With all Due Respect ...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Casportsfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Cap your obviously more informed on football than gun rights, so stick to football! Guns dont kill people any more than cars kill people (when driven by a drunk) or forks make people fat. Evil people kill people. P.S. I dont expect my answer to be very popular in the liberals lair of "The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts" but its one gun owners opinion. P.P.S no assault weapons were used in Connecticut, 2 handguns a 9mm and a glock 40.

    [/QUOTE]

    And why does any person need a glock anyway???  To go hunting Deer??  Yes guns don't kill people.  People WITH guns kill people.  Explain how this guy was going to kill 27 people with a FN knife or a pipe.  It's not a liberal thing.  It's kind of a common sense thing.  Love to hear your answer to that question.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you REALLY think if somebody wants to kill a whole bunch of people they couldn't do it without guns? You've GOT to have more common sense than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really think a gun doesn't make it easier to kill things?  If you need proof, try deer hunting with a knife sometime . . . 

    Guns--and particularly high-capacity firearms--make these kinds of massacres much, much easier.  A lot of countries with saner gun control laws ban high-capicity weapons for a reason.  Those are killing machines.  When I lived in the US, I could go online and purchase a 33 round magazine for a 9 mm Glock for 30 bucks, no questions asked.  But because I live in Canada, that's impossible for me now.  

    Maybe you're a peace-loving guy who doesn't know much about weapons, but if you did know anything about firearms and other weapons, there's no way you'd claim that killing lots of people is just as easy with a knife as it is with a high-capacity pistol or rifle. 

    And yes, bombs are effective too, but bombs still require more time, knowledge, skill, and forethought to construct.  It's pretty easy to buy a gun and ammo and go out and kill.  No special skills or planning are requred. 

       

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Actually, the easier way to bag a deer would be to set an explosive b00by trap. And the meat would already be sectioned for you.

     

    I can assure you my knowledge of firearms is likely vastly superior to yours. Get back to me when you can answer the question of how many .33 caliber bullets a 12 gague pump is actually capable of putting into the room compared to an SKS with a 30 round mag.

     

    It doesn't take much skill at all to throw together a half dozen molotov cocktails.

    [/QUOTE]

    let's worry about molotov cocktails when that happens. right now, too many guns out there are the issue.

    this really has nothing to do with tight to bear arms. it's just a bunch of immature guys who can't let go of their toys. 

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]


    Good work. Lots of evidence that an armed public prevents crime.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Casportsfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Cap your obviously more informed on football than gun rights, so stick to football! Guns dont kill people any more than cars kill people (when driven by a drunk) or forks make people fat. Evil people kill people. P.S. I dont expect my answer to be very popular in the liberals lair of "The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts" but its one gun owners opinion. P.P.S no assault weapons were used in Connecticut, 2 handguns a 9mm and a glock 40.

    [/QUOTE]

    And why does any person need a glock anyway???  To go hunting Deer??  Yes guns don't kill people.  People WITH guns kill people.  Explain how this guy was going to kill 27 people with a FN knife or a pipe.  It's not a liberal thing.  It's kind of a common sense thing.  Love to hear your answer to that question.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you REALLY think if somebody wants to kill a whole bunch of people they couldn't do it without guns? You've GOT to have more common sense than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really think a gun doesn't make it easier to kill things?  If you need proof, try deer hunting with a knife sometime . . . 

    Guns--and particularly high-capacity firearms--make these kinds of massacres much, much easier.  A lot of countries with saner gun control laws ban high-capicity weapons for a reason.  Those are killing machines.  When I lived in the US, I could go online and purchase a 33 round magazine for a 9 mm Glock for 30 bucks, no questions asked.  But because I live in Canada, that's impossible for me now.  

    Maybe you're a peace-loving guy who doesn't know much about weapons, but if you did know anything about firearms and other weapons, there's no way you'd claim that killing lots of people is just as easy with a knife as it is with a high-capacity pistol or rifle. 

    And yes, bombs are effective too, but bombs still require more time, knowledge, skill, and forethought to construct.  It's pretty easy to buy a gun and ammo and go out and kill.  No special skills or planning are requred. 

       

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Actually, the easier way to bag a deer would be to set an explosive b00by trap. And the meat would already be sectioned for you.

     

    I can assure you my knowledge of firearms is likely vastly superior to yours. Get back to me when you can answer the question of how many .33 caliber bullets a 12 gague pump is actually capable of putting into the room compared to an SKS with a 30 round mag.

     

    It doesn't take much skill at all to throw together a half dozen molotov cocktails.

    [/QUOTE]

    let's worry about molotov cocktails when that happens. right now, too many guns out there are the issue.

    this really has nothing to do with tight to bear arms. it's just a bunch of immature guys who can't let go of their toys. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    It's about FAR more than that.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Casportsfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Cap your obviously more informed on football than gun rights, so stick to football! Guns dont kill people any more than cars kill people (when driven by a drunk) or forks make people fat. Evil people kill people. P.S. I dont expect my answer to be very popular in the liberals lair of "The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts" but its one gun owners opinion. P.P.S no assault weapons were used in Connecticut, 2 handguns a 9mm and a glock 40.

    [/QUOTE]

    And why does any person need a glock anyway???  To go hunting Deer??  Yes guns don't kill people.  People WITH guns kill people.  Explain how this guy was going to kill 27 people with a FN knife or a pipe.  It's not a liberal thing.  It's kind of a common sense thing.  Love to hear your answer to that question.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you REALLY think if somebody wants to kill a whole bunch of people they couldn't do it without guns? You've GOT to have more common sense than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really think a gun doesn't make it easier to kill things?  If you need proof, try deer hunting with a knife sometime . . . 

    Guns--and particularly high-capacity firearms--make these kinds of massacres much, much easier.  A lot of countries with saner gun control laws ban high-capicity weapons for a reason.  Those are killing machines.  When I lived in the US, I could go online and purchase a 33 round magazine for a 9 mm Glock for 30 bucks, no questions asked.  But because I live in Canada, that's impossible for me now.  

    Maybe you're a peace-loving guy who doesn't know much about weapons, but if you did know anything about firearms and other weapons, there's no way you'd claim that killing lots of people is just as easy with a knife as it is with a high-capacity pistol or rifle. 

    And yes, bombs are effective too, but bombs still require more time, knowledge, skill, and forethought to construct.  It's pretty easy to buy a gun and ammo and go out and kill.  No special skills or planning are requred. 

       

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Actually, the easier way to bag a deer would be to set an explosive b00by trap. And the meat would already be sectioned for you.

     

    I can assure you my knowledge of firearms is likely vastly superior to yours. Get back to me when you can answer the question of how many .33 caliber bullets a 12 gague pump is actually capable of putting into the room compared to an SKS with a 30 round mag.

     

    It doesn't take much skill at all to throw together a half dozen molotov cocktails.

    [/QUOTE]

    let's worry about molotov cocktails when that happens. right now, too many guns out there are the issue.

    this really has nothing to do with tight to bear arms. it's just a bunch of immature guys who can't let go of their toys. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    It's about FAR more than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    really?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]


    Good work. Lots of evidence that an armed public prevents crime.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is an absurd story.  The reason it didn't make headlines is because this Meli character never fired his gun and could easily be just making the whole thing up.  He certainly didn't "stop" the murder.  Instead he "took cover" in a nearby store.  In other words he ran away.  But he's telling everyone he's sure the killer shot himself because he saw Meli's gun before Meli took cover. 

    C'mon, is the best you gun nuts have?

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]

    I am in a state has no restriction on concealed weapons. At any given time a good fraction of the men and some women are carrying a gun on them.


    Not that I don't worry about it but I can't imagine anyone getting more than a few shots off at a mall or movie theater before being confronted by other armed citizens. The argument more would get injured ..I just don't buy..you only have to take out one person and it is over.

    It would go alot farther in this country to build community, identify people with psychological conditions and treat them, and promote firearms as a detterent than just banning or resticting guns.

    If you can guarantee that all guns are eliminated...I would go along with it, but no one can make that guarantee so I would just as soon have the vast majority of my sane and responsible neighbors having guns.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]


    Good work. Lots of evidence that an armed public prevents crime.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly...which is why we should strap glocks on all elementary school children.

    But we shouldn't stop there. The United States (and other countries with nuclear weapons) should redistribute its nukes equally to all countries in the world.

    Because an armed world prevents war.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to seattlepat70's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Casportsfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Cap your obviously more informed on football than gun rights, so stick to football! Guns dont kill people any more than cars kill people (when driven by a drunk) or forks make people fat. Evil people kill people. P.S. I dont expect my answer to be very popular in the liberals lair of "The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts" but its one gun owners opinion. P.P.S no assault weapons were used in Connecticut, 2 handguns a 9mm and a glock 40.

    [/QUOTE]

    And why does any person need a glock anyway???  To go hunting Deer??  Yes guns don't kill people.  People WITH guns kill people.  Explain how this guy was going to kill 27 people with a FN knife or a pipe.  It's not a liberal thing.  It's kind of a common sense thing.  Love to hear your answer to that question.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you REALLY think if somebody wants to kill a whole bunch of people they couldn't do it without guns? You've GOT to have more common sense than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really think a gun doesn't make it easier to kill things?  If you need proof, try deer hunting with a knife sometime . . . 

    Guns--and particularly high-capacity firearms--make these kinds of massacres much, much easier.  A lot of countries with saner gun control laws ban high-capicity weapons for a reason.  Those are killing machines.  When I lived in the US, I could go online and purchase a 33 round magazine for a 9 mm Glock for 30 bucks, no questions asked.  But because I live in Canada, that's impossible for me now.  

    Maybe you're a peace-loving guy who doesn't know much about weapons, but if you did know anything about firearms and other weapons, there's no way you'd claim that killing lots of people is just as easy with a knife as it is with a high-capacity pistol or rifle. 

    And yes, bombs are effective too, but bombs still require more time, knowledge, skill, and forethought to construct.  It's pretty easy to buy a gun and ammo and go out and kill.  No special skills or planning are requred. 

       

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Actually, the easier way to bag a deer would be to set an explosive b00by trap. And the meat would already be sectioned for you.

     

    I can assure you my knowledge of firearms is likely vastly superior to yours. Get back to me when you can answer the question of how many .33 caliber bullets a 12 gague pump is actually capable of putting into the room compared to an SKS with a 30 round mag.

     

    It doesn't take much skill at all to throw together a half dozen molotov cocktails.

    [/QUOTE]

    let's worry about molotov cocktails when that happens. right now, too many guns out there are the issue.

    this really has nothing to do with tight to bear arms. it's just a bunch of immature guys who can't let go of their toys. 

     

    [/QUOTE]


    It's about FAR more than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    really?

    [/QUOTE]


    yes.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]


    Good work. Lots of evidence that an armed public prevents crime.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly...which is why we should strap glocks on all elementary school children.

    But we shouldn't stop there. The United States (and other countries with nuclear weapons) should redistribute its nukes equally to all countries in the world.

    Because an armed world prevents war.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well, the peace during the Cold War depended on MAD, so there might be more to the notion than your sarcasm allows for.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to TheExaminer's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    First of all, a Glock is a brand of gun, like Remington or Colt or whatever. Second, Ted Kosinsky used pipe bombs. Timothy McVey used fertilzer and ammonia and etc. If there is an evil of that kind in someone's heart, they'll find a way to kill. Pipe bombs are already totally illegal, did that stop Kosinsky? Should we eliminate all fertilzer and ammonia because someone killed 200+ people with it? Furthermore, how are you going to eliminate ALL access to ALL guns? Stricter gun laws? Wait, take guns away from EVERYONE. Is that it? Trouble with that is, only law abiding citizens would be affected by a new LAW taking guns away. Criminals don't get their guns through legal means, and if a legal gun ended up in his hands it was only because it was laying there, and not because he couldn't get one illegally if he had his heart set on killing 27 people. All he had to do was go on the street with a couple hundred bucks and he'd have everything he needs. If an animal like this kid is willing to kill 20+ kindergartners and his own parents two weeks before Christmas, I'm also convinced that he still wouldn't DARE violate a new gun law to get an illegal weapon-oh no-he'd be much to scared to be that politically incorrect, I'm sure of it. What people don't get is that it's the HEARTS of human beings that are screwed up. Until people's HEARTS change, the killing will go on, regardless of what weapons are available, and what laws are passed by society. We were killing each other long before guns, and doing it by the millions. So no, guns don't kill people, wicked people with evil hearts do. It's called S-I-N, that nasty three letter word psychiatrists tell us doesn't exist. That's what's known as a spiriutal problem, and that only God can fix. The catch is, he won't fix it unless the person himself wants it fixed--that's what's called "freel will"--with all it's unfortunate side effects. Since we live in a world that says God doesn't exist, we are obliged to live under the consequences of that caprice and all IT'S unfortunate side effects. What you asked here isn't all that hard to answer in my opinion.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Are you willing to discuss points of view? Are you willing to look at your own reasoning as well as others? If so lets take some of your remarks one at a time:

    Should we eliminate all fertilzer and ammonia because someone killed 200+ people with it?

    We are not letting people BUY ready made bombs are we? That guy ahd to make his. No one is saying that we should take the materials that are used in making guns off the market.

    Wait, take guns away from EVERYONE. Is that it? Trouble with that is...

    Why are you putting words in peoples mouths. That is not what anyone (or almost anyone) is saying. I do not think almost anyone is saying we should take all guns off the market.

    So no, guns don't kill people, wicked people with evil hearts do...

    Only people with "wicked" hearts kill? Good people do not make mistakes? Good people do not have moments of bad judgement? Good people are not affected by the circumstances of a moment? In this world I see violence committed by Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, ... whites, blacks, asians... pretty much every kind of person. What is most common is that they are male not female and way often between the ages of 18 and 40. Many instances are in the heat of a moment.

    It's called S-I-N, that nasty three letter word psychiatrists tell us doesn't exist. That's what's known as a spiriutal problem, and that only God can fix.

    Actually, most murders are made by people who believe in God. And not only murders done in the name of God. There are a lot of people who are believers whose combination of self righteousness and absolute certainty leads to the most violent positions, the most violent language, and the most violent behaviors. A good percentage of people who are either athiest or agnostic are more likely to rely on a sense of morality in governing their lives because they come to morality not out of fear of an angry God and not because a "daddy" God tells them what is right and what is wrong but out of a deep and abiding sense that things like the golden rule are inherently good and moral - self evident truths if you will. The sort of self evidence that led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment. 

    It is both curious and interesting that you bring God into this discussion as if your position were blessed by God and the positions of others who differ are not.

    Since we live in a world that says God doesn't exist, we are obliged to live under the consequences of that caprice

    Wow.. That is an amazing comment. In fact this world is not only filled with people who believe in God but filled with people who have little tolerance for those who either believe in a different theological history or simply do not believe at all. What we live in is a world where most violence is driven by religion or by those who are religious.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsfaninpa420. Show patsfaninpa420's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    With the responses generated from the anti gunners toward the CCW stopping the mall shooter it's apparent that the wrong group of people is calling the other extremists and nuts.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]


    Good work. Lots of evidence that an armed public prevents crime.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly...which is why we should strap glocks on all elementary school children.

    But we shouldn't stop there. The United States (and other countries with nuclear weapons) should redistribute its nukes equally to all countries in the world.

    Because an armed world prevents war.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well, the peace during the Cold War depended on MAD, so there might be more to the notion than your sarcasm allows for.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If sarcasm = following an analogous train of logic, let sarcasm be.


    In any event, I propose that you personally take charge of delivering the nuke arsenal to Iran and North Korea (and Congo and Cambodia and...), and informing the American public of this wise, well-thought-out course.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Only people with "wicked" hearts kill? Good people do not make mistakes?

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Murdering someone isn't a "mistake". It's evil.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to NY-PATS-FAN4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to patsfaninpa420's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    http://easybakegunclub.com/news/1943/Clackamas-Mall-Shooter-Was-Confonted-By-Concealed-.html

     

    Here's any everyday citizen  that recently become involved  through actions instead of words and stopped a mass shooting from happening.  This was recent and I don't remember this information making headlines.

    [/QUOTE]


    Good work. Lots of evidence that an armed public prevents crime.

    [/QUOTE]

    Exactly...which is why we should strap glocks on all elementary school children.

    But we shouldn't stop there. The United States (and other countries with nuclear weapons) should redistribute its nukes equally to all countries in the world.

    Because an armed world prevents war.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well, the peace during the Cold War depended on MAD, so there might be more to the notion than your sarcasm allows for.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    If sarcasm = following an analogous train of logic, let sarcasm be.


    In any event, I propose that you personally take charge of delivering the nuke arsenal to Iran and North Korea (and Congo and Cambodia and...), and informing the American public of this wise, well-thought-out course.

    [/QUOTE]


    I never said there weren't madmen in the world.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     What we live in is a world where most violence is driven by religion or by those who are religious.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Wrong.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A good percentage of people who are either athiest or agnostic are more likely to rely on a sense of morality in governing their lives because they come to morality not out of fear of an angry God and not because a "daddy" God tells them what is right and what is wrong but out of a deep and abiding sense that things like the golden rule are inherently good and moral - self evident truths if you will. The sort of self evidence that led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Rather humerous that you use the term self-evident while referencing the DOI, and subtract God from it at the same time.

    A look at the document makes this tactic look rather disingenuous.

     

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

     

     

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    Build your own guns?  Wow . . . regulating barrels is something of an art.  I'm not too worried about home-made firearms.  

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    A good percentage of people who are either athiest or agnostic are more likely to rely on a sense of morality in governing their lives because they come to morality not out of fear of an angry God and not because a "daddy" God tells them what is right and what is wrong but out of a deep and abiding sense that things like the golden rule are inherently good and moral - self evident truths if you will. The sort of self evidence that led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Rather humerous that you use the term self-evident while referencing the DOI, and subtract God from it at the same time.

    A look at the document makes this tactic look rather disingenuous.

     

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    The DOI architects used the word "Creator" rather than "God" because they were Deists, not conservative Christians. Jefferson admired the teachings of Jesus, but did not believe at all in His divinity; hence he re-fashioned his own Bible which deleted all the miracles of Jesus.

    The word "Creator" enables all Americans to insert their viewpoint of what created humanity; God, Allah, the Big Bang, Darwin, the Great Pumpkin...whatever. The founders were specifically intent on not following the pattern of monarchs who believed in the Divine Right of Kings; specifically, that the government should have no right to tell citizens to whom, or even if, they should worship.

    They were saying whatever your beliefs...all men are created with the same unalienable rights.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Casportsfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Cap your obviously more informed on football than gun rights, so stick to football! Guns dont kill people any more than cars kill people (when driven by a drunk) or forks make people fat. Evil people kill people. P.S. I dont expect my answer to be very popular in the liberals lair of "The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts" but its one gun owners opinion. P.P.S no assault weapons were used in Connecticut, 2 handguns a 9mm and a glock 40.

    [/QUOTE]

    And why does any person need a glock anyway???  To go hunting Deer??  Yes guns don't kill people.  People WITH guns kill people.  Explain how this guy was going to kill 27 people with a FN knife or a pipe.  It's not a liberal thing.  It's kind of a common sense thing.  Love to hear your answer to that question.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you REALLY think if somebody wants to kill a whole bunch of people they couldn't do it without guns? You've GOT to have more common sense than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really think a gun doesn't make it easier to kill things?  If you need proof, try deer hunting with a knife sometime . . . 

    Guns--and particularly high-capacity firearms--make these kinds of massacres much, much easier.  A lot of countries with saner gun control laws ban high-capicity weapons for a reason.  Those are killing machines.  When I lived in the US, I could go online and purchase a 33 round magazine for a 9 mm Glock for 30 bucks, no questions asked.  But because I live in Canada, that's impossible for me now.  

    Maybe you're a peace-loving guy who doesn't know much about weapons, but if you did know anything about firearms and other weapons, there's no way you'd claim that killing lots of people is just as easy with a knife as it is with a high-capacity pistol or rifle. 

    And yes, bombs are effective too, but bombs still require more time, knowledge, skill, and forethought to construct.  It's pretty easy to buy a gun and ammo and go out and kill.  No special skills or planning are requred. 

       

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a silly/specious argument anyway.

    Bombs and most bomb materials are regulated and monitored. People who order quantitites of these things are tracked by the FBI.

    I's color by numbers, but people don't want to pick up the crayons. The U.S. has a major murder problem, on par with 3rd world countries, and the sole difference between the U.S. and other 1st world countries without those issues is that here I can get a semi-automiatc weapon now, no questions asked. 

    Bombs being the topic ... the anti-gun control position is akin to saying ... Nuclear materials don't kill people ... people do, and evil is timeless too ... so why regulate it at all? Regulate evil.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you want to prevent people from being able to make a bomb you would have to close every gas station in the country. Reloaders buy gun powder by the can. Hell, you would have to ban the sale of black powder weapons and fireworks.

    Availability of guns isn't the sole difference between the US and other 1st world countries. The differences are legion. We have 12 million illegal immigrants for just one example.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, but there is a very, very common sense way of re-looking at that statement. 

    1.) The "flashpoint" crazies who kill dozens of people at once are great headline material, but the major problem is the complete saturation of guns into the United States. Simply selling them, en mass, makes that worse. There are literally *mountains* of studies that show stricter gun regulations reduce homicide by reducing gun related homicide. So by and large, by making it more difficult to actually kill people, the amount of killing is reduced.

    I live in New Orleans man, the homicide capital of the United States, and every single week there are gun related homicides, and every single week children get caught in crossfire. Your average gangster would *not* have access to weapons (or at least as easy) if a.) they were a rarer commodity and thus harder to steal or purchase on the black market that IS a shadow market of the regular market, and b.) if the penalties for breaking those regulations were simply onerous, making it far more likely that people would resort to less efficient ways of trying to kill each other. 

    2.) Bomb making materials you are talking about are things that have day-to-day practical uses that transcend what guns do day-to-day. Banning gasoline, cars, or any other material/object that people need to live their lives at the most basic level (which is the premise you are giving) is so far beyond asking that devices built for the purpose of killing things with great efficiency recieve tighter regulation than, say, getting a drivers license. 

    3.) And this is imbricated with the above bit ... no one is saying guns should be "banned" except people that are very pro-gun access, and only then by putting words into people's mouths. Most people, the people in the center and on the left, just realize that it's high time we had a national dialogue about increasing regulations and decreasing total sales of guns, thereby decreasing the ability of people to get access to them for whatever nefarious task they want to accomplish. 

    There is no need to puff up a position by inventing a straw man who is howling in the cornfields about banning all guns. But there is a need for people to come to the middle, have a discussion,  and stop trying to pretend that the United States' extremely lax gun laws, it's *obsession* with guns, and the large businesses that foster both of these play a huge role in how easy it is for criminals to get guns, and thus play a huge role in the sheer body count this nation produces daily .... when there aren't anomalous psychos killing children. 

    Pretending they are not connected is just wrong. 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from getdrunkstupit. Show getdrunkstupit's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    if you ban guns some simple things will happen.  Immorale "bad" people will keep their guns.  good people will give them up.  bad people will have free reign. 

     

    THINK BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to zbellino's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Casportsfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Cap your obviously more informed on football than gun rights, so stick to football! Guns dont kill people any more than cars kill people (when driven by a drunk) or forks make people fat. Evil people kill people. P.S. I dont expect my answer to be very popular in the liberals lair of "The Peoples Republic of Massachusetts" but its one gun owners opinion. P.P.S no assault weapons were used in Connecticut, 2 handguns a 9mm and a glock 40.

    [/QUOTE]

    And why does any person need a glock anyway???  To go hunting Deer??  Yes guns don't kill people.  People WITH guns kill people.  Explain how this guy was going to kill 27 people with a FN knife or a pipe.  It's not a liberal thing.  It's kind of a common sense thing.  Love to hear your answer to that question.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Do you REALLY think if somebody wants to kill a whole bunch of people they couldn't do it without guns? You've GOT to have more common sense than that.

    [/QUOTE]

    You really think a gun doesn't make it easier to kill things?  If you need proof, try deer hunting with a knife sometime . . . 

    Guns--and particularly high-capacity firearms--make these kinds of massacres much, much easier.  A lot of countries with saner gun control laws ban high-capicity weapons for a reason.  Those are killing machines.  When I lived in the US, I could go online and purchase a 33 round magazine for a 9 mm Glock for 30 bucks, no questions asked.  But because I live in Canada, that's impossible for me now.  

    Maybe you're a peace-loving guy who doesn't know much about weapons, but if you did know anything about firearms and other weapons, there's no way you'd claim that killing lots of people is just as easy with a knife as it is with a high-capacity pistol or rifle. 

    And yes, bombs are effective too, but bombs still require more time, knowledge, skill, and forethought to construct.  It's pretty easy to buy a gun and ammo and go out and kill.  No special skills or planning are requred. 

       

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's a silly/specious argument anyway.

    Bombs and most bomb materials are regulated and monitored. People who order quantitites of these things are tracked by the FBI.

    I's color by numbers, but people don't want to pick up the crayons. The U.S. has a major murder problem, on par with 3rd world countries, and the sole difference between the U.S. and other 1st world countries without those issues is that here I can get a semi-automiatc weapon now, no questions asked. 

    Bombs being the topic ... the anti-gun control position is akin to saying ... Nuclear materials don't kill people ... people do, and evil is timeless too ... so why regulate it at all? Regulate evil.

    [/QUOTE]


    If you want to prevent people from being able to make a bomb you would have to close every gas station in the country. Reloaders buy gun powder by the can. Hell, you would have to ban the sale of black powder weapons and fireworks.

    Availability of guns isn't the sole difference between the US and other 1st world countries. The differences are legion. We have 12 million illegal immigrants for just one example.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, but there is a very, very common sense way of re-looking at that statement. 

    1.) The "flashpoint" crazies who kill dozens of people at once are great headline material, but the major problem is the complete saturation of guns into the United States. Simply selling them, en mass, makes that worse. There are literally *mountains* of studies that show stricter gun regulations reduce homicide by reducing gun related homicide. So by and large, by making it more difficult to actually kill people, the amount of killing is reduced.

    I live in New Orleans man, the homicide capital of the United States, and every single week there are gun related homicides, and every single week children get caught in crossfire. Your average gangster would *not* have access to weapons (or at least as easy) if a.) they were a rarer commodity and thus harder to steal or purchase on the black market that IS a shadow market of the regular market, and b.) if the penalties for breaking those regulations were simply onerous, making it far more likely that people would resort to less efficient ways of trying to kill each other. 

    2.) Bomb making materials you are talking about are things that have day-to-day practical uses that transcend what guns do day-to-day. Banning gasoline, cars, or any other material/object that people need to live their lives at the most basic level (which is the premise you are giving) is so far beyond asking that devices built for the purpose of killing things with great efficiency recieve tighter regulation than, say, getting a drivers license. 

    3.) And this is imbricated with the above bit ... no one is saying guns should be "banned" except people that are very pro-gun access, and only then by putting words into people's mouths. Most people, the people in the center and on the left, just realize that it's high time we had a national dialogue about increasing regulations and decreasing total sales of guns, thereby decreasing the ability of people to get access to them for whatever nefarious task they want to accomplish. 

    There is no need to puff up a position by inventing a straw man who is howling in the cornfields about banning all guns. But there is a need for people to come to the middle, have a discussion,  and stop trying to pretend that the United States' extremely lax gun laws, it's *obsession* with guns, and the large businesses that foster both of these play a huge role in how easy it is for criminals to get guns, and thus play a huge role in the sheer body count this nation produces daily .... when there aren't anomalous psychos killing children. 

    Pretending they are not connected is just wrong. 

    [/QUOTE]


    I'm not against sensible gun control Z. I live in MA, we have the strictest in the country. I'm ok with that.

    But I AM NOT for citizens of MA telling LA what their gun laws should be. It would have to be a hell of a lot more people than a couple per 100K for me to join in with undermining states rights. I would support a Constitutional Amendment to place some basic restrictions on gun ownership because the Constitution supersedes states rights. Ie. you don't let felons or psychos have guns.

    Do I think it's stupid how some states handle their gun laws? Yes.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re: With all Due Respect ...

    In response to getdrunkstupit's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    if you ban guns some simple things will happen.  Immorale "bad" people will keep their guns.  good people will give them up.  bad people will have free reign. 

     

    THINK BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING

    [/QUOTE]

    Getting ready to be a couch potato and watch football all day. But inbetween, I continue to switch to the News channels. Many are using this tragedy to back their opinion about gun control.....if there were a way to stop this from happening, obviously I would be all for it, but there just isn’t. People will get their hands on firearms regardless of what laws are passed as there would be a Black Market, like the availability of drugs,  that would provide a crazy with weapons.  Did anyone see the following:

    Man with knife injures 22 kids at school in China 1:35a.m. EST December 15, 2012 


    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/12/14/china-school-stabbings/1770395/

    I mean there were adults who gave their lives stopping in front of bullets & lunging at the shooter. Can’t believe that a man with a knife couldn’t be disabled by adults with something, a chair etc. or simply tackling the man from behind. This incident just shows we in the US don’t have a monopoly on crazies !!!

    It is too bad to an extent that these loonies shoot themselves or are shot. I'd like a tranquilizer weapon or shoot the limbs etc. to keep the person alive so that his/her brain could be analyzed to see if something could be learned to prevent others from committing these tragedies. And "no" I would not want liberals etc. claiming that insanity keeps this vile creature from being killed, quarted & tortured slowly even !!!  A wild crazed animal is put to death so irrespective of a human being declared insane, death and a painful one too should be done.

    As much as I am excited about the upcoming game vs 49ers & Pats tonight , this event puts into perspective that life is sacred & we must count each day as a blessing. There are somber days ahead  & will be too over the holidays with the massacre of innocent children. I  cannot imagine the grief of parents/grandparents.  Why would God allow this ???  Recalling the “Exorcist” movies, and the inability for an explanation of why someone would do this…understand a hate against a friend, parent, teacher, law officer etc., but innocent children…I am wondering if someone can truly be possessed by the Devil. 

    How to explain to the other Kids other than telling them they are all going to heaven & some are going earlier that others I guess ?  Sort of like some Muslims believing they are going up to 72 Virgins so it is not the worst thing.  I do not even think child psychologists have good counseling advice for pre-teen children as there are no precedents.  Got to tell the kids that there are many evil people in the world.  

    I am  neither a grandparent/parent but with nieces & nephews it would be unimaginable the pain/sorrow to be experienced. My heart and condolences go out to all involved.

    OK, I’m venting.  I know that there are budget considerations and I don’t know if planes still have AirMarshalls now that cockpits are locked but wouldn’t it be nice too for some former Military to have security jobs at schools, movies, public places etc. & to have the right to search anyone looking suspicious or with bulky clothes. The heck with our deficit increasing, this is a much needed expenditure.

     

     

Share