3
   

AMERICAN CONSERVATIVES...on the wrong side of everything!

 
 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:12 pm
Show me that actual proposal with no fluff on it and I will tell you if I agree to it or not.

Do you oppose a national concealed carry permit? Like right now if you have a drivers license in your state, you can drive in any state. If I have a concealed carry permit in my state, shouldn't I be allowed to carry in any state?
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:15 pm
saintsfanbrian wrote:
Show me that actual proposal with no fluff on it and I will tell you if I agree to it or not.

Do you oppose a national concealed carry permit? Like right now if you have a drivers license in your state, you can drive in any state. If I have a concealed carry permit in my state, shouldn't I be allowed to carry in any state?

If you meet the requirements for a notional permit, yes. But I really do not understand why some many people slobber over such things. A skilled knife fighter can kill you long before you are able to draw your gun. Even a reasonably skilled unarmed person could do the same thing.
0 Replies
 
Centroles
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:16 pm
I edited in my actual proposal for the database in the post above.

I don't really care about the concealed weapon thing much actually. It's a seperate issue I never though much about. What I care about is a national database. Because I want the police to be able to track down the owner of a gun that was used in a murder in all cases, not just the ones where the gun shop kept good records and kept them in a safe place.

So back to the question, do you support the kind of national database I proposed in the above post. If not, why not?
0 Replies
 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:25 pm
2 seconds hobit, that is all it takes to draw and fire 2 well placed shots at some one. Oh and don't think I would have my hand on my pistol long before you were close enough to me to show me the knife if I felt that was the type of person you were. The number one rule is be aware of your surroundings. I don't go too many places where I think I might be ambushed by a street urchin. I also don't allow people into my house unless I know them personally. And we don't slobber over such things, we just want the same rights that you have when driving a car. And to protect our families from criminals. There are states that I could go to that a criminal can walk down the street carrying a gun and shoot me or my family and the only thing I can do to stop it is call the police. I have the right to defend myself where ever I am.

Centrol - As long as it is only accessible with the serial number of the gun and that is how it is organized, then I have no problem. If you are going to say that they can put in a name (any name) and pull up whether or not the person has a gun. No I am not for that, but if they physically have a weapon or the person in hand (and can verify his name and social security number), then put the dang thing in place. Let the lawyers sort it out. That is what they are good at.
0 Replies
 
Centroles
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:28 pm
You realise now saints, that you just took a very liberal position on gun control. You favored a policy that all the prominent conservatives would have fits with if someone tried to pass it through congress. You can't claim to be conservative on the issue of gun control anymore. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
saintsfanbrian
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:30 pm
Yes I can because I don't want you taking away my AK. And I would like to see what other "riders" the liberals have on that policy. A simple list does not a liberal make.
0 Replies
 
doglover
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:31 pm
hobitbob wrote:
I also would advocate registry of fireaerms already extant. Refusal to participate in a safety class should be grounds for denial of liscensure.


Absolutely.
0 Replies
 
Centroles
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:31 pm
I'm just saying, you're in favor of many policies that were repeatedly defeated by the NRA and conservatives.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:31 pm
In under two seconds I could (barehanded) crush your larnyx, break both of your knees, and gouge out one of your eyes, after first striking your dominant arm's olecrenon process and making you incapable of holding anything in that hand. Aren't you glad I'm not a mugger? Very Happy
A skilled knife fighter would be able to approach you very closely and slit your throat, a less skilled one will sneak up behind you. My personal opinion is that concealed carry permits are more useful as a security blanket for the average citizen, than as a method of protecting themselves. I think they may lead some people to take more chances than are prudent, becasue they trust in the cannon on their hip. Most people I know who have ccp's are not as aware of the neccessity of situational awareness as you seem to be.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:37 pm
To reiterate, I think that those who rely on their handgin for self defence, should go through somehting similar to Massad Ayoob's course on firearm self defence, and also some sort of unarmed defence class, like Krav maga.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 04:59 pm
The rule of thumb for edged weapons is that if the attacker is within 21 feet of you, there isn't enough time to safely react to his attack if your gun is in the holster.

I am not in favor of a national database. Here's why:

Quote:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin

Over the years the gun control laws have eaten away at our freedoms one tiny bite at a time. It's like being nibbled to death by ducks, or the analogy of the lobster in the cooking pot where the heat is turned up very slowly. You don't notice your rights are gone until you wake up one day and the police are at your door to confiscate all your guns. It's a slippery slope, but it's not one of the logical fallacies because we have already slid partway down the slope.

My question to those of you who advocate a national database of every gun in the country is, would you advocate a similar database for swords? And if not, why not?

I have more questions saved for later, but this is enough for now. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:01 pm
Essential is the operative word. What is essential about decentralization?

As to the sword question: because they do not have any statistical significance.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:01 pm
Tarantulas wrote:
The rule of thumb for edged weapons is that if the attacker is within 21 feet of you, there isn't enough time to safely react to his attack if your gun is in the holster.

I am not in favor of a national database. Here's why:

Quote:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin

Over the years the gun control laws have eaten away at our freedoms one tiny bite at a time. It's like being nibbled to death by ducks, or the analogy of the lobster in the cooking pot where the heat is turned up very slowly. You don't notice your rights are gone until you wake up one day and the police are at your door to confiscate all your guns. It's a slippery slope, but it's not one of the logical fallacies because we have already slid partway down the slope.

My question to those of you who advocate a national database of every gun in the country is, would you advocate a similar database for swords? And if not, why not?

I have more questions saved for later, but this is enough for now. :wink:

Yes. I would ahppily register my swords, knives, sai, tonfa, nunchaku, ekubo, rokushakubo, hanbo, naginata, etc... Very Happy
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:02 pm
DL, you are saying that all the guns that my Dad owns should be registered, even though they aren't currently and don't need to be, in order to give them to me? That's ridiculous.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:02 pm
Why is it ridiculous?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:05 pm
Because you're applying a double standard.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:07 pm
Oh, my gawd -- don't let cjhsa get hold of any weapons!
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:08 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Because you're applying a double standard.

Waht double standard? A double standard would exist if one were to not register your weapons.
0 Replies
 
Tarantulas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:12 pm
Craven de Kere wrote:
Essential is the operative word. What is essential about decentralization?

As to the sword question: because they do not have any statistical significance.

I think "essential" means any freedom is essential. The quote works better without that word, so assume it's not there. Smile

Okay, you don't think we should register swords. How about boot knives and throwing knives and all other kinds of knives used for fighting? Let's create a national database of the owners of those weapons. Okay?
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Apr, 2004 05:16 pm
Craven: They only have significance in movies like "Kill Bill."
0 Replies
 
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/08/2025 at 02:22:24