UPS

Okay, if you all want to continue to drift, I'll go there.

RCW 9.41.220 Unlawful firearms and parts contraband. All machine guns, bump-fire stocks, undetectable firearms, short-barreled shotguns, or short-barreled rifles, or any part designed and intended solely and exclusively for use in a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or in converting a weapon into a machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, illegally held or illegally possessed are hereby declared to be contraband, and it shall be the duty of all peace officers, and/or any officer or member of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington, to seize said machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, or parts thereof, wherever and whenever found. [2019 c 243 § 4; 2018 c 7 § 4; 1994 sp.s. c 7 § 421; 1933 c 64 § 4; RRS § 2518-4.] Effective dates—2018 c 7: See note following RCW 9.41.010. Finding—Intent—Severability—1994 sp.s. c 7: See notes following RCW 43.70.540. Effective date—1994 sp.s. c 7 §§ 401-410, 413-416, 418-437, and 439-460: See note following RCW 9.41.010.

Okay, I'll play. Since when did the Revised code of Washington, Its legislature, its judiciary, become part of the chain of command of the armed forces of the United States or the state of Washington?

You may want to check your applicable state laws for this little gem.

I, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Nowhere in that is my state legislature, governor, Judiciary, identified as officers appointed over me.


unless...

...Some dolt thinks I'm going to uphold the The Insurrection Act of 1807 as presented by some left leaning demorat.

And before someone remembers me for the biased, contentious, surely, hypocritical, curmudgeon that I am. Yes I did tell one Australian to butt out because and only because they didn't have a dog in this fight. (nothing personal I assure you) . Otherwise if you are an American, born or naturalized, my oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic has not lapsed.

What this means is I will defend your rights to the death if necessary. It doesn't mean however that you are free to be an idiot without consequence. Remember also that your rights, freedom, and liberty end where they encroach on mine.

It's simple in theory and complex beyond belief in practice. Live, love, life. and all in it.

however

“I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I require the same from them.”

Just following the drift since the playground monitor hasn't sent anyone to the principals office, yet.
 
A republic (from Latin res publica 'public affair') is a form of government in which "supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives".[1] In republics, the country is considered a "public matter", not the private concern or property of the rulers. The primary positions of power within a republic are attained through democracy or a mix of democracy with oligarchy or autocracy rather than being unalterably occupied by any given family lineage or group. With modern republicanism, it has become the opposing form of government to a monarchy and therefore a modern republic has no monarch as head of state.

Democracy (from Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule'[1]) is a form of government in which the people have the authority to deliberate and decide legislation ("direct democracy"), or to choose governing officials to do so ("representative democracy"). Who is considered part of "the people" and how authority is shared among or delegated by the people has changed over time and at different rates in different countries, but over time more and more of a democratic country's inhabitants have generally been included. Cornerstones of democracy include freedom of assembly, association, property rights, freedom of religion and speech, inclusiveness and equality, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.
 
650Skull said:
A republic (from Latin res publica 'public affair') is a form of government in which "supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives".[1] In republics, the country is considered a "public matter", not the private concern or property of the rulers. The primary positions of power within a republic are attained through democracy or a mix of democracy with oligarchy or autocracy rather than being unalterably occupied by any given family lineage or group. With modern republicanism, it has become the opposing form of government to a monarchy and therefore a modern republic has no monarch as head of state.

Democracy (from Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule'[1]) is a form of government in which the people have the authority to deliberate and decide legislation ("direct democracy"), or to choose governing officials to do so ("representative democracy"). Who is considered part of "the people" and how authority is shared among or delegated by the people has changed over time and at different rates in different countries, but over time more and more of a democratic country's inhabitants have generally been included. Cornerstones of democracy include freedom of assembly, association, property rights, freedom of religion and speech, inclusiveness and equality, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.
Click to expand...
Majority rules is still 3 foxes and a chicken......
 
jetmechmarty said:
Last night, I watched a recent episode of Million Dollar Bogan. He’s an Aussie. He’s riding his Harley in California. He keeps talking about how everyone there is “packing heat”. He accidentally found himself at the entrance of a military installation. He described what the Marine sentry had as a “bazooka” (it was a shotgun). It’s all very interesting to see his take on it.
Click to expand...

Gotta remember these people, (like this), are playing up to the public to make their show more appealing than what it really is............If he says, (or states to get a reaction), he doesn't know the difference between a bazooka and shotgun and people believe him, it shows the gullibility if the people who watch.
 
kopcicle said:
Now, this is personal. You're Australian. You individually, collectively, or otherwise, gave up the right to keep and bear arms. You have no place in this discussion.






.
Click to expand...

I just wish that you, (and all of the other people who believe this), would do a simple search to find out this is not true in any way.

Was there a buy back and restrictions placed on types of guns allowed............yes

Was there some extra provisions on stand down periods between purchase and taking ownership..............yes

was there some added restrictions on criminals being able to own a gun...............yes.

Were all gun holders required to be registered.............yes.

Can anybody apply to purchase and buy a gun..............yes.

Have Australians, individually given up the right to own a gun or operate a gun...............NO

1996 there were 13% of Australians who owned guns and there were about 3.5 million guns in Australia

After the buy back there were about 2.5 million guns owned by about 8% of the population

Today there are 3.5 million guns in Australia owned by 8% of the population.

To say all Australians gave up their guns and rights when only 1/2 of the 13% of Australians who owned guns sold them to the gov't, ( and a lot of them hid their guns as well), in the first place is wrong because 87% of the population never owned a gun before 1996
 
650Skull said:
I just wish that you, (and all of the other people who believe this), would do a simple search to find out this is not true in any way.

Was there a buy back and restrictions placed on types of guns allowed............yes

Was there some extra provisions on stand down periods between purchase and taking ownership..............yes

was there some added restrictions on criminals being able to own a gun...............yes.

Were all gun holders required to be registered.............yes.

Can anybody apply to purchase and buy a gun..............yes.

Have Australians, individually given up the right to own a gun or operate a gun...............NO

1996 there were 13% of Australians who owned guns and there were about 3.5 million guns in Australia

After the buy back there were about 2.5 million guns owned by about 8% of the population

Today there are 3.5 million guns in Australia owned by 8% of the population.

To say all Australians gave up their guns and rights when only 1/2 of the 13% of Australians who owned guns sold them to the gov't, ( and a lot of them hid their guns as well), in the first place is wrong because 87% of the population never owned a gun before 1996
Click to expand...
Where in Aussie law does it state or affirm that you have a "right" to own a firearm?
 
46th Georgia said:
Where in Aussie law does it state or affirm that you have a "right" to own a firearm?
Click to expand...

If/when we become a republic them we will have a written constitution similar to the us. We don't have one now because all our rights are under Australian law based on the Westminster system. This gives us a the democratic freedom as pointed out in a previous post. Our right to owning a fire arm is that it is not, illegal to own one

"Cornerstones of democracy include freedom of assembly, association, property rights, freedom of religion and speech, inclusiveness and equality, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights."

Australia does swear allegiance to the queen. We are still a part of the commonwealth, (as is Canada), but it is basically lip service as we make our own laws, protect ourselves withe our own army/navy and England has no say what so ever in the running of the country or its laws..................Under our system the gov't has to adhere to a basic principle and if they cannot carry out their duties to that principal and loose control,and a request is asked of the Governor general, (the queens representative in Australia and appointed by Australia), can dissolve parliament and work with parliament till a satisfactory caretaker gov't is installed or elections held.

here is a search on the legality to owning a gun in Australia

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=is+it+illegal+to+own+a+gun+in++Australia&ia=web
 
650Skull said:
If/when we become a republic them we will have a written constitution similar to the us. We don't have one now because all our rights are under Australian law based on the Westminster system. This gives us a the democratic freedom as pointed out in a previous post. Our right to owning a fire arm is that it is not, illegal to own one

"Cornerstones of democracy include freedom of assembly, association, property rights, freedom of religion and speech, inclusiveness and equality, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights."

Australia does swear allegiance to the queen. We are still a part of the commonwealth, (as is Canada), but it is basically lip service as we make our own laws, protect ourselves withe our own army/navy and England has no say what so ever in the running of the country or its laws..................Under our system the gov't has to adhere to a basic principle and if they cannot carry out their duties to that principal and loose control,and a request is asked of the Governor general, (the queens representative in Australia and appointed by Australia), can dissolve parliament and work with parliament till a satisfactory caretaker gov't is installed or elections held.

here is a search on the legality to owning a gun in Australia

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=is+it+illegal+to+own+a+gun+in++Australia&ia=web
Click to expand...
So, parliament can vote to outlaw guns if it wishes. I'm glad our founders gave us a Republic.
 
I hadn’t poked my head in here since it started, I noticed it has been quite busy. I thought , boy people must really have a lot to say about UPS. 😄

kopcicle said:
“I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people and I require the same from them.”
Click to expand...

Great movie!
BDABE0B7-126B-4B95-98B9-516053A95F07.jpeg
 
The founders indeed gave us a republic, it is The Bill of Rights within the Constitution, however that protects the rights citizens cherish. Laws, even the Constitution, are still changeable. As Ben Franklin reportedly said: " A republic, if you can keep it."
 
jpdevol said:
The founders indeed gave us a republic, it is The Bill of Rights within the Constitution, however that protects the rights citizens cherish. Laws, even the Constitution, are still changeable. As Ben Franklin reportedly said: " A republic, if you can keep it."
Click to expand...
Right you are. We wouldn't have what we have today had it not been for those who refused the Constitution without the Bill of Rights.
 
Yes, 46th. I may have been confusing with the term "within"; it, as you infer, was the ratification process that brought about the Amendments.
 
jpdevol said:
Yes, 46th. I may have been confusing with the term "within"; it, as you infer, was the ratification process that brought about the Amendments.
Click to expand...
Many people complain about the glacial like speed that a constitutional amendment requires for passage. It's supposed to be that way, plenty of time for debate and to allow cooler heads to prevail, Our founders were geniuses.
 
jpdevol said:
They also spent a lot of time in Taverns - must have been good guys!
Click to expand...
I love reading the writings of our founders. Truly amazing men. One of these days I'm going to read the journal of Joseph Plumb Martin. I believe it is the only journal known to exist written by a Revolutionary War soldier. I've read several journals written in the 1860's during The War Between The States, and they can be a difficult read as certain phrases and words are not common today, not to mention the formality of Victorian Era English.
 
Back
Top