Rosie and Extremism

OmSigDAVID wrote:

P.S.:
MM has a fine analytical mind,
worthy of admiration.
He is indeed correct that people can do what they want,
as this is the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave[/size]

No, he is consistently illogical and hasn't a clue how to argue.

I formerly worked in a library and I hated dealing with large type books.

Its true that I have worn glasses most of my life and have worn bifocals
for more than a decade, however, I find outsized type unreadable on anything but a billboard.

OSD, responding to Cyc, wrote:

I suspect that u r a FONY

I suspect you misapprehend. I suspect as well, based on what has been evidenced in this discussion, that you're arguing beyond your depth when you take on Cyc - but that's your call.

timberlandko wrote:

OSD, responding to Cyc, wrote:

I suspect that u r a FONY

I suspect you misapprehend. I suspect as well, based on what has been evidenced in this discussion, that you're arguing beyond your depth when you take on Cyc - but that's your call.

Let him bring it on.

As a little green fellow once said:
" I 'll be right here. "
David

It is interesting that a surprizingly large number
of liberals who r forceful in their opposition
to an ordinary citizen 's right to arm himself
in defense of his life or his other property,
carry guns themselves, and keep armed bodyguards.

If the visually impaired like them, when you write to those people, use the large fonts.

However, on this forum, the large fonts are simply rude and extremely difficult to read.

I have asked you several times to use normal fonts
and at least one other poster here has ridiculed you. Get the hint.

As for MM: read his posts.

There are so many posters here who are predictable.

For example, you are crochetdy.

I have found him to be an honorable man
whose postings I was glad to read for years on Abuzz
and I found his mind to be enlightened

OmSigDAVID wrote:

timberlandko wrote:

OSD, responding to Cyc, wrote:

I suspect that u r a FONY

I suspect you misapprehend. I suspect as well, based on what has been evidenced in this discussion, that you're arguing beyond your depth when you take on Cyc - but that's your call.

Let him bring it on.

As a little green fellow once said:
" I 'll be right here. "
David

See, the thing that you don't get is that I'm not really against you.

I've owned two rifles since I was ten - a .22 with a 14-shot capacity, and a 30-30. I've used them for various hunting purposes, and remember the first time I shot a doe - I was sweaty, scared, proud, ashamed at what I had done. I remember my father and our Scoutmaster showing us how to clean the animal, respect it, use every part of it in order to show honor to the beast.

I've done some competition target shooting and a little bit of skeet. My father is much better at skeet than I am, so much that it's humilating. He always said he didn't have anything else to do as a kid in West Texas other than shoot guns and chase tail. I used to laugh when he said that, till I saw him knock down 8 or 9 out of 10 a few times in a row.

I'm an example of someone in the middle; I respect guns, own them, have used them, and would defend myself with them. But I don't always agree with everything about gun ownership in the USA.
I dislike handguns, immensly.

I don't think they have much purpose beyond attacking human beings.

Sure, some people pistol-hunt, but that's a pittiance compared to the legions of guys
with one tucked into their waistband on a dark night.

Should handguns be illegal? Nope.

But there's nothing wrong with having to have a license.

You have to have a license to do all sorts of sh*t these days,
why not have one for the right to wave around a deadly weapon?

Police and the Military have to take courses on weapon safety
and maintenance, shouldn't regular civilians?

My objection to your comment, if you recall:

Quote:

It is interesting that a surprizingly large number
of liberals who r forceful in their opposition
to an ordinary citizen 's right to arm himself
in defense of his life or his other property,
carry guns themselves, and keep armed bodyguards.

There are many liberals who are forceful in their opposition to an ordinary citizen's right to 'arm himself,' who do not own guns. There are probably some who do, who fight against the right of the average person to do so, and yet do so themselves; there are plenty of hypocrites all around. But, I think if you look, you will see that the vast majority of arguments made by Liberals, are for licensing of sale and usage of handguns, and licensing of usage on automatic weapons.

I think if you assume that all celebrities are 'liberal' then you would be mistaken. Most of them are simply self-centered, a lifestyle that has been reinforced by years of focusing on their 'persona,' on their ego, on marketing themselves to the public. I don't listen to them any more than anyone else; but if something one of them makes sense, then I don't exclude them, either.

Now, peace be unto thee

Cycloptichorn

OSD wrote:

I have found him to be an honorable man
whose postings I was glad to read for years on Abuzz
and I found his mind to be enlightened

Found his POV to be not contrary to your own, eh?

OmSigDAVID wrote:

( I have been accosted by police at gunnery ranges,
admiring the beauty of my ordnance. )
David

Are you sure those weren't male strippers warming up for a show?

The same way that thay teach swimming safety,
I see nothing against maintenance of firearms safety,
but thay cannot interfere with you going swimming if u flunk
that course; the same applies to gun possession.
[/b]

OmSigDAVID wrote:

The same way that thay teach swimming safety,
I see nothing against maintenance of firearms safety,
but thay cannot interfere with you going swimming if u flunk
that course; the same applies to gun possession.
[/b]

One obvious difference, of course, is that it is relatively difficult to kill someone besides yourself while swimming.

ossobucco -- I scroll past most of that big type because, like you, I find it akin to standing next to a bank of amplifiers. I also find it an expression of extreme ego: my letters are the biggest! my letters are the brightest colors!

David -- I am not going to paste and pare your posts, so I will tell you that being honorable and being logical are neither mutually inclusive nor exclusive.

As for the Founding Fathers having been opposed to the licensing of guns, well, you've yanked them from their historical context. They lived in a world when people needed to hunt game to supplement their husbandry and when many of the European settlers had to protect their wives, children and livestock. As they were used to indentured servants and apprenticeships for craftspeople, we can say with some assurance that if they lived in a less wild and dangerous environment, they would approve licenses for guns. And I wonder how many residents of Philadelphia or some of the other major towns owned rifles that they kept in town? On the other hand, they may have owned dueling pistols -- we know Hamilton and Burr did -- but there was a sort of covert licensing to the dueling pistol as property of 'gentlemen.'