439 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

Eonwe, on 24 December 2012 - 11:08 PM, said:

Either you are a troll, or very stupid

If you're calling me a conspiracy theorist because I know that governments have no conscience, and have the ability to kill their citizens - as many governments in the past have done - then you are deliberately ignoring the facts regarding the millions of *disarmed* citizens killed by their governments, and violating common sense in a very reckless and unintelligent manner.

@ questionmark - The ability of the people to bare arms shall not be infringed. What do you not get about that?

I don't care if half the country is drinking the koolaid and think it's a good idea to take away their own rights.

They can hand in their guns, they can hand over their rights - because they're putting themselves on a serving tray for the government.

In other words, democracy at its finest - the wolves outvoting the sheep - but first the government has to spin the public against our ability to defend ourselves through the liberal media and use it as a banner to recruit more wolves. They can get more wolves, but I know how to put wolves down.

I don't care how many guns you have, as long as every one of them is registered, identifiable and you responsible for the damage they cause by your actions or your neglect.

[Yamato]

questionmark, on 24 December 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

I don't care how many guns you have, as long as every one of them is registered, identifiable and you responsible for the damage they cause by your actions or your neglect.

Then you're pretending there are problems that don't exist.   Registration requirements and damages from our neglect or misuse are already on the books.   If this was really all you cared about you'd be very happy with the laws we have.

[questionmark]

Yamato, on 24 December 2012 - 11:16 PM, said:

Then you're pretending there are problems that don't exist.   Registration requirements and damages from our neglect or misuse are already on the books.   If this was really all you cared about you'd be very happy with the laws we have.

Where the problem is that in most states is is about as enforced as the prohibition to have sex doggie style. And that is what has to change.

[Kafkaesque]

questionmark, on 24 December 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

I don't care how many guns you have, as long as every one of them is registered, identifiable and you responsible for the damage they cause by your actions or your neglect.

As an adult who values religious adherence to good laws, they are.

But if any one wants to take away my right to defend myself in this free society, they have another thing coming.

That is all I am advocating.

Edited by Eonwe, 24 December 2012 - 11:23 PM.

[Yamato]

questionmark, on 24 December 2012 - 11:19 PM, said:

Where the problem is that in most states is is about as enforced as the prohibition to have sex doggie style. And that is what has to change.

I see no evidence to believe in this rhetorically lipsticked opinion.   The wake of the tragedy you're skiing behind right now cooking up so many unrelated issues about guns, has nothing to do with preventing Sandy Hook.

[Yamato]

Eonwe, on 24 December 2012 - 11:08 PM, said:

Either you are a troll, or very stupid

If you're calling me a conspiracy theorist because I know that governments have no conscience, and have the ability to kill their citizens - as many governments in the past have done - then you are deliberately ignoring the facts regarding the millions of *disarmed* citizens killed by their governments, and violating common sense in a very reckless and unintelligent manner.

@ questionmark - The ability of the people to bare arms shall not be infringed. What do you not get about that?

I don't care if half the country is drinking the koolaid and think it's a good idea to take away their own rights.

They can hand in their guns, they can hand over their rights - because they're putting themselves on a serving tray for the government.

In other words, democracy at its finest - the wolves outvoting the sheep - but first the government has to spin the public against our ability to defend ourselves through the liberal media and use it as a banner to recruit more wolves. They can get more wolves, but I know how to put wolves down.




- Ron Paul

Another tragedy the media ignores in this country is the epidemic of dog shootings by cops.  It's unconscionable how easily cops shoot our loved ones and get away with it usually with no legal recourse by the victims of those shootings.   But just try and shoot a police dog; it's treated the same as shooting an officer of the law.

Giving our government a monopoly on arms is the stupidest political idea I've ever heard in my life.

[Yamato]

My girlfriend has a 90 lb lab and despite the fact that he's over 10 years old, he is very protective not to mention very strong, and will bark authoritatively and repeatedly if he knows someone is outside.   When she opens the door he comes running straight at me, even if he already recognizes me, and it's intimidating.   He doesn't bite me of course; he doesn't even jump on me.  He runs around me and acts super-happy to see me, but that's not what it looks like or sounds like when he's charging across the room towards the door.  A cop has already drawn a gun on her dog who has never bitten anyone and never would.   I've warned her to never let her dog near a cop if one is at the door.   She agreed to put him in the bedroom and shut the door and that could very well save his life from these gun-happy goons with badges.

[Kafkaesque]

Yamato, on 24 December 2012 - 11:35 PM, said:

My girlfriend has a 90 lb lab and despite the fact that he's over 10 years old, he is very protective not to mention very strong, and will bark authoritatively and repeatedly if he knows someone is outside.   When she opens the door he comes running straight at me, even if he already recognizes me, and it's intimidating.   He doesn't bite me of course; he doesn't even jump on me.  He runs around me and acts super-happy to see me, but that's not what it looks like or sounds like when he's charging across the room towards the door.  A cop has already drawn a gun on her dog who has never bitten anyone and never would.   I've warned her to never let her dog near a cop if one is at the door.   She agreed to put him in the bedroom and shut the door and that could very well save his life from these gun-happy goons with badges.

My dog is a pure bred golden retriever and eleven. He has a thyroid condition and thus is very huge. His bark is only amplified by his size; in a similar manner, it's a very authoritive and deep growl and bark when someone is at the door. However, as soon as someone walks in the house his tail starts wagging, slapping into the walls. He has only ever bit anyone once in his life, and that was me - ten years ago. As soon as you sit down he'll run up to you and rest his head in your lap, continuing to wag his tail, playfully nudging into your arms or knees, seemingly with a look on his face like he's almost smiling.

If a cop ever walked up to my door, he'd probably think it was a huge dog ready to attack, and thus would be ready to put him down.

Depsite the fact he's never attacked anyone in his life and has no mean bones in his body.

Edited by Eonwe, 24 December 2012 - 11:39 PM.

[Maizer]

Yamato, on 24 December 2012 - 10:34 PM, said:

If reality is contained by the selective attention to none but the most outlandish of gun crimes as focused on by our media, then yeah.   But I'll need evidence to believe your opinion that murderers in the US are more cowardly than their European counterparts and need guns to kill with.

The point is murderers with guns are far, far, far more deadly than with knives.

Simply compare school rampages with guns and knives. A gun nut here in this forum looked at 7 incidents in China where someone went crazy with a knife at elementary schools. The total killed was less than Sandy Hook alone.

[Maizer]

Eonwe, on 24 December 2012 - 11:08 PM, said:

Either you are a troll, or very stupid

If you're calling me a conspiracy theorist because I know that governments have no conscience, and have the ability to kill their citizens - as many governments in the past have done - then you are deliberately ignoring the facts regarding the millions of *disarmed* citizens killed by their governments, and violating common sense in a very reckless and unintelligent manner.

You are so detached from reality that I wouldn't be surprised you think martians are going to invade the Earth. Hey anyone can twist history. Oh some people shot each other in 1779, let me shoot my neighbors! Oh the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, lets bomb Tokyo tomorrow! Oh the Mongols swept through China, lets exterminate them.

Your fear of the government goes beyond paranoia into insane territory.

[Hawkin]

Maizer, on 24 December 2012 - 09:24 PM, said:

Yeah and how sad at how people twist his words to advocate for killing machines

You kill a million people you're a conquerer. You kill 1 person you're a murderer. Go Figure.

[Kafkaesque]

Maizer, on 25 December 2012 - 12:26 AM, said:

You are so detached from reality that I wouldn't be surprised you think martians are going to invade the Earth. Hey anyone can twist history. Oh some people shot each other in 1779, let me shoot my neighbors! Oh the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, lets bomb Tokyo tomorrow! Oh the Mongols swept through China, lets exterminate them.

Your fear of the government goes beyond paranoia into insane territory.

All of the members of the founding government were well read students of history who went through years of rigorous study. Some of them were fluent in several languages, on top of being emissaries and diplomats to foreign countries at certain points; Thomas Jefferson, for instance, was fluent in five languages. Benjamin Franklin, for instance, was a celebrity in France and perfeclty fluent in French, being the the one to convince the King of France to bankroll the American colonies in their revolt against the British Empire and the King of England. All of the founding fathers had learned through their years of study, examining the rise and fall of great empires and governments, the weaknesses and mistakes of such entites and how they eventually turned to tyranny and abused their citizenry, or collapsed from within; that is why they integrated a safeguard in our Republic; the second amendment, because they understood the depths governments could sink.

All of the founding fathers were extensively read in political science and the ideas and concepts of the Enlightenment; following the teachings of John Locke, Montesquieu, Voltaire, Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Francis Bacon, Baruch Spinoza, Issac Newton - even being aware of such political works from early Western philosophers such as Artistotle, or even Machiavelli's work on Republicanism: The Discourses On Livy. The latter being beneficial in combining Republicanlism and Liberalism to create the first incarnation of our government. Popular sovereignty and social contracts laying down the basic dynamic between government and consenting constiuents? Rousseau's ideas. The separation of powers between our branches of government? Montesquieu. Natural and unalienable rights? John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. Insight into tyranny through satire? Voltaire; Candide being one particular work of satire.

And since I follow their sound advice and years of study, studying extensively for over five years myself, I'm a conspiracy theorist!? It is you who is a horrible fool, a troll, and you will wish you had the ability to defend yourself when your time inevitably comes.

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it." - Voltaire

Even if I think you're full of **** or honestly misled.

If you even try to refute this post you will show to everyone on this topic that you truly are an idiot.

Edited by Eonwe, 25 December 2012 - 03:50 AM.

[Br Cornelius]

Eonwe, on 25 December 2012 - 02:51 AM, said:

All of the members of the founding government were well read students of history who went through years of rigorous study. Some of them were fluent in several languages, on top of being emissaries and diplomats to foreign countries at certain points; Thomas Jefferson, for instance, was fluent in five languages. Benjamin Franklin, for instance, was a celebrity in France and perfeclty fluent in French, being the the one to convince the King of France to bankroll the American colonies in their revolt against the British Empire and the King of England. All of the founding fathers had learned through their years of study, examining the rise and fall of great empires and governments, the weaknesses and mistakes of such entites and how they eventually turned to tyranny and abused their citizenry, or collapsed from within; that is why they integrated a safeguard in our Republic; the second amendment, because they understood the depths governments could sink.

All of the founding fathers were extensively read in political science and the ideas and concepts of the Enlightenment; following the teachings of John Locke, Montesquieu, Voltaire, Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Francis Bacon, Baruch Spinoza, Issac Newton - even being aware of such political works from early Western philosophers such as Artistotle, or even Machiavelli's work on Republicanism: The Discourses On Livy. The latter being beneficial in combining Republicanlism and Liberalism to create the first incarnation of our government. Popular sovereignty and social contracts laying down the basic dynamic between government and consenting constiuents? Rousseau's ideas. The separation of powers between our branches of government? Montesquieu. Natural and unalienable rights? John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. Insight into tyranny through satire? Voltaire; Candide being one particular work of satire.

And since I follow their sound advice and years of study, studying extensively for over five years myself, I'm a conspiracy theorist!? It is you who is a horrible fool, a troll, and you will wish you had the ability to defend yourself when your time inevitably comes.

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it." - Voltaire

Even if I think you're full of **** or honestly misled.

If you even try to refute this post you will show to everyone on this topic that you truly are an idiot.

Did you also realize that many of them were also Freemasons who firmly believed in the concept of a OWG. They were the people who helped the American nation to become what it is today - a monolithic quasi-dictatorship.

I think you should take the rosy-tinted glasses off and look at your founding fathers for what they were - a bunch of people who set out to form a globe spanning Empire and used your founding principles to achieve it.

And as I keep pointing out the ownership of guns offers only the illusion of greater personal safety as it shown by the stats which show that gun owning countries have far higher homicide rates. The simple fact is that I live in a country where guns are not allowed and I have a astonishingly small chance of been shot or murdered - can you say the same ?

Its really starting to disturb me how many extremist anti-government nut jobs we have on these boards. Government is what you make it by the choices we make as politically active citizens. Most of the same wingnuts probably have no active involvement in any form of Government. If there is a failure of democracy its largely down to people who think things can resolved by a good fight in the streets. As I keep pointing out to them - try living without a government for a while to realize what you actually have. Tragically sad.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 25 December 2012 - 10:56 AM.

[Yamato]

Maizer, on 25 December 2012 - 12:23 AM, said:

The point is murderers with guns are far, far, far more deadly than with knives.

Simply compare school rampages with guns and knives. A gun nut here in this forum looked at 7 incidents in China where someone went crazy with a knife at elementary schools. The total killed was less than Sandy Hook alone.

Anyone with a gun is far, far, far more deadly than with a knife.  If we only look at murderers though, then it's still true but a very selective picture.   Having a gun doesn't make someone a bad person.  I was the exact same the day after I bought a shotgun for home defense.   If we're wanting legislation to keep murder rates down, then having the 2nd Amendment in the US isn't the problem.   In fact, European states should adopt US laws because murder rates are much lower in the US.  

But that doesn't serve the true purpose of the argument here or Obama's interest, which is to ban guns, not adopt better systems of laws that keep murder rates down.   The latter would require honesty and sensibility and an actual desire to lower murder incidence rates in the US.   I am starting to think that these unconstitutional gun control advocates would be happier with higher murder rates in the US but with fewer guns.   That would be their political mission accomplished.   And we might prevent events where 20 kids get shot, and the lack of sensational stories on the news will make them feel safer.  And isn't that what it's really all about?   People just want to feel safe and they conjure up all kinds of bad ideas, usually with what governments can do to their own people, to do so.

[Br Cornelius]

Yamato, on 25 December 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

Anyone with a gun is far, far, far more deadly than with a knife.  If we only look at murderers though, then it's still true but a very selective picture.   Having a gun doesn't make someone a bad person.  I was the exact same the day after I bought a shotgun for home defense.   If we're wanting legislation to keep murder rates down, then having the 2nd Amendment in the US isn't the problem.   In fact, European states should adopt US laws because murder rates are much lower in the US.  

But that doesn't serve the true purpose of the argument here or Obama's interest, which is to ban guns, not adopt better systems of laws that keep murder rates down.   The latter would require honesty and sensibility and an actual desire to lower murder incidence rates in the US.   I am starting to think that these unconstitutional gun control advocates would be happier with higher murder rates in the US but with fewer guns.   That would be their political mission accomplished.   And we might prevent events where 20 kids get shot, and the lack of sensational stories on the news will make them feel safer.  And isn't that what it's really all about?   People just want to feel safe and they conjure up all kinds of bad ideas, usually with what governments can do to their own people, to do so.

A very selective interpretion which only holds true if you include Russia - which is not Europe. Murder rates in mainland Europe are at least a 1/3 of the American statistic.

Br Cornelius