Darwinism at work in Michigan

[DrHenley]

I do not think it is Doc it appeared in multiple UK news and media sites.

Look at the sign in the middle of the picture. The original says "Heil Witmer". The PHOTOSHOPPED image says "Nuke Coronia Now". If that's not Photoshopping, I don't know what is.

 

[Mountain trapper]

I do not think it is Doc it appeared in multiple UK news and media sites. Below are the originals that were seen on Fox, Sky, Mail and Telegraph. I ADMIRE their great kit and their BALLS but there is a time and place..................... But hey ho as it has been pointed out its their guarenteed right to do this even though they feed the anti gun lobby more ammo to be used against them.

View attachment 10269

View attachment 10270

Haters are going to hate Bill, no matter what gun owners do. I for one am sick of people wanting to bend over for the gun haters in hopes that they would go easier on us. F$@k them.

 

[Mountain trapper]

Look at the sign in the middle of the picture. The original says "Heil Witmer". The PHOTOSHOPPED image says "Nuke Coronia Now". If that's not Photoshopping, I don't know what is.

I did hear, but didn't see, some swastikas and Nazi references at the Michigan protest. They were refering their governor as using Nazi tactics. Of course the fake news twisted it and said there were Nazis at the protest.

 

[DrHenley]

I did hear, but didn't see, some swastikas and Nazi references at the Michigan protest. They were refering their governor as using Nazi tactics. Of course the fake news twisted it and said there were Nazis at the protest.

Yep, I saw the reports about the swastikas but oddly none of those articles actually had pictures of them. They didn't want you to know the context - that would defeat their inference that there were Nazis there.

 

[GaRp58]

Skull Masks, Body armour, load bearing vests, tactical holsters, fully fitted AR15s ,

Take another real look at the pic Bill. The guy in front right is not even in the real photo. He probably just shopped his own pic into the original to have something for his facebook thread and look important...he was in the back of the group, but now in front...I don't know...I have a pic of my little brother standing in the doorway with G.W. Bush and another of my uncle with the same person on Air Force one. One of them is real and the other shopped. Wonder if you could tell the difference??? Slow down and get all the info before you label it as ammo. The leftys, commys, righteys and lots of wannabes will do **** like this just to get the sides riled up and laugh when the **** goes down...slow down dude---GP

 

[jontte]

just something, that swastika is the original,not the copy Adolf used and in my eyes that pic is quite badly photoshopped...

 

[tmttactical]

Happy to see some of the crowd did get fired up. The anti gunners are going to hate, no matter how we dress or present our views. The crowd was demonstrating against illegal action taken by their governor. The obvious hardware is sometimes needed to remind a government official that the people do have the means to forcibly remove a political hack. We don't need permission to install a suppressor on our high powered pellet rifle, they are not firearms. We don't need a license to buy any firearm, that are not full auto and we can get full auto if we are willing to pay the tax stamp and the huge cost for the weapon. In some states we may have to prove we used appropriate force but in most states, if they entered out homes uninvited, them leaving feet first is considered good form. You labeled these people "Morons" because YOU did not like their attire or armament. Being judgmental based on news you read from a bias political media, does not speak highly of your intelligence. You were not there, so obviously, you don't have a clue what went down there. If I believed half the stuff posted by the BBC, I would have to believe all you were illiterate wimps, that needed the Nanny state to lead you. Since you all finally voted to grow a pair and leave the E.U., I do know there are at least half of you all that grew a pair.

 

[noboat1]

Still doesn't change the fact that there were more than twice the average number of deaths in NYC between 3/4/20 and 4/4/20.

You can't believe those numbers, Cuomo is calling every death a coronavirus death in order to secure more federal funds.

 

[Brent S]

You must be getting your distortated view of these protesters from the BBC or some other fake news outlet. I saw the pictures on the news again today and didn't see any of the type of people that your describing here. Btw, these protests are growing every day.

Trump is openly encouraging them to.

 

[Mountain trapper]

Trump is openly encouraging them to.

Thats great to get his support.

 

[Brent S]

I do agree that we can’t stay boarded up forever. I think making masks mandatory, strict distancing and common sense need to be involved though. If we just reopen we will see the surge in deaths within weeks again. I’d be ok with opening tomorrow if more stringent health protocols were in place. One, we don’t have the masks yet, two the testing still isn’t near where it needs to be. We can’t even get toilet paper either....

 

[tmttactical]

I do agree that we can’t stay boarded up forever. I think making masks mandatory, strict distancing and common sense need to be involved though. If we just reopen we will see the surge in deaths within weeks again. I’d be ok with opening tomorrow if more stringent health protocols were in place. One, we don’t have the masks yet, two the testing still isn’t near where it needs to be. We can’t even get toilet paper either....

Sorry Brent, but I am not willing to give the government any additional power over my life. Yes I do social distancing, when I have to go out to pick up prescriptions. Yes I have masks and can even make crude masks. No, I don't want the government to tell me what I can or cannot do. We should have the right to decide what protocols we are willing to follow. The government should make the information available, make suggest /recommendation but it does not have the legal right to dictate to me what I have to do to leave my own home. if people are too stupid to follow the suggestion and get infected and die, then the gene pool will be improved. The government is not the Lord and Master of the public, they are the servants of the public. Open business and let the people make their choices. Let mother nature remove the stupid. The people have been informed and they--- not the government--- are responsible for those choices. Brent, you have the facts, why would your rush out and get exposed, just because the government opened business back up? You are not going to do anything reckless, so why do you need or want the government to get involved?

 

[Brent S]

Sorry Brent, but I am not willing to give the government any additional power over my life. Yes I do social distancing, when I have to go out to pick up prescriptions. Yes I have masks and can even make crude masks. No, I don't want the government to tell me what I can or cannot do. We should have the right to decide what protocols we are willing to follow. The government should make the information available, make suggest /recommendation but it does not have the legal right to dictate to me what I have to do to leave my own home. if people are too stupid to follow the suggestion and get infected and die, then the gene pool will be improved. The government is not the Lord and Master of the public, they are the servants of the public. Open business and let the people make their choices. Let mother nature remove the stupid. The people have been informed and they--- not the government--- are responsible for those choices. Brent, you have the facts, why would your rush out and get exposed, just because the government opened business back up? You are not going to do anything reckless, so why do you need or want the government to get involved?

I understand your point and don’t really care about people too stupid to follow common sense. I don’t want more rule from the government either. Except they aren’t just putting themselves at risk but are going to be exposing others that have existing health issues.

 

[tmttactical]

I understand your point and don’t really care about people too stupid to follow common sense. I don’t want more rule from the government either. Except they aren’t just putting themselves at risk but are going to be exposing others that have existing health issues.

Brent, I am one of those "Others" with existing health risks and NO they will not be able to expose me. I will not be hanging around those others. I will not be at the re-opened beaches or parks. I will not even be at my local rifle ranges, until things are back to a normal state. The actions of the stupid will not affect me, as I do not associate with the stupid. If the pandemic increases, then I will switch from my charcoal filtered masks to a full face respirator mask. We no longer eat any take out food. We do not grocery shop. as all our orders are delivered or are pick up. All delivered products are disinfected and we maintain a very high level of hygiene. While I do not wish any harm, even to the stupid, I don't want to surrender any of my rights and privileges to government control.

 

[DrHenley]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Before you talk about "constitutionality" remember that two of the goals of the Constitution were to Insure Domestic Tranquility, and to Promote The General Welfare. Now, how should the FEDERAL government achieve those two Constitutional Goals in this context?

 

[tmttactical]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Before you talk about "constitutionality" remember that two of the goals of the Constitution were to Insure Domestic Tranquility, and to Promote The General Welfare. Now, how should the FEDERAL government achieve those two Constitutional Goals in this context?

The federal government should provide information and suggest guideline BUT not impose it's will (politicians desires) on the American people. I don't need to be forced to wear a mask but if I am too stupid to wear a mask, then I get to take my chances. I don't need the government enforce social distancing, I practice that on my own and will not be in any crowd. Promote the General Welfare is done by providing facts, and making suggestions. Insure Domestic Tranquility is accomplished by stopping the influx of foreign travelers and illegal invaders from other countries. The fear of losing jobs, incomes, savings and on being put on the streets leads to domestic unrest. Food shortages lead to domestic unrest and must be mitigated before it upsets the tranquility of the public. Positive action, that provides improvement in the situation is welcome. Restrictive actions does not help the domestic tranquility. Provide access to more masks and test kits is a positive action. Issuing fines and arresting folks that do not fallow the wills of politicians, is a negative action. The positive action promotes domestic tranquility and is good for the general welfare but the negative action creates more rebellion and distrust of the government. The government has a big enough of a P.R. issue with the public, it does not need to impose it's dictatorial proclamations. Closing government building and parks is within their legal rights. Mandating people wear masks in public is just one step closer to be like the CCP. When the party (government) decides they must and can control your movement and attire, in the NAME of SAFETY, then you are no longer a free person or nation.

 

[KateMTx]

I don't need to be forced to wear a mask but if I am too stupid to wear a mask, then I get to take my chances.

The main reason to wear a mask is to protect others, not yourself. So your stupid will kill other people as likely as kill you, if you're one of the hidden infected.

 

[DrHenley]

The federal government should provide information and suggest guideline BUT not impose it's will

That's like saying the government should have guidelines about murdering people, but not impose it's will on anyone about it.

 

[Proud Prepper]

That's like saying the government should have guidelines about murdering people, but not impose it's will on anyone about it.

Nonesence, government can not infringe on your constitutional rights, unless it directly denies another's constitutional rights. Come on Doc, your comparing apples to fruit loops.

 

[Mountain trapper]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Before you talk about "constitutionality" remember that two of the goals of the Constitution were to Insure Domestic Tranquility, and to Promote The General Welfare. Now, how should the FEDERAL government achieve those two Constitutional Goals in this context?

Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are more about limiting the powers of government, not their taking total control of We the people.
I doubt very much that our Founding Fathers intended for the government to forcibly lock down our country, destroy our economy, ruin people's livelihood, our ability to earn a living and wipe out our life savings over the flu.
Making recomendations and suggestions is one thing, but doing it by force is another.

 

[DrHenley]

Nonesence, government can not infringe on your constitutional rights, unless it directly denies another's constitutional rights. Come on Doc, your comparing apples to fruit loops.

Am I?
If I have COVID-19 and cough on you, and you catch it and die, have I not killed you?

We are talking about preventing people from KILLING other people.

 

[DrHenley]

I'm not defending any particular action by anyone. I am just asking the question if the government has a constitutional duty to protect the lives of the citizens, how should they do that?

I believe my right to life trump's your "right" to infect me with COVID-10.

 

[tmttactical]

That's like saying the government should have guidelines about murdering people, but not impose it's will on anyone about it.

If I accidentally , through no negligence of my own, kill somebody, then I am not criminally liable. There are guideline regarding taking life and what qualifies as to what is murder, negligent homicide, manslaughter and self defense. Each of these guideline must be applicable before I am deprived of my liberties. Since there is no factual proof that the DIY face mask prevents the transmission of the virus. There is no government mandate to ware any specific type, quality or brand of face mask. There is no proof that everybody not wearing a face mask is a liability. If I am wearing a hand knitted porous handkerchief, with huge gaps in the weave, as a mask, I would be in compliance. That mask would NOT serve or provide any viable protection from me passing the infection to anybody else. So these face masks are not real protection and too many will rely on the face mask to help keep them safe. If I am in a residence where the virus is present, and I have it on my clothes, shoes, and hands, what good will a poorly improvised mask do? That is not a sufficient reason to lock me in my residence. Now what would be the public the response if they (the government) said you have to ware a full face respirator and a hazmat suit every time you left your residence and you must use a decontamination chamber before re-entry into your residence? From what I have read, that is the only real method to stop all transmission of the virus. So the question is, does the state have the legal right to infringe on your liberty to force you to wear a faulty protection item? If the general public wants to protect themselves, they are free to purchase the highest level of PPE gear. Again that is their choice and does not infringe on my person. If the state or the federal government wish to mandate real health protection, then it must also provide all the equipment and training needed to properly use the equipment for it to be effective. IF and that is a very big if, the pandemic is bad enough to trample on personal freedoms, then is is bad enough for those in charge to provide all the needed health equipment. Half azz response / mandates does not equate to the need to ignore peoples rights. If the equipment is not available, then make suggestion, find out why it is not available, determine how long it will be before the equipment is available but until it is available, the state does not get to deprive anybody of the their rights, for fake protection to look like they are doing something helpful. If it is needed to safe and to guard the nations health, then why are people who violate the gathering rules or fail to wear face masks not arrested for attempted murder or attempted manslaughter? Simple the arrest would be thrown out of court and resulting lawsuit would bankrupt the cities, counties and states. They issue fines (make money) and threaten jail but as far as i know they have not convicted and sent anybody to jail for violating the Executive Orders.

 

[DrHenley]

I repeat...

I'm not defending any particular action by anyone (or any particular government policy or order). I am just asking the question if the government has a constitutional duty to protect the lives of the citizens, how should they do that?

 

[tmttactical]

Am I?
If I have COVID-19 and cough on you, and you catch it and die, have I not killed you?

We are talking about preventing people from KILLING other people.

If you have Chin flu and know it and deliberately try to infect me, they you are guilty of the same crimes like the people that know they have HIV and deliberately infect other. If somebody has a casual affair and get HIV and the other party did not know they had HIV, then is is just your bad luck and no crime has been committed. That is the same with the China Flu. If you choose to go out into the public, then it is your choice how far YOU want to go to protect your self. Your concern for getting infected does not give you and or the government the right to trample on my rights.

 

[DrHenley]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/coronavirus-connecticut-doctor-deliberate-coughing-nurses
Coronavirus scare as doctor arrested, charged with coughing on nurses

 

[tmttactical]

I repeat...

I'm not defending any particular action by anyone (or any particular government policy or order). I am just asking the question if the government has a constitutional duty to protect the lives of the citizens, how should they do that?

No offense is taken DrHenley. Sorry if my crude writing style made it seem that way. The simple fact or answer is Yes and NO, they cannot trample on your individual rights to protect the masses. That would be like saying in a food shortage they get to pick who get's to eat. Everybody is free to take as many precaution to protect their health, as they see fit. Me and the wife, we stay home, do not eat any food we did not prepare. We purchased latex gloves, charcoal filtered masks and and even hunted down more hand sanitizer. We have our food and supplies delivered or do curb side pickup, where we don't even leave the car. We filled the car up March 20th. and it is still has 3/4 full tank. Those are some of our precautions but I don't want the government to mandate these methods for everybody. The government is a starving animal and your rights and tax money is it only food. The more we surrender of these items, the more it wants. The government does have a constitutional duty to protect the lives and freedom of its citizens but it must to both. It does not get to pick or choose what rights to protect and what rights to trample on.

 

[DrHenley]

It does not get to pick or choose what rights to protect and what rights to trample on.

Sure it does. It does it all the time. Telling my how fast I can drive my car is trampling all over my rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, LOL.

 

[tmttactical]

Sure it does. It does it all the time. Telling my how fast I can drive my car is trampling all over my rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, LOL.

Many a ticket has ruined my pursuit of happiness. During my youth, California set up traffic schools to enabling offenders to keep the traffic violation points off their records. At one point in time, I knew every instructor by name in the S.F. Bay area. In the beginning there was no limit to the number of times you could attend.

 

[Proud Prepper]

I'm not defending any particular action by anyone. I am just asking the question if the government has a constitutional duty to protect the lives of the citizens, how should they do that?

I believe my right to life trump's your "right" to infect me with COVID-10.

I disagree that on the premise that by anyone traveling or actions making a legal living not knowing or believing they have an infectious sickness, can do so without being liable in violation of anyone's constitutional rights. There must be malaise intent or reasonable negligence in my actions.

It's unconstitutional to force anyone not known to be infected, to do anything that violates there constitutional rights.

You would have to prove reasonable negligence for it to be a violation of your right to life. There are numerous supreme court rulings to support this.