Printable View
agreed. None of the four are worth killing for, whether you're the one stealing them or the who owns them. The peace of mind afforded by gun ownership is an illusion. If there is a gun in your home it is more likely to be used in a suicide, more likely to be the cause of a serious or fatal accident, more likely to be fired in anger than used to protect against a life-threatening intruder.Quote:
the 4 high dollar items to any burglar are; cash, jewelry, guns, & prescriptions
And this right here is the sentence structure and contemplative style of a supremely intelligent man. Being so smart must be frustrating.Quote:
Originally Posted by my my my!
It might have seemed like muddled garbage to a simpleton such as yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
But I could not have made myself clearer to you.
Why is their subjective belief not relevant? Just because Broncofan says so? You're a truly mistaken if you think your standards of morality be it subjective or perceived define another person's reality and belief system. If someone sincerely, in their live reality, sincerely believe in Santa Claus, who are you to tell them otherwise? If a pedophile believes that he is not doing anything wrong and really sincerely feels that way, Broncofan's or my opinion is not going to change a damn thing.
No, I'm saying I DON'T conceptualize a knife as a weapon. To me it's just a utensil that is sharp. Just like I know what a gun can do, does not mean I fetishize it and dream about one day killing people, or pretend that beer bottles are human beings. See, that's what non gun enthusiasts don't understand. It's just a sport, hobby and security for some of us. But to people that are tired of gun violence, guns are the worst thing in the world. I do understand that people are tired of gun violence. However, I'm tired of drunk drivers, I seriously am, I lost a dear friend to a drunk driver. Do , I wish alcoholic beverages should be banned so my suffering is alleviated? No, I can handle my alcohol intake, just like I can handle my weapons responsibly. The shooters at school are the retards that ruin it for everyone else, just like a drunk driver makes other social drinkers that can handle their alcohol, look bad.
Now you also say "You're saying that since it was not a practice seriously frowned upon they had a right to be upset if it were abolished"
Yes, and I do believe they had a right to get upset. Do I think, they were correct in the overall scheme of morality? No. But , that does not change the fact they were pissed and were passionate about their way of life enough to go to war over it .
Who am I to tell someone who believes in Santa Claus that Santa Claus doesn't exist? Well it's nigh impossible to prove a negative. However, the law is not indifferent when it comes to people's actions. The legislature cannot upon hearing that pedophiles feel they're engaged in victimless acts fail to pass laws to protect children now can they? What you're saying is that everyone should have a referendum on any law they happen to disagree with. That's not how our government has ever been run.
I understand that people may be very passionate about their right to engage in all sorts of heinous acts. But we do have to attempt to develop some sort of objective morality as a society or we run the risk of saying anything is permissible just because some people believe it is.
BTW, you are not going to change a pedophiles mind perhaps, but he can be put in prison. Back to the main point. If gun laws are passed and upheld by the judiciary and you try to shoot officers, that's where you end up, at best.
For once I believe you:D.Quote:
Originally Posted by my my my!
I'm done for the night. Good luck to you. I recommend you get rid of your guns and get a life. Sorry for my liberal snobbery. Drink beer, recycle the beer bottles, don't shoot them. Again, just recommendations with absolutely no malice intended. Or maybe I am being malicious, but you're right that we're never going to understand each other. I'm done trying for now.
"Well it's nigh impossible to prove a negative"Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
See man, just because you in your heart and mind know it's a negative, as well as I, that does not mean you and I can define that for someone else (theoretically no one knows for sure, but then we get in the realm of individual realities and we should not go there)
"The legislature cannot upon hearing that pedophiles feel they're engaged in victimless acts fail to pass laws to protect children now can they?"
I'm glad the laws are in place to protect children from pedophiles, and pedophiles are the bottom feeders in a prison system. However, that does not change the pedophile's belief that what he/she did is right (if said pedophile thinks there's nothing wrong with it), they are going to think they are wrongfully imprisoned. That is not to say prison does not make them see the error in their ways, but prison and penalties don't fix stupid all the time. Some get out of prison a changed man, and some get out the same exact pedophile as they went in (and in their mind sincerely believe it)
" But we do have to attempt to develop some sort of objective morality as a society or we run the risk of saying anything is permissible just because some people believe it is"
I agree. However, some minds can not be changed, again, if they believe their truth to be reality. The real world consequence is prison and social punishments and the like.
"If gun laws are passed and upheld by the judiciary and you try to shoot officers, that's where you end up, at best"
Yes I realize this, and I am ok for standing up for something I believe in. What I've been stating since my first post, is that without any change to the judiciary AND to the constitution, my weapons are legal.
However if some local, state or civilian agent or group decides by committee to suddenly say "you can not have x type of weapon in your possession" without first consulting the supreme court or a popular vote to re-ammend or remove the 2nd amendment, then their action is seen as a violation of my 2nd amendment right.
Hey , if gun control advocates get their way and get the 2nd amendment repealed, cool. I'll be fully aware of the change. I'll give up my weapons if that's what the new amendment/constitution says.
If those types come into my house, trying to remove something that is still legal according to the constitution and supreme court. Then they will be met with what I consider an appropriate reaction (by my beliefs).
For me an Appropriate reaction if the 2nd amendment is still in effect would be, to kindly tell them that my house is protected by the 2nd amendment, if they refuse to leave and insist on taking my weapons, I will react accordingly. Perhaps through calling a lawyer, maybe get the president's attention through media or some other venue. If they still refuse, and STEP inside my home without a warrant, then I would consider this an illegal invasion of my home and unnecessary and would then proceed to the really dramatic option, which would be to shoot the intruder.
You call me crazy for that? I'm ok with that. :D Does not mean I agree with you.
I don't think I have anything "on topic" to add to this thread...I've already stated my position on guns in several threads.Quote:
Originally Posted by volkov2006
Just a short rant while it's on my mind.
Cigarettes serve no "purpose" other than to get you to buy more cigarettes. They are a poisonous commodity that does nothing other than get you hooked on an item that, more often than not, either slowly destroys your health or kills you outright. Any pleasure a person derives from smoking them is purely psychological and usually based on the mind's response to an addiction. They don't really create an actual high as we know it...and I've seen far more people (including friends and family members) die slowly (sometimes quickly) from cigarettes than guns. Period.
I wouldn't use them as a comparison to guns because guns do actually serve a defensive purpose in life. They are an actual tool. How that tool is used and regulated is up to us....
...but cigarettes are just garbage.
As a matter of fact - if my only choice was to completely outlaw the production and sale of either guns or cigarettes.....it wouldn't even be close.
rant over ...sorry to derail the thread.
The two items have nothing to do with each other, so no sense in using them as a comparison either positive or negative.
You're not derailing the thread. What you said is very relevant. And some of the people posting in this thread will disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by fred41
Cigarettes are a KNOWN killing object(albeit slowly) with an addictive substance and with dubious psychological effects that is still allowed for sale anywhere in the United States. Knowing full well that It kills thousands of people through a prolonged agonizing death.
But people here will defend that and say "but cigarettes aren't a thing that was MEANT to kill, like guns".
Personally I'm ok with people smoking, it's their thing (although I could argue their second hand smoke is killing me lol) just like I'm ok with owning weapons and I THINK they should be fine with that (some aren't of course lol).
:)
Nope , not lying about it. My COLT m4 is actually stamped COLT M4.Quote:
Originally Posted by thombergeron
I do agree that it is a semi-auto version and that's all I said it was. I even told volkov that I only own semi-autos and bolt actions.
I do agree that I do NOT own a military version of the M4, full auto , with a switch to burst fire. But mine is definitely a COLT M4.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...rbine-lesocom/
It took almost two decades, but Colt Defense is finally offering a consumer-legal M4 Carbine. The Colt LESOCOM is very close to the M4A1 that Colt manufactures for the military.
M4A1 is what you're thinking. And I never claimed to own a M4A1
Actually it is just the wedge issue of the moment. We have a few go-to wedge issues that can always be relied on in the US political discourse to take folks eye of the ball on issues like economic inequity, unemployment, global warming and corporate crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
Newtown simply made gun safety / gun regulation / gun control such a hot third rail. For the better part of a decade plus most American's have avoided the topic. But some of other favorites to distract the public while likes of Jamie Dimon and the Koch Brothers do their thing include:
Abortion : Right to Life
Death Penalty : Right to Kill
Health Care : Right to live only if you have a job and your employer provides insurance.
Defense of Marriage Act: Right to be homophobic
But Newtown really woke this one up because these were little babies in a mass shooting.
And the demographics of America are changing under the feet of the GOP and they think they lost to Obama because Romney flipped to more moderate policies once he got their nomination rather realizing the only reason Romney did not lose by more was because he abandoned some of his more conservative stances in the general election.