Those *dangerous* Korean War relics

Saw this clip today about a derelict 1950's era AA gun sitting in some
guy's yard near DFW airport. "Concerned individuals" (i.e. dimwits)
called the news station worried about the gun being pointed toward the
airport, and being used to target aircraft(!) Fer Christ's sake, did
they notice the tall grass growing all around the thing? Don't most
public libraries and VFW halls have an old howitzer sitting outside?
Sheeesh...

http://www.nbc5i.com/video/9304340/index.html

This was a free country before 1968, then they passed a new
law which required all "destructive devices" to be
registered and deactivated. Historical cannons outside of
court houses had the barrels cut and the breech welded, the
barrel filled with concrete. Those AA guns probably have
had similar treatment with a torch and welding rod.

But Texas, like many states does allow ownership of real
machine guns IF the federal laws on background checks and
taxes/registration are followed. So maybe the owner of the
AA is the most trustworthy and honest fellow in the county.

Or maybe he is just a Jane Fonda fan and wants her to come
visit.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Kingfish" wrote in message
ups.com...
| Saw this clip today about a derelict 1950's era AA gun
sitting in some
| guy's yard near DFW airport. "Concerned individuals" (i.e.
dimwits)
| called the news station worried about the gun being
pointed toward the
| airport, and being used to target aircraft(!) Fer Christ's
sake, did
| they notice the tall grass growing all around the thing?
Don't most
| public libraries and VFW halls have an old howitzer
sitting outside?
| Sheeesh...
|
| http://www.nbc5i.com/video/9304340/index.html
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:LQZfg.25291$ZW3.19897@dukeread04...

This was a free country before 1968, then they passed a new
law which required all "destructive devices" to be
registered and deactivated.


The US ceased to be a free country long before 1968.

Income tax? Prohibition? Joined United Nations?


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote
in message
.net...
|
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| news:LQZfg.25291$ZW3.19897@dukeread04...
|
| This was a free country before 1968, then they passed a
new
| law which required all "destructive devices" to be
| registered and deactivated.
|
|
| The US ceased to be a free country long before 1968.
|
|

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:2Regg.25779$ZW3.13140@dukeread04...

Income tax? Prohibition? Joined United Nations?


Prohibition, yes, but we repealed that. The Civil War, military draft,
Social Security, the dole, Social Security, minimum wage, etc., etc., etc.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
news:2Regg.25779$ZW3.13140@dukeread04...

Income tax? Prohibition? Joined United Nations?



Prohibition, yes, but we repealed that. The Civil War, military draft,
Social Security, the dole, Social Security, minimum wage, etc., etc., etc.

Civil war???

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Civil war???


Yup. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents a state from
leaving a union that it freely joined. The southern states were forced to
rejoin the union.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

Civil war???



Yup. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents a state from
leaving a union that it freely joined. The southern states were forced to
rejoin the union.



OK, from a state perspective I see your point. However, to me a free
country means that individuals have freedom, not just states. The
slaves in the southern states certainly wouldn't have considered
themselves to be living in a free country.


Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

OK, from a state perspective I see your point. However, to me a free
country means that individuals have freedom, not just states. The slaves
in the southern states certainly wouldn't have considered themselves to be
living in a free country.


Agreed. Slavery was wrong, no question about that. But it was not
unconstitutional and it would have eventually ended here without a war just
as it did in the rest of the Americas, except Haiti, I believe. Lincoln is
revered today for preserving the Union, but he did so in only a geographical
sense. The relationship of the federal government to the states was
significantly different after the war. While slaves gained freedom via the
war, every other American was less free.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...
Agreed. Slavery was wrong, no question about that.

That's very progressive of you, Steven. But it doesn't quite jibe with your
earlier post today, in which you listed the Civil War as the first point at
which the US "ceased to be a free country"--which would only be possible if
it had been a free country *until* then.

--Gary