Thoughts on gun control

Foxfyre wrote:

Well help me out here Gunga. Do you think ALL Muslims are terrorists or inclined that way? If so, why do you think that?

No. I figure it's more like ten or fifteen percent, but ten or fifteen percent of a billion people is way too many to have thinking dark thoughts day and night and doing suicide bombings, and the religion itself basically supports the lunatics; the 85% who lead rational lives are doing so DESPITE the religion and not because of it. That's the problem. So long as the religion remains in anything remotely like its present form, the problem will not get better, and I do not see any hope of the religion changing until the rest of the world sets its foot down and starts playing hardball with it, i.e. with the religion and the people in charge of it.

Western nations in particular are going to have three basic choices in dealing with Islam:

Ban it.

Submit to it.

And there might be a third choice which would be to devise some officially sanctioned and tightly controlled version of it while banning all others.

But that third choice is problematical, and I do not see any more in that direction in the US at present. My own choice would be to ban the religion and let the chips fall where they will.

0 Replies

I'm having a hard time believing my eyes.

Fox, if gunga said he thought we should nuke Jerusalem, or that we should outlaw Judaism, would you condemn that or would you wonder politely how he came to that conclusion?

Have you really never read his threads before now?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I'm having a hard time believing my eyes.

Fox, if gunga said he thought we should nuke Jerusalem, or that we should outlaw Judaism, would you condemn that or would you wonder politely how he came to that conclusion?

Have you really never read his threads before now?

Do you have any idea at all how stupid that sounds?

FDR obviously gave orders to bomb Berlin while never giving orders to bomb London. Why don't you try asking somebody why they can't see what a monster FDR was by imagining him ordering the bombing of London the way he did Berlin? Mecca and the dickheads who run it and people connected with them sent 20 suicide bombers to level a major section of Manhatten island; Jerusalem and the people in charge of it have never done that. You'd think the difference would be fairly obvious.

0 Replies

Right. Mecca is a place. A place. It didn't send suicide bombers to the US, that was Osama bin Laden -- a person (who was not at Mecca when he sent them). I would think the difference would be fairly obvious.

0 Replies

The silence from foxfyre's corner speaks louder and louder...

0 Replies

gungasnake wrote:

Western nations in particular are going to have three basic choices in dealing with Islam:

Ban it.

Submit to it.

And there might be a third choice which would be to devise some officially sanctioned and tightly controlled version of it while banning all others.

As for option three, you could start by mandating that all Muslims wear yellow crescents. That way you could recognize them at first sight on the streets and be aware of the danger they pose.

0 Replies

Dartagnan wrote:

The silence from foxfyre's corner speaks louder and louder...

I'm checking in now and then. You lost me when you couldn't see the difference between what Hitler did and what Gunga is saying.

I don't agree with Gunga in how best to deal with the Islamofacist terrorist problem and would imagine few people do. His solution is extreme and would be futile. That in no way negates his right to his opinion about that without being attacked for it no matter how many straw men you guys try to build around what he is saying.

I agree with Gunga 100% in the the danger the terrorists present and the contempt I feel for their motives and practices. So far I have seen nothing at all to pin as racist on Gunga other than he condemns Islamic terrorists and the people who support them. But so do I. So should we all.

None of you have ventured to explain to him WHY he is wrong. You expend all your efforts in condemning him.

Until Islamic terrorists love their children more than they hate people different from themselves, and so long as they see terrorism as a way to force people to confirm to what they want, they will remain a serious danger to everyone in the free world.

Until the politically correct guardians of all that is right and good on the Left are willing to condemn the Islamofacist terrorists more than they condemn those who dare to criticize them, I suspect we will remain in far greater danger than we need to be.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Right. Mecca is a place. A place. It didn't send suicide bombers to the US, that was Osama bin Laden -- a person (who was not at Mecca when he sent them). I would think the difference would be fairly obvious.

Like I said, Fox and facts...oil and water.

never fails.

Try imagining he spoke that way about christians, or republicans.....

0 Replies

dlowan wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
Right. Mecca is a place. A place. It didn't send suicide bombers to the US, that was Osama bin Laden -- a person (who was not at Mecca when he sent them). I would think the difference would be fairly obvious.

Like I said, Fox and facts...oil and water.

never fails.

Try imagining he spoke that way about christians, or republicans.....

I don't have to imagine. I see it all the time from people on the Left condemning both Republicans and Christians on far less facts than what Gunga has to take on Islam. The thing is, you can try to see where somebody like Gunga is coming from and counter with your own argument. Or you can condemn him because he thinks differently than you do. So which of you is the most extreme?

0 Replies

Fox, tell me, do you explain to freedom4free why he is wrong? Or do you accept that his views are fringe and beyond reason and ignore him. Do I need to engage gunga in a debate about how you can't ban a religion and still have western values? (We have had that discussion, btw.) Or how Islam and terrorists are not equal? He admits that, and still says it would be ok to ban the religion and force the religious conversion of muslims. Do I need to explain to him why American values prevent us from nuking mecca and medina? Or why exterminating the palestinians is not a viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis? Really, would you go that far?

You are trying desperately to minimize what he is saying but it's not working. Sadly, you're lowering yourself more than you're raising him. Really Fox, you should be ashamed. Before you say one more word in his defense I urge you to do a few searches on his posts for the words "nuke", "exterminate", and "slammite".

0 Replies

I don't think people who look the other way when snood is typically racist... or who conveniently disappear when one person uses Tarbaby and then howl when someone else does should get too comfortable on their high horse re Fox's exchange with Gunga.

0 Replies

As a PRACTICAL matter,
banning a religion has no effect
and loyalty oaths are worthless.

People will continue to believe
what thay choose to believe
and to plot n conspire as thay see fit.
It did not work with the commies;
it will not work with the Moslems.

However, we may wish to consider
whether it is safe to let them into America.

David

0 Replies

That's what Lash thinks.

And we didn't even have to ask.

So fortunate.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Right. Mecca is a place.
A place.

It didn't send suicide bombers to the US,
that was Osama bin Laden -- a person
(who was not at Mecca when he sent them).
I would think the difference would be fairly obvious.

No. That 's foolish.
That 's like saying that Tokyo sent its representatives
to execute their ministrations on us on 12/7/41,
or that Moscow sent its spies.
Everyone knows what that means.

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:
msolga wrote:
You know, I'd hate to live in a society where I felt fearful enough
to believe that I had to own a gun, just in case.
That I had to own one to feel safe.

That 's like saying
that I 'd hate to live in a society
where I felt fearful enuf that I HAD to
own a spare tire just in case to feel SAFE from flat tires,
or saying
that I 'd hate to live in a society
where I felt fearful enuf that I HAD to
have fire insurance on my house, just in case
even tho there had been no fires in the neighborhood.

And it has something to do with
the likeliness of homicides,
flat tires and fires

Tho I have gone for years without the problem manifesting,
I have found that flat tires are not unlikely enuf.

Failing to plan
is planning to fail.
The life u save may be your own.

David

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Fox, tell me, do you explain to freedom4free why he is wrong? Or do you accept that his views are fringe and beyond reason and ignore him. Do I need to engage gunga in a debate about how you can't ban a religion and still have western values? (We have had that discussion, btw.) Or how Islam and terrorists are not equal? He admits that, and still says it would be ok to ban the religion and force the religious conversion of muslims. Do I need to explain to him why American values prevent us from nuking mecca and medina? Or why exterminating the palestinians is not a viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian crisis? Really, would you go that far?

You are trying desperately to minimize what he is saying but it's not working. Sadly, you're lowering yourself more than you're raising him. Really Fox, you should be ashamed. Before you say one more word in his defense I urge you to do a few searches on his posts for the words "nuke", "exterminate", and "slammite".

I told Freedom4Free exactly where he was wrong and why. And I had no problem at all ignoring him when it became apparent that he was trolling trying to stir up trouble.

I am not attempting to raise Gunga in any way shape or form. He's a big boy quite capable of defending himself. But neither am I willing to accept the tar brush you people want to paint on anybody who thinks differently than you do or who sees things from a different point of view. You people aren't ignoring Gunga. You are diverting any attempt at discussion of the topic with your less than charitable personal attacks on him. You have ignored every point I make and are now turning on me because I won't join you in your personal attacks.

It's like everybody should champion diversity as long as everybody thinks exactly like the Lefties think and uses only the words acceptable to the Lefties.

And the hypocrisy of that is pretty hard to overlook.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

That's what Lash thinks.

And we didn't even have to ask.

So fortunate.

It's a fact you have so kindly spewed all over the pages here.

Nobody has to use their imagination.

You seem proud of it. You make low racist attacks continually and make no apology. Your twisting over "Tarbaby" speaks for itself.

Tsk.

0 Replies

OmSigDAVID wrote:

old europe wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
msolga wrote:
You know, I'd hate to live in a society where I felt fearful enough
to believe that I had to own a gun, just in case.
That I had to own one to feel safe.

That 's like saying
that I 'd hate to live in a society
where I felt fearful enuf that I HAD to
own a spare tire just in case to feel SAFE from flat tires,
or saying
that I 'd hate to live in a society
where I felt fearful enuf that I HAD to
have fire insurance on my house, just in case
even tho there had been no fires in the neighborhood.

And it has something to do with
the likeliness of homicides,
flat tires and fires

Tho I have gone for years without the problem manifesting,
I have found that flat tires are not unlikely enuf.

Failing to plan
is planning to fail.
The life u save may be your own.

David

I've spent quite some time in El Salvador, not too long ago. Firearms abounded. People usually had them on the seat next to them when they drove their cars through the city. At supermarkets, they had "no guns allowed inside" signs, and you were required to leave them at the entrance. You got a number in return, and picked them up again after you had done your shopping.

Somehow, it appeared to me as if this didn't make El Salvador safer. When the sun went down, people quickly picked up their stuff, and the streets which were overly crowded during the days to an extent that it became impossible for cars to pass emptied within half an hour. The family I was living with warned me not to leave the house after sunset if I wanted to see the sun rise the next day.

I guess you would feel comfortable in a society where everyone owned a gun and was allowed to get one, no questions asked. I, personally, feel way more comfortable living in a society which sets some minimum requirements for people who want to possess a deadly weapon.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

But neither am I willing to accept the tar brush you people want to paint on anybody who thinks differently than you do or who sees things from a different point of view.

"Us people" don't tar everyone who thinks differently. We explicitly call hate-mongering and extremism for what it is. In this case "us people" happen to be right.

Quote:

You people aren't ignoring Gunga. You are diverting any attempt at discussion of the topic with your less than charitable personal attacks on him. You have ignored every point I make and are now turning on me because I won't join you in your personal attacks.

No, every point you try to make relies on minimizing the actual meaning of gungasnake's words, and we're not buying it. Not ignoring it, just no buying it.

Quote:

It's like everybody should champion diversity as long as everybody thinks exactly like the Lefties think and uses only the words acceptable to the Lefties.

And the hypocrisy of that is pretty hard to overlook.

And that's just bullshit. We're not talking about diversity, we're talking about extremist ideas that fly in the face of American values. And I feel confident calling them what they are.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Right. Mecca is a place.....

You know, I seem to have fallen into a trap here somehow or other.

I mean, somebody hands me a key to the botton to nuke Mecca right now, and I would not push it.

Here's what I HAVE said here in the past: One, that the pentagon actually has gone through the scenarios for wiping Mecca and that there are people in the pentagon who want to do it and

Two, that nuking Mecca was about the only other (than what he actually did) way George W. Bush could have proceeded after 9/11 and likely what I'd have done at the time in W.'s place.

W has taken the high road and it's absolutely sickening to listen to the grief he catches for it from leftists.

0 Replies

Thoughts on gun control

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know