Printable View
Somone who needs a gun in the UK can apply for one, fill in the paperwork, prove your not a nutter or need a gun, you get a certificate, licence and can get a gun. Dont see how that is pious pesonally..Quote:
Originally Posted by SFTB
Actually we couldnt go tit for tat cos I dont play that game, I see your point, but I was merely throwing comment as it what most people would think when you read such a line... :)
Gun sales always shoot up when a Democrat get's into the WH due to the NRA scare tactics. In which the only gun related law Obama has implemented is allowing guns in federals parks.Quote:
Originally Posted by kittyKaiti
Banning concealed carrying leaves a hell of a lot dangerous things you can still do. It's nowhere near a virtual banning of all guns. If you want to carry a gun in public have the balls to carry it in the open so that everyone is aware of the risk they take by being in your proximity and so everyone can see the orientation of the barrel.Quote:
I'm for reasonable regulation. Banning concealed carry for everybody, IMO, isn't reasonable. You think it is. Banning it for certain people because of their past behavior or current mental status is reasonable. But everybody? No matter what reason? It's as close to a ban as you can get.
Why would you want to encourage 'open carry'?
Bringing a gun into a public area is an infringement on our general right to a safe public space. If you're going to bring a hazardous instrument into a playground, a tennis court, a store and thereby increase our risk of injury, then at the very least let us know: display your piece. Why is that so unreasonable? I know, I know...you have this fantasy that all the bad guys will then know who is carrying and take them out first. Comic book fantasies are generally not a good basis of rational thought.
What I wrote about "dead bacon" was in regards to the idea that if in my neighborhood, on a street I've lived on for 25 years, was to have a ton of idiot cops walk on my street and commence opening fire on crowds of children, infants in strollers and mothers holding babies in their arms with mace pepper balls, rubber bullets and bean bags and then watching from my bedroom window has my neighbors dive to shield their children from said barrage of lethal weaponry, my reaction would have in fact been to return fire from my house with my AR-15 to ward off the vicious and murderous attack launched by the police against said crowds of children, infants and mothers. In the video from the Anaheim incident, you can watch as fathers and mothers used their own bodies to guard their 5 year olds from being shot in the face with bean bags and mace pepper balls and one heroic man, who attempted to fight off a vicious K-9 Unit dog which was attacking a baby stroller. This sick display of behavior from police only fuels the hatred people already have of them and of the government who condones this behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by seanchai
Do any of you know what would happen to a toddler struck by a rubber bullet or bean bag fired from a shotgun? Instantaneous death from the impact of those bags and bullets or a minimum of serious skull fractures, loss of teeth or permanent blindness. An infant would be killed immediately as its head is crushed from the force of the impacting beanbag rounds and the inhalation of those exploding mace pepper balls, essentially paintballs filled with OC powder, the same chemical used in pepper spray and mace, would induce respiratory arrest, asthma attacks and other severe breathing problems. Now, I don't know about any of you people but what does one do when the police begin opening fire a barrage of said weaponry against a crowd of children, infants and parents? Do you dial 911? Well shit, that won't work because all the responders are busy at the scene shooting the neighborhood children.
Yeah shoot back, that'll save the children.
It actually just might. I could alternatively use something they would consider "less lethal" and shoot at them with bb guns and pepper spray but that would involve me going into hand-to-hand combat with my local PD and I'd rather not get shot up in the face with beanbags with the rest of my neighbors' three and four year olds.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
Remind me not to stand next to you at a public protest in the event things go awry...I'd rather live to write the book.Quote:
It actually just might.
There we go. The ad hominem attack. 'Comic book fantasies.' 'Irrational.'Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
I can't possibly raise a good point, which you choose to disagree with by presenting another good point. No, I'm irrational and have comic book fantasies. That must be it.
There can't possibly be good things and bad things about 'open carry' as compared to 'concealed carry'. Of course not. You must be right. About everything. You must be.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms..disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one." - Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist in 1764. -Thomas JeffersonQuote:
Originally Posted by trish
"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -Thomas Jefferson
Re the two quotes in sequence:Quote:
Originally Posted by Faldur
1) was not quoted by Jefferson, they are words that were underlined in his copy of Beccaria's book On Crimes and Punishments (1674)
2) Jefferson never said or wrote The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." -the quote was unknown before 2007, ref: Matt Carson, On a Hill They Call Capitol: A Revolution is Coming (Carsons Publishing, 2007), p131.
Note, to labour this point again, that the 2nd Amendment refers to 'People' not 'Persons', ie a collective of persons, not individuals.