Pages: 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 14

 

2006-07-05 06:41:34
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7058

Skruples wrote:

stryyker wrote:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
I think if it came right down to it the military would roll right over the American people. Johnny average with his 12 guage shotgun, or whatever guns his personal arsenal includes is no match for a well trained soldier, let alone a tank or aircraft. I put more faith in the military personnel's reluctance to act upon orders that put them in conflict with the public, and the laws that prevent the military from being used against the people.
The military is the people, For the most part they are Right wing, freedom loving people. I doubt they could ever be effectively turned on their own people.

However, when an A10 disappeared during clintons administration.
clinton and his staff were visibly worried until it turned up. What does that tell you.
2006-07-05 06:44:33
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6783

Horseman 77 wrote:

The military is the people, For the most part they are Right wing, freedom loving people. I doubt they could ever be effectively turned on their own people.
Except that if the people on this forum are anything to judge by most Rightists believing Leftists to be some sort of a disease, and therefore cannot be trusted with so many weapons.  This also brings up the question of bias in any information provided by the American military.

Horseman 77 wrote:

However, when an A10 disappeared during clintons administration.
clinton and his staff were visibly worried until it turned up. What does that tell you.
That the US Army (Air Force?  Who's was it?) cannot be trusted to allow a democratically elected government to run it's course.
2006-07-05 07:13:42
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7058

Bubbalo wrote:

Okay, here's another good one:  by your logic, pre-emptive strikes ought not be made.  Outlawing guns would be pre-emptively striking at assault with a firearm.

More to the point, however, is the fact that I am correct.  Someone who gets a gun and is law-abiding until they shoot someone is not a criminal until that point.  It is, therefore, more expensive for the victim, as they must pay for that persons freedom to have a lethal weapon with their life.

Your analogy is also lacking.  The objects you list can all be used for purposes which harm noone.  A gun is designed to harm.  I find you accusal of a pre-judge pre-punish policy also foolish: by your logic anyone ought be able to own anything and do whatever they like with it provided they harm noone.  You'd better run down to city hall, Horseman, they've pre-judged and pre-punished you by prohibiting your access to tactical nuclear weapons!
Once again  you have deluded the level of debate with your (Abrams tank, Tactical Nuke) nonsense. Laws restricting citizens and warfare are two entirely different subjects. To draw parallels is ridiculous and requires no response.
Guns are designed for many specific purposes, I never bought a "Harm gun".

Restricting a citizens Constitutional rights with out a crime being committed is a serious subject not taken lightly.

It is also a well know fact that as our gun laws have become more restrictive Violent crimes have increased exponentially.

Many areas and municipalities are loosening legal carry restrictions and everywhere they do violent crime ebbs proportionality.

Like I said before The law abiding gun owner commits a level of crimes that is unmeasurable in the USA.
We all know this if you choose to ignore it as the cornerstone of your argument. So be it! If you ignore the facts, debate can only stagnate.
2006-07-05 07:48:52
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7058

Horseman 77 wrote:

The military is the people, For the most part they are Right wing, freedom loving people. I doubt they could ever be effectively turned on their own people.

Bubbalo wrote:

Except that if the people on this forum are anything to judge by .
They are not, other posts have shown most are children who live at home and have learned few of "life's hard lessons " and have yet to acquire "real world experience" outside of the classroom.

Bubbalo wrote:

most Rightists believing Leftists to be some sort of a disease, .
Please speak only for yourself, at the very worst I believe They are not, most are children who live at home and have learned few of "life's hard lessons " and have yet to acquire "real world experience" outside of the classroom.

Bubbalo wrote:

and therefore cannot be trusted with so many weapons..
again, speak only for yourself.

Bubbalo wrote:

This also brings up the question of bias in any information provided by the American military..
What are you talking about here ? How do you come to this conclusion? What are you referencing ?

Horseman 77 wrote:

However, when an A10 disappeared during clintons administration.
clinton and his staff were visibly worried until it turned up. What does that tell you.

Bubbalo wrote:

That the US Army (Air Force?  Who's was it?) cannot be trusted to allow a democratically elected government to run it's course.
Tell me how you came to this conclusion ? Clearly you don't even read before you respond,

There was no plot, no subterfuge, nothing afoul or afoot by anyone. The point was that a leader of questionable loyalty, integrity and character could probebly not trust his own people and military.

Being in no possession of no loyalty, integrity and character it must be difficult to judge, recognize or trust the trait in others, like describing colors to some one borne blind.

the A10 was lost in a training accident thats all......


Silence.... lol bitch got owned, again !

Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-07-07 15:44:33)

2006-07-05 13:27:18
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York

Bubbalo wrote:

Okay, here's another good one:  by your logic, pre-emptive strikes ought not be made.  Outlawing guns would be pre-emptively striking at assault with a firearm.

More to the point, however, is the fact that I am correct.  Someone who gets a gun and is law-abiding until they shoot someone is not a criminal until that point.  It is, therefore, more expensive for the victim, as they must pay for that persons freedom to have a lethal weapon with their life.

Your analogy is also lacking.  The objects you list can all be used for purposes which harm noone.  A gun is designed to harm.  I find you accusal of a pre-judge pre-punish policy also foolish: by your logic anyone ought be able to own anything and do whatever they like with it provided they harm noone.  You'd better run down to city hall, Horseman, they've pre-judged and pre-punished you by prohibiting your access to tactical nuclear weapons!
I will say this only once more Bud, I KILLED a carjacker in the parkinglot of a 7-11 store. He was starting to take off with my wife, my 3 year old and my 10 year old LOCKED in the car. Do you think me a criminal for Protecting my family? The cops gave me a pat on the back, because this Socalled humanbeing had a rap sheet longer than my arm of assaults, and I think he was on his last Hoora and my family would have ended up dead.

I regret what i had to do, But had no choice, so if that makes me a criminal, so be it, but my wife and kids are still alive. Who knows how many lives i might have saved that day, Just from a possible high speed chase, and we all know those dont end well now do they.

Im done with this subject. I thank god I had my right to carry my legal weapon that day, and i still do every day of my life. I NEVER leave home without it.
2006-07-05 16:05:48
Ether151
Banned
+22|6881
I think that you did exactly what was need in that possition, I have almost come to that point my self a car jacker was trying to take off with my car and my wife was also in the car and when I drew my gun on him he hit the floor just like that he was unarmed but this situation could have been a nightmare, when it comes to loved ones there is no exception I was ready to put him down and if the car jacker would have waited another second or so I would have.  I for one am on your side in this issue HEADSTONE.  With your wife and kids in the car I would have done the same without hesitation.  For those of you that have not been put in a situation like this have no right to judge this man and his actions, it is one thing to talk about things like this but to actualy be there is something you couldn't possibly comprehend.
2006-07-05 20:44:29
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York
your exactly right, Its so hard to comprehend its not even funny
2006-07-05 21:03:07
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6911|Tampa Bay Florida

JG1567JG wrote:

The NRA is about allot more than just gun ownership.  They help protect hunters rights against crazy groups like peta. They help protect freedom of speech with the very first lawsuit against the Campaign Finance Reform Act which limits groups such as the NRA from saying anything about a politician within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days before a general election. If that isn't a violation of the First Amendment to the constitution then I dont know what is.  The lawsuit unfortunatly failed. Without the Second Amendment, the government can take away the whole constitution.
excuse me, but, protect hunters rights?


ROFL
2006-07-05 21:14:01
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6771|Southeastern USA
well all I can say is that all of you need to watch bowling for columbine............
then do like I did and join the NRA as soon as you hit the eject button on the DVD player, Charleton Heston thanks you for my membership, Michael Moore
2006-07-05 21:23:46
|-LoNgHiLL-|
Member Member
+7|6783|Classified

Bubbalo wrote:

by your logic, pre-emptive strikes ought not be made.  Outlawing guns would be pre-emptively striking at assault with a firearm.
To me; your logic is more like the USA striking the EU with a nuke to prevent China from nuking the US...

Bubbalo wrote:

by your logic anyone ought be able to own anything and do whatever they like with it provided they harm noone.
Actually I agree...

Bubbalo wrote:

You'd better run down to city hall, Horseman, they've pre-judged and pre-punished you by prohibiting your access to tactical nuclear weapons!
But, do you actually know a person who wants to own a nuke that isnt at least a little disturbed?

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

I thank god I had my right to carry my legal weapon that day, and i still do every day of my life.
Where do you live? In 48 out of the 50 states carrying a fire arm is a PRIVILEGE... They took away our rite along time ago...

kr@cker wrote:

well all I can say is that all of you need to watch bowling for columbine............
then do like I did and join the NRA as soon as you hit the eject button on the DVD player, Charleton Heston thanks you for my membership, Michael Moore
Dont forget that MM dubbed in new questions after recording the interview with CH...

Last edited by |-LoNgHiLL-| (2006-07-05 21:38:01)

2006-07-06 04:06:28
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York

|-LoNgHiLL-| wrote:

Bubbalo wrote:

by your logic, pre-emptive strikes ought not be made.  Outlawing guns would be pre-emptively striking at assault with a firearm.
To me; your logic is more like the USA striking the EU with a nuke to prevent China from nuking the US...

Bubbalo wrote:

by your logic anyone ought be able to own anything and do whatever they like with it provided they harm noone.
Actually I agree...

Bubbalo wrote:

You'd better run down to city hall, Horseman, they've pre-judged and pre-punished you by prohibiting your access to tactical nuclear weapons!
But, do you actually know a person who wants to own a nuke that isnt at least a little disturbed?

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

I thank god I had my right to carry my legal weapon that day, and i still do every day of my life.
Where do you live? In 48 out of the 50 states carrying a fire arm is a PRIVILEGE... They took away our rite along time ago...

kr@cker wrote:

well all I can say is that all of you need to watch bowling for columbine............
then do like I did and join the NRA as soon as you hit the eject button on the DVD player, Charleton Heston thanks you for my membership, Michael Moore
Dont forget that MM dubbed in new questions after recording the interview with CH...
At the age of 21 i had the privilege to exercise my right to posses and carry a firearm. After an application process, and $22 later, a judge looked at my paper work and granted me that right. Took him all of 30 seconds seeing i was never ever in trouble before. I was one of the last people in Onondaga County here in Syracuse NY that was allowed the right as i call it, granted the right to Carry a concealed weapon. Unfortunately, they no longer give out carry permits, if you even say you want a pistol for protection, the liberal Judge denies your permit. Kind of sick i say. I mean whats the logic? I want a pistol to shoot at paper??? But to be honest i have a 6 shot shorty shotgun with double 0 Buckshot in it for my home. It WILL take out a full door in one shot.
2006-07-06 04:14:50
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York

Spearhead wrote:

JG1567JG wrote:

The NRA is about allot more than just gun ownership.  They help protect hunters rights against crazy groups like peta. They help protect freedom of speech with the very first lawsuit against the Campaign Finance Reform Act which limits groups such as the NRA from saying anything about a politician within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days before a general election. If that isn't a violation of the First Amendment to the constitution then I dont know what is.  The lawsuit unfortunatly failed. Without the Second Amendment, the government can take away the whole constitution.
excuse me, but, protect hunters rights?


ROFL
HEY!!! I belong to PETA!!!!!  People Eating Tasty Animals!!


Had the missfortune of meeting some of these jokers in the woods with whistles, But im glad to say, after a shot near the foot of there lead idiot, They left ASAP!!!
2006-07-06 05:17:39
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6771|Southeastern USA
trespass laws come on handy when you meet these pussies out in the woods, remember when all those deer in the midwest got overpopulated and were suffering from that chronic wasting disease (the deer couldn't absorb it's food properly, and  slowly starved to death over a period of weeks), the states tried to enact a bill that would put together a group of hunters to cut down the deer population and slow the disease's spread, and guess who wanted to stop it? Even in the areas they weren't successful they tied up the action so long thousands of deer were starved to death.

"Animals have the right to butter and garlic"- Ted Nugent

Last edited by kr@cker (2006-07-06 06:52:22)

2006-07-06 07:58:34
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York

kr@cker wrote:

trespass laws come on handy when you meet these pussies out in the woods, remember when all those deer in the midwest got overpopulated and were suffering from that chronic wasting disease (the deer couldn't absorb it's food properly, and  slowly starved to death over a period of weeks), the states tried to enact a bill that would put together a group of hunters to cut down the deer population and slow the disease's spread, and guess who wanted to stop it? Even in the areas they weren't successful they tied up the action so long thousands of deer were starved to death.

"Animals have the right to butter and garlic"- Ted Nugent
And now the disease is spreading like wildfire. Here in Onida county here in NY, they had to kill off a whole farm of deer because of CWD. They also had special hunts to take out a hundred wild deer that 30% had CWD.

Thanks PETA!!! Assholes!
2006-07-06 09:09:43
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6993|PNW

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

At the age of 21 i had the privilege to exercise my right to posses and carry a firearm. After an application process, and $22 later, a judge looked at my paper work and granted me that right. Took him all of 30 seconds seeing i was never ever in trouble before. I was one of the last people in Onondaga County here in Syracuse NY that was allowed the right as i call it, granted the right to Carry a concealed weapon. Unfortunately, they no longer give out carry permits, if you even say you want a pistol for protection, the liberal Judge denies your permit. Kind of sick i say. I mean whats the logic? I want a pistol to shoot at paper??? But to be honest i have a 6 shot shorty shotgun with double 0 Buckshot in it for my home. It WILL take out a full door in one shot.
There doesn't have to be any logic. A shotgun is nearly as easily concealable as a handgun if you shorten the barrel. But striking out at various types of firearms overtime is easier than just banning them altogether.

I could inflict deadly wounds with my 80lb draw compound bow or a knife bought at a quickie-mart, but nobody looks at me twice for buying archery and cutlery gear...

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-07-06 09:11:53)

2006-07-06 09:27:33
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

At the age of 21 i had the privilege to exercise my right to posses and carry a firearm. After an application process, and $22 later, a judge looked at my paper work and granted me that right. Took him all of 30 seconds seeing i was never ever in trouble before. I was one of the last people in Onondaga County here in Syracuse NY that was allowed the right as i call it, granted the right to Carry a concealed weapon. Unfortunately, they no longer give out carry permits, if you even say you want a pistol for protection, the liberal Judge denies your permit. Kind of sick i say. I mean whats the logic? I want a pistol to shoot at paper??? But to be honest i have a 6 shot shorty shotgun with double 0 Buckshot in it for my home. It WILL take out a full door in one shot.
There doesn't have to be any logic. A shotgun is nearly as easily concealable as a handgun if you shorten the barrel. But striking out at various types of firearms overtime is easier than just banning them altogether.

I could inflict deadly wounds with my 80lb draw compound bow or a knife bought at a quickie-mart, but nobody looks at me twice for buying archery and cutlery gear...
I hear ya.  But you need to look no further than the UK to see that even Kitchenware is now Illegal. They actually want people to turn in there frigging Kitchen Knives. Unless my friend was lying to me, I think thats just plain CRAZY!!
2006-07-06 09:41:14
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6771|Southeastern USA
have they issued safety scissors yet?
2006-07-06 09:41:54
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6993|PNW

kr@cker wrote:

have they issued safety scissors yet?
I wouldn't think so. You can still poke an eye out with those plastic fatties.
2006-07-06 13:40:14
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7058

JG1567JG wrote:

The NRA is about allot more than just gun ownership.  They help protect hunters rights against crazy groups like peta. They help protect freedom of speech with the very first lawsuit against the Campaign Finance Reform Act which limits groups such as the NRA from saying anything about a politician within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days before a general election. If that isn't a violation of the First Amendment to the constitution then I dont know what is.  The lawsuit unfortunatly failed. Without the Second Amendment, the government can take away the whole constitution.
Most law enforcement agencies use the NRA safety training as does the US Armed Forces at times, They trained troops deploying in Iraq. Its a better course, more live range time and cheaper. Less expense to the taxpayer.

PS. Didn't you know only liberals can decide who should have rights and be protected.

You are a liberal or a Fascist ! Am I not correct ?
2006-07-06 14:35:20
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6771|Southeastern USA

Horseman 77 wrote:

JG1567JG wrote:

The NRA is about allot more than just gun ownership.  They help protect hunters rights against crazy groups like peta. They help protect freedom of speech with the very first lawsuit against the Campaign Finance Reform Act which limits groups such as the NRA from saying anything about a politician within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days before a general election. If that isn't a violation of the First Amendment to the constitution then I dont know what is.  The lawsuit unfortunatly failed. Without the Second Amendment, the government can take away the whole constitution.
Most law enforcement agencies use the NRA safety training as does the US Armed Forces at times, They trained troops deploying in Iraq. Its a better course, more live range time and cheaper. Less expense to the taxpayer.

PS. Didn't you know only liberals can decide who should have rights and be protected.

You are a liberal or a Fascist ! Am I not correct ?
George Souros of Moveon.org spearheaded the Campaign Finance Reform Act movement, while at the same time retaining armies of lawyers to find loopholes to allow him to continue lobbying as usual, you'll notice that Moveon.org is often airing campaign commercials long after everyone else is forced to quit.
2006-07-06 15:20:34
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6923|New York

kr@cker wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

JG1567JG wrote:

The NRA is about allot more than just gun ownership.  They help protect hunters rights against crazy groups like peta. They help protect freedom of speech with the very first lawsuit against the Campaign Finance Reform Act which limits groups such as the NRA from saying anything about a politician within 30 days of a primary election and 60 days before a general election. If that isn't a violation of the First Amendment to the constitution then I dont know what is.  The lawsuit unfortunatly failed. Without the Second Amendment, the government can take away the whole constitution.
Most law enforcement agencies use the NRA safety training as does the US Armed Forces at times, They trained troops deploying in Iraq. Its a better course, more live range time and cheaper. Less expense to the taxpayer.

PS. Didn't you know only liberals can decide who should have rights and be protected.

You are a liberal or a Fascist ! Am I not correct ?
George Souros of Moveon.org spearheaded the Campaign Finance Reform Act movement, while at the same time retaining armies of lawyers to find loopholes to allow him to continue lobbying as usual, you'll notice that Moveon.org is often airing campaign commercials long after everyone else is forced to quit.
Alls George is doing is causeing heartache for his party. It will be moveon alright, The Dems loseing even more seats if this dingbat keeps it up. The conservatives Will turn out in mass if pushed hard enough by his propaganda.

Glad im Independent now, I just dont see good choices on neither side yet.
2006-07-12 11:29:40
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7058
had his commie ass kicked right out of the post. case .79
2006-07-12 11:46:33
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6771|Southeastern USA
I just got a newsletter from the NRA (I joined right after watching bowling for columbine) detailing the UN's 8734612836402783th attempt to regulate private gun ownership, they apparently spent the whole time arguing with each other as usual, I'll post some relevant portions when I get home.
2006-07-20 00:20:31
Sambuccashake
Member
+126|6832|Sweden
I don't know why you're allowed to purchase assault rifles and whatnot but this commercial made me laugh:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 4024579484
2006-07-21 10:15:30
Jinto-sk
Laid Back Yorkshireman
+183|6813|Scarborough Yorkshire England

Sambuccashake wrote:

I don't know why you're allowed to purchase assault rifles and whatnot but this commercial made me laugh:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 4024579484
lmao cool ad

 

Pages: 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 14

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard