Own a Assault Weapon? soon the Sheriff will be at your home

Quote:

---

hippifried is going to get shot up in his house?

---

The odds are against it. With near certainty hippifried's life will never be seriously threatened by a home intruder. Which brings up the point: guns are very rarely used for protection. They are used to engender peace of mind. But the peace of mind afforded by a gun in your home is illusory. It comes with a cost. The cost of the illusion is increased risk of injury or fatality to family, friends and visitors to your home. Accidents, suicides, murder in a fit of anger. When there's a gun in your home, all these things are way more likely to occur than a home invader who threatens your life.

Good post, Odelay. Love you hippiefried.

My house got broken into twice when I lived in a bad neighborhood.

Young black kids,

Several times little gangs of elementary school kids would just walk into my house, once when I was upstairs taking a bath. I considered running down the stairs naked and shouting, but ...nah.

None of those kids deserved to get shot. How did I remedy the situation? I moved to another neighborhood and paid four times the mortgage.

GUNS SHOULD BE LEGAL FOR WHITE ADULTS BUT ILLEGAL FOR YOUNG BLACK MEN.

Of course that's ridiculous, but you can bet black kids on the corner in a bad neighborhood, or driving around the ghetto in a new car get stopped by the cops daily, so in that respect ..........

Guns are dangerous in desperate hands, that is why Obama is stressing SCHOOL for kindergarteners. That is the only realistic cure, or the MOST realistic cure. Give kids something to live for.

This pic has nothing to do with this post, I just like Bogie.

I don't have anything to add to the specific issue that started this thread, but I have noticed, and not just on HA that guns and politics in the USA produces a frenzy of debate (if that is what it is) more than any other domestic topic I can think of; more than abortion, gay marriage, drugs, or really important things like education and jobs. In less than 24 hours this thread is already on page 7... why?

In response to the gun deaths compared to other things like cars or cigarettes there is one thing different only one is designed to kill as its only purpose. And that one is guns it has no other purpose you can't drive it, smoke it, cook with it, or do anything else with it you can shoot and nothing else, either responsibly or to kill.

I am also going to post an estimated gun death total since Newtown every day:

70 days since Newtown 2141 gun related deaths up by 105 since yesterday, these are only ins the US deaths by guns, since December 14 2012.

I believe that to be too high, these are no combat deaths, we did not more soldiers in the entire war on terror then we do in the US yearly, also are those gun deaths going down from conservative or right wing studies, in 2010 we had over 10,000 in 2011 we had over 9,000 if I am correct in that and in 2012 we had over 12,000 how is that acceptable what are the causes guns.

Sorry for the double post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by my my my!

Current firearms in my possession, all semi auto or bolt action , no full auto:
HK G36C
Colt M4 carbine
Howa 1500 Sniper Rifle
Yugoslavian SKS
Marlin .22
Beretta 9mm
Mossberg shotgun

---

Unless you are active-duty military or law enforcement, you do not have a Colt M4, which is an automatic rifle. You may own one of Colt's civilian AR-15 models, but the M4 is the military version, which you do not have.

Weird thing to lie about, since you could actually own Colt's LESOCOM carbine, which looks remarkably like the M4. But if you're claiming to own an honest-to-god M4, then you're lying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by my my my!

because believe it or not through your liberal skull, to most slave owning southerners, slaves were PROPERTY.

You call me moron, .

---

First of all, you are a moron. It's not just something I call you.

Second of all some of your later posts make it sound like you grasp exactly how bad slavery was. However you seem to justify the anger of the southerners because they believed they had a vested property right in people. Who cares what they thought? Next thing you're going to tell me a pedophile thinks he has a right to screw children. Have you ever heard of something called natural law? There are certain things decent people don't do even when permitted. The only way slaveowners should have been compensated is by trying on the shackles for themselves.

I have a new working definition of chutzpah: being told that your previous practice of enslaving human beings is an affront to human dignity as well a grave violation of human rights and demanding compensation to stop doing it.

Finally, you obviously have a fetish for guns. Early on in our country's history it was settled that the arbiter of the constitutionality of laws passed by the legislature is the judiciary. I doubt you're a judge. So if a law is passed, you do not rule on whether it is constitutional. If you try to shoot a police officer doing his job, my support goes to the officer, not to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by broncofan

First of all, you are a moron. It's not just something I call you.

Second of all some of your later posts make it sound like you grasp exactly how bad slavery was. However you seem to justify the anger of the southerners because they believed they had a vested property right in people. Who cares what they thought? Next thing you're going to tell me a pedophile thinks he has a right to screw children. Have you ever heard of something called natural law? There are certain things decent people don't do even when permitted. The only way slaveowners should have been compensated is by trying on the shackles for themselves.

I have a new working definition of chutzpah: being told that your previous practice of enslaving human beings is an affront to human dignity as well a grave violation of human rights and demanding compensation to stop doing it.

Finally, you obviously have a fetish for guns. Early on in our country's history it was settled that the arbiter of the constitutionality of laws passed by the legislature is the judiciary. I doubt you're a judge. So if a law is passed, you do not rule on whether it is constitutional. If you try to shoot a police officer doing his job, my support goes to the officer, not to you.

---

You're yet another moron here.

I have clearly stated that I am fully against Slavery you dumbass. If your reading comprehension does not allow you to see that, then it is your fault and not mine.

1: I don't have a fetish for guns, to me they DO NOT mean what they mean to you aka "potential killing machine or object designed to kill people" . To me they're a hunk of plastic and metal that I use to test my hand and eye coordination on non-live targets. Can you get that through your thick skull?
A knife to me does not mean "stabby weapon" it means "vegetable chopper"
You're so fucking dense , you just come across as stupid.

2: I don't justify the anger of the slave owners. I'm saying they were angry, because they were. The civil war is proof that they didn't like the idea of being told to free their slaves.
As far as your moronic suggestion the owners shackle themselves. If you were to go back in time, they would've told you to fuck off just like they did to the US Government.You don't accept that? You want to live in lala land and everything is cotton candy and fluffy bunnies and good people? Go ahead, skip the reality of what SLAVERY was and how bad people can be.
To the civil war era slave and us in 2013 looking at it now, Slavery was the worst fucking thing to happen to a human.To the slave owners of 1860, not so, they were merely property. What do you not get about that moron? I've stated many times to you incompetent readers, that I am fully against the abomination known as slavery and am glad the North won. Do I sugarcoat history? No, it was what it was. If i could go back in time and catch the first fucker to try to sell a slave, i would. But that's pipe dream bullshit.

3: Pedophiles. Yes some do think they're not doing anything wrong. You don't accept that they are so fucked in the head that they sincerely believe that? Sure they should be shot on the spot. But you can not speak for them, unless you yourself are a pedophile. So now Your take on a subject is the one true morally acceptable approach on any subject?. Get of your high horse moron.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odelay

hippifried is going to get shot up in his house?

Several things come to mind. First, I didn't know hippi owned a house. I figured his countercultural persona would have sort of steered him away from the mass hysteria of the housing market of the last several decades.

Second, are we sure that hippi doesn't have some mean old doberman waiting for any invader? Seems more like his style than some semi-automatic small penis compensating weapon.

Finally, unlike the author, I would mourn hippi's demise. Although, I bet he'd have a helluva wake. Hope I'm invited.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trish

The odds are against it. With near certainty hippifried's life will never be seriously threatened by a home intruder. Which brings up the point: guns are very rarely used for protection. They are used to engender peace of mind. But the peace of mind afforded by a gun in your home is illusory. It comes with a cost. The cost of the illusion is increased risk of injury or fatality to family, friends and visitors to your home. Accidents, suicides, murder in a fit of anger. When there's a gun in your home, all these things are way more likely to occur than a home invader who threatens your life.

Good post, Odelay. Love you hippiefried.

---

Damn! So much love, & so little blood circulation where it's needed to do anything about it...:heartbroken: Gettin' old sucks, butteye'll pass on the alternative.

Back on topic:
One thing I've noticed through the years is that having guns makes you a target. Not necessarily a target of violence or governance, but the 4 high dollar items to any burglar are; cash, jewelry, guns, & prescriptions. In that order.

My,
You're not a very clear-headed guy are you? What I was saying with my analogy is that the subjective belief of slaveowners and pedophiles is not relevant. You keep telling me what they thought, what they felt, what they wanted. We know what they wanted. It was not something that anyone should accept. We keep hearing fear-mongering about moral relativism from right wingers but that's what you're engaging in. You're saying that since it was not a practice seriously frowned upon they had a right to be upset if it were abolished.

You say a knife should not be conceptualized as a weapon because it also has utility in preparing food. That's very lovely, but what is this distinct utility you envision for a gun? That you can shoot it at objects and pretend those objects are human beings? Or do you try to chop vegetables with your gun?

You say you are anti-slavery, and it sounds like you are. But you're extremely generous to both slaveowners and in your last bullet point to pedophiles. I don't understand your argument. The purpose of bringing up pedophiles is to say that their belief that they are not doing anything wrong does not sanitize their actions. This was the universal principle you were supposed to take away from the analogy rather than the muddled garbage you posted.