There was a time

Re: There was a time

dyslexia wrote:

most of my 62 + years I have been a strong supporter of gun ownership rights. Having encountered such persons as Shiksa, OmSickDavid etal I have changed my opinion and would give up my gun ownership rights should the law so decree solely on the basis that those that support such rights are wackos that frighten the mass citizenship of america. and endanger life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for common citizens.

In your 62+ years, you have probably encountered Klansmen and their racist hate speech, both of which were at least as wacko as the people you mentioned. Have they caused you to reverse your position on free speech rights, free press rights, and free assembly rights too? If not, why not? The logic of the argument would be the same.

0 Replies

I dont own a gun, but i should. I think it is pretty stupid of me not to own one. A gun to me is a form of insurance. Yeah lets pass more laws on guns, lets ban them ALL. Lets make manufacturing guns and ammunition illegal, lets make it so owning any firearm gets you life in prison.

And guess whos gonna STILL be walking around with guns, you guessed it, THE CRIMINALS WHO DONT OBEY LAWS.

Any form of gun suppression is pure nonsene.CRIMINALS DONT OBEY LAWS SO A GUN LAW WILL NOT AFFECT THEM IN ANY WAY.THE SAME WAY THEY GET DRUGS THROUGH THE BORDER IS THE SAME WAY THEY GET THEIR GUNS, WEED IS ILLEGAL, YET HOW MANY MILLIONS SMOKE IT? HOW MANY TONS ARE CARRIED THROUGH OUR BORDERS EACH DAY?
I dont want to sound like a gun nut, which you could say i am even not being able to afford one, but i mean the logic behind gun laws is TOTALLY FLAWED.

guns laws dont affect criminals, gun laws dont affect criminals GUN LAWS DO NOT AFFECT PEOPLE WHO DO NOT OBEY LAWS! if you believe they do you seriously need to rethink how you think.

Why cant people understand the illogical thinking behind gun laws?

"hey man i want to rob someone, im a poor person that grew up in a ghetto warzone and have nothing to lose anyways so whats it matter?"

"naw bro didnt you hear, guns are illegal!"

"aw fasho fasho?, i didnt know that! looks like ill have to rob people with a knife instead!"

If you cannot comprehend the fallacy of gun control your brain must be dead to the eyes of logic. I mean, its an oxymoron in the greatest sense, passing laws to try to curb violent crimes by people who dont obey laws in the first place.

If anyone could explain how a law someone isnt gonna follow is going to be followed by the person WHO WILL NOT FOLLOW IT, id love to hear it. until then some people need to realise their thinking isnt correct.

I think alot of you are letting personal feelings towards certain people with loud opinions cloud your judgement. Maybe they have said a few off the wall things, but is anyone here perfect?

Please, provide some different answers to the problem of gun violence. some LOGICAL answers. dont sit there and degrade someone for having an interest in guns.
Next your going to blame global warming on car freaks.

Police dont escort me around all day protecting me from criminals, So wtf am i supposed to do when someone robs me ? take a bullet like a man? calmy explain to the person robbing me that there are gun laws?
Inform him that what he is doing is illegal and place him under citizens arrest?

Thats right, GUN CONTROL LAWS PROTECT CRIMINALS

But its ok, nobody is perfect, i cant be to harsh on you guys. Smile

Oh yeah, ima spend thousands on a 50 cal machine gun then go apeshit and shoot everyone around me. Yeah, thats logical, fertilizer bombs kill more people and are easily 95% cheaper.

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

Thomas wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
most of my 62 + years I have been a strong supporter of gun ownership rights. Having encountered such persons as Shiksa, OmSickDavid etal I have changed my opinion and would give up my gun ownership rights should the law so decree solely on the basis that those that support such rights are wackos that frighten the mass citizenship of america. and endanger life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for common citizens.

In your 62+ years, you have probably encountered Klansmen and their racist hate speech, both of which were at least as wacko as the people you mentioned. Have they caused you to reverse your position on free speech rights, free press rights, and free assembly rights too? If not, why not? The logic of the argument would be the same.

Actually not, I remain an advocate of total free speech/assembly/free press/ gun ownership, I only fear psychotic gun ownership. I, at this point, continue to advocate gun ownership rights and I continue to own guns (not many I admit) but I continue to maintain that "gun ownership rights" have been relegated to fanatics/psychotics that very much frighten me. Probably not a very well defined answer but it's early in the a.m.

0 Replies

Coming from a country where there is gun control, I don't see the need
for ordinary citizens to own a gun. It works in other civilized countries, why
is it so hard to understand for Americans, especially given the statistics
about murder rates in the US vs. Europe.

How many children are dying on a yearly basis because they've been
playing with Papa's gun collection? Even one child is one too many.

If you're inclined to hunt, then all weapon therefore need to be declared
and registered on a yearly basis. No problem.

Crime always will find a way to arm itself, yes, but it will be much harder
to get one, and alone for this reason, gun control is a plus in my book.

0 Replies

happycat wrote:

Since Baltimore's murder rate is going to probably hit the 300 mark for the first time in several years, the only guns that concern me are illegal and unregistered guns that are used by gang members (yes we now have Bloods and Crips) to kill innocent bystanders. I don't care that they are killing each other, except that it gives Baltimore a bad name and dirty streets.

So, hunters and the like are of little consequence since they are doing what they do legally, use what they kill, and it's a fact that herds need to be thinned at times.

Though I have to admit there's no way in hell I could shoot the family of deer that I'm watching right now in my backyard. (There's a young one not much bigger than my dog,)

I am a pro-deer person.
The deer r safe from me.

I add to my gun collection only out of esthetic considerations,
or in support of my love of historical artifacts. My security concerns have been
satisfied many decades ago.

As of now, I desire my fellow citizens
to fully arm themselves, and for government to revert to its l'aissez faire
policy toward personal armament.

I believe that the Roberts USSC will bring that about.
David

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

Thomas wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
most of my 62 + years I have been a strong supporter of gun ownership rights. Having encountered such persons as Shiksa, OmSickDavid etal I have changed my opinion and would give up my gun ownership rights should the law so decree solely on the basis that those that support such rights are wackos that frighten the mass citizenship of america. and endanger life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for common citizens.

In your 62+ years, you have probably encountered Klansmen and their racist hate speech, both of which were at least as wacko as the people you mentioned. Have they caused you to reverse your position on free speech rights, free press rights, and free assembly rights too? If not, why not? The logic of the argument would be the same.

A very astute question there, Thomas;
cuts right to the heart of the matter.
David

0 Replies

David, I wouldn't want a gun in my house. I have a temper and I'm hormonal.

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

dyslexia wrote:

Thomas wrote:
dyslexia wrote:
most of my 62 + years I have been a strong supporter of gun ownership rights. Having encountered such persons as Shiksa, OmSickDavid etal I have changed my opinion and would give up my gun ownership rights should the law so decree solely on the basis that those that support such rights are wackos that frighten the mass citizenship of america. and endanger life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for common citizens.

In your 62+ years, you have probably encountered Klansmen and their racist hate speech, both of which were at least as wacko as the people you mentioned. Have they caused you to reverse your position on free speech rights, free press rights, and free assembly rights too? If not, why not? The logic of the argument would be the same.
Actually not, I remain an advocate of total free speech/assembly/free press/ gun ownership, I only fear psychotic gun ownership. I, at this point, continue to advocate gun ownership rights and I continue to own guns (not many I admit) but I continue to maintain that "gun ownership rights" have been relegated to fanatics/psychotics that very much frighten me. Probably not a very well defined answer but it's early in the a.m.

Addressing the concept of psychotics in possession of guns:
let us assume that a fellow believes that he is the re-incarnation of Napoleon.
He is out of touch with reality.

If he is peaceful, causes no trouble,
what is your problem with him ?

Suppose that a criminal breaks into the abode
of our Napoleonic psychotic, demanding his property and threatening his life,
and the psychotic blasts him, with fatal effects.

Is there anything rong with that ?

If a psychotic is gratuitously VIOLENT, then he shud be addressed on the basis
of his conduct, confined and treated as a criminal.
( I have never supported the M'Naghten Rule. )
David

0 Replies

happycat wrote:

David, I wouldn't want a gun in my house. I have a temper and I'm hormonal.

U r the captain of your own ship.
U must decide how to run your own life, and what chances u wish to take.
David

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

dyslexia wrote:

I remain an advocate of total free speech/assembly/free press/ gun ownership, I only fear psychotic gun ownership. I, at this point, continue to advocate gun ownership rights and I continue to own guns (not many I admit) but I continue to maintain that "gun ownership rights" have been relegated to fanatics/psychotics that very much frighten me. Probably not a very well defined answer but it's early in the a.m.

No, that's fine. I have no problem with checks into any criminal or mental health background of prospective gun buyers. It's no different than denying the vote to convicted criminals, which no Americans seems to have a human rights problem with.

0 Replies

David -- I am only now noticing that you're now writing in standard orthography and a standard font. Thank you very much! It makes your posts a lot easier to read.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

David -- I am only now noticing that you're now writing in standard orthography and a standard font. Thank you very much! It makes your posts a lot easier to read.

I second that. Smile

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

dyslexia wrote:

most of my 62 + years I have been a strong supporter of gun ownership rights. Having encountered such persons as Shiksa, OmSickDavid etal I have changed my opinion and would give up my gun ownership rights should the law so decree solely on the basis that those that support such rights are wackos that frighten the mass citizenship of america. and endanger life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for common citizens.

If u want to,
u can throw your guns in the garbage now.
U don 't need to wait for any decree.

I believe that the reason that u regard me with such intense disfavor,
is that I am against DISCRIMINATION.
I know that every American has an equal right,
a natural right, and a constitutional right
to defend his life from the violence of criminals or animals
and an equal right to access to the necessary emergency equipment.

U wish to discriminate on the basis of age and a few other criteria
against citizens' rights to defend their lives,
and that 's what u have against me.

My philosophy is that dangerous people with violent histories ,
shud be prevented from having access to polite society,
whether by incarcerating them, or killing them, if thay have committed capital crimes,
or by BANISHING them behind 1000s of miles of water.

What liberty did I " endanger " ??
David

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

David -- I am only now noticing that you're now writing in standard orthography and a standard font.
Thank you very much!
It makes your posts a lot easier to read.

Thomas, I do not deserve your praise.

Several of the citizens of A2K appealed to me,
so plaintively, that I relented to some limited extent.
I agreed to reduce the amount of coloration and
differences of size in my chosen fonts.

I did not agree to change my use of fonetic spelling.

I do not opt to put Ls into wud, cud nor shud,
nor to add UGH to the end of the word tho,
because it is anti-logical and that 'd make me COMPLICIT
in perpetuating the defective paradime of non-fonetic spelling.
I was guilty of that for many years n decades; I did not then think of it.
I now wish to demonstrate a better, faster and easier way to spell.

Sometimes I reduce my use of fonetic spelling when dealing
with exceptionally serious substantive issues.
To the limited extent that I have earned your thanx,
I accept them.
David

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

Thomas wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
I remain an advocate of total free speech/assembly/free press/ gun ownership, I only fear psychotic gun ownership. I, at this point, continue to advocate gun ownership rights and I continue to own guns (not many I admit) but I continue to maintain that "gun ownership rights" have been relegated to fanatics/psychotics that very much frighten me. Probably not a very well defined answer but it's early in the a.m.

No, that's fine.
I have no problem with checks into any criminal
or mental health background of prospective gun buyers.

Quote:
It's no different than denying the vote to convicted criminals,
which no Americans seems to have a human rights problem with.

1 ) I do not consider myself soft on criminals.
I have always supported the death penalty,
and do not support the M'Naghten Rule.
I believe that violent recidivists shud be incarcerated or BANISHED
from the North American Continent, for public safety.

However, IF thay r released into polite society,
then I believe that thay shud be allowed to defend their lives and property,
like everyone else.
To do otherwise is equal to making them play Russian Roulette every day.

2 ) It seems to me
that every person who is expected to obey the law
conversely has the right to participate in the political process
which results in making the law: i.e., elections.
This includes children of any age that can walk into a voting booth
and vote.
David

0 Replies

It shud be borne in mind
that regardless of the state of the law,
or the law of the state,
criminals WILL arm themselves, if thay choose to.
Legal prohibitions ( like the 18th Amendment and Volstead Act )
are ignored and are devoid of effect,
except by people who are obsessed with obeying the law.

This group does NOT include criminals,
so legally discriminating against criminals is an empty gesture.
David

0 Replies

Re: There was a time

Thomas wrote:

dyslexia wrote:
I remain an advocate of total free speech/assembly/free press/ gun ownership, I only fear psychotic gun ownership. I, at this point, continue to advocate gun ownership rights and I continue to own guns (not many I admit) but I continue to maintain that "gun ownership rights" have been relegated to fanatics/psychotics that very much frighten me. Probably not a very well defined answer but it's early in the a.m.

No, that's fine. I have no problem with checks into any criminal or mental health background of prospective gun buyers. It's no different than denying the vote to convicted criminals, which no Americans seems to have a human rights problem with.

I could easily have a problem with that; haven't thought about it that much, alas. I've also agreed with you elsewhere today, but not spoken up yet..
(I hate to fall into the me too thing, though I do it.)

0 Replies

Over the past two weekends I did some high quality high up tree trimming with my shotgun and .22. Ya gotta love being able to shoot off a 1/2" branch 40' in the air with a single shot. No climbing involved. My Marlin is a tack driver.

You see, to me, a gun is a tool. It's no more dangerous than any other tool. In fact, my Dad's hand held circular saw scares the crap out of me - much moreso than any gun, at least as far as using the tool.

0 Replies

AH &%^ING MEN TO THAT!, one time i turned on a tablesaw and the blade shot str8 into the fuckin air. i was like "oh my god, i almost got hit in the face with a flying sawblade"

and my cousins grandfather got his left hand amputated by a circular saw.

But seriously folks, when it comes to all these gun laws, the only people they keep from taking up arms are the people who obey the law.

One has to ask, why disarm law abiding citizens when criminals are going to obtain them freely?

Either americans are stupid, or they are trying to make us helpless.

Theres no other option unless whoever made the laws randomly picking them out of a hat.

I havent heard any logical argument from an anti-gun advocate ever.

0 Replies

OGIONIK wrote:

AH &%^ING MEN TO THAT!, one time i turned on a tablesaw and the blade shot str8 into the **** air. i was like "oh my god, i almost got hit in the face with a flying sawblade"

and my cousins grandfather got his left hand amputated by a circular saw.

But seriously folks, when it comes to all these gun laws, the only people they keep from taking up arms are the people who obey the law.

One has to ask, why disarm law abiding citizens
when criminals are going to obtain them freely?

I don 't know,
but I suspect, that the reason is that
those who favor suppression of the right of self defense,
view criminals as coming predominantly from the poor,
and the anti-gunners FAVOR the poor,
so thay want the poor to be SAFE and PROTECTED when
thay are robbing the more financially successful.

For the most part, those who try to suppress the right to access
to emergency equipment for defeating predatory violence
detest the affluent middle class and the rich,
so incidents of the poor safely and successfully attacking the affluent are secretly FUN for the suppressionists.

0 Replies

There was a time

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know