0
   

The Communist Origin of the Modern Conservative Movement VI

 
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 6 Dec, 2018 11:28 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
The NRA has done everything in its power to make sure the real truth about guns is hidden from the American people and it is now more corrupt than ever taking the Russian money to try and further corrupt our government.

The real truth about guns is hidden in the crap filled propaganda you push and the massive over use of transference from the violent left.

Quote:
I know of no police department that gather stats on how many time people use a gun for defensive purposes other then police using their guns in criminal situations.

It's called police reports, and in order for someone to claim a self-defense shooting if someone was shot, the police have to investigate. Not to mention not every case of GDU leads to someone being either shot or killed. My DGU is an example, someone was trying to break into my garage and they thought better of doing so when they found my gun pointing at them through the sliding glass door on the back of the house. I didn't have to shoot him, he ran off, that's usually the case with a vast majority of DGU cases. Why do you think the range of DGU was 2.5 million to 250,000? More fair studies are required, not studies based on simple violence, but overall gun use.

Quote:
The National Gun Manufacturer Association has one reason and only one reason to exist, to sell more guns.

There is no such gun group. What you might be looking for is the NSSF, National Shooting Sports Foundation, they are the gun manufacture lobby.
https://www.nssf.org/

Quote:
There are no moral concerns just profit.

That's where you would be wrong. The moral concerns is the ability of US citizens to protect their lives and property. I find it immoral to think banning guns will keep people safe. You think removing guns will lower crime and that isn't the case. The crime stats don't favor the average American if they have nothing to protect themselves.

Quote:
Would you say that social security, Medicare and Medicaid are failures?

Yes, in their own original mission statements and purpose. They all suffer from "mission creep" and fraud is rampant in those systems. There are no real checks and balances and the politicians use them as weapons in political battles instead of actually helping people.

Quote:
Those programs are pure socialism you will find a variation of those programs in every socialist country.

No, they are not pure Socialism but they are now being pushed for those purposes. I don't care what other countries do, we are the USA and have always done things differently, there is a reason we are a world power and the rest aren't. We innovate and find new and better ways. Hell, the SS system is 100 years old and should be completely revamped to match our modern economy, not a time when only 1 person in the house worked.
If the stock market is good enough for the 1% and their money, it should be good enough for me to invest my SS funds as well.

Quote:
America has a hybrid government made up of both greed-based solutions (capitalist) and social solutions. Ignorant people like to ignore the socialists features of our government.

We don't ignore the "socialist features" of the system, we fight against them and push for reform.

Quote:
Look around you friend socialism is alive and well all around you. The older people have some dignity do to social security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

It's funny how you think asking for govt handouts is a form of dignity. For those who are able bodied and accept those handouts, isn't dignity, it's laziness. That's part of the problem with socialism, it convinces people they don't have to work or provide for themselves, there is still some sucker who will want to do it for them. Our social safety net should be based on actual need and ability, not wants and demands.

Quote:
Before social security, notice the word, once a husband died his wife was left to eat out of trash can in your beautiful greed-based society where everything is divided up based on greed.

That just wasn't the case back then, we actually had a much closer society of those willing to help each other, and provide for those who couldn't help themselves. A majority of our programs came out of the depression and should have gone away when we recovered from the Great Depression. The only thing those programs do now is provide ammo for political wars.

Quote:
Twins are rare would you consider that a birth defect? In effect a mutation of a cell results in two fetuses

Only a fool would ask such a question.

Quote:
Children are born with a cleft palate is correcting that really any different?

Nothing at all, except we aren't talking about such things or even true physically intersex people. We are talking about people who "self identify" as the opposite sex, people born with normally working bodies who think they were born of the wrong sex and want surgery to "fix" the problem.

Quote:
Goggle listed the shooting of children in a bed but did not list those both shot with the same bullet.

It more than likely didn't happen the way you remember it did, doesn't stop you from pushing a false narrative.

Quote:
The National Gun Manufacture Associations want to hide the fact that guns are the number one health hazard in America today and they corrupted the political system to make sure it stays hidden.

As I noted above, there is no such group, you are looking for the NSSF, they are the gun manufactures lobby, the NRA is a citizens rights gun group, making sure people here in the US have Constitutional access to firearms for their use, as the 2nd Amendment states and is the only Amendment which says "shall not be infringed".

Quote:
Don’t kid yourself Dickey Act was meant to keep the facts hidden. At no time in history has anything like Dickey Act been even attempted it shows rampant corruption of government by big business.

You are the one kidding yourself, the only information that was being hidden was a fair study on guns. Gun violence can still be studied but those studies can't be used to change our Constitution. The Constitution was put in place to limit the Federal Govt, not limit the citizens.

Quote:
The only study that would help the gun lobby is one that showed nobody was shot or injured by a gun in America and that will never happen.

Why do you never mention or even read the 2013 CDC study, why do no leftists or media people reference the study? They are scared of the truth and will only report on bias studies that back their anti-gun agenda.
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 6 Dec, 2018 11:53 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
This is typical gun nut reasoning give an 18-year-old a gun and send him off to interact with other youngsters. What did this gun nut think would happen when his kid got in a fight? He is going to his car to get the gun daddy gave him and even the score and that is exactly what he did.

If you don't like 18 year old adults with guns, then change the age of an adult to 21. You don't seem to have this same reaction to the gang shooters, and they kill more people then the type of person you are claiming is a gun nut. Besides, I've already agreed with you, this doesn't sound like a DGU to me.

Quote:
This is what happens when you give a teenager a deadly weapon and say now you can decide who lives and who dies.

You say teenager as if an 18 year old isn't an adult. Raise the age of adulthood to 21 or 25, I'd support it.

Quote:
The NRA is upset with retailers who have decided they will no longer sell guns to teenagers.

Adults, 18 is the age of an adult.

Quote:
The disagreement between you and me is that you don’t want “any more regulations on gun ownership” because of the slippery slope theory while I recognize that more regulations are necessary.

That isn't so, you just happen to fall on the extreme side of the gun issue and I can't agree with an extremist on much.
The slippery slope on guns isn't a theory, people like you want them gone from society not restrictions, you have said as much, you see no reason for anyone to have a gun, that is an extreme position and one I will never agree with.

Quote:
The right to own a gun should never supercede the right for someone to live.

See, not restrictions, gun ban. The slope is slipped with you.

Quote:
I viewed the video of the incident from several different cameras.

No you didn't, there is only one video and one angle of the shooting.

Quote:
The old man pulls the gun immediately the black man is backing away when shot.

Immediately after he was assaulted and shoved to the ground.

Quote:
The old man was looking for a fight because there is no reason to pick a fight over a parking place when there are much better places available.

If that's the case, why even have handicap spaces for parking, we should just get ride of them since there is always a "better" place to park.

Quote:
The only thing hurt about the old man was his pride and that is why he killed the other man the same reason the college student killed the other college student and wounds two others. I always heard policeman say how they had a different attitude when they have a gun on them.

I don't believe anything you say about cops, you have clearly shown you anti-police bias. As for the two shootings, they are not the same types of shooting. Besides, in both cases the shooters have been arrested and are facing trial.
https://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/One-of-Michael-Drejka-s-three-lawyers-removes-herself-from-case_172803044

Quote:
A gun would not have helped in this situation after the victim was knocked senseless with the first blow.

Good thing he is only in a coma with brain damage and not dead, can you imagine the scene of his brains laying all over the place vs his brain being scrambled in his head...
I think I'm starting to see things your way, we shouldn't shoot the crooks, instead we should take the beatings and end up at the hospital in coma.


0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Thu 6 Dec, 2018 10:31 pm
@Baldimo,
ID seems to have become very popular. There is nothing like a good murder mystery that didn’t come out of somebody’s imagination. You should be able to find ID on an internet package.

____________________________________________________
The old tale that guns don’t kill people bullets do. Maybe a complete ban of ammunition might be the answer that way you could bare arms you just couldn’t fire them.

____________________________________________________
If we decide that pushing someone to the ground is a first-degree felony punishable by immediate execution, then children should have the same option. They should publish a list of offenses that gun nuts believe are punishable by immediate execution, so people would be aware.

____________________________________________________
I live in the south this state was once part of Virginia. In this county as recently as 20 years ago blacks were told you better not let the sun set on your ass in this county. One black man who found himself on jury duty was in a panic when the Judge decide to hold the jury past dark. This isn’t the even the deep south where the incident took place. You’re talking about a place where the white majority would kill black school children for going to the same school as their children. The only way to stop the angry mobs was to bring in the national guard. Many people alive today in south were raised by avowed racists that may be underground, but it didn’t go away. So, then you are telling me they should publish an age that you will not be executed on the spot for shoving someone down. Say you will not be executed for shoving anybody down under 50 but if you shove somebody down over 50 it is legal to execute you.

____________________________________________________
You think it is a shame someone is dead for shoving someone to ground but you think you should still be able to do it. The death penalty is reserved for the most severe crimes. In our society we have decided that the punishment should fit the crime, but gun nuts decided they should be able to execute people for even minor crimes.

___________________________________________________
When the black man returns to his car, he finds an angry man confronting his girlfriend. His basic instinct would be to remove the threat. All he sees is an angry man who might have a gun confronting his girlfriend.

____________________________________________________
It is very difficult to reason with somebody who wants to pick a fight. As some people get older, they are chronically angry. When I first got married, we lived in an old retired neighborhood we were the only younger couple. The next-door neighbor had a pine tree that was overgrown over my driveway. When you got out of the car you got soaked or covered with snow when you opened the car door. I never complained or ask him to trim his tree. One day I bought a big truck to haul the race car and parked it in my driveway. I looked out and he was furiously trimming the tree. I went out to thank him and he was so angry he could hardly talk. He said I had ruined his tree by breaking a branch out of his tree with the mirror on my truck which was completely in my driveway. I had a few other run ins with him and I never spoke to him again. He is the type that would shoot you if he had a gun. When he died his wife had the tree cut down.

Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Fri 7 Dec, 2018 09:57 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
You should be able to find ID on an internet package.

Don't need it, found plenty of other stuff to watch, including an old episode of New Detectives my father-in-law who was a detective, not a crook, working one of his old cases. It was pretty cool.

Quote:
The old tale that guns don’t kill people bullets do.

The phrase is actually: Guns don't kill people, people do. Meaning that the gun is an intimate object, a tool, and does not have any motives of it's own. People of motives and people use objects to kill other people. As another poster is fond of saying, would the person be any less dead if they were stabbed or beat to death? No, death is death, murder is murder. How many ID shows have you seen where people were stabbed to death, to include entire families?

Quote:
If we decide that pushing someone to the ground is a first-degree felony punishable by immediate execution, then children should have the same option.

You lose the argument when you saw such silly things.

Quote:
They should publish a list of offenses that gun nuts believe are punishable by immediate execution, so people would be aware.

How about keeping your hands to yourself and no one will feel threatened. I fail to see why you are in favor of assaulting people in the first place. You are actually arguing that it should be ok to assault someone. Interesting.

Quote:
I live in the south this state was once part of Virginia. In this county as recently as 20 years ago blacks were told you better not let the sun set on your ass in this county. One black man who found himself on jury duty was in a panic when the Judge decide to hold the jury past dark. This isn’t the even the deep south where the incident took place. You’re talking about a place where the white majority would kill black school children for going to the same school as their children.

The events you are talking about took place over 40 years ago, before I was born. The US has changed a lot, not every instance of violence is race related and to think it is, shows your own level of racism and transference.

Quote:
You think it is a shame someone is dead for shoving someone to ground but you think you should still be able to do it.

I don't want to see the right of self-defense taken away because a few individuals have misused it.

Quote:
The death penalty is reserved for the most severe crimes.

Are you sure about that? There are plenty of people who have been found guilty of the most horrible crimes who don't get the death penalty and people, mostly from the left, who oppose the death penalty regardless of what someone did.

Quote:
When the black man returns to his car, he finds an angry man confronting his girlfriend. His basic instinct would be to remove the threat. All he sees is an angry man who might have a gun confronting his girlfriend.

Drop the BS. The man was standing there talking to the woman in the car, there was no threat. If he thought the guy had a gun, he wouldn't have attacked him. There is zero evidence the guy had a gun until he was pulling it out on the advancing attacker. Once the attacker saw the gun, that's when he started to turn away, not prior. He was already walking up on the guy on the ground, and I've seen enough fight video's to know the stance the guy was taking and it wasn't one that said he was going to back off, until he saw the gun. At that point the guy already felt in fear of his life, it's a subjective call and one the courts will be making in 2019 as this case goes in front of a judge.

Quote:
It is very difficult to reason with somebody who wants to pick a fight.

It's hard to reason with someone who said nothing to you and instead chose to use violence as their first action, how to you talk to someone from the ground?
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Dec, 2018 09:11 pm
@Baldimo,
The laws have been changed by the National Gun Manufacturers Association to stand your ground laws that allow on the site executions for even minor offences.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Fri 7 Dec, 2018 10:08 pm
@Baldimo,
I don’t know what percentage of people are shot with their own gun but it in domestic shootings I will bet it is quite high. In this case the woman had charged her ex-husband with rape. The case was due in court the next day. Her ex knew she kept a gun in her car. He gets the gun and kills her and her new boyfriend. She supplied him with a gun to kill her. Do you think that gun provided her with protection? With protection like that who needs to worry about criminals.

___________________________________________________
There is absolutely no difference between a family killed in their home, a family killed in the street, a family killed at school, or a family killed at the post office. In fact, close family members are the most likely suspects in killings.


“Individuals who commit mass shootings may fall into any number of categories, including killers of family, of coworkers, of students and of random strangers.”

Wikipedia

____________________________________________________
Look around you there is a church on nearly every corner. There is no institution that has inflicted as much absolute ignorance on western civilization as religion. If you find people believing is something completely ignorant you can bet it has it root in religion. You can never separate ignorance from religion.

____________________________________________________
If something happens over 3 million times without variation, I would argue that can’t be a birth defect and occurs naturally.

____________________________________________________
It may be a small percentage but 3,300,000 is a huge number.

____________________________________________________
If disease was killing as many people as guns do each year there would be billions spent to prevent it.

____________________________________________________
Do you think the many incidences of outright executing people for minor offences would be separated from other defensive use of guns? Here is a guy that got shoved down the guy that shoved him should be executed. This is a real slippery slope. What if he just gave him a dirty look the guy could feel really threatened by that dirty look?
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sat 8 Dec, 2018 10:02 pm
@Baldimo,
Shoving somebody would be a minor offence. Had it been reported it is doubtful that anybody would have even been arrested. At most an arrest citation might have been issued. There was a case of shoplifting where the shoplifter was shot and killed after he left the store. People can now be shot for petty theft in America. That makes the Arab countries practice of cutting a thieves’ hands off as much more humane compared to America. The message we send that is legal to execute anyone that shoves us down is not lost on the gun nuts. They will deliberately provoke people, so they can execute them just as the gun nut started argument and got shoved down. What if he got punched? What if the guy took a step in his direction? Surly the old man would have felt just as threatened. Do you have any idea how many fist fights happen every day? What the gun nuts are advocating is their right to execute anyone involved in a fight.
Zardoz
 
  3  
Reply Sun 9 Dec, 2018 10:12 pm
@Baldimo,
Face it, no study of guns will ever make them look good. The only way is to try and prevent studies of gun violence from taking place. Whether it is 3,000, 30,000 0r 300.000 people needless killed every year in America it is a bad thing. The NRA lost enough of its corrupt politicians in the last election that the amendment that prevented the study of gun violence can and should be repealed. Then we can finally get the real truth about gun violence in America.

____________________________________________________
Did you really need a gun to discourage them from breaking into the garage? When I was small, we were eating supper in the winter after dark. There was an intercom between the house and garage. All of a sudden, we heard glass breaking. My dad did not grab a gun he got an ax handle. When he got to the rear of the garage, he heard the thieves discussing what they were going to take once they got in. Dad chased them for a couple of blocks whether he landed the ax handle I never knew. Next night same time another window was broken, and the chase was on. The third night dad hid across the alley and waited they never showed up. The word must have got around because it has been over 60 years and there has never been even an attempted break in. Dad had served in WWII if he had taken a gun instead of an ax handle it is likely they might have got shot especially on the second occasion. I don’t know whether the thieves ever figured out how they were so quickly discovered intercoms were not to common in the 50s. A gun is not the answer people defended themselves for thousands of years before guns were invented. The ax handle was never reported so I guess the stats on defensive use of ax handles are not recorded.

____________________________________________________
The Gun Manufacturers Association owns and run the NRA. The NRA objectives are a carbon copy of what the Gun Manufacturers Association are. All manufacturers have associations that lobby for laws that would benefit them. There is no reason to believe the gun manufacturers are any different but there is one difference they use the NRA as a front organization.

____________________________________________________
The Gun Manufacturers Association could care less about anybody defending themselves because there is no defense against someone killing you with a gun. Even presidents with an army of secret service agents are killed with guns. So, don’t kid yourself. What it does is make a hell of a slogan to sell more guns. Most of the crime that takes place in America is made possible with guns. How many women are raped with guns? How many people are car jacked with guns? How many people are killed with guns? Guns may not be the reason for crime, but they make it so much easier.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 11:38 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
I don’t know what percentage of people are shot with their own gun but it in domestic shootings I will bet it is quite high.

So you don't have any stats but you "bet it is quite high".

Quote:
In this case the woman had charged her ex-husband with rape. The case was due in court the next day. Her ex knew she kept a gun in her car. He gets the gun and kills her and her new boyfriend. She supplied him with a gun to kill her. Do you think that gun provided her with protection? With protection like that who needs to worry about criminals.

A case you saw on a TV show, seems to be proof of what? TV likes to use sensational cases?

Quote:
There is absolutely no difference between a family killed in their home, a family killed in the street, a family killed at school, or a family killed at the post office. In fact, close family members are the most likely suspects in killings.

You are right, so what's the difference between a family killed with a gun or a hammer or a knife? Family's have been killed by all 3 items, you seem hung up on the guns for obviously bias and propagandist reasons.

Quote:
“Individuals who commit mass shootings may fall into any number of categories, including killers of family, of coworkers, of students and of random strangers.”
Wikipedia

A blanket statement that doesn't reflect the basis for such crimes and only serves to increase the death toll for propaganda.

Quote:
Look around you there is a church on nearly every corner.

So what, look around you, there is starting to be a Mosque on every corner as well, it just depends on where you live. People since the dawn of time have taken part in religion, it's nothing new and takes on many forms.

Quote:
There is no institution that has inflicted as much absolute ignorance on western civilization as religion. If you find people believing is something completely ignorant you can bet it has it root in religion. You can never separate ignorance from religion.

I would disagree with you. Socialism and Communism have done far more damage and caused more death in modern history than religion has, Communism is responsible for over 100 million deaths in the 20th Century alone, yet University professors still teach that Socialism and Neo-Maxism are good for humanity. Nazi's killed 6 million people of a single faith in a massive program of death and destruction, if people reacted to Socialists and Neo-Marxists the same way they reacted to Nazi's, the world would be a better place.

Give your anti-religious rhetoric a rest or save it for someone who wants to discuss religion.

Quote:
If something happens over 3 million times without variation, I would argue that can’t be a birth defect and occurs naturally.

You really need to stop inflating the number to make it look larger than it really is. If you want to consider it be be natural, it would have to happen in a large majority of the population, not 1% or less of the population.

Quote:
It may be a small percentage but 3,300,000 is a huge number.

Every time you make a post on this number it grows. Stop with the false #'s or prove they are correct.

Quote:
If disease was killing as many people as guns do each year there would be billions spent to prevent it.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. We have laws in place that make it illegal to kill people.

Quote:
Do you think the many incidences of outright executing people for minor offences would be separated from other defensive use of guns?

If they were minor offences, they wouldn't fall under the Stand Your Ground Laws and would be prosecuted.

Quote:
Here is a guy that got shoved down the guy that shoved him should be executed.

So you do believe in the death penalty.

Quote:
This is a real slippery slope.

It's only a slippery slope in your mind. You don't think anyone has the right to self-defense, you would rather see a man beaten into a coma then see the beater shot dead.

Quote:
What if he just gave him a dirty look the guy could feel really threatened by that dirty look?

Tell it to the DA.



0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 11:43 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Shoving somebody would be a minor offence.

It's still assault.

Quote:
Had it been reported it is doubtful that anybody would have even been arrested.

That's just it, it wasn't going to stop with a shove. The only reason the guy stopped approaching him was due to him pulling a gun from his pocket. Without that gun, that man on the ground would have been beaten pretty badly.
As it stands now, the man was arrested and is facing charges.

Quote:
There was a case of shoplifting where the shoplifter was shot and killed after he left the store.

Another story with no citation, this is once again getting old.

Quote:
People can now be shot for petty theft in America. That makes the Arab countries practice of cutting a thieves’ hands off as much more humane compared to America. The message we send that is legal to execute anyone that shoves us down is not lost on the gun nuts. They will deliberately provoke people, so they can execute them just as the gun nut started argument and got shoved down. What if he got punched? What if the guy took a step in his direction? Surly the old man would have felt just as threatened. Do you have any idea how many fist fights happen every day? What the gun nuts are advocating is their right to execute anyone involved in a fight.

Nice story, why are grown men still fighting?

0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 11:55 am
@Zardoz,
Quote:
Face it, no study of guns will ever make them look good.

Studies shouldn't be done to make things good or bad, they should tell the truth. You don't want a study that tells the truth, you want a bias study that can be used to limit our Constitutional Rights.

Quote:
The only way is to try and prevent studies of gun violence from taking place.

You are proving my point. You want a study on gun violence, I want a study on gun use. You are bias and your study request proves this.

Quote:
Whether it is 3,000, 30,000 0r 300.000 people needless killed every year in America it is a bad thing.

This is why you can't be trusted with studies, you can't even seem to get the basic stats right. People killed by guns is less than 12,000 per year, the vast majority of those people take their own lives. Stats do not favor your argument.

Quote:
Did you really need a gun to discourage them from breaking into the garage?

Yes. What was to prevent him from trying to bust into the house if I had just yelled at him? When seconds count, the police are at least 10 minutes away.

Quote:
When I was small, we were eating supper in the winter after dark. There was an intercom between the house and garage. All of a sudden, we heard glass breaking. My dad did not grab a gun he got an ax handle. When he got to the rear of the garage, he heard the thieves discussing what they were going to take once they got in. Dad chased them for a couple of blocks whether he landed the ax handle I never knew. Next night same time another window was broken, and the chase was on. The third night dad hid across the alley and waited they never showed up. The word must have got around because it has been over 60 years and there has never been even an attempted break in. Dad had served in WWII if he had taken a gun instead of an ax handle it is likely they might have got shot especially on the second occasion. I don’t know whether the thieves ever figured out how they were so quickly discovered intercoms were not to common in the 50s. A gun is not the answer people defended themselves for thousands of years before guns were invented. The ax handle was never reported so I guess the stats on defensive use of ax handles are not recorded.

Nice story.

Quote:
The Gun Manufacturers Association owns and run the NRA. The NRA objectives are a carbon copy of what the Gun Manufacturers Association are. All manufacturers have associations that lobby for laws that would benefit them. There is no reason to believe the gun manufacturers are any different but there is one difference they use the NRA as a front organization.

There is no such thing as a Gun Manufactures Association, the rest of your dribble is worthless.

Quote:
The Gun Manufacturers Association could care less about anybody defending themselves because there is no defense against someone killing you with a gun. Even presidents with an army of secret service agents are killed with guns. So, don’t kid yourself. What it does is make a hell of a slogan to sell more guns. Most of the crime that takes place in America is made possible with guns. How many women are raped with guns? How many people are car jacked with guns? How many people are killed with guns? Guns may not be the reason for crime, but they make it so much easier.

Lots of emotion, no facts, lets try this again when you actually have some facts to work with.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 12:03 pm
@Baldimo,
Quote:
There is no such thing as a Gun Manufactures Association...

But there is a gun manufacturer's association.

Quote:
The chief trade association for gun manufacturers is the National Shooting Sports Federation, which is, incidentally, located in Newtown, Conn. But the NRA takes front and center after each and every shooting.

"Today's NRA is a virtual subsidiary of the gun industry," said Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center. "While the NRA portrays itself as protecting the 'freedom' of individual gun owners, it's actually working to protect the freedom of the gun industry to manufacture and sell virtually any weapon or accessory."

BI
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 12:09 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
But there is a gun manufacturer's association.

Yes there is, and I've pointed this out to Zardoz, but he prefers to live in his own fantasy world.

Quote:
The chief trade association for gun manufacturers is the National Shooting Sports Federation, which is, incidentally, located in Newtown, Conn. But the NRA takes front and center after each and every shooting.

The NRA takes center because they do the most work in support of their members, of which I am one as of this year, 2nd Amendment rights. When the call to ban guns come out after each of these shootings, who else is going to step up, but the group who is back by 2nd Amendment supporters. It's about the rights of the people not to be infringed, which the leftists anti-gun groups do everything in the power to infringe upon.

Quote:
"Today's NRA is a virtual subsidiary of the gun industry," said Josh Sugarmann, executive director of the Violence Policy Center. "While the NRA portrays itself as protecting the 'freedom' of individual gun owners, it's actually working to protect the freedom of the gun industry to manufacture and sell virtually any weapon or accessory."

There is nothing better than posting a quote from someone who's aim is to see guns banned and the 2nd Amendment removed.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 12:39 pm
@Baldimo,
Quote:
There is nothing better than posting a quote from someone who's aim is to see guns banned and the 2nd Amendment removed.

I know he wants to ban handguns and assault-styled weapons but I haven't seen any indication that he wants to repeal the 2nd Amendment in its entirety.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 12:55 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
I know he wants to ban handguns and assault-styled weapons but I haven't seen any indication that he wants to repeal the 2nd Amendment in its entirety.

I see no difference between what he wants and a ban on the 2nd Amendment, since he has no clue how guns work and proves this with every BS post. He is basically calling for a ban and confiscation of 80% of the guns in the US, and I see that as a major violation of the "shall not be infringed" portion of the 2nd Amendment, the only amendment with such wording. I believe this shows how important firearms were to the Founding Fathers.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 01:05 pm
@Baldimo,
I was referring to Josh Sugarmann, btw.

Quote:
I believe this shows how important firearms were to the Founding Fathers.


Okay, but why is something that was important over 200 years ago just as important today? "'Cuz the Founding Fathers said so," doesn't seem like a very cogent argument to me.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 01:13 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
I was referring to Josh Sugarmann, btw.

I don't know who Josh Sugarmann is and I don't care. "Shall not be infringed".

Quote:
Okay, but why is something that was important over 200 years ago just as important today? "'Cuz the Founding Fathers said so," doesn't seem like a very cogent argument to me.

They are just as important today as they were 200 years ago. You would have to read the Federalist and anti-Federalist papers to understand what the 2nd was intended to do. When one side of the aisle says we don't need guns, it should be the first clue you really do need your guns.
0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Mon 10 Dec, 2018 10:34 pm
@Baldimo,
You would advocate doing away with social security, Medicare and Medicaid because of fraud? Would you advocate doing away with banks because banks are robbed? Would you advocate doing away with retails stores because of shop lifting? There will always be crime and people who steal. No matter what system you have criminals will find a way to steal it just becomes another cost of doing business. It is unrealistic to believe that government alone can stop fraud.

There are very few people that get social security that would say that it doesn’t help them out. Seniors would have no affordable access to healthcare without Medicare. Everyone thinks that Medicaid is only for the poor but anyone that lives long enough to go into a nursing home will see their lifetime assets eaten up in a few months and their care will be paid for by Medicaid. My mom is 90 and it is an option she is facing. She has substantial assets but fully realizes that in a couple of years they would be exhausted. At that point after she could no longer come up with a $100,000 a year without Medicaid she would simply be dumped in the street. Nursing homes are businesses just like every other business if they are not paid, they couldn’t stay in business.

Without those programs, life for the elderly in America would be worse than in third world countries.

____________________________________________________
Come on, it is named social security for a reason. Social Security was born from the Great Depression when there was a big push for social programs. Roosevelt was facing a strong American communist movement, remember Whitaker Chambers and all his fellow communists that founded the modern conservative movement? This is when they were active communists. Roosevelt was able to take the wind out of the American communists’ sails by adopting some of their best programs. That is politics at work.

Would you go to Las Vegas and “invest” your retirement saving on a roulette wheel? The stock market is gambling plain and simple you make bet on the future of a company. If the company does well, you make money. If the company goes bankrupt, you lose your money. The stock mongers point to the Dow Jones average going up. But what they don’t tell people is all the companies that bankrupt disappear from the Dow Jones and I think all 100 original companies of the Dow Jones have bankrupted or lost so value they no longer qualify to be on the Dow Jones. If you were a batter and you did not count your strike outs you would be batting 1,000. The best advice that was ever given was not to gamble with your retirement.

In WV they gave the teachers a choice between a traditional pension or letting them invest their retirement money in the stock market. The brokers convinced them if they let them invest their money in the stock market, they would all be millionaires in a few years. After a few years when reality set in the teachers found they had been duped. They had lost a good portion of their money and begged to be able to buy there way back into the traditional retirement. A very few did make a little money just as in gambling. There were some millionaires however, the stock brokers. People who make money gambling brag about but people who lose money are silent.
____________________________________________________________________________________

Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Tue 11 Dec, 2018 12:25 pm
@Zardoz,
Quote:
You would advocate doing away with social security, Medicare and Medicaid because of fraud?

This is why you don't quote what I say, it's easier to change the context of what I said. I said these programs have suffered from mission creep and rampant fraud. My solution, I would like to see the programs reformed and have a better form of means testing to qualify for the programs. Eliminate the rampant fraud and those who can work who don't work should be kicked off the programs all together.

Quote:
Would you advocate doing away with banks because banks are robbed?

No, but I would have let them fail a decade ago when they proved they were not capable of doing the business they were created to do. The Feds never should have saved the banks or any other industry that was failing. Look at what is taking place with GM after the US taxpayer saved them. This is why the govt shouldn't be saving these companies.

Quote:
Would you advocate doing away with retails stores because of shop lifting?

Stores that suffer massive losses due to theft and mismanagement often shut down and go out of business, it's nothing new under the Sun.

Quote:
There will always be crime and people who steal. No matter what system you have criminals will find a way to steal it just becomes another cost of doing business. It is unrealistic to believe that government alone can stop fraud.

If they want to stop fraud they can, but they won't because when they eliminate fraud, they isolate a part of their voter base. People like you will play this stupid game that you just played. That's why fraud won't be limited or eliminated, politicians depend on it.

Quote:
There are very few people that get social security that would say that it doesn’t help them out. Seniors would have no affordable access to healthcare without Medicare.
Without those programs, life for the elderly in America would be worse than in third world countries.

I have no vendetta against any of those programs, I don't want to see them expanded to the general population in their current forms. I would prefer we update SS to a more modern program to fit our current economy, not an economy from over 60 years ago.

Quote:
Come on, it is named social security for a reason. Social Security was born from the Great Depression when there was a big push for social programs.

The Great Depression was almost 100 years ago, the program should be reformed to meet a modern day economy and demands.

Quote:
Roosevelt was able to take the wind out of the American communists’ sails by adopting some of their best programs. That is politics at work.

So to be Communism, you adapt their demands? That leaves us with the mess we are in today. Just as we shame and degrade Nazi's, we should also shame socialist and communists, they are all of the same ilk, centralized govt control over everything. Thank the gods our Constitution protects us from such evils.

Quote:
Would you go to Las Vegas and “invest” your retirement saving on a roulette wheel? The stock market is gambling plain and simple you make bet on the future of a company. If the company does well, you make money. If the company goes bankrupt, you lose your money. The stock mongers point to the Dow Jones average going up. But what they don’t tell people is all the companies that bankrupt disappear from the Dow Jones and I think all 100 original companies of the Dow Jones have bankrupted or lost so value they no longer qualify to be on the Dow Jones. If you were a batter and you did not count your strike outs you would be batting 1,000. The best advice that was ever given was not to gamble with your retirement.

Why is the stock market good enough for the "1%" but not for the rest of us? Why should they be the only ones who make money in that system? People like you don't want anyone to be wealthy, you want us all poor and dependent on the govt.



0 Replies
 
Zardoz
 
  2  
Reply Tue 11 Dec, 2018 10:11 pm
@Baldimo,
The Republican Party fought social security for twenty years and would eliminate it in a heartbeat even today if the Democratic Party didn’t stop them.

“So how did older Americans get by? Website Gobankingrates.com compiled a list of 16 things that served for a safety net for seniors before social security, though safety net doesn’t really apply to many of the options, which including panhandling, moving into almshouses or poorhouses, or dying impoverished, which was the fate that befell 1 out of 2 in the years after the 1929 stock market crash.”


Source: AARP

When the winner take all economics results in 1 out of 2 older Americans dying impoverished socialism begins to look far superior to the average person.


I don’t know whether you realize it or not but when a couple retires each one collects their own social security based on the years they worked and what they paid in. Upon the death the survivor is able to take the higher benefit, but they do not get to collect both social security checks. I am sure the Republicans would like to allow only one check to a couple even though they both worked 40 years. When two people in a couple work both pay social security.

If you have a lot of money to invest you might make some money, but service charges eat up the small investor’s investments. If you have a million shares you pay the same service charge as if you have one share. Do you see the problem there? You also have to spend a good deal of time studying the market and all the company’s prospects. Inside information also helps a lot of big investors. ____________________________________________________________________________________
The Republican Party fought social security they want to make life in America a lottery where the winner takes all.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/23/2019 at 12:57:43