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.


- - - - -

Anti-gun propagandists


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1    OverSword

OverSword

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 12,265 posts
  • Joined:16 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle WA USA

  • When the power of love overcomes the love of power then humanity can evolve

Posted 04 January 2013 - 06:04 PM

I'll state up front that I'm not a supporter of armed guards at schools or teachers packing heat, but this article, among other things, makes some genuinely good examples of how powerful people believe there should be two levels of gun control.  One for them (the important people) and one for the rest of us (those who don't matter in the 'big picture')

I urge you to read the entire article before commenting, it's short and easy.

From the article:

Apparently she saw the need for firearms in the defense of her own life, but not the need for the average citizen to have the same opportunity.

And what about Senator Chuck Schumer, who called for the president to use the excuse of “national security” and terrorism to force through restrictive gun legislation? The man who also voted against a bill which would have prevented outside entities like the UN from asserting gun control treaties that affect the American public? Well, Chuck has his own concealed carry permit in the state of New York, of all places, and still continues his antigun rhetoric. Again, do they see themselves as part of a higher and more valuable class of people? How do they explain these contradictions in their position?

What about media gigolo Michael Moore and his theater of the absurd? Playing the role of gun fan while at the same time incessantly promoting gun control rhetoric using skewed information and disingenuous talking points? The same man who suggested that the sound of a racking shotgun on tape is as effective as having the real thing uses bodyguards armed with THE REAL THING, one of whom was recently arrested for carrying an unlicensed weapon into JFK Airport:


But anti-gun propagandists with armed bodyguards are nothing new. In fact, anti-gun mayor Michael Bloomberg travels with a cadre of five to six bodyguards, all packing heat. Why do these people who say they despise guns and gun ownership continue surrounding themselves with the same “devilish weaponry”? It’s simple; because the mere reality of gun ownership deters criminal attack. If it didn’t, they wouldn’t rely on firearms at all.
http://www.alt-marke...s-own-hypocrisy


Edited by OverSword, 04 January 2013 - 06:06 PM.


#2    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 7,961 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 04 January 2013 - 06:10 PM

Security would be the only thing good for a while, you don't want them armed with sticks


#3    aztek

aztek

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2006

Posted 04 January 2013 - 08:51 PM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 04 January 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

Security would be the only thing good for a while, you don't want them armed with sticks

i do. or more like i don't care.

RESIDENT TROLL.

#4    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,950 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 04 January 2013 - 08:58 PM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 04 January 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

Security would be the only thing good for a while, you don't want them armed with sticks

What if they were pointed sticks?

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#5    Sir Wearer of Hats

Sir Wearer of Hats

    Is not a number!

  • Member
  • 9,669 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queensland, Australia.

Posted 04 January 2013 - 10:10 PM

View PostThe New Richard Nixon, on 04 January 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

Security would be the only thing good for a while, you don't want them armed with sticks
Indian police use sticks, metre and a half pieces of knitted bamboo - they hit hard enough to do permanent damage.


#6    Drayno

Drayno

    Reverend Dudemeister

  • Member
  • 3,675 posts
  • Joined:18 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 January 2013 - 12:26 AM

View PostOverSword, on 04 January 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

I'll state up front that I'm not a supporter of armed guards at schools or teachers packing heat, but this article, among other things, makes some genuinely good examples of how powerful people believe there should be two levels of gun control.  One for them (the important people) and one for the rest of us (those who don't matter in the 'big picture')

I urge you to read the entire article before commenting, it's short and easy.

From the article:

Apparently she saw the need for firearms in the defense of her own life, but not the need for the average citizen to have the same opportunity.

And what about Senator Chuck Schumer, who called for the president to use the excuse of “national security” and terrorism to force through restrictive gun legislation? The man who also voted against a bill which would have prevented outside entities like the UN from asserting gun control treaties that affect the American public? Well, Chuck has his own concealed carry permit in the state of New York, of all places, and still continues his antigun rhetoric. Again, do they see themselves as part of a higher and more valuable class of people? How do they explain these contradictions in their position?

What about media gigolo Michael Moore and his theater of the absurd? Playing the role of gun fan while at the same time incessantly promoting gun control rhetoric using skewed information and disingenuous talking points? The same man who suggested that the sound of a racking shotgun on tape is as effective as having the real thing uses bodyguards armed with THE REAL THING, one of whom was recently arrested for carrying an unlicensed weapon into JFK Airport:


But anti-gun propagandists with armed bodyguards are nothing new. In fact, anti-gun mayor Michael Bloomberg travels with a cadre of five to six bodyguards, all packing heat. Why do these people who say they despise guns and gun ownership continue surrounding themselves with the same “devilish weaponry”? It’s simple; because the mere reality of gun ownership deters criminal attack. If it didn’t, they wouldn’t rely on firearms at all.
http://www.alt-marke...s-own-hypocrisy


Michael Moore said people who own guns are racist.

Clearly he has no grasp on reality.

But it's okay for him to have armed body guards, of course.

Edited by Eonwe, 05 January 2013 - 12:26 AM.

"One leader, one people, signifies one master and millions of slaves." - Camus

#7    and then

and then

    Abyssus Abyssum Invocat

  • Member
  • 13,203 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land's End

  • Because what came before never seems enough...

Posted 05 January 2013 - 02:38 AM

Sickening hypocrisy and worthy of them being shamed (if that's possible) in public.  I think they are pompous asses and they are craven to boot......

  We've cast the world, we've set the stage,
  for what could be, the darkest age...

#8    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 10,961 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 05 January 2013 - 03:14 AM

Oversword, where is the issue? Anti-gun does not mean prohibition. It means more control. That's the strawman that the author is attempting. That Schumer carries or Michael Moore use armed guards is not shocking, hypocritical, or even of any issue. Even repealing the 2nd amendment is not prohibition. A law could be made to do that. But that is far from reality. Our creator did not endow us with the right to bear arms.

Edited by ninjadude, 05 January 2013 - 03:15 AM.

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

#9    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 05 January 2013 - 04:02 AM

Tar and feather the hypocrits. Thats what they used to do. Oh but wait youd have to get there past military equipped armed guards,


#10    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,344 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 05 January 2013 - 06:15 AM

Why are we willing to accept that some people are too dangerous to have a gun, but okay with them moving about freely in society?

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#11    MstrMsn

MstrMsn

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston

  • "If you don't like the answer, you shouldn't have asked the question!"

Posted 05 January 2013 - 07:33 AM

View Postninjadude, on 05 January 2013 - 03:14 AM, said:

Oversword, where is the issue? Anti-gun does not mean prohibition. It means more control. That's the strawman that the author is attempting. That Schumer carries or Michael Moore use armed guards is not shocking, hypocritical, or even of any issue. Even repealing the 2nd amendment is not prohibition. A law could be made to do that. But that is far from reality. Our creator did not endow us with the right to bear arms.

Did you even bother reading what you wrote? ANTI does not equate to more control, it means they are against. You might want to crack open a dictionary and look up the word.

And yes, Schumer, Feinstein, Bloomberg do want bans. That's what their resctrictive "gun control" desires are.

Then again, you might just be p***y because your state failed to ban "assault weapons" and large capacity magazines....

We are born with 2 fears: Falling, and loud noises, all others are LEARNED.
You say fear is all in the mind. I say you are right; for it is our imagination that makes things seem scary.
If you want to learn how to not be afraid, ask.

#12    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,138 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 05 January 2013 - 07:35 AM

Do armed gaurds stop bank robberies.  Ya didn't think so.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#13    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,138 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 05 January 2013 - 08:03 AM

does a clerk at 7-11 stop it from being robbed with a gun.  does a guy buying milk in the back even know whats going on even if he has a concel to carry. No

These are called jerk off rights cause they don't work never did never will. well in a rae exception ;_

Edited by The Silver Thong, 05 January 2013 - 08:08 AM.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#14    MstrMsn

MstrMsn

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts
  • Joined:09 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston

  • "If you don't like the answer, you shouldn't have asked the question!"

Posted 05 January 2013 - 08:41 AM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 05 January 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

does a clerk at 7-11 stop it from being robbed with a gun.  does a guy buying milk in the back even know whats going on even if he has a concel to carry. No

These are called jerk off rights cause they don't work never did never will. well in a rae exception ;_

Did armed Secret Service stop the attempt on Reagan? Well, yeah, after he missed him and hit Brady. The point is, Hinkley got a shot off, before the armed men had a chance to do anything.

I'm a lawful gun owner. I understand both sides. I have issues with both sides - more so the anti gun people, only because most of them know absolutely nothing about guns. MOST just follow the crowd.

We are born with 2 fears: Falling, and loud noises, all others are LEARNED.
You say fear is all in the mind. I say you are right; for it is our imagination that makes things seem scary.
If you want to learn how to not be afraid, ask.

#15    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,138 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 05 January 2013 - 08:44 AM

View PostMstrMsn, on 05 January 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Did armed Secret Service stop the attempt on Reagan? Well, yeah, after he missed him and hit Brady. The point is, Hinkley got a shot off, before the armed men had a chance to do anything.

I'm a lawful gun owner. I understand both sides. I have issues with both sides - more so the anti gun people, only because most of them know absolutely nothing about guns. MOST just follow the crowd.

Are you really going to compare a President to a guy in a 7-11 making a grab for beer to deffend your point.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users