How can an Amish man Buy an Firearm? (no photos of Amish)

[Roger65]

I've said it before and I will say it again. When the crap flys, and the world is headed for defcon 5, the Amish will just keep Rollin.
They are the kings of self subsistence.

I have family in Greece. The people in the villages have been impacted much less by the economic collapse. They grow their own food and have for centuries.

The people in the city can't even afford a chicken to roast for Christmas dinner. And the ones who can, cut it in half and freeze the second piece for Easter dinner.

 

[RVTECH]

and because getting that photo ID would violate his religious beliefs."

Somebody correct me if I am wrong but I always thought a provision of 'Separation of Church and State' meant religious beliefs cannot 'trump' State or Federal laws.

 

[Oregonhunter5]

DEFCON 1 is full scale nuclear war. DEFCON 5 is complete peacetime. We are currently at DEFCON 5.

And all these years I had it backwards.
Lol

 

[etrain16]

Somebody correct me if I am wrong but I always thought a provision of 'Separation of Church and State' meant religious beliefs cannot 'trump' State or Federal laws.

There is no such law or provision. The only mention is in the First Amendment, and that is expressly written to keep the government out of religion, not the other way around. Thomas Jefferson wrote about the concept of separation of church and state, but there is no such law that prevents religion from interacting with the state, nor is there a law that can, in most cases, trump religious freedom. Of course there will be some exceptions, such as if your religion said it was required that you murder someone, you'd have a hard time claiming religious liberty on that one.

Individual concerns like the one being discussed here, usually need to be addressed on a case by case basis. But for the most part, religious liberty is supposed to trump the state's laws - see the second half of the statement below. The First Amendment's comments regarding religion were to protect the people from the government, not the government from religion. Which, by the way, is exactly what the 2nd amendment is supposed to protect in regard to our gun rights. The Constitution was meant to protect us all from an over-stepping government. For all the good it does for us today.

As the concept is commonly understood today, the government has never passed a law implementing the "separation of church and state." The First Amendment simply states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

 

[etrain16]

80% lower, buy parts assemble tada.... if you choose to live in a faith that doesn't allow you to something that's your issue. They dont like our laws or technology they should stay out of it.

So, you're in favor of getting rid of the first amendment? Because the purpose of the religion clause in the first is to keep government out of religion. These people's religious choices are supposed to be protected in this country. That is one of the reasons this country was founded in the first place.

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

I would hope, as people who are seeing our 2nd amendment rights under similar assault, that we would be on the side of liberty and freedom for all of the rights expressed in the Constitution. Otherwise you give credence to those that tell us if we don't like this country's gun laws, we can get out.

 

[jbett98]

Don't discount the Mormons. They have a plan to still be standing at the end of times.

 

[bakersman345]

I think maybe we didn't get the sarcasm in my posting. I was hoping the whole bacon thing would round it out to make sense.

However if you looking to argue the first amendment that would be fine as well. His religious freedom isn't being violated because the law doesn't impede his practice or his religion. There are many time where faith and the law dont jive. Most of the time you don't have to break the law to practice your religion.
Next point if make is that the religious freedom part of the Constitution prevents laws from being made a against the "institution" not the individual.
Thats why those bakers in oregon haD to pay $137000 for not serving the lesbians.
I am l for freedom of religion, this case has no merit because the law wasn't made to impede on his religion it has nothing to do with it. It's his faith and when faith is in play he has to choose what to fallow, these are you choices not the governments

 

[etrain16]

I think maybe we didn't get the sarcasm in my posting. I was hoping the whole bacon thing would round it out to make sense.

However if you looking to argue the first amendment that would be fine as well. His religious freedom isn't being violated because the law doesn't impede his practice or his religion. There are many time where faith and the law dont jive. Most of the time you don't have to break the law to practice your religion.
Next point if make is that the religious freedom part of the Constitution prevents laws from being made a against the "institution" not the individual.
Thats why those bakers in oregon haD to pay $137000 for not serving the lesbians.
I am l for freedom of religion, this case has no merit because the law wasn't made to impede on his religion it has nothing to do with it. It's his faith and when faith is in play he has to choose what to fallow, these are you choices not the governments

No, I didn't get the sarcasm, and no, I'm not trying to pick a fight, it did look like you were serious and wanted to address that.

Actually it does impede him because that law is in conflict with his 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms. The law, which is in conflict with his religious beliefs, is preventing him from exercising his 2nd amendment rights, and that is a problem.

And I wouldn't cite the bakers in Gresham as a good argument. That ruling was wrong, and was very politically motivated. Just because a judgment comes down or a law is passed, doesn't mean it's constitutionally sound, it simply means that the right people with the right resources and influence, have been able to turn it around. There are a sh1t ton of bad laws on this country - in my view, many of them could/should be stricken. Unfortunately those with more power and influence than either you or I have wield that power over us in a big way.

Our world would be better if he could buy his gun, if the bakers didn't have to pay their judgment, and if the government would get out of our business.

 

[bakersman345]

No, I didn't get the sarcasm, and no, I'm not trying to pick a fight, it did look like you were serious and wanted to address that.

Actually it does impede him because that law is in conflict with his 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms. The law, which is in conflict with his religious beliefs, is preventing him from exercising his 2nd amendment rights, and that is a problem.

And I wouldn't cite the bakers in Gresham as a good argument. That ruling was wrong, and was very politically motivated. Just because a judgment comes down or a law is passed, doesn't mean it's constitutionally sound, it simply means that the right people with the right resources and influence, have been able to turn it around. There are a sh1t ton of bad laws on this country - in my view, many of them could/should be stricken. Unfortunately those with more power and influence than either you or I have wield that power over us in a big way.

Our world would be better if he could buy his gun, if the bakers didn't have to pay their judgment, and if the government would get out of our business.

I agree with you 100% his Second amendment rights were violated and the world would be a better place if people were free to do as they please. I'm just going woth past jusdments, and the SCOTUS rulings in the past. To say he has no case. If I agree is anther or not is diffrent.

P.s they banned bacon to make the Muslims happy in prison

 

[etrain16]

I agree with you 100% his Second amendment rights were violated and the world would be a better place if people were free to do as they please. I'm just going woth past jusdments, and the SCOTUS rulings in the past. To say he has no case. If I agree is anther or not is diffrent.

P.s they banned bacon to make the Muslims happy in prison

Unfortunately we're at the mercy of some bad people right now. I'm glad to see he's fighting back, and I hope he wins. I do understand we need some laws, but it's gotten so out of control that every Tom, Dick and Harry who gets their panties in a twist over something they don't like finds a way to make yet another law.

I do get a bit hot over issues like this. My beef is not with you, but the people that have gotten us here today.

Yeah, I heard about the bacon thing too. Also a big bunch of B.S. I'm surprised some prisoners haven't rioted over that one. I wonder what they would do if there was a competing religious belief that required the use of bacon for their religious rituals? Perhaps it's time to start the Church of the Anointed Pork Products. We can send bacon-toting missionaries all over the middle east to spread the good word: Bacon Makes Everything Better

 

[Oregonhunter5]

Don't discount the Mormons. They have a plan to still be standing at the end of times.

Yes we do...
If anyone needs info on food storage, I can get my hands on info. I'm pretty sure you can go to our storehouses in Portland, cops bay, Springfield, or Medford, to get wheat and other stuff.

 

[etrain16]

other stuff.

Other stuff....guns???

 

[Caveman Jim]

And all these years I had it backwards.
Lol

No, it's the Gov who have it wrong..... stuff escalates, so does counting..... just sayin....

 

[Oregonhunter5]

Other stuff....guns???

Well good question. As some of you know we give 10% of our income every month to the church. That's to pay for many many things. But, with that said, that money goes toward food and survival items. We have a massive ready system to support not only our members, but also as many as we can outside the church. When things get bad. When I say massive, I mean beyond believable. We have millions of acres. And in some of those areas, we have gigantic under ground silos, bunkers. And all day they have guys driving huge tractors in and out all day, loading them up. They drive right into the earth. It's crazy....

 

[Caveman Jim]

If there are any still alive after the rabid scavengers get through with them.

Hence the reason he wants a gun.....

 

[etrain16]

Well good question. As some of you know we give 10% of our income every month to the church. That's to pay for many many things. But, with that said, that money goes toward food and survival items. We have a massive ready system to support not only our members, but also as many as we can outside the church. When things get bad. When I say massive, I mean beyond believable. We have millions of acres. And in some of those areas, we have gigantic under ground silos, bunkers. And all day they have guys driving huge tractors in and out all day, loading them up. They drive right into the earth. It's crazy....

We have some Mormon friends, we've heard of some of those things ourselves.

 

[RicInOR]

I think a better argument on the Amish -vs- Photos goes along these lines:
1. The state already issues them and ID without the photos which is legal and accepted.
2. Certain people have argued and been granted photo changes, such as a Sikh's head wrap - dastar.
3. The Federal government does not issue ID, therefore it is a states rights issue.

I don't associate this as a freedom of religion issue and would not tie it to the Christian bakers.

 

[edslhead]

Cant they just get their pictures off that show " Amish Mafia"

 

[Xyda Go Mon]

My first response would be,"80%," pick a caliber. My second response would be, ".30, .45 or .50 cal. repeating air rifle." Built and used correctly, it will take down an Elk. Never need to buy powder and can cast your own bullets. Personally, I'd take the 80% build.

 

[Onramp]

I totally believe in a man's right to practice his own religious beliefs. But come on. I'm going to say Merry Christmas, and I'm going to have a Christmas tree. A Jewish person can say Happy Hanukkah, and a Buddhist can say whatever they say. I do however recognize the laws of the land, and am sick and tired of everybody wanting an exception for their religious beliefs. Does EVERYBODY have to have some kind of exception? I know, maybe I'm a little off on this, but dang it - go spend your money on something else other than another lawsuit clogging the courts.