Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 6 votes

'Culture war' more than gun rights

gun control nra

  • Please log in to reply
138 replies to this topic

#121    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 08 May 2013 - 10:50 PM

View PostSir Wearer of Hats, on 08 May 2013 - 10:30 PM, said:

Well as down that road does lie Totalitarianism.
All inclusive background checks is perhaps a better phrase - you MUST do a background check on someone to sell a gun, proof of that check is what makes the sale legal. It'll be perfect, tonnes of new jobs created over night in the department of fire arm background checks. Of course it'll make private sales nigh impossible, but you could sell to liscenced business buyers who on-sell to others.

Well, what about people, who pass on their guns to their children or grandchildren? My husband's grandfather was an avid antique gun collector and we have several of his guns, many from 1800's. My daddy has a Japanese made rifle, that his father got off a dead Japanese soldier in the Pacific during World War II. I would HOPE that such transfers as these would be okay under what you're saying. I have no problem with background checks in theory, I have had many background checks done on me and my husband since we both have bought guns. I'm just saying these types of transactions between family members, especially when a parent or grandparent or great-grandparent has left a gun to someone, they should be able to do that, don't you think?


#122    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    SCIENCE!

  • Member
  • 10,513 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 08 May 2013 - 10:57 PM

View PostKowalski, on 08 May 2013 - 10:50 PM, said:

Well, what about people, who pass on their guns to their children or grandchildren? My husband's grandfather was an avid antique gun collector and we have several of his guns, many from 1800's. My daddy has a Japanese made rifle, that his father got off a dead Japanese soldier in the Pacific during World War II. I would HOPE that such transfers as these would be okay under what you're saying. I have no problem with background checks in theory, I have had many background checks done on me and my husband since we both have bought guns. I'm just saying these types of transactions between family members, especially when a parent or grandparent or great-grandparent has left a gun to someone, they should be able to do that, don't you think?
Well if left in a will I suppose that's entirely another matter.

I must not fear. Fear is the Mind-Killer. It is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and to move through me. And when it is gone I will turn the inner eye to see it's path.
When the fear is gone, there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

#123    Michelle

Michelle

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,827 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tennessee

  • Eleanor Roosevelt: Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Posted 08 May 2013 - 11:07 PM

I'm more concerned about medical records being scrutinized, Kowalski. Even needing something to help someone sleep could be construed as a mental disorder according to some people. We all have our quirks and who is to say whether someone is dangerous or not?


#124    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 09 May 2013 - 12:13 AM

View PostSir Wearer of Hats, on 08 May 2013 - 10:57 PM, said:

Well if left in a will I suppose that's entirely another matter.

Okay, cool. :tu:



View PostMichelle, on 08 May 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

I'm more concerned about medical records being scrutinized, Kowalski. Even needing something to help someone sleep could be construed as a mental disorder according to some people. We all have our quirks and who is to say whether someone is dangerous or not?

Have you ever heard of this disorder? It makes me laugh actually that psychiatrists consider this a disorder:

Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a childhood disorder described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as an ongoing pattern of anger-guided disobedience, hostility, and defiant behavior toward authority figures which goes beyond the bounds

Check out:http://en.wikipedia....efiant_disorder


#125    third_eye

third_eye

    _ M Ġ ń Ř Ī Ş_

  • Member
  • 7,564 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia

  • "Legio nomen mihi est, quia multi sumus"

    God has no religion ~ Mahatma Gandhi

Posted 09 May 2013 - 12:25 AM

View PostKowalski, on 09 May 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:


~snip
Have you ever heard of this disorder? It makes me laugh actually that psychiatrists consider this a disorder:

Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a childhood disorder described by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as an ongoing pattern of anger-guided disobedience, hostility, and defiant behavior toward authority figures which goes beyond the bounds

Check out:http://en.wikipedia....efiant_disorder

Sadly ... we see it quite clearly in the kids today, thankfully a bit of reverse psychology gets the parent by and by but they must be constantly on their toes as the kids catch on fast and sometimes pull a reverse on the parents, its quite stressful to say the least.

Edited by third_eye, 09 May 2013 - 12:26 AM.

Quote

' ... life and death carry on as they always have ~ and always will, only the dreamer is gone ~ behind the flow of imagination, beyond any effort to be still
dancing in the ebb and flow of attention, more present than the breath, I find the origins of my illusions, only the dreamer is gone ~ the dream never ends
'

GIFTS WITH NO GIVER - a love affair with truth ~ Poems by Nirmala

third_eye ' s cavern ~ bring own beer


#126    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 09 May 2013 - 12:32 AM

View Postpreacherman76, on 08 May 2013 - 09:39 PM, said:



Why would you assume our military would side with tyranny? They took a oath to defend the constitution against ALL enemies.

That is only a radicalized right-wing narrative and while many soldiers are right-wing extremists, many are not.

Many soldiers and LEOs, most in fact, are not Oath Keepers. Most right-wing soldiers and LEOs are not Oath Keepers. It is rather a non-mainstream approach.

The radical right-wing does not have a monopoly on defenders of the Constitution nor on how to define tyranny.

I have read an Oath Keeper refer to themselves as heroes. No one really has a right to self-declare themselves as heroes.

Oath Keepers plan to march, armed, into DC this July. They are going to raise their profile, one even hopes to be arrested, as to make a court case over the Second Amendment. The SCOTUS might not agree with their version of militia.

It will be interesting if they actually make it to their planned rally. The couple of test runs this year seem to have been in their favor.

One tried getting a city council to pass some law. They declined and said they would wait for the courts to decide. I doubt there is any court case.

Others wore 3% patches and were made to remove them by their department.

Their fantasies to arrest politicians seems childish.

The oath they take has a few components.  To focus just on one and ignore the others reveals difficulty with formulas.

Three have already been arrested but the Oath Keepers claim they are not real Oath Keepers. One was kicked out two days before his arrest. One is doing time. Two did despicable crimes involving minors that have nothing to do with their political anti-government views.

No need to mention those crimes here. Anyone googling can discover on their own.


------------------
------------------


This is what I think about soldiers and the pact they have with us:



Many soldiers are heroes but would never call themselves that.

I trust my government and our military even if I often disagree with our politicians' decisions including foreign policy. There are plenty of times I agree too. Our military has nothing to do with that and the best soldiers leave politics behind when wearing the uniform.

These old values are lost among some misguided soldiers but live on in many others. We all have veterans in our families going back several wars. Friends and co-workers too.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!, 09 May 2013 - 12:59 AM.


#127    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,841 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:30 AM

View PostMichelle, on 07 May 2013 - 09:50 PM, said:

With one in three households in the US owning guns, if you go by the polls, there should be people dropping like flies left and right. Then of course there are all of the illegal guns in houses where they would not give an honest answer.

Yep

(CNN) -- Gun-related homicides and crime are "strikingly" down from 20 years ago, despite the American public's belief that firearm crime is on the upswing, a new study said Wednesday.
Looking back 50 years, a Pew Research Center study found U.S. gun homicides rose in the 1960s, gained in the 1970s, peaked in the 1980s and the early 1990s, and then plunged and leveled out the past 20 years.
"Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago," the researchers say.
A Pew survey of Americans in March found 56% believed gun-related crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% said it's lower. The survey said 26% believed it stayed the same and 6% didn't know.


Posted Image


Posted Image<a class="cnnvideo_clicklink" href="http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/us/study-gun-homicide#" title="Click to watch this video">

Posted ImageFerguson: Irresponsible humans, not guns
Chicago's record murder rate: Don't blame guns alone
The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#128    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:35 AM

Violent crime has been down for a while. Anyone looking at the stats last year from the FBI would have seen the same.

The issue now is not over violent crime in general or even crimes involving firearms but mass shootings. Mass shootings is what the public focus is on.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!, 09 May 2013 - 01:39 AM.


#129    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,841 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:43 AM

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 09 May 2013 - 12:32 AM, said:

That is only a radicalized right-wing narrative and while many soldiers are right-wing extremists, many are not.


The US military donated more money to Ron Paul in 08 and 12 then to all other's running combined. I feel just fine about where our members of the military side on the subject of freedom.  And what is it with you people and your over use of the words radical, or extremists? Im a extremist for believeing its possible  our military will keep thier oaths? Even DHS has returning vets as the #1 "terror threat"

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#130    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,841 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 09 May 2013 - 01:45 AM

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 09 May 2013 - 01:35 AM, said:

Violent crime has been down for a while. Anyone looking at the stats last year from the FBI would have seen the same.

The issue now is not over violent crime in general or even crimes involving firearms but mass shootings. Mass shootings is what the public focus is on.

If they take a few million of these kids off drugs where the lable says it could make you kill yourself, we will quickly see a steady decline in that as well.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#131    Jessica Christ

Jessica Christ

    jeanne d'arc, je te suivrai

  • Member
  • 3,609 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2011
  • Location:Currently entering

  • It seems so important now but you will get over.

Posted 09 May 2013 - 02:00 AM

View Postpreacherman76, on 09 May 2013 - 01:43 AM, said:



The US military donated more money to Ron Paul in 08 and 12 then to all other's running combined. I feel just fine about where our members of the military side on the subject of freedom.  And what is it with you people and your over use of the words radical, or extremists? Im a extremist for believeing its possible  our military will keep thier oaths? Even DHS has returning vets as the #1 "terror threat"

Believing you are going to square off with our federal government using arms is extremist. Oath Keepers have been radicalized.

It is noted that they are radicalized because a vast majority of they right are not. Many conservatives are sensible and don't envision or are preparing for domestic violence. They are partners in our federalist form of government.

It is ironic that 3 days after 9-11 the Congress handed over power to wage war to the President and it is still in effect.

That is not constitutional. Yet a few radicalized soldiers believe they are defenders of the Constitution but they also take orders, that is part of the oath too.

It is ironic that our wars might not be constitutional at all but only the courts can decide what is or not constitutional.

Not me or you even if I feel this is not.

Spc. Michael New who refused to wear the UN beret or take orders from a foreign commander was radicalized but at least his actions are respectable. He never promoted raising arms against our federalist government.

Still all other soldiers will join a peace keeping force if it is required again and report to a foreign commander.

Our government is not going to confiscate weapons. Believing so seems odd to more than half of us in America.

But if anyone raises arms against us, our country, or our government, we have many laws to handle them. If serious enough Section Three, Article Three has a term for that.

No one who is aware is expecting that to happen or for Oath Keepers to rise to that level. There are other concerns.

Edited by Leave Britney alone!, 09 May 2013 - 02:28 AM.


#132    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,009 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 09 May 2013 - 02:34 AM

View PostMichelle, on 08 May 2013 - 03:39 AM, said:

How quickly you forget Katrina with the looting and killings that happened during a major disaster in New Orleans.

which actually proves my point rather than yours. They were dependent on each other for help. Lone independent wolfs - died.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#133    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,009 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 09 May 2013 - 02:40 AM

View Postpreacherman76, on 09 May 2013 - 01:43 AM, said:

The US military donated more money to Ron Paul in 08 and 12 then to all other's running combined.

are all your "facts" wrong? http://thinkprogress...ilitary-donors/

Posted Image

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#134    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,841 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:33 AM

View PostLeave Britney alone!, on 09 May 2013 - 02:00 AM, said:

Believing you are going to square off with our federal government using arms is extremist. Oath Keepers have been radicalized.

It is noted that they are radicalized because a vast majority of they right are not. Many conservatives are sensible and don't envision or are preparing for domestic violence. They are partners in our federalist form of government.


First, Im not talking about "a square off" with the federal governmnet. I talking about should the day come when the fed decides to come for us. Big difference. There is not a single real conservative that is in partnership with the Fed. Thats like saying there are true christians in a pact with the devil. Nor does the fed see any real conservatives as partners. In fact they have labled every single one of us as terrorists.

Quote


It is ironic that 3 days after 9-11 the Congress handed over power to wage war to the President and it is still in effect.

It isnt ironic at all. Its criminal. It proves beyond any doubt that folks like yourself live in a false paradigm. There is no left or right once to climb the top of that ladder. There is only the bank.


Quote


That is not constitutional. Yet a few radicalized soldiers believe they are defenders of the Constitution but they also take orders, that is part of the oath too.
There are alot of people who take the oath seriously. They arent all soldiers. But the ones who are have drawn thier line in the sand.

Quote


It is ironic that our wars might not be constitutional at all but only the courts can decide what is or not constitutional.

Not me or you even if I feel this is not.

So when the constitution directly says only congress can declare war, you are so dumb that you need a court to clarify that for you?


Quote


Our government is not going to confiscate weapons. Believing so seems odd to more than half of us in America.

88% of Americans believe gun violence has gone up over the last 20 years. The way things are, dont always line up what Americans believe. They are already unconstitutionaly disarming vets as we speak.

Quote


But if anyone raises arms against us, our country, or our government, we have many laws to handle them. If serious enough Section Three, Article Three has a term for that.

No one who is aware is expecting that to happen or for Oath Keepers to rise to that level. There are other concerns.

Nor am I expecting it to happen. In fact once enough people wake up these people will run like the cowards they are. And more people wake up by the day.

Edited by preacherman76, 09 May 2013 - 09:56 AM.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#135    preacherman76

preacherman76

    Humble Servent

  • Member
  • 10,841 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Parts Unknown

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:46 AM

View Postninjadude, on 09 May 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

are all your "facts" wrong? http://thinkprogress...ilitary-donors/

Posted Image

Of course I meant while Paul was actualy still in the race. After the media lied about the first few states we won, and had to drop out, of course the donations switched. During his run, he was blowing them all outta the water. In fact even your chart here is very impressive considering he was only in the running for a few weeks, and still came in third to the two guys who ran full presidencial campaigns.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.





Also tagged with gun control, nra

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users