1
   

AN IMPOSSIBLE EVENT

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 08:14 pm
Bella Dea wrote:
Or perhaps trying to teach a 5 year old not to shoot his friend while playing cops and robbers with mommy and daddy's loaded gun that is in the nightstand in case of a break in.


In the Army,
a quick n effective means was employed
to teach new recruits not to walk behind recoiless rifles,
to wit:
an old crate was hung down from a tree,
behind a recoiless rifle.
As the rifle was discharged,
the backblast swiftly n utterly destroyed the suspended crate.
Further persuasion was unnecessary.


Similarly,
if u show a person in the early years of life
what a firearm can do to what is in front of it,
predictably he will understand, from observation,
not to do that to anything he does not wish to destroy,
the same as he wud not do so with a hammer,
a knife, or a rock.
Most people are not malicious,
and thus will restrain themselves from doing harm,
altho there always have been murderers at all ages,
young or old.

I will agree, that
if a child is known to be a malicious and hostile person,
then care shud be exercised to keep him from pounding people
with rocks or hammers, or harming them with sharp objects
and to try to stop him from buying or making bombs or guns
( as I used to, HARMLESSLY, for fun in the backyard, when I was around 8 to 12 years old ).
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 08:28 pm
najmelliw wrote:
You know something? I cannot understand why you start using these kind of stories as material to advocate your cause (the freedom to carry guns if so desired), whereas you state that 'only the tiniest fraction of people', namely 1% of 80 million people ( 800 thousand persons ) is for you not cause enough for gun carriers to be denied the right to wield guns. I cannot but conclude you place a VERY small value on the people's lives, unless those lives can advocate your cause.

And don't bother telling me I didn't quote you right... Reread your own post.

Naj

U DID NOT QUOTE ME RIGHT.
READ my post
.

I did NOT SAY that a full 1%
of 80,000,000 American gun owners
cause trouble with their guns.
I said that only THE TINIEST FRACTION THEREOF
did so; i.e., something much LESS than a full 1%



The Bill of Rights puts control of guns
the same as control of theology,
BEYOND THE REACH of government,
so that government can ONLY control theology or guns
by an exericise of USURPATION,
with the same authority as a schoolyard bully.
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Apr, 2006 08:32 pm
Government has as much authority to control guns
as it has to stop holding elections,
and simply remain in power.
David
0 Replies
 
lezzles
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 12:50 am
Wow! Golly gee! this is the most exciting thread I've ever read!

It's got it all! Rotten commies, dirty recidivists, semi-literate gun-totin' cranks who spout the Bill of Rights, Mushariggumdurremdah*, a Latin term (always adds a bit of credence), teenage head-smashing hammer murderers, 5-year-olds loading up and riding to the rescue, "my-discredited-research-beats-your-discredited-research" - even the 3 musketeers get a look-in!

I'm spell-bound. Can't wait for the next enthralling and exciting episode.

(*apologies for the spelling, Set)
0 Replies
 
Lord Ellpus
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:17 am
After trying various anagrams of omsigdavid, I have found that if I remove a few letters but add some more, and then shuffle them, I can make it read Charlton Heston. Incredible!
0 Replies
 
najmelliw
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 01:41 am
You know? I see now what you ment, but in order to avoid confusion next time, OmSigDavid, please, PLEASE, learn how to use such simple punctuation tools as comma's. Or how to write proper english sentences. That would avoid the confusion.

Nevertheless, only the tinest fraction of 1% of 80,000,000 people must be tiny indeed, if it is less significant to you then (I'm not denying it was a horrible event!) the murdercase that opened this thread. It sounds very much like utilitarianism, you know. And then only an utilitarianism from your point of view, I might add.

Funny, that you compare guns and theology. Actually, no, let me refrase that. Scary, that you compare guns and theology. very scary indeed.

Naj.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 27 Apr, 2006 08:12 am
Ahhh! Guns and bibles, the two precursors of American "civilization"...
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Apr, 2006 01:42 am
najmelliw wrote:
You know? I see now what you ment, but in order to avoid confusion next time, OmSigDavid, please, PLEASE, learn how to use such simple punctuation tools as comma's. Or how to write proper english sentences. That would avoid the confusion.

Well,
for someone who counsels me
to: " learn how to use such simple punctuation tools as comma's [sic] "
to avoid " confusion "
I suggest that u learn how to use an apostrophe,
and learn when to AVOID using one,
so as not to create " confusion " between possessive
and plurality.



Quote:

Nevertheless, only the tinest fraction of 1% of 80,000,000 people
must be tiny indeed, if it is less significant to you then
(I'm not denying it was a horrible event!) the murdercase that opened this thread.
It sounds very much like utilitarianism, you know. And then only an utilitarianism from your point of view, I might add.

U fail to understand the 2 points
that I seek to establish, to wit:
1. crime is too easy for violent criminals
because their future victims are NOT sufficiently well armed in their own defense.
Better armament of the victims yields better results,
in the event of criminal depredations,
hence, gun control encourages more crime and needless death,
in the discretion of the criminal predator.

2. Even if were otherwise,
that crime were not reduced by having a better armed citizenry,
still each citizen, of any age, has a right to defend his life
and his property from criminal depredation,
and government was never granted any authority
to limit this right of self-defense.



Quote:

Funny, that you compare guns and theology. Actually, no, let me refrase that. Scary, that you compare guns and theology. very scary indeed.
Naj.

They are equal insofar as
the authority of government to control either one.
David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
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
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/08/2021 at 03:50:05