assault weapon ban again

[jhs5120]

.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

You just always go on weird tangents about the police and the DHS and government conspiracies, but I realize what your impression is of the federal government and "why" you believe they want to control firearm purchases. I just think you're wrong. With all due respect.

I'll sum myself up for you: Anti-corruption, freedom loving American. Oh, and I can't stand abuse of power and trust. CNN..........ah, never mind.

http://benswann.com/faith-in-police-...historic-lows/

Here I go on another weird tangent-only because after I logged out, and went to my homepage, this was right there in front of me:

http://news.yahoo.com/as-wars-wind-d...233505138.html

The fact of the matter is......I'm not making ANY of this stuff up. How can you say any of this stuff I link to is "government conspiracies"? I'm not writing these articles. Is it all a figment of my imagination? Is there no cause for alarm?

Sincerely, Clayton

[teetwoohsix]

CNN:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTWY14eyMFg



Sincerely, Clayton

[jhs5120]

.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

Did you just link a CNN video from 1990????

Sure did. Oh, my bad........fake then, but not now.

Sincerely, Clayton

[jhs5120]

.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

So are you saying the part written about Wanis Thonetheva is fake, or are you just going off on another tangent. I'm genuinely curious about the purpose of this random link........

" Going off on another tangent".......... if you don't get it you never will. Enjoy your brainwashing, you seem to enjoy it. By the way- you are obvious.

Sincerely, Clayton

[steve B]

Looks aside, the MRAPs are some very good multi purpose trucks. Ones that cost around 5-600,00 bought new.

Even one of the articles linked says they would be useful after a disaster like a flood or hurricane.

So what should the feds do? Scrap the surplus ones? Pay a load of money to essentially rebody them as less "scary" trucks? or simply give them as-is to police departments? (And probably eventually fire depts. and maybe some other emergency services)


Historical precedents?

A lot of early airmail was flown in Curtis JN-4 aircraft. Nearly all WWI surplus, sold for as little as $50. It became the basis for some following civilian aircraft, and since it was mainly a trainer, it was the first plane flown by many new pilots including some guy named Lindbergh who became a pretty good pilot from what I read.

The postal service also used combat aircraft, mostly bombers like the Martin MB-1

WWII surplus 5 ton trucks and Jeeps were put to a host of civilian and government uses. Park service, fire departments, Town public works, and much more.

Bostons Duckboat tours originally operated with restored WWII era vehicles, but has switched to modern replicas for ease of maintainance.

I'm not sure it's still policy, but at one time if you set up a non-profit museum focused on some aspect of the military the proper branch would let you apply for a piece of surplus equipment. That's how the tank Museum in Danbury CT started. It's an excellent museum by the way.

Steve B

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by steve B

Looks aside, the MRAPs are some very good multi purpose trucks. Ones that cost around 5-600,00 bought new.

Even one of the articles linked says they would be useful after a disaster like a flood or hurricane.

So what should the feds do? Scrap the surplus ones? Pay a load of money to essentially rebody them as less "scary" trucks? or simply give them as-is to police departments? (And probably eventually fire depts. and maybe some other emergency services)


Historical precedents?

A lot of early airmail was flown in Curtis JN-4 aircraft. Nearly all WWI surplus, sold for as little as $50. It became the basis for some following civilian aircraft, and since it was mainly a trainer, it was the first plane flown by many new pilots including some guy named Lindbergh who became a pretty good pilot from what I read.

The postal service also used combat aircraft, mostly bombers like the Martin MB-1

WWII surplus 5 ton trucks and Jeeps were put to a host of civilian and government uses. Park service, fire departments, Town public works, and much more.

Bostons Duckboat tours originally operated with restored WWII era vehicles, but has switched to modern replicas for ease of maintainance.

I'm not sure it's still policy, but at one time if you set up a non-profit museum focused on some aspect of the military the proper branch would let you apply for a piece of surplus equipment. That's how the tank Museum in Danbury CT started. It's an excellent museum by the way.

Steve B

You make some good points Steve, as always- but it's really a larger issue than just the MRAP's. It, to me, is the militarization of the police forces that scares me. They are calling returning veterans, people who are suspicious of centralized government, people who store food and water, etc. "potential domestic terrorists"! Read the 2012 NDAA sections 1021 and 1022. If you look at everything as a whole, it's a bit alarming to me. This amongst a lot of other things. Militarizing the police does nothing but instill fear in the public. In essence, they are bringing the war home and they consider the U.S. of A. a "battlefield" now. It's in the 2012 NDAA. And then you have all of the executive orders that have been signed that get no news coverage........all about controlling everything from food, water, travel, etc. These are not conspiracies, but verifiable facts.

I guess time will tell. I hope it's as innocent as you say- but I just don't see it.

Sincerely, Clayton

[jhs5120]

.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

From post # 235



Sounds like a conspiracy to me, but what do I know.

The second to last link I provided (a couple of posts back) SAYS exactly what you just quoted me writing in post #235. So, where is the conspiracy Jason? Did you even read the article? Is the DHS not part of the Federal Government? Nice try though.

Sincerely, Clayton

[jhs5120]

.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

You're posting articles written by conspiracy theorists on websites frequented by conspiracy theorists about conspiracy theories, and then you use these conspiracy theorist's conspiracy theory articles to provide support for the conspiracy theories that you are writing about on this forum.

Just because someone writes an article about a subject doesn't make it not a conspiracy theory.

So the last article I posted from Yahoo! is now considered a conspiracy theory? I see. I've came to the conclusion that I am wasting my time with you because it really doesn't matter to me if you believe me or not. You do your best to discredit me and attack my character-like you know me that well. This is usually what certain people do when you are destroying the credibility of a lie.

Think about it Jason- if we (the public) were given the truth all of the time, would conspiracies even exist? No, they would not. But, we are lied to, manipulated, and deceived on a regular basis. For example- the North Hollywood bank robbery shootout. Why was there no "conspiracy theory" there? Because it really was what it was.

If this conversation were making progress, I'd love to continue-but it's not and it won't. You believe what you want to believe, justify everything and enjoy CNN and whatever else you consider to be the truth.

Sincerely, Clayton

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

I've came to the conclusion that I am wasting my time with you because it really doesn't matter to me if you believe me or not.

Yes, you are wasting your time. You may as well be talking to a brick wall.

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

But, we are lied to, manipulated, and deceived on a regular basis.

Bingo! Just like the Benghazi incident was over a YouTube video. Just like Fast and Furious. Just like 'losing' all of Lois Lerner's emails.

But, Clayton, when you point out these lies, these people are so quick to say, "Bush lied about this. Bush lied about that. Blah, blah, blah..." They want to defend their political party, and by doing so try to deiscredit the other side. They're too blind and ignorant to see that we're being lied to not just by one party, but by both parties.

[jhs5120]

.