How about a federal permit to purchase?

[0to60]

We are, are we?

So, when we rounded up thousands of peacable Japanese and held them in internment camps through the duration of WWII, your parents? grandparents? they were in charge of that, were they?

I wasn't around at the time, but I'm guessing very few american citizens disapproved of this. Japan attacked us. We were at war. It was a precautionary measure. I don't find this to be an example of oppressive gov't in the slightest bit.

Any old timers listening? Did you think the gov't was going against our wishes in this?

 

[ngnrd]

Rounding up its citizens and forcing them into internment camps for no other reason than because the government doesn't trust them is the DEFINITION of oppression and tyranny. The Japanese government attacked us, not Americans of Japanese heritage. And it shouldn't matter if the population at large agreed with it. The US is not supposed to be a mob-rule democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic. There is no place for witch hunts here.

The fact that you don't understand this basic concept of government tyranny is a giant red flag regarding your views.

 

[beatledog7]

Oppression of the highest order.

 

[BullfrogKen]

Wow. You just don't get it, do you?


Imprisoning people because their grandparents originated from Japan. . . Many of those people were second-generation, American-born citizens.

Doesn't matter if 98% of the population asked for it to be done. Americans have basic human rights, and imprisoning them with zero due process simply because they were of Japanese heritage is a gross violation of human rights.

We were at war with Germany and Italy at the same time. We didn't round them up for mass-arrest and internment because they were armed. The Japanese were not, and their culture conditioned them not to question authority. That's what blindly trusting your government gets you.

 

[PavePusher]

My suggestion: A Federal Permit to post silly ideas on the Internet. Surely that's reasonable and responsible, right? Right?!

 

[PavePusher]

I wasn't around at the time, but I'm guessing very few american citizens disapproved of this. Japan attacked us. We were at war. It was a precautionary measure. I don't find this to be an example of oppressive gov't in the slightest bit.

Any old timers listening? Did you think the gov't was going against our wishes in this?

Tyranny... it's O.K. if it's the public's wish? H.F.S.

I don't find this to be an example of oppressive gov't in the slightest bit.

My jaw just hit my combat boots. :banghead:

 

[0to60]

My whole point is that the gov't bides by the voters wishes. The japanese being rounded up in camps does not contradict that. Whether you think it was tyrannical or not isn't the question. My premise was simply that the gov't isn't some separate entity from the people. It is a subset of the people, elected to make policy that represents those same people.

If you think it was mean of us to round them up, I applaud your compassion. That isn't the point, though.

 

[MistWolf]

You want me to beg permission from the government to exercise my rights? No. What other rights will I have to beg, hat in hand to exercise? What rights shall my children have to beg for? What other rights are YOU willing to beg the government to exercise and what are you going to do when they tell you no?

 

[BullfrogKen]

You just don't have a concept of the rule of law, or how a Republic works, or an understanding of inalienable rights, do you?

Mean? It was a gross violation of human rights to round up yellow families and put them in a prison camp for years. Those actions are not a matter open to public debate or popular vote.

Our educational system really has dropped the ball when you can't see the wrong in behavior like that. Honestly there is no reason for me to continue the conversation with you when you don't feel outraged over a government abuse of human rights like that. It makes me shudder that you think it's OK.


This should serve as a lesson that not all gun owners are on the same side.

 

[armoredman]

Yes, your state has been doing just fine, with the exception of your congresswoman being shot in the head by the exact type of person that I'm talking about.

Wow, you ARE getting desperate, going for that one time we had a Congresswoman shot by a crazed murderer WHO PASSED A BACKGROUND CHECK just fine. How many high profile murders have there been in un-utopian Chicago, IL; do you really want to go there? Goodness gracious, the phrase about people in glass houses comes to mind.

Do you guys REALLY believe that felons' rights to guns should be protected? Do you guys REALLY think that we shouldn't be trying to prevent psychopaths from getting guns?

So saying I want to protect civil liberties means I want criminals and psychopaths to get guns illegally. That is the single most twisted jump of illogic I have ever heard. Are you really this far off in left field that you truly believe we here wish to arm criminals? I work in prison, kid, I KNOW what kind of people are out there on your streets. I carry a gun because I have stared in the face of Evil, and Evil gets out on parole next Tuesday, to a parole office near you.
I think I have listened to this troll long enough, have a nice day.

 

[0to60]

You just don't have a concept of the rule of law, or how a Republic works, or an understanding of inalienable rights, do you?

Mean? It was a gross violation of human rights to round up yellow families and put them in a prison camp for years. Those actions are not a matter open to public debate or popular vote.

Pretty much anything is open to public debate.

The supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the internment camps in 1944, so maybe the interpretation of inalienable rights is subjective?

I agree, there is no point in continuing the conversation, but not because we disagree. Discussing and debating is the spirit of a forum like this, and a perfect example of exercising the 1A.

 

[beatledog7]

The supreme court upheld the constitutionality of the internment camps in 1944...

Which proves only that we can't trust SCOTUS either.

 

[PavePusher]

My whole point is that the gov't bides by the voters wishes. The japanese being rounded up in camps does not contradict that. Whether you think it was tyrannical or not isn't the question. My premise was simply that the gov't isn't some separate entity from the people. It is a subset of the people, elected to make policy that represents those same people.

If you think it was mean of us to round them up, I applaud your compassion. That isn't the point, though.

Did I miss something? Did they run a poll of public opinion? I do know the government propaganda machine was in full-court-press at the time. I believe some of the phrases were "jap menace" and "yellow peril". That does not equate to the popular will of the people.

But you have justified slavery, segregation, restricting women and blacks from voting, and many other violations of Rights, on the basis of "will of the people".

One of the founding principles of this nation is protecting the Rights of the minority. That's why we are a Representative Republic, not a straight Democracy.

 

[PabloJ]

Which proves only that we can't trust SCOTUS either.

The 'internment camps' were NON-event. Not so long ago Slobodan Milosevic used the "winning formula" of ethnic pride, nationalism ,..... to organize starvation camps and shoot certain groups into mass graves while whole of Europe did next to NOTHING.

 

[Al Thompson]

Time to say "Good night"....