Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6

 

2006-11-09 22:04:46
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6927|Seattle, WA

GATOR591957 wrote:

Who pissed in your Post Toasties?  Or are you just angry the Republican era is over?
Try actually reading my posts, thanks, next.

Spearhead wrote:

12 hours after the election you already started asking questions (rather rudely) about what the Democrats are going to do about things Republicans already F'ed up on.  I notice you didn't give answers to my comments about your questions, thats because the questions themselves were stereotypical, biased, and disrespectful.  I respect conservatives, but when someone posts something as obviously partisan and disrespectful as your OP, then it crosses the line.  I think it's quite clear, if you read your OP, that your judgement is very biased and very negatively directed towards the left.

I'm sorry if I misread your tone, but if you ask a rude, ill-mannered question, expect a rude, ill mannered answer.
Asking questions, rather rudely, Ok I'll humor you, please quote what you thought was rude and I will correct myself, I meant no ill harm, I was CURIOUS.

...........

Didn't give your answers comments, because I was busy reading some other stuff, what do you want me to address, I apologize.  The questions were in a sense sterotypical, I agree now, but why do you think that is, because Dems and the majority of em are represenative of the party of line of tax spend, disagree? Just tell me, not rudeness, facts.  I'm not saying Republican spending was under control either, careful.

Something obviously partisan, I meant it only in passing friend, you misread my intentions, but as is my character, I am usually sarcastic, so to reaffirm, I meant no rudeness or disrespect.  I added in a few humorous yet somewhat serious undertones such as taxes because well frankly, thats what the party is, a party of tax and spend, at least satirically if you disagree.    I hope spending can come under control no matter WHO IS RUNNING CONGRESS.  It needs to go DOWN.  And frankly with Pelosi on the helm, and the senate handed over, I think we are going to see some large taxes.  Not to mention the rise in minimum wage, which I agree to adjust and raise, BUT NOT FRMO $5 and a half to $7 and a half or whatever. A 2 dollar hike on min wage is not going to be good for the economy unless it is phased.  I hope it is phased or inflation will set in quicker than you mis read my statements.    Thanks for responding with a more articulate sense, have a good day man.

Wes
2006-11-09 22:54:16
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6833|Southeastern USA
i still dont see any real ideas on here, just a bunch of monday morning quarter backing at best
2006-11-09 23:33:25
beerface702
Member
+65|6976|las vegas

bob_6012 wrote:

It's nice to see some people on the left don't oppose a ban on handguns, or any weapons for that matter. It's even more nice that at least one of them thinks the Brady Bill was a joke. I hope they won't try and take our guns away because it is a constitutional right for me to own a gun, no matter what category it may be, handgun to assault rifle to hunting guns, I own them all. I'm just cautious because Feinstien's is a Dem, and she's one of the people behind the banning of all assault weapons in California, and I think she might have been behind the .50 cal ban too, but don't hold me to that one. If that group can get any momentum rolling I'm just not crazy about it. But back on topic, I am very anxious to see how the left will handle themselves now that they are in power and under the same spotlight they put the right. It will be an interesting time coming up, all I have to say is don't screw this chance up, you might not get another one for a long time.
i agree 100%

im a avid gun collector, not as of late though, funds are going to bills etc, and i started school again. but anyway i really hope this handgun bill doesnt pass. i mean what the fuck


im all for tighter laws though, and i do think it's a bit to easy to obtain semi-auto rifles, like AK-7 clones, or armalite m-16s etc etc, a kid only 18 can easily get one in alot of states, there is no waiting period here in neveda. and i think that does need to change. it should be 2 weeks, with a permit, plus a safety course, just like if you where to obtain a CCW license for conceled carry.

some states are a bit to far, like new york. but it seems to be working

I think any type of gun should be avaiable, just with tighter laws on how you obtain one.

dont just ban them! we know that doesnt work.
2006-11-10 00:28:21
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|7005|Eastern PA

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

The REASON the Republicans didnt have Things under control was because Democrats Voted and Acted in the house and senate out of pure SPITE for the president. Thats how most of them ran there campaigns.
So even though Republicans had commanding majorities in both houses of congress and control of the White House they couldn't get anything done right because the minority party (which can't introduce legislation, doesn't control any committees, or have any real power in either house) voted against some bills (which usually passed anyway what with those solid majorities)...

Give me a break. Republicans held total power and still bitched and moaned like they were being ignored by the big bad Dems. They sounded like a bunch of children with persecution complexes.

The bottom line is that with that unfettered power comes the ugly truth that the Republicans own all the fuckups of the past 6 years. There's no one to blame their failures on, no other house that was controlled by the other party, no oppositon President fucking up their well laid plans, and no hostile bureaucracy mucking about in their carefully constructed legislation. The grand republican experiment has experienced a spectacular flameout both electorially and in real world terms exemplified most notably by the abismally tragic Iraq policy.
2006-11-10 00:37:54
bob_6012
Resident M-14 fanatic
+59|6938|Lancaster Ohio, USA

beerface702 wrote:

bob_6012 wrote:

It's nice to see some people on the left don't oppose a ban on handguns, or any weapons for that matter. It's even more nice that at least one of them thinks the Brady Bill was a joke. I hope they won't try and take our guns away because it is a constitutional right for me to own a gun, no matter what category it may be, handgun to assault rifle to hunting guns, I own them all. I'm just cautious because Feinstien's is a Dem, and she's one of the people behind the banning of all assault weapons in California, and I think she might have been behind the .50 cal ban too, but don't hold me to that one. If that group can get any momentum rolling I'm just not crazy about it. But back on topic, I am very anxious to see how the left will handle themselves now that they are in power and under the same spotlight they put the right. It will be an interesting time coming up, all I have to say is don't screw this chance up, you might not get another one for a long time.
i agree 100%

im a avid gun collector, not as of late though, funds are going to bills etc, and i started school again. but anyway i really hope this handgun bill doesnt pass. i mean what the fuck


im all for tighter laws though, and i do think it's a bit to easy to obtain semi-auto rifles, like AK-7 clones, or armalite m-16s etc etc, a kid only 18 can easily get one in alot of states, there is no waiting period here in neveda. and i think that does need to change. it should be 2 weeks, with a permit, plus a safety course, just like if you where to obtain a CCW license for conceled carry.

some states are a bit to far, like new york. but it seems to be working

I think any type of gun should be avaiable, just with tighter laws on how you obtain one.

dont just ban them! we know that doesnt work.
Hmm...I see where you're coming from beerface, however I would have to dis-agree on how easy it is to obtain one, mostly for the fact that I don't know too many 18 year olds that have the money to purchase one. AK-47's normally go for 300-400 dollars, depending on their condition and the cheapest Armalite I've seen was $800. I was 20 before I bought my first "assault weapon" my humble M-14, and that set me back $1200, before I decided to transform it into a sharpshooting platform. But since money is the only thing stopping one from purchasing a firearm, then yes, I can see where a more in depth check is needed, however, when you purchase the firearm the retailer does call the FBI to do the background check on you, so if the FBI says you're on the level to purchase the firearm then I don't see the problem. I do believe that everyone should have to go through a saftey course, I went through a hunter saftey course years ago so I could get a hunting license, and that had a healthy dose of gun safety in it and I was told that I handled my firearms better afterwards. There are some things that could be tweaked but overall I think the system that is in place in the state of Ohio is a good one. I guess I just have never been able to figure out the point of the waiting period to buy firearms, but if I've missed something I'm glad to listen.
2006-11-10 01:02:39
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6958|Canberra, AUS

AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:

Ok so first off, I would like to say Congratulations to the Democrats, they ran an "interesting" campaign not to the standards I would like, but won fair and square, and with good reasons as well.  But this I would like to know, so what now? What are you going to change? What are you guys going to be rooting for?
I don't know about the democrats, just myself. These suggestions are very likely not going to be useful, as they are based on the current AUSTRALIAN economic situation (i.e. a massive budget surplus)

1. Are you just going to raise taxes and only confirm activist judges?
No, I'd cut taxes. Efficiency over quantity

2. What are you going to DO about immigration.
Apply stricter (not too strict as that would cost too much) border control. Since when was illegal immigration legal?

3. What are you going to do about health care that DOES NOT involve raising taxes??
More beds. More hospitals. More importantly, more funding for university places and education. I would want the very best doctors in the world. Again, this is working on a surplus-budget.

4. How about gun control?  Siding with John Conyers and Pelosi for a Nat'l Handgun ban? Think that'll work? It didn't in D.C.....
I really want to know why you NEED a gun. What's wrong with, say, a cricket ball? A rock-solid 150gm piece of leather is likely to break a criminal's focus. In any case if you can hear that you've been broken to it means you probably haven't locked all the doors and closed all the windows properly. This probably means that they haven't planned it carefully and have done it purely on impulse (I donubt that most criminals even take the basic step of wearing gloves so they don't leave prints) A criminal smart enough to get in undetected is smart enough to evade you presence. In that case you need an alarm system. But you don't need a gun.

5. Abortion?
A baby is not worth two destroyed lives - one of the mother (or father) and the baby's. What I mean by this is it should be legalized under financial or other pressures.

6. Gay Marriage?
I wouldn't call it marriage.

7. Education? Just going to raise taxes as usual?
See the bit on health. Surely you can cut military spending and buy a few less missles (which cost about a million each in some cases) and spend more on one of the three most important facets of society?

8. Oh almost forgot Iraq? Phased withdrawl, complete withdrawl.
I'd stay in until the place is fixed to the point where it doesn't turn into Somalia. After that GTFO.

9. Impeaching proceedings for the Pres? For what exactly, and don't you do say lying or I will direct you to a dictionary.
Bush + Impeachment = Cheney. That's not good.

I've heard enough of your guys' garbage on your ads, now talk about yourselves, your values, and what you plan to support or change now that the ball is in your court.

And don't be extreme, or I'll slap you with a herring.

Thanks for your input and all I can say is Good luck, all eyes are on you now, and now you guys are going to be scrutinized and picked apart just like you did to us when we had majority.
I have no idea what you're on about beacuse I'm not American.

Last edited by Spark (2006-11-10 01:03:15)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-11-10 01:15:01
bob_6012
Resident M-14 fanatic
+59|6938|Lancaster Ohio, USA
In response to Spark on gun control...

You seem to forget that it is in our constitution that we have a right to own firearms. If it be for hunting, target shooting, or self defense, Americans have a right to firearms. I am not about to defend myself with a cricket ball, I don't even know what one looks like, I would assume it's round, otherwise it wouldn't make a good ball would it? But I digress, nothing stops an intruder in his tracks better than the sounds of a pump action shotgun when you chamber a new round, that tells the intruder that you mean business and that they better get the fuck out or else they're going to have a real painful experience. I don't know how you do it down in Australia, but here in the USA we like our firearms and we're not going to give them up, it's just something you won't be able to understand.

Last edited by bob_6012 (2006-11-10 01:16:46)

2006-11-10 01:56:51
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6958|Canberra, AUS

bob_6012 wrote:

In response to Spark on gun control...

You seem to forget that it is in our constitution that we have a right to own firearms. If it be for hunting, target shooting, or self defense, Americans have a right to firearms. I am not about to defend myself with a cricket ball, I don't even know what one looks like, I would assume it's round, otherwise it wouldn't make a good ball would it? But I digress, nothing stops an intruder in his tracks better than the sounds of a pump action shotgun when you chamber a new round, that tells the intruder that you mean business and that they better get the fuck out or else they're going to have a real painful experience. I don't know how you do it down in Australia, but here in the USA we like our firearms and we're not going to give them up, it's just something you won't be able to understand.
To answer your questions:

You have a right to firearms. That doesn't mean you have to use them. I am sure there are millions upon millions who feel perfectly safe without a gun.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-11-10 02:04:50
CommieChipmunk
Member
+488|6853|Portland, OR, USA

Spark wrote:

bob_6012 wrote:

In response to Spark on gun control...

You seem to forget that it is in our constitution that we have a right to own firearms. If it be for hunting, target shooting, or self defense, Americans have a right to firearms. I am not about to defend myself with a cricket ball, I don't even know what one looks like, I would assume it's round, otherwise it wouldn't make a good ball would it? But I digress, nothing stops an intruder in his tracks better than the sounds of a pump action shotgun when you chamber a new round, that tells the intruder that you mean business and that they better get the fuck out or else they're going to have a real painful experience. I don't know how you do it down in Australia, but here in the USA we like our firearms and we're not going to give them up, it's just something you won't be able to understand.
To answer your questions:

You have a right to firearms. That doesn't mean you have to use them. I am sure there are millions upon millions who feel perfectly safe without a gun.
Gun control is a very touchy subject in America (you can take away all other rights without anyone questioning anything, but when it comes to the guns..).  At first i thought it was ignorance, i mean there are so many murders here its disgusting, and that i believe could be solved with a ban on guns.  I wouldn't have minded it, but then i got to thinking about the bit i said earlier about all of our rights being stripped away.  Once the guns are gone, we can't really fight back against an oppressive government.  The more and more they take the more unsafe I feel, not because of my fellow citizens, but because of an over powerful government
2006-11-10 02:10:35
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6958|Canberra, AUS

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Spark wrote:

bob_6012 wrote:

In response to Spark on gun control...

You seem to forget that it is in our constitution that we have a right to own firearms. If it be for hunting, target shooting, or self defense, Americans have a right to firearms. I am not about to defend myself with a cricket ball, I don't even know what one looks like, I would assume it's round, otherwise it wouldn't make a good ball would it? But I digress, nothing stops an intruder in his tracks better than the sounds of a pump action shotgun when you chamber a new round, that tells the intruder that you mean business and that they better get the fuck out or else they're going to have a real painful experience. I don't know how you do it down in Australia, but here in the USA we like our firearms and we're not going to give them up, it's just something you won't be able to understand.
To answer your questions:

You have a right to firearms. That doesn't mean you have to use them. I am sure there are millions upon millions who feel perfectly safe without a gun.
Gun control is a very touchy subject in America (you can take away all other rights without anyone questioning anything, but when it comes to the guns..).  At first i thought it was ignorance, i mean there are so many murders here its disgusting, and that i believe could be solved with a ban on guns.  I wouldn't have minded it, but then i got to thinking about the bit i said earlier about all of our rights being stripped away.  Once the guns are gone, we can't really fight back against an oppressive government.  The more and more they take the more unsafe I feel, not because of my fellow citizens, but because of an over powerful government
I never stated that you should ban/remove guns. I merely said you had the right but there was no need to excercise that right.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-11-10 06:23:47
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6985|New York

kr@cker wrote:

don't forget who wrote the no child left behind act
Thats the Biggest Dissapointment I have with Our education system. Very sad indeed. Yup they sure screwed the pooch on it ill agree on that one.
2006-11-10 06:53:23
GATOR591957
Member
+84|6910

kr@cker wrote:

i still dont see any real ideas on here, just a bunch of monday morning quarter backing at best
Kracker, enlighten me on what ideas the Republicans have or had.  Seems to me the country has spoken and your (Republican) ideas have been thoroughly trounced.

P.S. Since you seem to be an authority on gas and oil.  Tell me the gas prices were not linked to the election.  Gas has risen here in Phoenix by 5 cents in two days. Baloney!
2006-11-10 07:03:37
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6833|Southeastern USA

<[onex]>Headstone wrote:

kr@cker wrote:

don't forget who wrote the no child left behind act
Thats the Biggest Dissapointment I have with Our education system. Very sad indeed. Yup they sure screwed the pooch on it ill agree on that one.
actually i was referring to the fact that it was written by ted at the behest of W. kinda blows two illusions out of the water, one being it was solely a GOP fuckup, the other being that the republicans haven't tried to "reach across the aisle" and work with the dems in a cooperative spirit in the past 6 years. if you look there are dems on all sorts of committees, something usually unheard of when an opposing party has power. maybe that would explain why the senate kept fucking up lately and spinning their wheels. seeing them screw up the 9-11 commission was almost comical.

winning races by less than 1% margins of just a few thousand votes is hardly trouncing your opponent. people weren't voting for democrats, as usual, they were voting against the GOP not sticking to it's guns. even i ended up voting for a few democrats (though mostly on the local level), because i think they forgot why they got there in the first place. Needs more NEWT!!!!



and here the gas prices went up before the election, look for another bump, but fill up before thanksgiving week, that's usually one of the biggest jumps each year

Last edited by kr@cker (2006-11-10 07:07:51)

2006-11-10 11:11:42
bob_6012
Resident M-14 fanatic
+59|6938|Lancaster Ohio, USA

Spark wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Spark wrote:

To answer your questions:

You have a right to firearms. That doesn't mean you have to use them. I am sure there are millions upon millions who feel perfectly safe without a gun.
Gun control is a very touchy subject in America (you can take away all other rights without anyone questioning anything, but when it comes to the guns..).  At first i thought it was ignorance, i mean there are so many murders here its disgusting, and that i believe could be solved with a ban on guns.  I wouldn't have minded it, but then i got to thinking about the bit i said earlier about all of our rights being stripped away.  Once the guns are gone, we can't really fight back against an oppressive government.  The more and more they take the more unsafe I feel, not because of my fellow citizens, but because of an over powerful government
I never stated that you should ban/remove guns. I merely said you had the right but there was no need to excercise that right.
Why is there no need to exercise the right, I'm not following you. I don't want to attack your viewpoint, I want to understand your viewpoint. If by exercising the right you mean going out and target shooting then that doesn't make sense. Also not defending myself with a firearm in my own home doesn't make sense to me either, please could you try and help me see your side more clearly.

Last edited by bob_6012 (2006-11-10 11:12:30)

2006-11-10 11:15:18
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6927|Seattle, WA

beerface702 wrote:

bob_6012 wrote:

It's nice to see some people on the left don't oppose a ban on handguns, or any weapons for that matter. It's even more nice that at least one of them thinks the Brady Bill was a joke. I hope they won't try and take our guns away because it is a constitutional right for me to own a gun, no matter what category it may be, handgun to assault rifle to hunting guns, I own them all. I'm just cautious because Feinstien's is a Dem, and she's one of the people behind the banning of all assault weapons in California, and I think she might have been behind the .50 cal ban too, but don't hold me to that one. If that group can get any momentum rolling I'm just not crazy about it. But back on topic, I am very anxious to see how the left will handle themselves now that they are in power and under the same spotlight they put the right. It will be an interesting time coming up, all I have to say is don't screw this chance up, you might not get another one for a long time.
i agree 100%

im a avid gun collector, not as of late though, funds are going to bills etc, and i started school again. but anyway i really hope this handgun bill doesnt pass. i mean what the fuck


im all for tighter laws though, and i do think it's a bit to easy to obtain semi-auto rifles, like AK-7 clones, or armalite m-16s etc etc, a kid only 18 can easily get one in alot of states, there is no waiting period here in neveda. and i think that does need to change. it should be 2 weeks, with a permit, plus a safety course, just like if you where to obtain a CCW license for conceled carry.

some states are a bit to far, like new york. but it seems to be working

I think any type of gun should be avaiable, just with tighter laws on how you obtain one.

dont just ban them! we know that doesnt work.
A much more moderate approach to something usually pushed to the extreme.  I don't think you can differentiate between an AK-47 clone and a bolt action rifle though, especially when a bolt action could do potentially more damage (depending on caliber).  2 weeks is awfully long, cut that down to 5-7 days, the course sounds like a good idea.  There are a lot of dopes out there.
2006-11-10 11:18:38
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6927|Seattle, WA

Masques wrote:

because the minority party (which can't introduce legislation, doesn't control any committees, or have any real power in either house) voted against some bills (which usually passed anyway what with those solid majorities)...

Give me a break. Republicans held total power and still bitched and moaned.........
Thats not true, they can introduce bills, make amendements, I think you need to go read on how Congress works... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress

Bitched, yes, for good reason, yes because the Dems would only provide staunch opposition even to the most basic things (English as a national language, etc).  The minority party historically scrutinizes the majority, so get ready for role reversal, because now you're going to hear MORE criticism from the right because thats exactly what the left has done for the past 12 years, but a lot more heavily in the past 4.  Don't even think about complaining about the right complaining because thats about all the left did the lats 12 years. 
2006-11-10 11:21:49
Masques
Black Panzer Party
+184|7005|Eastern PA

kr@cker wrote:

Needs more NEWT!!!!
I think Newt was batshit insane (and a little over-enthusiastic about the benefits of technological improvement) but he seemed genuinely serious about policy and governance, certainly moreso than the current crop of Republicans.
2006-11-10 11:22:30
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6927|Seattle, WA

Spark wrote:

I don't know about the democrats, just myself. These suggestions are very likely not going to be useful, as they are based on the current AUSTRALIAN economic situation (i.e. a massive budget surplus)

1. Are you just going to raise taxes and only confirm activist judges?
No, I'd cut taxes. Efficiency over quantity

2. What are you going to DO about immigration.
Apply stricter (not too strict as that would cost too much) border control. Since when was illegal immigration legal?

3. What are you going to do about health care that DOES NOT involve raising taxes??
More beds. More hospitals. More importantly, more funding for university places and education. I would want the very best doctors in the world. Again, this is working on a surplus-budget.

4. How about gun control?  Siding with John Conyers and Pelosi for a Nat'l Handgun ban? Think that'll work? It didn't in D.C.....
I really want to know why you NEED a gun. What's wrong with, say, a cricket ball? A rock-solid 150gm piece of leather is likely to break a criminal's focus. In any case if you can hear that you've been broken to it means you probably haven't locked all the doors and closed all the windows properly. This probably means that they haven't planned it carefully and have done it purely on impulse (I donubt that most criminals even take the basic step of wearing gloves so they don't leave prints) A criminal smart enough to get in undetected is smart enough to evade you presence. In that case you need an alarm system. But you don't need a gun.

5. Abortion?
A baby is not worth two destroyed lives - one of the mother (or father) and the baby's. What I mean by this is it should be legalized under financial or other pressures.

6. Gay Marriage?
I wouldn't call it marriage.

7. Education? Just going to raise taxes as usual?
See the bit on health. Surely you can cut military spending and buy a few less missles (which cost about a million each in some cases) and spend more on one of the three most important facets of society?

8. Oh almost forgot Iraq? Phased withdrawl, complete withdrawl.
I'd stay in until the place is fixed to the point where it doesn't turn into Somalia. After that GTFO.

9. Impeaching proceedings for the Pres? For what exactly, and don't you do say lying or I will direct you to a dictionary.
Bush + Impeachment = Cheney. That's not good.

I've heard enough of your guys' garbage on your ads, now talk about yourselves, your values, and what you plan to support or change now that the ball is in your court.

And don't be extreme, or I'll slap you with a herring.

Thanks for your input and all I can say is Good luck, all eyes are on you now, and now you guys are going to be scrutinized and picked apart just like you did to us when we had majority.
I have no idea what you're on about beacuse I'm not American.
You Dems need to listen to this guy, he has ALL The right ideas (except on 4, but thats ok).  You guys really really need to take interest in what this person has to say, what an excellent post Spark, thank you for responding to my question of curiosity without being ridicolous like some other people

I can't stress this enough, I sound like a broken record, if the Dems do like 2 of the any highlighted above they will keep a majority because they have moved farther to the CENTER and not more left.  I wish you were in America Spark, because you would bring some much needed intelligence and foresight to the Democratic party.  If I was a Democrat, I'd hug you, screw it I'd hug you anyway.  Have a good day.
2006-11-10 11:26:19
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6927|Seattle, WA

Spark wrote:

To answer your questions:

You have a right to firearms. That doesn't mean you have to use them. I am sure there are millions upon millions who feel perfectly safe without a gun.
In different cultures, take a walk in East L.A. for an afternoon until dusk.  Maybe you'll figure it out.  Let's not get too far off track, I'm really glad that some lefties are stepping up to the plate and not being stupid about my question.  I say kudos to you. 

Spark, when we "use" them its  not to kill someone as a primary purpose, it is to defend one's life.  There are not that many cases of LAWFUL citizens misusing firearms intentionally against an agressor.  Yes there are some, but than they aren't lawful citizens, because they should be prosecuted.    Good day.
2006-11-10 11:43:38
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6833|Southeastern USA

Masques wrote:

kr@cker wrote:

Needs more NEWT!!!!
I think Newt was batshit insane (and a little over-enthusiastic about the benefits of technological improvement) but he seemed genuinely serious about policy and governance, certainly moreso than the current crop of Republicans.
Newt made a plan and stuck with it, he didn't get distracted by short term polls and kept his eyes on the finish line. both parties now seem more concerned with running daily popularity campaigns. which ship will reach it's destination faster, one that changes it's course every 30 minutes or the one that, rofl, "stays the course".

@ spark, try to ham my family, friends, or break into my house, you'll find out how much of a right i have to use my gun.

Last edited by kr@cker (2006-11-10 11:45:04)

2006-11-10 11:46:11
AlbertWesker[RE]
Not Human Anymore
+144|6927|Seattle, WA

kr@cker wrote:

Masques wrote:

kr@cker wrote:

Needs more NEWT!!!!
I think Newt was batshit insane (and a little over-enthusiastic about the benefits of technological improvement) but he seemed genuinely serious about policy and governance, certainly moreso than the current crop of Republicans.
Newt made a plan and stuck with it, he didn't get distracted by short term polls and kept his eyes on the finish line. both parties now seem more concerned with running daily popularity campaigns. which ship will reach it's destination faster, one that changes it's course every 30 minutes or the one that, rofl, "stays the course".

@ spark, try to harm my family, friends, or break into my house, you'll find out how much of a right i have to use my gun.
Good post on both points.
2006-11-10 16:19:38
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6958|Canberra, AUS

bob_6012 wrote:

Spark wrote:

CommieChipmunk wrote:

Gun control is a very touchy subject in America (you can take away all other rights without anyone questioning anything, but when it comes to the guns..).  At first i thought it was ignorance, i mean there are so many murders here its disgusting, and that i believe could be solved with a ban on guns.  I wouldn't have minded it, but then i got to thinking about the bit i said earlier about all of our rights being stripped away.  Once the guns are gone, we can't really fight back against an oppressive government.  The more and more they take the more unsafe I feel, not because of my fellow citizens, but because of an over powerful government
I never stated that you should ban/remove guns. I merely said you had the right but there was no need to excercise that right.
Why is there no need to exercise the right, I'm not following you. I don't want to attack your viewpoint, I want to understand your viewpoint. If by exercising the right you mean going out and target shooting then that doesn't make sense. Also not defending myself with a firearm in my own home doesn't make sense to me either, please could you try and help me see your side more clearly.
As I said earlier you don't need a gun to protect yourself. The common criminal would be easily frightened by someone running at them with a baseball bat screaming. These are the criminals who pick locks, break windows etc. The uncommon criminal wouldn't even be noticed, if they're good enough to get into the house silently then they're good enough not to be heard.

Plus, ninety-nine-and-a-half times out of 100 what you thought was a burglar was just your wife going to the toilet. At least with some kind of melee weapon (or ball) it's non-lethal and you can be very sure who you're whacking.

On the 'rights' thing - yes, I'm ALLOWED to have a gun, but does that mean I HAVE to have one? I have a right to drive (well, not really. not yet, anyway) but does that mean I HAVE to drive?

Once again I note that I have not yet advocated any changes to laws. I merely state that you don't need to excercise the rights granted in those laws.

Last edited by Spark (2006-11-10 16:24:37)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-11-10 16:42:32
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6934|USA

Spark wrote:

bob_6012 wrote:

Spark wrote:


I never stated that you should ban/remove guns. I merely said you had the right but there was no need to excercise that right.
Why is there no need to exercise the right, I'm not following you. I don't want to attack your viewpoint, I want to understand your viewpoint. If by exercising the right you mean going out and target shooting then that doesn't make sense. Also not defending myself with a firearm in my own home doesn't make sense to me either, please could you try and help me see your side more clearly.
As I said earlier you don't need a gun to protect yourself. The common criminal would be easily frightened by someone running at them with a baseball bat screaming. These are the criminals who pick locks, break windows etc. The uncommon criminal wouldn't even be noticed, if they're good enough to get into the house silently then they're good enough not to be heard.

Plus, ninety-nine-and-a-half times out of 100 what you thought was a burglar was just your wife going to the toilet. At least with some kind of melee weapon (or ball) it's non-lethal and you can be very sure who you're whacking.

On the 'rights' thing - yes, I'm ALLOWED to have a gun, but does that mean I HAVE to have one? I have a right to drive (well, not really. not yet, anyway) but does that mean I HAVE to drive?

Once again I note that I have not yet advocated any changes to laws. I merely state that you don't need to excercise the rights granted in those laws.
If you were a criminal, and YOU had a gun, would you really be scared of someone with a bat??
2006-11-10 16:50:59
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6958|Canberra, AUS

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:

bob_6012 wrote:

Why is there no need to exercise the right, I'm not following you. I don't want to attack your viewpoint, I want to understand your viewpoint. If by exercising the right you mean going out and target shooting then that doesn't make sense. Also not defending myself with a firearm in my own home doesn't make sense to me either, please could you try and help me see your side more clearly.
As I said earlier you don't need a gun to protect yourself. The common criminal would be easily frightened by someone running at them with a baseball bat screaming. These are the criminals who pick locks, break windows etc. The uncommon criminal wouldn't even be noticed, if they're good enough to get into the house silently then they're good enough not to be heard.

Plus, ninety-nine-and-a-half times out of 100 what you thought was a burglar was just your wife going to the toilet. At least with some kind of melee weapon (or ball) it's non-lethal and you can be very sure who you're whacking.

On the 'rights' thing - yes, I'm ALLOWED to have a gun, but does that mean I HAVE to have one? I have a right to drive (well, not really. not yet, anyway) but does that mean I HAVE to drive?

Once again I note that I have not yet advocated any changes to laws. I merely state that you don't need to excercise the rights granted in those laws.
If you were a criminal, and YOU had a gun, would you really be scared of someone with a bat??
Well... think of beserker tactics. Mad axe-man just with a slightly different weapon.

In any case its not hte bat that'll frighten people. It's the charging and screaming.

Last edited by Spark (2006-11-10 16:51:40)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-11-10 16:54:51
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6934|USA

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Spark wrote:


As I said earlier you don't need a gun to protect yourself. The common criminal would be easily frightened by someone running at them with a baseball bat screaming. These are the criminals who pick locks, break windows etc. The uncommon criminal wouldn't even be noticed, if they're good enough to get into the house silently then they're good enough not to be heard.

Plus, ninety-nine-and-a-half times out of 100 what you thought was a burglar was just your wife going to the toilet. At least with some kind of melee weapon (or ball) it's non-lethal and you can be very sure who you're whacking.

On the 'rights' thing - yes, I'm ALLOWED to have a gun, but does that mean I HAVE to have one? I have a right to drive (well, not really. not yet, anyway) but does that mean I HAVE to drive?

Once again I note that I have not yet advocated any changes to laws. I merely state that you don't need to excercise the rights granted in those laws.
If you were a criminal, and YOU had a gun, would you really be scared of someone with a bat??
Well... think of beserker tactics. Mad axe-man just with a slightly different weapon.

In any case its not hte bat that'll frighten people. It's the charging and screaming.
Yer right, you would scare me so much I would shoot yer ass!!

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard