64
   

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

 
 
BillRM
 
  -1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:09 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Well, Hawk, your side of the political spectrum seems always to be suggesting free enterprise can do what government cannot. So perhaps the "obvious compromise" ought not to be conceived of as only a governmental assessment. Maybe a panel of concerned citizens of some sort can be established to do the job.


Wonderful means to disarmed the citizens the rulers do not care for.
parados
 
  2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:14 pm
@Val Killmore,
Val Killmore wrote:

Yes I suppose he was.
Do you hope his predictions will come true and World War IV is fought with sticks and stones? We wouldn't want to be fighting with guns now do we?

If people like you have their way it probably will.

We wouldn't possibly want to keep certain types of weapons out the hands of certain people. Why would we?
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:17 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Wonderful means to disarmed the citizens the rulers do not care for.


Also a wonderful way to disarm people who shouldn't be allowed to play with guns.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:20 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:

... government is increasingly deemed to be unfit to carry out its duties.


True.

and after seeing systematic and repeated abuses of power from the government (most notably blatant manipulation attempts) calls from government to entrust it new powers are viewed with skepticism.
0 Replies
 
Val Killmore
 
  -1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:26 pm
@parados,
That's funny coming from you. People like me? That is a general statement, do explain. What are the characteristics of "people like me" who if have their way, the prediction will come true. And regarding "certain" types of weapons, are you classifying guns as WMD by any chance?

Has our initiative to keep certain types of weapons out the hands of certain people lead to the diminished of such weapons to significant lower numbers? Sure policies against proliferation of such weapons is set in place, but is it practical, in the sense that there are measures set in place that will prevent Einstein's predictions? And can you guarantee that?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:28 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Well, Hawk, your side of the political spectrum seems always to be suggesting free enterprise can do what government cannot. So perhaps the "obvious compromise" ought not to be conceived of as only a governmental assessment. Maybe a panel of concerned citizens of some sort can be established to do the job.

that is what we did with sex law, where state sponsored NGO's pass out the loot from Washington and propose law changes. the problem is that these NGO's dont let anyone in the door who does not pay homage to victim culture....we know before we start that doing this with with gun control would freeze out all those who want the citizens to be allowed to use guns. the government has already poisoned this well about subcontracting out this government function.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:33 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Re: Frank Apisa (Post 5237722)
Quote:
Well, Hawk, your side of the political spectrum seems always to be suggesting free enterprise can do what government cannot. So perhaps the "obvious compromise" ought not to be conceived of as only a governmental assessment. Maybe a panel of concerned citizens of some sort can be established to do the job.

that is what we did with sex law, where state sponsored NGO's pass out the loot from Washington and propose law changes. the problem is that these NGO's dont let anyone in the door who does not pay homage to victim culture....we know before we start that doing this with with gun control would freeze out all those who want the citizens to be allowed to use guns. the government has already positioned this well about subcontracting out this government function.


So how do YOU propose to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of people who show reckless tendencies...or otherwise show themselves as being unfit for weapon possession, Hawk?

Or do we just throw our hands up into the air and say, "Everyone can own a gun no matter how nuts or unfit...and we gotta live with the results?"
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:38 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
So how do YOU propose to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of people who show reckless tendencies...or otherwise show themselves as being unfit for weapon possession, Hawk?

i think that there is a list as long as my arm of problems that we cant fix till after we fix Washington, and that gun control is on it. I find it endlessly fascinating that Washington is pulling this diversionary tactic of trying to get us to focus on something other than their incompetence by bringing up gun control, which we cant solve BECAUSE of their incompetence and abuse of the citizens...which is incompetence again.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:43 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:

i think that there is a list as long as my arm of problems that we cant fix till after we fix Washington, and that gun control is on it. I find it endlessly fascinating that Washington is pulling this diversionary tactic of trying to get us to focus on something other than their incompetence by bringing up gun control, which we cant solve BECAUSE of their incompetence and abuse of the citizens...which is incompetence again.


Interesting. And I agree in many ways with much of what you said.

But perhaps you did not understand my question. Allow me to restate it with slightly altered wording:

How do YOU, Hawk...how do YOU propose to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of people who show reckless tendencies...or otherwise show themselves as being unfit for weapon possession?
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:51 pm
@hawkeye10,
Lets all hope & pray that FrankA is prevented from owning any weapons.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 01:57 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
How do YOU, Hawk...how do YOU propose to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of people who show reckless tendencies...or otherwise show themselves as being unfit for weapon possession?

i think that we admit that we are fucked for now, we dedicate ourselves to fixing washington which means taking it back from the corporate class who now run it against our interests, and then we have have government run a process that finds the citizens who are unfit to be trusted with the use of guns and which works to keep guns out of their hands.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:02 pm
275 pages but I think this thread has missed an important point: this debate is not between D's and R's, it is between urban and rural...rural D's have no ability to support Obama's agenda, because the people will cut them off at the knees next election.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:12 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

...rural D's have no ability to support Obama's agenda, because the people will cut them off at the knees next election.


Municipal D's will starve if any new restrictions are made to the 2nd amendment because rural farming communities will no longer supply them with food.
spendius
 
  1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:15 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
i think that we admit that we are fucked for now, we dedicate ourselves to fixing washington which means taking it back from the corporate class who now run it against our interests, and then we have have government run a process that finds the citizens who are unfit to be trusted with the use of guns and which works to keep guns out of their hands.


That's hand-wringing hawk. How do you propose fixing Washington and how do you, when you have fixed Washington, identify the citizens you refer to?
spendius
 
  2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:19 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Municipal D's will starve if any new restrictions are made to the 2nd amendment because rural farming communities will no longer supply them with food.


Do you mean you don't know farmers any better than that?

There's enough pie-in-the-sky on this thread to feed the hungry of the world.
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:21 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
How do you propose fixing Washington
we get ruthless about teaching this crowd that they work for us, and that we want this nation to be fair to all and successful. finding solutions is their mission, the fighting is a side game that we only tolerate so long as the work gets done.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:22 pm
@spendius,


The big blue cities are totally dependent on the
rural farmer for food... rural farmers and the
communities they live in will not tolerate any
additional restrictions to their constitutional rights.

Halting food shipments into DC would send a strong message.
Ruthless? Yes. Effective? You bet!
parados
 
  1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:28 pm
@Val Killmore,
Quote:
People like me?
Who want no restrictions on weapons

Quote:
And regarding "certain" types of weapons, are you classifying guns as WMD by any chance?
No. Why would you think so? Are you arguing that "arms" in the Constitution is restricted to only certain types of weapons?

For your other questions.
Yes.
Yes.
No.

Now perhaps you can start to answer my questions.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:28 pm
@H2O MAN,
most of the AG sector is owned by the corporate class, who are not going to revolt over gun issues, which they mostly do not care about.
parados
 
  1  
Sun 27 Jan, 2013 02:29 pm
@H2O MAN,
Perhaps you should understand capitalism H2o

That capital in capitalism will prevent your silly suggestion about the capitol.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 06/30/2025 at 12:17:41