n'Gun Control and Silencers 06 08 2015
You would buy a silencer from a gun store. And you need to file some paperwork and pay a fee per my understanding.
But the people who run the gun stores seem very nefarious to me. Long unkempt hair, fat bellies, tattoos etc.
Which brings me to my next point. If you are buying it from someone like that why would you ever need to pay those fee's and do that paperwork?
Lets say a woman was raped and went batty crazy from the trauma. She wanted a silencer to protect herself?
(A) Now I know that women have been statutory raped by police officers.
A woman like that is in a real bad spot isn't she!
The gun store owner looks at her and starts giving her the swine mouth runaround. He might even ask her out on a date. He might even see to it that there are reasons why she has to come back to the store.
What is my point with those above sentences? That is exactly the type of person your gov doesn't want to have a silencer! But it is exactly the type of person our Constitution has the Right to keep and bear arms in it for!
What if a single woman worked for a man who demanded she have sex with him or he would fire her. He knows she can't make her rent payment and will be homeless otherwise. Are there people like that? They are everywhere!
Could I construct a small crossbow that could be wielded from under a raincoat whereby the limbs and string where enclosed in a hard cover so that I could be walking along the street with it in my label and quickly pull it out to kill an attacker? Yes I could and I just invented something else I will never make a dime from. But what is the point? That crossbow is virtually silent. Actually something like that would be very nice to have in the woods for turkey or deer hunting because the string is enclosed there is less chance of fouling on brush!
There I said more than enough again. More than I should have. But I still have a right to.
Any Supreme Court justice or president that doesn't make the law consistent to our Constitution is indeed guilty of treason.
******'
A woman comes from France marries an American and takes him for everything he has including house and home. That is a woman that should be deported and forced to give back everything including house and home.
******'
A wealthy man comes from a country that tortures. He should have to pay a wealth tax of 100% before being allowed in the United States or if he wants to stay in the United States.
When an expost facto law really isn't one? When it involves foreigners and corruption. It is just asserting how things should be and were violated. What it really means is that your Constitutional rights were denied to you because of oversight negligence.
It is like hey look this person is violated our Constitutional rights and we don't have known laws or interpretation of known laws to stop it. In that case an expost facto law isn't one. It really means that someone violated our laws by making loopholes. And that was indeed what caused The original Declaration of Independence!
The Declaration of Independence was in effect an Expost facto law telling the bad people to "GET OUT!"
Thomas Paul Murphy
Copyright 2015
Originally published on 06 08 2015 at: www.themilwaukeeandwisconsinnews.blogspot.com
With regard to Paragraph (A) above; what kind of a "network" does that create? Is it connected to the banking system? So you have 2 people in it and there has to be more in it. So you have a network. I can't articulate it better than that right not, but I just don't like it. It is something that needs to be taken more seriously, investigated, and all the participants need to leave this country.
You would buy a silencer from a gun store. And you need to file some paperwork and pay a fee per my understanding.
But the people who run the gun stores seem very nefarious to me. Long unkempt hair, fat bellies, tattoos etc.
Which brings me to my next point. If you are buying it from someone like that why would you ever need to pay those fee's and do that paperwork?
Lets say a woman was raped and went batty crazy from the trauma. She wanted a silencer to protect herself?
(A) Now I know that women have been statutory raped by police officers.
A woman like that is in a real bad spot isn't she!
The gun store owner looks at her and starts giving her the swine mouth runaround. He might even ask her out on a date. He might even see to it that there are reasons why she has to come back to the store.
What is my point with those above sentences? That is exactly the type of person your gov doesn't want to have a silencer! But it is exactly the type of person our Constitution has the Right to keep and bear arms in it for!
What if a single woman worked for a man who demanded she have sex with him or he would fire her. He knows she can't make her rent payment and will be homeless otherwise. Are there people like that? They are everywhere!
Could I construct a small crossbow that could be wielded from under a raincoat whereby the limbs and string where enclosed in a hard cover so that I could be walking along the street with it in my label and quickly pull it out to kill an attacker? Yes I could and I just invented something else I will never make a dime from. But what is the point? That crossbow is virtually silent. Actually something like that would be very nice to have in the woods for turkey or deer hunting because the string is enclosed there is less chance of fouling on brush!
There I said more than enough again. More than I should have. But I still have a right to.
Any Supreme Court justice or president that doesn't make the law consistent to our Constitution is indeed guilty of treason.
******'
A woman comes from France marries an American and takes him for everything he has including house and home. That is a woman that should be deported and forced to give back everything including house and home.
******'
A wealthy man comes from a country that tortures. He should have to pay a wealth tax of 100% before being allowed in the United States or if he wants to stay in the United States.
When an expost facto law really isn't one? When it involves foreigners and corruption. It is just asserting how things should be and were violated. What it really means is that your Constitutional rights were denied to you because of oversight negligence.
It is like hey look this person is violated our Constitutional rights and we don't have known laws or interpretation of known laws to stop it. In that case an expost facto law isn't one. It really means that someone violated our laws by making loopholes. And that was indeed what caused The original Declaration of Independence!
The Declaration of Independence was in effect an Expost facto law telling the bad people to "GET OUT!"
Thomas Paul Murphy
Copyright 2015
Originally published on 06 08 2015 at: www.themilwaukeeandwisconsinnews.blogspot.com
With regard to Paragraph (A) above; what kind of a "network" does that create? Is it connected to the banking system? So you have 2 people in it and there has to be more in it. So you have a network. I can't articulate it better than that right not, but I just don't like it. It is something that needs to be taken more seriously, investigated, and all the participants need to leave this country.
No comments:
Post a Comment