BILL IN UTAH PROMOTES GUN FREEDOM

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

maporsche wrote:

Setanta wrote:

Let me know if you come up with a plausible argument to suggest these jokers would use their weapons quickly and effectively with no danger to anyone else.

Let me be as clear as I can.

These 'jokers' should be trained by law enforcement personal to be allowed this privledge. This training should be designed to prepare for likely scenerios that a student may encounter.

Would these gun toters get a nice shiny badge at the end of their "police training"?

If so, thay can just leave it there, or dump it in the trash,
but competent knowledge of good defensive strategy is useful.

David

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Ive always wondered at the logic that gun toters live by.
"They are able to protect themselves from nuts with guns"

Thank u for putting YOUR words into OUR mouths.
Our concept, and that of the Founders of this Republic
is that when a task manifests itself in front of u
( including an emergency ) u r better off if u HAVE the necessary equipment to control the situation than if u do NOT.

Farmer, truly, without exageration:
u subordinate your powers of reason to your chaotic emotion.

farmerman wrote:

I wonder if some other gun nut would see DAve toting

Farmer, what is this "toting" **** all the time ????
Do u TOTE your geological equipment or TOTE your fishing equipment where u go ??

farmerman wrote:

a gun and think that HE was the nut.
Then its just a matter of reflex and aim .

Farmer: I am 100% sure that u r smarter than the stupidity u r faking here.
I have repeatedly posted here that Vermont and Alaska have no
interference by government with people carrying guns.
Thay do not have the shootouts that u r foolishly posting about.
If thay did, we 'd read about them and see them on the news.
This fantasy of yours (set forth within your nested quote)
just has never happened even once, so far as I have ever heard.
As a scientist with a logical mind, u MUST know this;
i.e., that one gun lover sees another gun lover carrying a gun
and then expresses his malice for gun carrying by assassinating him.

If u said he 'd invite him for a beer, then OK, maybe.

farmerman wrote:

The statistics favor someone settling an argument with a gun if many more people are packing.

Is that SO? In that case, police, Army & Marines must have many gun duels, right ? on a continuing basis?

The people of Vermont and Alaska are always busy with gun duels, according to u ?

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
maporsche wrote:

Setanta wrote:

Let me know if you come up with a plausible argument to suggest these jokers would use their weapons quickly and effectively with no danger to anyone else.

Let me be as clear as I can.

These 'jokers' should be trained by law enforcement personal to be allowed this privledge. This training should be designed to prepare for likely scenerios that a student may encounter.

Would these gun toters get a nice shiny badge at the end of their "police training"?

If so, thay can just leave it there, or dump it in the trash,
but competent knowledge of good defensive strategy is useful.

David

Why should the police train vigilantes? Better to let the police do the job they are paid to do and keep the lunatic fringe out of it.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
maporsche wrote:

Setanta wrote:

Let me know if you come up with a plausible argument to suggest these jokers would use their weapons quickly and effectively with no danger to anyone else.

Let me be as clear as I can.

These 'jokers' should be trained by law enforcement personal to be allowed this privledge. This training should be designed to prepare for likely scenerios that a student may encounter.

Would these gun toters get a nice shiny badge at the end of their "police training"?

If so, thay can just leave it there, or dump it in the trash,
but competent knowledge of good defensive strategy is useful.

David

Why should the police train vigilantes?
Better to let the police do the job they are paid to do and keep the lunatic fringe out of it.

The police will do what we TELL them to DO, or get other jobs,
whereupon their REPLACEMENTS will do what we TELL them to DO.

Let 's not lose sight of who is paying WHOM.

In America, government is under, below the citizens.

Let me be CLEAR; we r discussing competent handling
of defensive emergencies thru optimal strategies, not chasing down wise guys.

We pay them for that.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

David wrote:

Quote:

The police will do what we TELL them to DO, or get other jobs,

Is the we the gun nuts? I would think that everyday, rational, lawabiding citizens would be happy to let the police do the job they are hired for.

Since you get to TELL the police what to do, can you tell them who to give a ticket to and who not? Can you just threaten to fire them if they give you a ticket? I am just trying to understand your logic here.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

Um, we pay police officers to train concealed carry classes TODAY, in 48 states that offer it. Their salary is paid through the fees/dues that millions if permit owners have purchased already. I have been trained by two of these individuals in my own concealed carry classes.

I don't see the problem with this. It's going on all around ALL of you (unless you are in IL or WI) everyday, all the time.

There's over 300,000,000 guns in the US. you think David owns them all?

1 Reply

The real gun story from Utah lately is the one about the law barring the federal govt. from interfering with any business involving intrastate firearm commerce.

Browning of course is headquartered in Utah, as are other manufacturers.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=9824672

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

Gunga,
Do u have any idea of how to get the transcript of oral arguments
in McDonald v. Chicago in NON-pdf ??

David

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporche wrote:

Quote:

There's over 300,000,000 guns in the US. you think David owns them all?

I think he would if he could.

2 Replies

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

maporche wrote:

Quote:
There's over 300,000,000 guns in the US. you think David owns them all?

I think he would if he could.

I woud not disarm my fellow Americans.

David

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

You are pretty boring to talk to here. You keep ignoring the important parts of my post, I assume in order to focus all your efforts on being witty.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

You are pretty boring to talk to here. You keep ignoring the important parts of my post, I assume in order to focus all your efforts on being witty.

Which parts would they be?

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

I'm sure you know; you just choose not to reference them. I mean my rebuttal to your 'we shouldn't pay the police to do this' post was completely edited out and unremarked upon.

It's your right, of course, to respond to whatever you want. I just find your recent posts boring. Don't change anything on my account; but it will make me less likely to respond.

Your actions here will have consequences on the quality of conversations you'll have moving forward.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

I'm sure you know; you just choose not to reference them.
I mean my rebuttal to your 'we shouldn't pay the police to do this'
post was completely edited out and unremarked upon.

It's your right, of course, to respond to whatever you want.
I just find your recent posts boring. Don't change anything on my account;
but it will make me less likely to respond.

Your actions here will have consequences on the quality
of conversations you'll have moving forward.

That 's all Richard HAS; don 't take it personally.
The most that he is mentally able to do
is lean to the left and be social, offering lite remarks.

He is not a deep thinker; he is feeble-minded.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

That 's all Richard HAS; don 't take it personally.
The most that he is mentally able to do
is lean to the left and be social, offering lite remarks.

He is not a deep thinker; he is feeble-minded.

David

....and YOU are an ass who insists on using other than usernames.

You even try to put politcal associations with people when you don't have the foggiest idea of what they may be. Anybody that disagrees with you is subject to your silly remarks of feeble mindedness etc. Grow up, David.

1 Reply

@Intrepid,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

That 's all Richard HAS; don 't take it personally.
The most that he is mentally able to do
is lean to the left and be social, offering lite remarks.

He is not a deep thinker; he is feeble-minded.

David

Quote:

You even try to put politcal associations with people
when you don't have the foggiest idea of what they may be.

That 's a foolish thing to say, Dick.
By your words over several years, u define yourself.

Quote:

Anybody that disagrees with you is subject to your silly remarks
of feeble mindedness etc.

No; that is factually incorrect, Dick.
So far as I remember, I have not attributed feeblemindedness to anyone but u.
(I mean that in the nicest way, of course.)

Quote:

Grow up, David.

If I grow up much more, I 'll grow down (like about 6 feet).

0 Replies

BILL IN UTAH PROMOTES GUN FREEDOM

Quick Links

My Account

able2know