Is there a section in the books stating that n if so can u post it for me thanks.
Actually most of the breeding in an elk herd is accomplished by the spikes that stay with the cows/calves until they drop their horns a second time. That's why there are limitations in most states on taking spike bulls. You might try asking a wildlife biologist about that. As for a right that was not granted by the 2nd Amendment why was it written and insisted upon? A little common sense here. The King's men were confiscating guns, so the right did not exist - it had been usurped by the tyrant and his henchmen.
I have guided on game ranches, and believe me, most of that meat goes to Hunters for the Hungry because the city studs are only interested in the head and horns.
BTW, the firearms the 2nd Amendment protected were muzzle-loading flintlocks...everyone should have one so that they can be a part of their local militia...just saying'. Having manned a crew-served automatic weapon in combat, and having carried a somewhat illegal Thompson because it was the best close range weapon I could get my hands on I can safely say I understand weaponry. If you think you can hunt deer or elk with an AR or an AK you might want to check with your local game officer about that.
As for the gun industry the NRA is their best shill for ramping up sales. Every time Wayne LaPierre's hair catches on fire sales skyrocket - a couple of years ago it was almost impossible to find .223 primers because of the rumor started that the Gov't was buying up all the .223 ammo. I'm not for repealing the Second, but I do think we need to build in a little common sense about assault weapons. I have WWII military arms - several of them, but in the case of two of them I need to be about 500 meters away to level the playing field with the AR/AK crowd. If you continually live in fear, WarHead you should perhaps go spend some time in a place where there is a war and know what real fear is. It ain't here.
You fools! Bringing a rifle to fight an Apache! Ask Ruby Ridge!
Three glocks versus a Bradley. You people are under full spectrum control. I am controlling you right now. This is a police state, which is good. There are a lot of tweekers going around. Your guns are ineffectual against tyranny. Tuna fellatio.
Per Odin..." If you think the Second Amendment is about hunting, you are dramatically mistaken."
Odin brings up a very good question. My question to Odin, ok, what is the Second Amendment about?
My argument as to why we should repeal this amendment is that it was originally about protecting the rights of citizens to arm themselves as a militia, keeping the militia, or military at that time separate from the government, enabling the citizenry to protect themselves from a oppressive government.
This is clear in the Second Amendment and the amendment from the Virginia constitution from which the Second Amendment was modeled from.
It was an issue important to those at that time, as they sought liberty from an oppressive monarchy.
The Supreme Court and those who oppose gun legislation have made it clear, the need for a militia separate from the government is no longer necessary, therefore that part of the Second Amendment can be ignored, it is not necessary.
So, since that is no longer the purpose, I argue, there is no longer a purpose for the Second Amendment.
What we now have is a constitutional protection on a privately manufactured and privately marketed product. We have no such protection for any other privately manufactured and privately marketed products.
I think this is wrong, it has helped the gun manufacturers and retailers to reap in huge profits.
This is not the purpose of our Constitution or our Bill of Rights, to give such constitutional protections to privately manufactured and privately marketed products.
Therefore, in my humble opinion, the Second Amendment should be repealed.
I went to high school with Gene. We get together each year for a class reunion and talj about him. We, the class of Fonda-Fultonville High School 1968 would love to see this case solved and justice served.
The term "trophy hunt" is indeed a loaded term, meaning different things depending on who you ask and the circumstances in which it is used.
We should start with defining a "trophy". Basically, it is any part of an animal which is kept for purely decorative and memory purposes. Tusks, horns, antlers, etc kept on a wall are a prime example of trophies. Trophies are not bad thing, as I will explain in a minute.
As Odin stated, trophy hunting in its worst form is when the animal is taken merely for the trophy bits and the rest of the animal is not used. And this is what most people think of when they here the term "trophy" associated with hunting.
Now let's go to the other end of the trophy hunt spectrum. If a hunter takes an animal and uses nearly every bit of the animal including meat, hide, and bones, but keeps an antler for a memento, perhaps it was the first hunt with a child or the first such animal taken, or maybe just to remember a great hunt, then by definition they have kept a trophy and by extension the person is a trophy hunter.
Those that practice the former are very rare and are generally considered unethical at the least and quite possibly criminal.
Most hunters fall more towards the latter end of the spectrum. If you go into the home of most hunters, you will find at least one such trophy. As author, hunter, and TV personality Steven Rinella opines, these trophies are usually more to remind the hunter of the event than they are to brag to people about how great a hunter they are.
Hmmm, maybe there's another behind the scenes cabal germinating here...who drinks wine or beer?
Gentlemen, we have something of a consensus building. Joel, even though you refer to yourself as a conservative the projects you propose to support are the very ones that have been torpedoed by the "too much debt, too many regs, too much tax" group in DC who identify just as you do. If ONLY we could have a level playing field and a free market economy. As the world economy stands right now we are about as far from a free market as we could possibly get and still call it that with a straight face. You and rms are spot on with regard to cronyism and money politics.
I absolutely agree that our first priority should be infrastructure and public concerns, including safety AND health. If that sounds too progressive then recap the numbers of emergency room visits and costs for the 20 odd million folks who now have insurance that did not have it before. It's not a perfect system but it's a start. I have advocated for dismantling the terminally broken VA Health Care System since 1991 - I wrote then President George H W Bush that veterans could all benefit from a system that has been in place for retired military for decades. It's called Tri-Care for Life, and it served my parents extremely well until they died. Obviously some tweaks would have to occur to allow for means, disabilities, combat tours, and a multitude of other things I'm sure someone will toss into the pot, but it could be done, and it really wouldn't be all that difficult. I would have had to ride a bus 300+ miles to have a hangnail taken care of by the VA if I depended on their system.
About our once amazing city...I caddied for a couple of months at the Broadmoor in the early 60's - actually made more than my father who was an Air Force LTC. The heavy hitters (not of the golf ball) were all there - the Tutt/Penrose cabal, the Holly Sugar types, and so on. I was young and failed to see how things worked, but I also lived in one of the early centers of the oil world in West Texas and was old enough to see how the real world operates just about everywhere. Money politics is not new, it is pervasive, and too often is passed from generation to generation. Tax breaks for the rich, made possible by redistricting everything in favor of the play for pay crowd (think Tom Delay in Texas), are self-sustaining. The first tax break that W signed put $50K directly into Cheney's pocket.
Of course big money wants TABOR to go away - they want all taxes for the rich to go away - "taxes are for the poor", ala the French monarchy sycophants. The Koch Brothers want the employer's contributions to Medicare, Social Security and Unemployment Insurance to go away because it would increase their bottom line. But it isn't being a good citizen or a contributing member of our society.
In general terms, we all agree to some extent. The next step is finding that courageous person to step forward into the fray and run the gauntlet of public scrutiny - don't look at me!
I can agree with part of Joel's arguments but I do not agree TABOR benefited the State and certainly is a double whammy for COS. Colorado Springs in under not just the State Tabor Law but this community also liked the idea so much they voted in a local Tabor law besides.
There is nothing in Tabor to adjust for unplanned environmental catastrophe like the Waldo Canyon and Black Forest Fires. Then it is comical for me to watch our highly conservative right wing no tax pledge officials break their necks trying to be the first in line for Federal funds to help them respond and recover.
There is mismanagement at all levels of Colorado Springs Municipal and El Paso County funds - the spoils going to the faithful. The stormwater enterprise was determined by the courts to be a legal and appropriate fee which did not need the vote of the so called "people" to be collected. The week willed Council decided to repeal it to make their "people" happy. Unless we decide to bring in some sustainable form of revenue the continued deterioration of our region is a foregone conclusion.
PS TABOR is absolutely needed. Look at who's most in favor of getting rid of it (when they're not pretending to be conservative in front of the electorate): Big business. Oh they'll never admit they want it repealed--just "tweaked." Big government politicians and their corporate sponsors were the most outspoken against the original passage of TABOR. They want their puppets and rubber stamps to be able to take more of the the people's money and give it to them. TABOR at least puts the people in the middle of that process.
My suggestion? Government focus on government things: public works, public safety, parks and creating an environment with an even playing field that allows the free market to flourish. That means no cozy relationships between government officials and contractors or developers. That means no government picked winners and losers. Everyone plays by the same rules and nobody gets special favors. Unfortunately that doesn't happen here--far from it. Our city is rife with cronyism and special relationships with special sectors and special companies and special donors. Try to do business without their say so here? Good luck! I heard it over and over again from businesses owners who told me in confidence, worried that if they were to say so publicly they'd lose market share from the legalized cabal. My solution? Voters look at campaign finance and experience of candidates when voting. Get the big money obligations out of decision making and elect people that will represent the interests of their constituents and not their donors and who are smart enough to know the difference amidst all the whispering in their ears about "what's best" and who have courage to do it when it's hard. I am a conservative--as constitutionally conservative as you can get, but I've also seen it up close and personal those professing certain conservative values and principals who will forget them at the first hint of any conflict, any threat of a donation for the next campaign not coming in or a nasty editorial. You see the same thing with liberals professing certain values and abandoning them--look at Clinton looking the other way for human rights violations after a big donation to the CGI comes in. Moral courage is needed and it is a rare find. In Colorado Springs, people from the Republican side tend to get elected. That's only because of the demographic. If the cabal needed democrats to get their hands on taxpayer money they'd pretend to be democrats. Guaranteed.
BTW - I'm a 'he'
Voila! A real discussion. Thanks you for the references...I will do my due diligence. If I read between the lines correctly, TABOR = good for the community/state; corrupt government = bad for everyone except those who line their pockets. I'm still skeptical about limiting government's ability to raise revenue. The entire issue about debt has been mischaracterized as a liberal/democrat/progressive phenomenon. Since C Spgs is none of those, nor is its elected government, then who is to blame for the misuse of "dedicated" tax funding?
I wholly agree that the real problem is not how much money there is, or how it is raised as revenue, but the ease at which the scamsters are able to get in the middle and skim off money for their buddies. An argument I also had with my father once upon a time about voting Democratic was that he posited the Democrats would raise taxes and give all the money away. My retort was that if I elected Republicans they would steal all the money and give it to their friends. Perhaps the most glaringly obvious example of that would be the Iraq War and Halliburton's rise from the ashes of a bad acquisition with a huge asbestos liability and Cheney's ability to select himself as Vice President, of course. How different is the political spectrum now?
When I built municipal works in Colorado Springs we were held to an unforgiving contract and schedule. When I did DOD work it was a budget line item in the Congressional Appropriations Bill that passed prior to the construction. RFPs had been sent out and evaluated, and Federal edict required the contract to go to the lowest bidder. I can tell you from personal experience that that is not a fun place to be...but you keep working. When I built apartments in Colorado Springs the building code here was the most strict I had ever encountered, and I worked in at least eight different state jurisdictions and easily 3 times that many local jurisdictions. My first building did what no other first inspection had done for that particular inspector - it passed on the first walk-through.
You have given me some good source material for research. The origin of the bill in Douglas Bruce's less than integral hands gives me cause for pause. I would have you do a very quick check on spending by administration on the national level beginning with President Eisenhower. Also look at tax structures during those administrations, and corresponding interest rates. As far as "tax and spend liberals" are concerned we come up looking pretty good, economically speaking. There's a whole lot of hot air blowing around out there.
So, why has Colorado Springs' revenue surpassed growth? You might be able to answer that question, but why has the infrastructure not kept up with that revenue growth? That answer lies in the hallowed halls of government. I think that big venue and big box developments are driven by a whole bunch of folks who get mailbox money from the government and can spend it prolifically - most of them did 20 - 30 years of service - I get mine from battlefield/combat injuries. Either way, I don't pay tax on that income, nor do they. And they are your most reliable voter block.
TABOR passed under the most forgiving Constitutional provisions for an amendment in the country. I'm discouraged that it may be harder to amend the Colorado Constitution after November, but only because we didn't kick TABOR out the door before it becomes more difficult to do it. I actually agree with the suggested amendment because it is a lot more representative. Like Citizens United, TABOR needs to go.
I like the idea of spending within my means. It makes sense for me and my personal life. But the State (broad term) is not a business, and has responsibilities that reach far beyond what my meager efforts to right the ship are doing. Iraq and Afghanistan put us deep in the hole economically. A bill that was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by a Democratic President (I'm still mad - 2008 cost me about $600K) allowed the American banking system to bet my money on spook financial instruments, and we still haven't prosecuted the offenders. I guess the synopsis is this: government is here for all of us, and downturns be damned - life continues on and we all have to dig deep. If it means kicking all the bastards out and reorganizing the current way things are done, then so be it...but at the same time we need to maintain continuity.
What do you suggest? You obviously have been engaged in the process, but I need solutions.
Read TABOR in the State Constitution. Also look at the explosion of State and City revenue since the passage of TABOR. The City doesn't build the roads--the developers are required to do so in new developments. They build them with poor quality because it's cheaper for them and in two years the City takes over the responsibility. That's in City code. The warranty period was reluctantly changed from one year to two years even though nationally it is recommended to be 5. DOD Work is nothing like municipal work. When the DOD runs out of money congress can just go into more debt and they do.
I know that money is mismanaged because I was on City Council for two budget cycles and have looked in detail at the giveaways for non-essential items. For starters I would refer you to the City's budget pages. Specifically to the Consolidated Annual Financial Reports (https://coloradosprings.gov/finance/page/c…) Pay particular attention to "COP" payments of debt for the USOC HQ and at Sales and Property TIF paid to the URA and the DDA. All tolled--over $10 million per year.
Also look at the unspent budget for roads over the last 5 years by over $1 million. Visit also the Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority budget reports (http://pprta.com/library/financial-reports…) look at "final financials" over the last several years and see the City's routine failure to spend millions per year that is allocated to roadway maintenance.
Lastly, look at the total revenues of the City and its percentage of growth exceeding any population growth. At the State level revenues have skyrocketed despite TABOR. Citizens seem willing to be duped repeatedly into voting for tax increases will be spent on what they're promised to be spent. TABOR mandates that vote comes directly from the citizens and not just politicians, but the same problem with PR money passing the measures exists as for political campaigns.
I don't dispute that politicians continue to be elected from both sides of the political spectrum who are more beholden to their campaign donors than to the welfare of the City and the citizens they represent. It's a national epidemic. Campaign dollars win elections. Pure and simple. The electorate responds to dollars spent and those willing to spend the dollars will get what they want. Period. Until the electorate goes beyond signs, billboards, TV commercials and radio ads in deciding their votes, it's a hopeless endeavor to change it.
As for your comment about the statewide problem, I would say that the same thing is occurring. The legislature has passed giveaways for their donors repeatedly. Look at the explosion of the State's Office of Economic Development and International Trade. They have no accountability and give away money like it's candy to well-connected interests such as the movie subsidies and the developer-backed Regional Tourism Act that has pledged hundreds of millions in state revenues for things the government should not be paying for. As a result, less revenues make it to role-of-government budget lines like infrastructure.
I liked this because you are so far off base it's funny. If growth in the community was the intent, why did the infrastructure not keep pace? The reason you cite as shoddy quality construction is a direct function of a limited budget (artificially limited by TABOR, I might add) making it necessary to skimp on contracts, designs and execution of public works. I did some DOD work, and I did some municipal work in my 40+ years as a contractor. It's all still standing. In economic downturns life still goes on. People still have needs and problems and the function of government does not change.
I'm interested in where you find your information about how the city officials mismanage our tax dollars (your tax dollars, actually - I visit the city regularly, but I don't live there...I do pay sales tax, however). I would welcome your numbers, but I would also remind you that the electorate continues to keep or move these players into office and continue the broken status quo. I question that there is any meaningful consideration for population growth - since the infrastructure desolation is pretty much statewide, with every agency crying the blues.
شكر كبير لDR.AGBEBAKU الرجل الذي ساعدني عندما كان مريضا جدا، وكان لي وزوجي حيث بفيروس نقص المناعة البشرية وابنتي الصغيرة ذلك أيضا، ولدي محاولة كل ما عندي ممكن أفضل للحصول على الشفاء ولكن لم أستطع الخروج مع أي شيء، أنا من الكونغو متزوج ويعيش في الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية لقد ذهبت إلى مستشفى آخر ولكن لا يوجد علاج، وعندما اكتشفت أنني لم أفقد عقلي بسبب التفكير سوف يموت قريبا، أبلغت أسرتي في بلدي، وقدم سيئة ولكن أخبرني عن علاج في أفريقيا، أعطوني الاتصال DR.AGBEBAKU، اتصلت به وسألته ما يمكن القيام به بالنسبة لي للحصول على الشفاء، وقال لي ماذا أفعل، وماذا يكون المطلوب للعلاج، أنني يجب أن تعطي تفاصيل الدخول إليه والرجل طلب لبنود علاج ط وزوجي قدمت كل ما له مساء ذلك انه اتصل بي وقال لي ما يجب القيام به بعد أسبوعين أنا وزوجي ذهب للاختبار و ونحن حيث جاءت سلبية، على مقربة من خمسة أشهر حتى الآن لم الاسبوع أنا لا أذهب لاختبار لمجرد أن يكون هناك بالتأكيد أنا بخير، ولكن كل ما يظهر النتائج انا بخير تماما، ويمكنك الكتابة له الآن من خلال email@example.com أو يدعوه على +2349035850834 أو إضافة له على موقعه ما عدد التطبيقات في +2349053099479.
"One of the great flaws in TABOR and in the TaxedEnoughAlready Party's argument is that there is no consideration for population growth, and no planning for economic downturns that affect the gross economic product of the state economy."
Dear sir/ma'am: you are incorrect. TABOR allows growth in revenue for population growth and inflation. What it does NOT account for is the fact that City government has diverted City dollars (collected for infrastructure and public safety) for not-in-the-role-of-government things like helping developers build retail outlets and housing developments, museums and stadium and pet projects for favored campaign donors. It also doesn't anticipate that developers and contractors will build shoddy quality roads and stormwater infrastructure and hand it off to the City to fix after a two-year warranty period. In economic downturns, TABOR demands that government lives within its means. Spending choices of elected officials have mandated that being done by turning off street lights and letting park grass die, because they chose to hand over existing revenues to the USOC and the URA and other crony interests and must continue paying on them even in lean years. Happy to provide numbers to you.
God Bless Andrew Wommack Ministries. Andrew Wommack is truly a man of the Lord and the residents of woodland park may not welcome it now but this Bible college will be nothing but a blessing to the people there. I hope to one day be a student at Charis.
One of the great flaws in TABOR and in the TaxedEnoughAlready Party's argument is that there is no consideration for population growth, and no planning for economic downturns that affect the gross economic product of the state economy. This is extremely short-sighted and selfish and is handing our children and their children an infrastructure mess they may not be able to fix. Without a solid infrastructure there can be no solid economic growth, or even modest opportunities for those who will follow us.
All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation