Here I am

Who do you trust?

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

President Bush Please Say It

You Missed America!!

As I watched the news, and as the story of flight 93, and it's crash in Pennsylvania, it occurred to me, as it did to many of you, I'm sure, that something went wrong. Phone calls confirmed that people on board were determined to take things into thier own hands, and were going to try to stop the bad designs.



I think it's time that we begin to start trusting. We're going to have to trust each other. The government needs to trust it's people, and the people need to begin to expect and offer trust in each other.



We need to be trusted to defend ourselves, to make efforts to save ourselves, and to use our own judgement in our lives. If only, and those words run cold in my blood, - if only - the good men and/or women on that plane could have defended themselves. 2 citizens, on 2 planes, excercising judicious care, and a constitutional right, could have saved them all. One good and brave soul, armed, and all or most of those dead would not now be. Is this a risk we should take in the future?



Isn't it still true, that government must derive it's powers by the consent of those governed? And for that to be true, must it not trust those people with the power of life and death as well? I can think of no other right so precious, as the right to live, to defend your own life and those of your family, neighbors, friends, countrymen.



Isn't now, the time when real leaders would tell us to turn to our neighbors and friends, and understand that we must take on the responsibility of saving each other? Anti-gun laws have not been demonstrated to solve crime... but I see one horror, one horror I yet cannot grasp because of it's size and breadth... that could have been averted.



A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.



Wasn't that - the security of a free state - what the amendment meant? Wasn't it for those times when resonsibility for safety and lives rested upon the people, that Amendment Two came to be? If not then, it was the single most fortelling sentence written in the last 300 years.



In the days that famous document was written... The "Militia" was any citizen who would stand and answer the call to fight for thier friends, neighbors, family, on a volunteer basis. And now we see the most incredible example of that. A story so gripping it has shut down a nation - and because we forgot how to make a FREE state secure - to give power to it's people.
 
I trust my neighbor.

I don't know if Mike keeps any firearms or not. I hope he does. I hope that if I ever dial his number with a 911 panic, that he'll come and shoot the intruder that's interupted my life. I hope he trusts me enough to make the same call to me, if necessary.



Cops are good people, and they try to be on time, but a criminal's never late.



IMHO, a CCW permit should be sufficient for the carry of one's own firearms, knives, etc. onto any public conveyance.



Sure, a would-be hijacker will just keep his nose clean long enough to obtain one himself, but he won't feel so secure wondering which total stranger is "Passenger 57" will he?



Plato: "A well-armed society is a polite society"
 
Originally posted by Power Wagon

[B



We need to be trusted to defend ourselves, to make efforts to save ourselves, and to use our own judgement in our lives. If only, and those words run cold in my blood, - if only - the good men and/or women on that plane could have defended themselves. 2 citizens, on 2 planes, excercising judicious care, and a constitutional right, could have saved them all. One good and brave soul, armed, and all or most of those dead would not now be. Is this a risk we should take in the future?



Isn't it still true, that government must derive it's powers by the consent of those governed? And for that to be true, must it not trust those people with the power of life and death as well? I can think of no other right so precious, as the right to live, to defend your own life and those of your family, neighbors, friends, countrymen.



Anti-gun laws have not been demonstrated to solve crime... but I see one horror, one horror I yet cannot grasp because of it's size and breadth... that could have been averted.



A story so gripping it has shut down a nation - and because we forgot how to make a FREE state secure - to give power to it's people. [/B]



amen to that.



our right to carry should not be infringed, ANYWHERE.



a good deterant to keep evil people from doing evil deeds.



mm
 
A person, with a background check, clearance, and every type of screening could be given a federal CCW. Fingerprint, picture, and all online accessible. No terrorist will get that.



And federal CCW permits obligate you to respond to national and local emergencies. "Citizens" of the highest order and obligation.



I'm tired of being a victim or watching others be a victim. REAL TIRED.
 
the ability to carry should be national, openly or concealed.



vemont style. no permit required. why ask permision to excercise your God given rights.



there should be no place that right should be restricted.



the ultimate detterant to crime.



mm
 
...such a strange contrast...

Originally posted by muddymess

the ability to carry should be national, openly or concealed.



vemont style. no permit required. why ask permision to excercise your God given rights.



there should be no place that right should be restricted.



the ultimate detterant to crime.



mm



The same state that has such a simple firearms law, which, in terms of political flavor, we'd classify as "very conservative", also has that same-sex "civil union" thing... . :confused:
 
Re: ...such a strange contrast...

Originally posted by rich m





The same state that has such a simple firearms law, which, in terms of political flavor, we'd classify as "very conservative", also has that same-sex "civil union" thing... . :confused:

one good law, and one sick and disgusting law.
 
Heck, we have to be able to carry guns in Vermont. After 2pm you can't find a cop/trooper/sheriff/etc. My town and most surrounding do not even have a police department.



BUT, you know what, we don't have much crime either. :) Wonder why??



As to the other thing most Vermonters are not so proud of...



Vermonters have a rich history of fierce independance.



Vermonters have a very unique form of independance. "you do your thing and I'll do my thing" To that end, of all the states I've lived in, this is probably the most 'tolerant' of alternative lifestyles because of this independance thing.



Unfortunatly some out of state VERY financially influencial folks realized that the civil union thing might work here if they twisted it into the politicians and probably loaded their campaign war chests too.



The majority that supported the law our now out of office and the Governor who signed the bill has announced he will not run again.



The vermont lawmakers did not follow the will of the people and we are slowly attempting to take vermont back. I doubt the law will ever get changed, but at least those lawmakers know we are not pleased.



The law extends protection to same sex civil unions but clearly excludes heterosexual couples from creating such a non-marriage union. Thus the same sex couple can for example extend death benefits to each other and enjoy other protections under the law but a heterosexual couple can't.....



Regardless of where you stand on the same sex thing, this is a discriminatory law.



==

sorry, you got me on my soap box!
 
Last edited:
...some lawyer work should be free of charge...

Originally posted by David_VT

The law extends protection to same sex civil unions but clearly excludes heterosexual couples from creating such a non-marriage union. Thus the same sex couple can for example extend death benefits to each other and enjoy other protections under the law but a heterosexual couple can't.....



Regardless of where you stand on the same sex thing, this is a discriminatory law.



==

sorry, you got me on my soap box!





Since it's discriminatory, some Atty. @Law needs to present it to the Supreme Court of Vermont, and have it declared Unconstitutional, and stricken from the record... These "special interest" groups sometimes get their special rules, but when they're worded in such a manner as that, they deserve only to be rescinded... . rm
 
Back
Top