User Panel
Quoted: We are in the middle of abandoning the Biblical worldview, with its concepts of absolute truth and higher authority, and replacing it with a Secular Humanist worldview View Quote What is this WE crap??? View Quote We as in the American people as a whole, our culture. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: OK, OK. I am now on board. I HATE LAWYERS. JUDGES, TOO. View Quote Amen, but Eric the hun seems cool[;)] View Quote What about me?[:D] View Quote Well, being from the Citadel.... Oh, never mind.... [;)] |
|
Quoted: All of you can say what you want, the fact is that this country was founding on Christian principles. Allah and Buddha did not have shit to do with this country, except for the fact that a person could choose to worship them as "God" freely without be persecuted for it. Banning the "pledge of allegiance" is just another nail in the coffin on the USA. God has held a protective shield around this country since we became a nation. No other country has been blessed like ours. I have a pesimistic outlook on the future of the USA and today's news just makes the dark days ahead seem closer. View Quote Correct! Although I wouldn't say God did us special favors. We simply played by the rules of the game that He established. The Biblical worldview is the closest match to reality (duh, because the One who created reality also gave us the rule book), and therefore it has the best results. If we choose to play the game by another set of rules (another worldview), don't be surprised if it doesn't work. This isn't a new thing, this clash has been going on all through history. Here's a good book on it: [url]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0891072926/qid=1025127613/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/102-3860481-5953745[/url] We simply reap what we sow, it's a fundamental principle of the universe. Have we sown the seeds we are now reaping? |
|
\\RANT ON//
This is Bullshit! Religious endorsement or not, this country was built by Christians and other God fearing people, and if the rest of you don't like it, you can leave it! Piss on all this "Don't want to offend anyone" bullshit. I WANT them to be offended, maybe they will leave! Free up more space for someone who knows that being an American citizen is a privilege. So, do all of you godless people believe in the right to burn the US flag, too? Just asking. Be warned, don't think of doing so around me. There are just some things you don't do. \\rant off// I feel better now. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Question for liberals including [b]ArmdLbrl[/b]: Is reciting the Declaration of Independance, Gettysburg Address, Washington's Inaugural speeches or other such historical writings (or certain passages from them) "unconstitutional"? View Quote You mean because of the refrences to god? If you are forced to do it, in order to make you say the word God, or to try and force students to beleve that its un-American to not beleve in God because previous American heros did, then yes it would be. View Quote Oh, but children ARE forced to do it!! Children in public schools (good ones) are REQUIRED TO READ the Declaration of Independance, Gettysburg Address, Emancipation Proclamation etc. that contain words like [b]"this nation, under God", "endowed by our Creator", "through Divine Providence", "I invoke... the gracious favor of Almighty God"[/b] etc. They are REQUIRED to learn those famous writings from our nation's founders and leaders. They are REQUIRED to recite or write essays on those words. They are REQUIRED to learn what a "Quaker" is, what "[b]Divine Providence[/b]" is, and what "[b]manifest destiny[/b]" was about. They are REQUIRED to learn what "[b]natural law[/b]" is and how THAT is the foundation of our rights and freedoms. The Gov't writes laws instructing that these words be inscribed on our National Monuments and buildings - at taxpayer expense. These words, uttered by Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Madison, Henry, Adams, Alexander and all other Presidents and other major founding documents of our nation, do NOT represent an "establishment of religion", they are historical facts about the foundation and source of our basic rights and freedoms, believed by, uttered by and written by those who actually WROTE the 1st Amendment. [red][b]The words "under God" are just two words that so clearly summarize the very principles of "natural law", "endowed by our Creator", "Divine Providence" and "manifest destiny" that drove the creation of this nation.[/b][/red] To say that including a reference to "natural law" or "Creator" in our Pledge is tantamount to establishing a religion is utter ignorance at best, and outright dishonesty and antagonism to religious beliefs at worst. The case in question is whether Congress has the right to insert the words "under God" in the Pledge. The 9th Court found it unconstitutional and ordered that the Pledge have those words stricken from them. Absurd!! That is JUST as absurd as if the 9th Court had ordered that the Declaration of Independance and Emancipation Proclamation is unconstitutional and has to have the words [b]"endowed by our Creator"[/b] and [b]"gracious favor of Almighty God"[/b] stricken from them. The 9th Court must also order public schools to stop teaching the Declaration of Independance, Gettysburg Address, Emancipation Proclamation and remove all historical writings of our founding fathers that contain references to [b]"God", "Divine Providence", "Almighty"[/b] and [b]"Creator"[/b] because those words can not be REQUIRED reading in schools. [b]Isn't that right [red]ArmdLbrl????[/red] Be consistent now! Don't wuss out!! If kids can't be forced to SAY those words, then they can't be forced to READ and WRITE those words either![/b] God help the SCOTUS when this anti-religious, historical revisionism arrives at that court. |
|
...and where is it written that "There shall be a seperation of church and state"?
I've been looking, can't find it. |
|
[b]May God bless America and all of its 49 states and the liberal territory of California![/b]
|
|
[url]http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=1559501898[/url]
Howabout now. |
|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quoted: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PERSON: We are in the middle of abandoning the Biblical worldview, with its concepts of absolute truth and higher authority, and replacing it with a Secular Humanist worldview -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BEN: What is this WE crap??? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PERSON: We as in the American people as a whole, our culture. View Quote We as in the American people as a whole, our culture. View Quote I guess that is the crux of it isn't it??.. I am a WHOLE; in and of myself; AND I AM AN AMERICAN... My culture is My Culture... I guess that is why we have individual Liberties, because I am not in their CULTURE , whatever the hell that is?? TAKE ME AS AN INDIVIDUAL NOT AS A GROUP. BECAUSE I AM ALL OF ONE MAN, AND WILL NOT LEND MY NAME TO THAT WHICH I DON'T AGREE WITH OR SUPPORT. DON'T STICK ME IN WITH THOSE WHO ARE ABANDONING THE OLD VALUES OF AMERICA , BECAUSE I AM NOT ONE OF THEM, ALSO IF THAT MEANS THAT THE WORLD GOES AHEAD WITHOUT ME THAN THAT IS FINE TOO. |
|
For those who wish to vote in a survey about this:
[url]http://www.msnbc.com/news/772714.asp#survey[/url] |
|
Quoted:Perhaps God will bless us soon by causing "the big one" and having Kali sink into the ocean.... View Quote Here Here. I'm praying for the big one to take these suckas out. |
|
Quoted: I guess that all US money is now worthless because it has "GOD" printed on it.[?] View Quote I should be laughing at this comment, but I'm not. Can you think of a BETTER way for the Feds to get rid of ALL hard currency? A cashless society goes WAY beyond anything I would call a crappy idea. |
|
. Thus, Judge Goodwin also ordered the Declaration of Independance be stricken from public school books." View Quote shit....... The PHAROAH HAS SPOKEN, SO SPEAKETH KING RAMSES THE FIRST..... Whenever California turns into a barbaric hell will the last person leaving please turn off the lights.. Oh I forgot they can't keep there damn power on in the first place, I guess they are all ready half-way back to the period before a Human Being had rights... Ben |
|
. Thus, Judge Goodwin also ordered the Declaration of Independance be stricken from public school books." View Quote shit....... The PHAROAH HAS SPOKEN, SO SPEAKETH KING RAMSES THE FIRST..... Whenever California turns into a barbaric hell will the last person leaving please turn off the lights.. Oh I forgot they can't keep there damn power on in the first place. Ben |
|
. Thus, Judge Goodwin also ordered the Declaration of Independance be stricken from public school books." View Quote shit....... The PHAROAH HAS SPOKEN, SO SPEAKETH KING RAMSES THE FIRST..... Whenever California turns into a barbaric hell will the last person leaving please turn off the lights.. Oh I forgot they can't keep there damn power on in the first place. Ben |
|
Quoted: Christmas is a holiday as a reflection that no one is going to show up, and you cant punish them for not showing up, so why bother even trying to work that day? View Quote Last time I checked it was a state and federal holiday everywhere in the US. |
|
Also,
The suit was brought up by Atheists. Atheists who cannot stand to hear the word "God". Screw their idea of wanting to make this country a "better place" by not having others subjected to hearing the word. They are just feeling incredibly scared that there might actually be a God, so they want to get rid of anything that keeps reminding them. Remember, Monkeys and humans share 97% of the same DNA. But don't forget that pigs and humans share about 95%...I'm going to go wallow in the mud now. |
|
BAN GOD...FOR THE CHILDREN!!!!
Seriously though, this stinks to high heaven. This WILL be used to destroy our founding documents. Hell the men who wrote the constitution were unconsitutional. WTFF! If this can be stopped simply because some father (who does have a right to be an atheist) is afraid of outside influences on his child, why not homeschool her. It is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid outside influences. lib-who supports the right to burn flags. flame broiled UN anyone? |
|
I think having "under God" in there is just begging for trouble. I am sure some enterprising teens are gonna start stirring the pot by changing it, if they have to say it in class. I can't wait until one of them does a little public improvisation.
'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under [b]Allah[/b], indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' 'I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under [b]Satan[/b], indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.' |
|
So explain to me, if there is to be no "God" in government, Why I was asked to swear today by "Almighty and Eternal GOD" In a state circuit court as a Juror?
[-=(_)=-] |
|
Quoted: Well, the phrase "One nation under god" implies that there is something higher, more powerful than the government/state. I can see why they wouldn't want to give children in the government public schools that idea. View Quote Whaddya know, someone with their thinking cap on under the tin-foil hat... |
|
Quoted: So when is Christmas as a national holiday going to be ruled as unconstitutional? View Quote Just FYI, we no longer have the "Christmas" play or pagent in our schools anymore. It's called something else... |
|
Quoted: No other country has been blessed like ours. View Quote Those pesky Romans sure seemed to have their act together for what? 1000 years? TRG |
|
I guess that is the crux of it isn't it??.. I am a WHOLE; in and of myself; AND I AM AN AMERICAN... My culture is My Culture... I guess that is why we have individual Liberties, because I am not in their CULTURE , whatever the hell that is?? TAKE ME AS AN INDIVIDUAL NOT AS A GROUP. BECAUSE I AM ALL OF ONE MAN, AND WILL NOT LEND MY NAME TO THAT WHICH I DON'T AGREE WITH OR SUPPORT. DON'T STICK ME IN WITH THOSE WHO ARE ABANDONING THE OLD VALUES OF AMERICA , BECAUSE I AM NOT ONE OF THEM, ALSO IF THAT MEANS THAT THE WORLD GOES AHEAD WITHOUT ME THAN THAT IS FINE TOO. View Quote Well, as much as I agree with your sentiments, I don't think one can make the decision to be culturally autonomous. If you live in America, you exist in American culture and are pressured to conform to current cultural norms. Doesn't mean we have to go with the flow, but swimming upstream is getting harder. |
|
No Mc YOU ARE WRONG.
Because the children are required to stand up and and recite the pledge, and because the pledge connects ones individual patriotism, loyalty to the United States, to a belief in God. THAT is why this version of the pledge is unconstitutional. Remember it begins with "I peldge allegiance", in saying it you are making a individual statement of belief-which is why the court ruled in 1943 that the government could not compell students to recite it. Being assigned to read documents containing refrences to God are not de-facto forcing you to appeal to god. Even if the assignment was to write about the meaning of the refrence to God in the text it would still not violate the cause since it is the original authors views on religion that are being studied- NOT the students. If a teacher asked students to write about THEIR religious beleifs THAT would be wrong. At least in a public primary or secondary school. Your examples are absurd Mcallan. The Declaration of Independance was never a LAW, nor was the Gettysberg address and the Emancipation Proclimation was superceeded by the 13th Amendment. And showing them to kids does not meet the legal definition of harm because it just shows that Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Lincoln were Christians. It doesn't make ANY demands on the student. But if the teacher starts teaching that Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Lincoln were patriotic Americans BECAUSE they were religious and YOU should be too. Then we get into problems. Why don't you read the decision yourself and educate yourself? [url]http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FE05EEE79C2A97B688256BE3007FEE32/$file/0016423.pdf?openelement[/url] |
|
Well, as much as I agree with your sentiments, I don't think one can make the decision to be culturally autonomous. If you live in America, you exist in American culture and are pressured to conform to current cultural norms. Doesn't mean we have to go with the flow, but swimming upstream is getting harder. View Quote I didn't say I was culturally Autonomous... I said I didn't belong to their culture.. And ONE does make the decision to who and what they are.... ANd I don't find myself pressured into current cultural norms, I choose where I wish to be with respect to what my mind tells me is right... What stream are you swimming against?? Maybe you should identify it, and not only that, but if the stream is going the wrong direction find another stream , or in other circumstance make a different stream. Benjamin |
|
I was just appalled when I heard the ruling. I just can't believe where our country is heading these days. Who do these judges in San Francisco think they are? I don't even watch the nightly news anymore. So sick of the one-sided liberal propaganda. Seems like every traditional channel has a liberal spin; even public television which is a joke. All of this reminds me of something that Arnold Schwarzenegger said when asked by a reporter why he was a Republican. He said that when he came over from Austria he had no inclination towards either party until he heard Democrat Hubert Humphrey of MN speaking (in a debate) words that sounded exactly like the fascist ideals he experienced in his homeland.
|
|
Quoted: Mac, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE!!!!! ;>) View Quote Yeah, you broke page three. Wtf? |
|
Personally I don't believe in any God as envisioned by the various religions of man. I do accept the possibility that this universe had some creator, but don't think that being is even comprehensible by humans, much less requires human worship.
HOWEVER, that said...I don't have any problem with the "under God" portion of the pledge of allegiance, any more than the "In God we trust" on the money. I see it as an expression of the importance of religion to the majority of people in this country through the years. I also think the whole thing is overblown...it will be overturned by the Supreme Court. |
|
Can we just secede california from the rest of the country. Then the atheist communists and queers and pot smokers and all the other weirdo nutcases can have their way.
|
|
Quoted: I also think the whole thing is overblown...it will be overturned by the Supreme Court. View Quote Yes it most DEFINENTLY is overblown. But looking at the case as posted, I am not so sure they can overturn it. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: So when is Christmas as a national holiday going to be ruled as unconstitutional? View Quote Just FYI, we no longer have the "Christmas" play or pagent in our schools anymore. It's called something else... View Quote I was PO'ed when I went to my neice's Christmas charol performance and they changed the words from "We wish you a Merry Christmas" to "We wish you a Happy Holiday". |
|
Can someone please explain who this "under God" is?
Is he some kind of middle-level management God? If so, is there a Chief Operating God? I'm confused... [}:D] |
|
Quoted: No Mc YOU ARE WRONG. Because the children are [red]required[/red] to stand up and and recite the pledge, and because the pledge connects ones individual patriotism, loyalty to the United States, to a belief in God. THAT is why this version of the pledge is unconstitutional. View Quote Required? I don't think so. If they were required out in CA the only thing the court should have decided was that they weren't required. Read my post at the beginning of Page 1! Also, does anyone here know what happened to the little boy whose mother got school prayer thrown out? He became a preacher! |
|
Oh yeah, did anyone catch the father's statement he made? Can't exactly remember it word for word, but one word I did catch!
"I realize there are people that want to inject their religion on the rest of us, and it's up to some of us [red]PATRIOTS[/red] to stop it." Do what!!!??? You don't know the meaning of Patriot! |
|
Quoted: Oh yeah, did anyone catch the father's statement he made? Can't exactly remember it word for word, but one word I did catch! "I realize there are people that want to inject their religion on the rest of us, and it's up to some of us [red]PATRIOTS[/red] to stop it." Do what!!!??? You don't know the meaning of Patriot! View Quote Do YOU? It certainly doesnt meen fighting for a deity... |
|
Quoted: Yes it most DEFINENTLY is overblown. But looking at the case as posted, I am not so sure they can overturn it. View Quote They can and will. Write it down, you heard it here. [:D] |
|
Quoted: No Mc YOU ARE WRONG. Because the children are required to stand up and and recite the pledge,... Why don't you read the decision yourself and educate yourself? [url]http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FE05EEE79C2A97B688256BE3007FEE32/$file/0016423.pdf?openelement[/url] View Quote Ahem! Newdow does not allege that his daughter's teacher or school district requires his daughter to participate in reciting the Pledge View Quote He's just mad because all the other kids say "God" and doesn't like it. If anyone is trying to jam their agenda down someones throat...it's him! |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Yes it most DEFINENTLY is overblown. But looking at the case as posted, I am not so sure they can overturn it. View Quote They can and will. Write it down, you heard it here. [:D] View Quote You read it? What point do you think is weak? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: No Mc YOU ARE WRONG. Because the children are required to stand up and and recite the pledge,... Why don't you read the decision yourself and educate yourself? [url]http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FE05EEE79C2A97B688256BE3007FEE32/$file/0016423.pdf?openelement[/url] View Quote Ahem! Newdow does not allege that his daughter's teacher or school district requires his daughter to participate in reciting the Pledge View Quote He's just mad because all the other kids say "God" and doesn't like it. If anyone is trying to jam their agenda down someones throat...it's him! View Quote Try quoting the whole thing: Newdow does not allege that his daughter's teacher or school district requires his daughter to participate in reciting the Pledge.3 Rather, he claims that his daughter is injured when she is compelled to "watch and listen as her stateemployed teacher in her state-run school leads her classmates in a ritual proclaiming that there is a God, and that our's [sic] is `one nation under God.' " View Quote |
|
This just plain sucks. I'm so pissed off I can hardly see straight. I've never been religious, but this is digging at the roots of our country, our heritage. I know the "bad" part wasn't added until the 50's, but I grew up saying it, it's all I've ever known.
AAAARRRRGGGHHHH.....the bastards!!!!!! |
|
In reply to Sweeps last post.
Operating within the above-described legal landscape, we now turn to the question initially posed, namely, does Newdow have standing to challenge the 1954 Act? Initially, we note that the 1954 statute challenged by Newdow is similar to the Alabama statute struck down in Wallace. Neither statute works the traditional type of "injury in fact " that is implicated when a statute compels or prohibits certain activity, nor do the amendments brought about by these statutes lend themselves to "as-applied" constitutional review. Nevertheless, the Court in Wallace, at least implicitly, determined that the schoolchildren's parents had standing to attack the challenged statute. Moreover, the legislative history of the 1954 Act shows that the "under God" language was not meant to sit passively in the federal code unbeknownst to the public; rather, the sponsors of the amendment knew about and capitalized on the state laws and school district rules that mandate recitation of the Pledge. The legislation's House sponsor, Representative Louis C. Rabaut, testified at the Congressional hearing that "the children of our land, in the daily recitation of the pledge in school, will be daily impressed with a true understanding of our way of life and its origins," and this statement was incorporated into the report of the House Judiciary Committee. H.R. Rep. No. 83-1693, at 3 (1954), reprinted in 1954 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2339, 2341. Taken within its context, the 1954 addendum was designed to result in the recitation of the words "under God" in school classrooms throughout the land on a daily basis, and therefore constituted as much of an injury-in-fact as the policies considered in Wallace and Santa Fe. As discussed earlier, Newdow has standing as a parent to challenge a practice that interferes with his right to direct the religious education of his daughter. The mere enactment of the 1954 Act in its particular context constitutes a religious recitation policy that interferes with Newdow's right to direct the religious education of his daughter. Accordingly, we hold that Newdow has standing to challenge the 1954 Act. View Quote |
|
Quoted: Try quoting the whole thing: Newdow does not allege that his daughter's teacher or school district requires his daughter to participate in reciting the Pledge.3 Rather, he claims that his daughter is injured when she is compelled to "watch and listen as her stateemployed teacher in her state-run school leads her classmates in a ritual proclaiming that there is a God, and that our's [sic] is `one nation under God.' " View Quote View Quote Sorry, did not believe it was that important. However, now that you bring it up, what's the problem? If "he" doesn't believe there is a God, how is he going to stop her daughter hearing other people from claiming there is a God? "God" forbid she ever goes to spend the night with a friend whose family says a prayer before diner. What about all those "God Bless America" signs all over the place now? What does he do when she sees one of those? Explain to her that those people are wrong? Exactly! So why can't he explain that her teachers are wrong? (according to his beliefs that is) I hope his daughter grows up and marries a preacher! Just like the woman that got prayer banned in school because she was an atheist and didn't want her son hearing other people pray. He grew up to become a preacher! |
|
Quoted: Quoted: No Mc YOU ARE WRONG. Because the children are [red]required[/red] to stand up and and recite the pledge, and because the pledge connects ones individual patriotism, loyalty to the United States, to a belief in God. THAT is why this version of the pledge is unconstitutional. View Quote Required? I don't think so. If they were required out in CA the only thing the court should have decided was that they weren't required. Read my post at the beginning of Page 1! Also, does anyone here know what happened to the little boy whose mother got school prayer thrown out? He became a preacher! View Quote My first thought on hearing this, (well, maybe my 2nd), was gee, I wonder who's gonna get saved? Not many people know that Jane ROE (Roe vs. Wade fame), became a believer years ago. Last I heard, she was working for a Pro-Life organization in Houston. "All things work for the good of those who love G*d". |
|
Quoted: In reply to Sweeps last post. Operating within the above-described legal landscape, we now turn to the question initially posed, namely, does Newdow have standing to challenge the 1954 Act? Initially, we note that the 1954 statute challenged by Newdow is similar to the Alabama statute struck down in Wallace. Neither statute works the traditional type of "injury in fact " that is implicated when a statute compels or prohibits certain activity, nor do the amendments brought about by these statutes lend themselves to "as-applied" constitutional review. Nevertheless, the Court in Wallace, at least implicitly, determined that the schoolchildren's parents had standing to attack the challenged statute. Moreover, the legislative history of the 1954 Act shows that the "under God" language was not meant to sit passively in the federal code unbeknownst to the public; rather, the sponsors of the amendment knew about and capitalized on the state laws and school district rules that mandate recitation of the Pledge. The legislation's House sponsor, Representative Louis C. Rabaut, testified at the Congressional hearing that "the children of our land, in the daily recitation of the pledge in school, will be daily impressed with a true understanding of our way of life and its origins," and this statement was incorporated into the report of the House Judiciary Committee. H.R. Rep. No. 83-1693, at 3 (1954), reprinted in 1954 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2339, 2341. Taken within its context, the 1954 addendum was designed to result in the recitation of the words "under God" in school classrooms throughout the land on a daily basis, and therefore constituted as much of an injury-in-fact as the policies considered in Wallace and Santa Fe. As discussed earlier, Newdow has standing as a parent to challenge a practice that interferes with his right to direct the religious education of his daughter. The mere enactment of the 1954 Act in its particular context constitutes a religious recitation policy that interferes with Newdow's right to direct the religious education of his daughter. Accordingly, we hold that Newdow has standing to challenge the 1954 Act. View Quote View Quote I guess you got me there. If I'm understanding you right, if the government says it, it is true beyond a doubt. Well, there is proof that our kids tend to believe every thing our government tells them. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Oh yeah, did anyone catch the father's statement he made? Can't exactly remember it word for word, but one word I did catch! "I realize there are people that want to inject their religion on the rest of us, and it's up to some of us [red]PATRIOTS[/red] to stop it." Do what!!!??? You don't know the meaning of Patriot! View Quote Do YOU? It certainly doesnt meen fighting for a deity... View Quote It certainly did in 1776, perhaps you should do some research on the Nation in which you live lbrl...... |
|
Quoted: How long until "The 2nd Amendment is unconstitutional?" View Quote This is so completely wrong... This is the final result of liberal ideology, the dismantling of the last pieces of this country. GlockShooter, I thought the same thing... ordered another 2 cases of Lake City as soon as I heard the news as sort of a 'thankyou' to the Appeals Court... [usa] |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.