty far removed from a tyrannical government but should we really give up those checks and balances because of a small percentage of criminals.

Honestly what’s the first thing you would do if you were a dictator that wanted to push the US to a hard core socialist/communist government? Remove the guns so the producers couldn’t realistically fight back. Then you start removing protections of search and seizure and free speech. Basically everything in the bill of rights would be quickly removed because those are the primary checks and balances to oppose your takeover.”

Gun bans work well for tyrants. They worked well for Hitler, Stalin and Chairman Mao, to name just three.

Gun haters and gun control advocates need to give SERIOUS consideration to these “proposals” they put forth. The unintended consequences have a high potential to come back around and bite them just as badly (if not worse) as the gun owners.

In a serious calamity (martial law, gov’t tyrannical takeover, etc.) a gun owner most likely will not have any interest in protecting a non-gun owner as they probably will not trust them to not “squeal” to the authorities. This in hand may lead to the non-gun owners being lead to slaughter, as they have no means of defending themselves, and nobody to defend them…

If you want to stop/severely hinder gun violence, wake-up! Get rid of the banksters, their puppet-politicians and all gun-grabbers; allow CCW (concealed carry) arm teachers and ban gun-free zones.

[Huckleberry]

Specifically because of this post, I joined a new shooters group so as to strengthen my Second Amendment rights!

http://www.meetup.com/The-San-Diego-Shooters-club/photos/1220752/

[Huckleberry]

Is your primary a non-recourse or recourse loan?

How about you investment property loan?

[Huckleberry]

Regarding more firearm laws…

Another failure of “gun-free zones”! The answer? More of the same of course! We have over 20000 gun control laws already on the books, and that’s just at the federal level. These incompetently-written laws of course fail miserably to reduce crime, but their failures are a feature, not a bug. They provide the rationalization for gun-haters to come back demanding more, every time.

If gun control laws reduce shootings, why are all the worst cesspools of violent crime located in cities and states that have had the most draconian anti-gun laws in the nation on the books for decades? …and how dare you demand that the rest of us share in the misery that gun-control proponents have conned those poor people into accepting!

Why are such a vast majority of mass killings perpetrated in these “gun-free zones” — schools, theaters, shopping malls, where the victims can do nothing but wait to be shot down like animals? It’s a simple question, but I’ve never witnessed an anti-gun person even attempt to answer it.

Did you hear about the mass shooting at the local gun show last weekend?

Yeah, neither did I.

Shame on you for supporting this demagoguery.

[Huckleberry]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=SD Realtor]Your entire premise appears to be based on a belief that we will return to the way things were. I don’t think that is true at all. Your argument about a return to 2004 levels to me is not solid. I think it is safe to say that the 2004 economy was robust but for the wrong reasons, (see a housing boom fueled by unrealistic pricing and artificially low rates). This is not about any republican candidate at all. It is about the current level of spending and the lack of economic growth, not about increased revenues.[/quote]

No, my premise is drops. And how a few drops can go a long ways.[/quote]

Excellent points SDR. The 2004 economy was smoke and mirrors consumer debt/lending driven, not a solid industrial driven economy.

Drops may make some difference but not enough to get us out of the new hole that has been dug, especially if/when interest rates rise…

[Huckleberry]

[quote=Huckleberry][quote=SD Realtor]Agreed with CAR and Flyer, it has nothing to do with material objects. The one thing that I do not agree with in the article has to do with the presidential candidates. To me there really is no way to eliminate the change. I don’t think a Romney or Obama candidacy will make a difference. The acceleration of poverty, food stamp enrollment, differential between rich and poor has grown substantially under Obama. Similarly Wall Street has recorded phenomenal profits. Regardless of who is president the numbers are way way to staggering to change what will happen.[/quote]

This post is exactly why I posted this discussion topic:

http://piggington.com/ot_cloward–piven_strategy_obamademocratic_strategy_for_socialist

I have a sneaky suspicion higher powers are at work to really bring the system in line with what the oligarchs envision as full power and control over the masses.

Maybe I’m a bit paranoid, but I would rather be suspicious and prepared than being blindly led to slaughter.[/quote]

[Huckleberry]

[quote=SD Realtor]Agreed with CAR and Flyer, it has nothing to do with material objects. The one thing that I do not agree with in the article has to do with the presidential candidates. To me there really is no way to eliminate the change. I don’t think a Romney or Obama candidacy will make a difference. The acceleration of poverty, food stamp enrollment, differential between rich and poor has grown substantially under Obama. Similarly Wall Street has recorded phenomenal profits. Regardless of who is president the numbers are way way to staggering to change what will happen.[/quote]

This post is exactly why I posted this discussion topic:

http://piggington.com/ot_cloward–piven_strategy_obamademocratic_strategy_for_socialist

I have a sneaky suspicion higher powers are at work to really bring the system in line with what the oligarchs envision as full power and control over the masses.

[Huckleberry]

[quote=no_such_reality]Newsflash, we are a socialist country.

Medicare – socialist program.
Medicaid – socialist program.
Obamacare – socialist program.
Social Security – socialist program.
VA medical coverage – socialist program.
Public Education – socialist program.
50 Years of defense spending – socialist program.

It’s not a question of are we socialist or not, it’s just a matter of degree.

I’m already paying France level taxes, I want France level safety net![/quote]

I agree that we are already well on our way to a full socialist state.

What are Piggs forecasts of what our system will look like in 20 years? Are we talking about wealth confiscation? Or, just wealth erosion through mass inflation? And/Or, Mass taxation from higher income groups to fund all the social programs and MASSIVE gov’t? Or…??? What other scenarios am I missing and what will the impact of them be on those of us trying to fund our retirements?!?!

[Huckleberry]

[quote=spdrun]Conspiracy theories as usual. Obama isn’t any more of a Socialist than 75% of Americans. Affordable, portable health care, regardless of employment status or company size, is a good thing for *capitalism.*[/quote]

Have you heard of this strategy, researched it, and have knowledge of it? Why are you so quick to debunk it?

If you understand it’s premise and correlate it to current policy you can see many parallels…

Then, project forward if the same policy themes are continued, what we may end up with in 10-15 years…

[Huckleberry]

Here’s the link to the article:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49555671

[Huckleberry]

[quote=SD Realtor]Noo Obama did not… at least I doubt it. However it is his guy Eric Holder who oversaw it (it being the entire organization) … and then gave some bs story about knowing about it or not knowing about it (Fast and Furious) …

Is Obama responsible personally for the fiasco in Libya and the ensuing cover up attempt? Maybe or maybe not… but these are all his people. The fact that his administration couldn’t get the story straight, trying to pawn off a terrorist attack on a you tube video… I mean really… If your gonna stick it in my -sss at least give me a reach around.

I guess in the end if he did not personally do it he should not be held culpable in any way.[/quote]

spdrun, this is for you too…

This article hammers home my point about Obama (and his policies) and his administration being the drivers of this behavior and these sorts of acts.

There just IS NO disputing it!

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-10-17/obama-pursuing-leakers-sends-warning-to-whistle-blowers

[Huckleberry]

[quote=spdrun]Because Obama personally ordered the ATF agent fired. Yeah.[/quote]

Thanks for confirming…

[Huckleberry]

Yea, if this isn’t the furthest thing from “change” and “hope”, I don’t know what is…

[Huckleberry]

[quote=flu]Pretty soon, if we see a 30year below, 3% that will be ridiculously cheap…[/quote]

Do you really think the 30 yr. will get down to 3%? What are the realistic chances of that happening?

I will wait to research refi rates if we really think they will continue lower.

[Huckleberry]

Is Absolute Mortgage a good company to get a refi through?

[Author]

Posts