Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
RavenHawk

No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer

218 posts in this topic

Here's another angle: God isn't in my life at all, when I stand my ground, it's out of principle; not because of or have anything to do with any imaginary figure(s).

Exactly, and there are many more like you.. I am sure lots of non believers will be willing to stand their ground and fight for their rights too..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it ironic that you complained about an insult in a previous post (one that wasn't to be found).

Also, if you were educated in what actually does happen across the pond, you would know every day citizens don't own machine guns.

So, as you like to call someone to come protect you, I prefer not to rely on others.

Yes that is a pathetic attempt at an insult trying to say I can't defend myself :gun: but nice try .

Maybe using the term machine gun was abit off , how about military style guns that are capable of shooting 20+ rounds in a short time . Is this a better terminology ?

Now I will ask again , and no I don't claim to know the answer ....

How do YOU see this all working out if the government enforce the laws , the across the pond opinion ?

TiP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yes that is a pathetic attempt at an insult trying to say I can't defend myself but nice try .

Maybe using the term machine gun was abit off , how about military style guns that are capable of shooting 20+ rounds in a short time . Is this a better terminology ?

Now I will ask again , and no I don't claim to know the answer ....

How do YOU see this all working out if the government enforce the laws , the across the pond opinion ?

TiP."

Quite honestly, I don't know how it all plays out.

Now, what's a military style of rifle? Assault rifles? Yeah, everyday citizens don't own those either.

I think you mean the scary AR15.... That pistol grip and black finish clearly makes them a military weapon, definitely makes them more dangerous....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being a complete retard and trying ( not very well ) to insult me , why not answer some of my questions ?

What is going to happen to your country if indeed it turns to civil war ?

Where does that leave you on the world stage ?

What will happen to your economy ?

Are you suggesting we need a civil war. Your from Autz right ? No actually were just waiting for the line so we can turn in our guns. They havent started that program so we cant turn them in till we know we can itleast some food for our guns.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yes that is a pathetic attempt at an insult trying to say I can't defend myself but nice try .

Maybe using the term machine gun was abit off , how about military style guns that are capable of shooting 20+ rounds in a short time . Is this a better terminology ?

Now I will ask again , and no I don't claim to know the answer ....

How do YOU see this all working out if the government enforce the laws , the across the pond opinion ?

TiP."

Quite honestly, I don't know how it all plays out.

Now, what's a military style of rifle? Assault rifles? Yeah, everyday citizens don't own those either.

I think you mean the scary AR15.... That pistol grip and black finish clearly makes them a military weapon, definitely makes them more dangerous....

More dangerous than what ? a pellet gun ?

Any gun is dangerous but something that can launch 20 + bullets from 1 magazine is not IMO what the " average " citizen needs .

TiP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you suggesting we need a civil war. Your from Autz right ? No actually were just waiting for the line so we can turn in our guns. They havent started that program so we cant turn them in till we know we can itleast some food for our guns.

LOL im not suggesting anything , the term civil war had been used by several members here in relation to gun control , It's seem you guys are the ones that want a war if you dont get what you want .

As for the rest of your post ..... :no:

TiP.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idiots? Yea I agree..

How ironic. That comes from the religion that preaches peace and forgiveness lol . Those believers in god that don't like violence, because they believe in other answers, are wrong and just not doing it right.. Fred Phelps would say the exact same I'll bet ...IF you are not willing to be violent, then you are not a member of our "MORAL" high ground club..We invented morals, now shut up and get slaughtering, we need to have it all our way AMEN

Go on then, you copy and paste something from the NT that shows Jesus telling people - The best way to get what you want, is to kill people .. Use as much violence as thy can .. I want to see where Jesus has in fact told people to use violence. to get their way?.....Turn the other cheek actually means - Turn the other cheek so I can slap it too !!

So those who also wish to take a stand against the same government and are gun owners who DON'T believe in your Jesus, are not really much of a threat?

You post up - Bingo, right under my quote that said - It has nothing to do with god it's to do with the people.. And you were the one bringing god into this thread thinking god has something to do with it.

I know but you brought god into this anyway.. !!!

Why would god design it to be violent?

So, those who don't believe in god, but face it and deal with it, are stronger people? I see, well I guess they are.. Because according to you, only those that face it are likely to be putting their faith into god, so obviously they need a crutch, something to guide them, and most of them wound up hurt and killed over time.. The millions and millions of Christians over time, who have faced it and lost, millions and millions of which were killed, must of put their faith in god ..but it failed..

People with belief are far stronger than those without. Belief in God is incidental. You can believe in what you're doing, believe in yourself to influence what you're seeking to change, believe in someone else you're helping, believe in a cause, an idea, a greater good that some minor evils may hope to bring about. That's where true power comes. If you don't believe what you're doing is influential, you'll withdraw far sooner than not. Religious faith is no exception to this; it goes far to make people push on, far further than they otherwise would. That would answer your repetitive questions in what God has to do with it.

Ravenhawk is wrong to say Jesus isn't about non-violence when that's exactly what he preached. That's not to say that Jesus sat on his laurels or was a pacifist. Jesus was the most revolutionary thinker of his age, he changed the world. He gave the slaves of Roman tyranny purpose without even needing to violently challenge their bloody rule. He wasn't the Messiah borne of blood that the Jews were looking for, and they kept looking for someone else and they kept on getting slaughtered for their violent efforts.

Gandalf is analogous to Jesus here and I think relevant to how the power of belief can change the world. A figure of tremendous power that almost never used it, except at exceedingly rare moments in utmost need. People who believed in him would listen to his counsel, and the change in the world would come accordingly. That doesn't mean he avoided violence when violence was necessary, it just meant that he spent nearly all of his time in pilgrimage, counseling those who would listen, a wanderer using diplomacy and cunning to change peoples' minds. He guided them from a position of power to avoid the greater evil, to prevent the greater violence, exactly the way Jesus did. Now Jesus didn't live for thousands of years in the world, or get anywhere near as far in his travels geographically, but all of the other people who lived in his wake and spread his word, did.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad guys get guns faster then good guys its bull

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not even going to bother reading through the topic.

I don't care what laws the idiots send down.

I own a handgun and I WILL use it to protect my family if someone breaks into my home.

I don't care who they are, where they're from, or even if they're mentally unstable. Break through my door and it's a bullet in the skull. And I won't think twice about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only use 1 shell in my 105 mm howitzer, geez who needs 10?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I just got done taking a look in the mirror. Weird, I'm not grossly overweight, and I can climb 10+ flights of stairs without turning blue in the face.

Funny how stereotypes are unacceptable until one thinks it helps prove their point. Even more funny, it wasn't true.

Stereotypes exist because they reflect most the reality. And congratulations on not being average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes if your a good shot it only takes one shot to drop a deer ( i have done it that way several times and i won't shoot if i think it requires more than one bullet.)

On the other hand if you break a leg and have to wait for rescue it could take 50 or more shots to help people locate you when you do not show up in hunting camp that night. i guarentee you that when you fire off a couple shots durring hunting season at 2 AM and there are going to be people all over the mountain wondering what is wrong and or calling the cops. I never carry less that ten full clips for my rifle, granted all but two of them are 4 round clips. If they would make 20 or 50 round clips for a remington 742 30-06 autoloader i would own a dozen of them. if i ever find a 20 or 50 round clip for my 45 or any of my other clip fed guns I will own a dozen of them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes if your a good shot it only takes one shot to drop a deer ( i have done it that way several times and i won't shoot if i think it requires more than one bullet.)

On the other hand if you break a leg and have to wait for rescue it could take 50 or more shots to help people locate you when you do not show up in hunting camp that night. i guarentee you that when you fire off a couple shots durring hunting season at 2 AM and there are going to be people all over the mountain wondering what is wrong and or calling the cops. I never carry less that ten full clips for my rifle, granted all but two of them are 4 round clips. If they would make 20 or 50 round clips for a remington 742 30-06 autoloader i would own a dozen of them. if i ever find a 20 or 50 round clip for my 45 or any of my other clip fed guns I will own a dozen of them.

Nobody will stop you from carrying 100 rounds in your backpack, if you should think you need them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question I want to ask is, how many bullets are needed to bring down a tyrannical government?

What reason would you have to ask this? have you got any reasons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People with belief are far stronger than those without. Belief in God is incidental. You can believe in what you're doing, believe in yourself to influence what you're seeking to change, believe in someone else you're helping, believe in a cause, an idea, a greater good that some minor evils may hope to bring about. That's where true power comes. If you don't believe what you're doing is influential, you'll withdraw far sooner than not. Religious faith is no exception to this; it goes far to make people push on, far further than they otherwise would. That would answer your repetitive questions in what God has to do with it.

As we know there are many non believers who own guns and believe strongly in their rights, and they strongly believe that they should take a stand for those rights.. They can do this without bringing any spiritual belief in any god.. They will do it regardless, and stand by every thing they believe is right.. No one can say they don't.. There is a member on here that proves this - green dude.. he is just one, and I know there more like him..

Same can be said about anything we do in life.. Two men can each go for a job, both equally qualified, both have the experience required, but only one can get it.. One is the non believer, the other is religious... One believes in himself and holds a lot of strong confidence, the other is pretty confident, but hopes that god will guide him through the interview, this gives him more confidence .... The interviews take place, and the job goes to the non believer .. These things have happened many times.. One can have the ability to be able to face it and feel fully confident within themselves, the other can feel confident using a spiritual aid, thinking that will do it for them.. But it wont always work out in the way they hope.....Just like there are so many non religious who are rich and living it up, while so many poor religious people suffer...That's how the world is, just like there are so many religious people better off than non religious.. I call it - Swings and roundabouts.. It can go either way

When you have two people who are so similar, both gun owners and both strongly believe in taking a stand, but only one has a belief in a god, the other still has faith in himself and that's all he will run with... BOTH of these people can equally succeed... And continue to succeed.. Only thing is, only one of them never used a spiritual guidance to aid them..and yet succeeded in their mission, just like the religious person doing the same thing, but used a spiritual guide to help.. One needed help, the other didn't ...

Ravenhawk is wrong to say Jesus isn't about non-violence when that's exactly what he preached.

If you feel he was wrong, then you tell him so...

Edited by Beckys_Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LMAO!!!

WASHINGTON — Is your workplace getting shot up by a crazed gunman? No problem — just grab a pair of scissors and fight back!

That’s some of the helpful advice in a new instructional video from the Department of Homeland Security that was posted on the agency’s Web site just a month after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/shear_bravery_beats_guns_feds_d9BanDpupuVezePd6trYoM

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LMAO!!!

WASHINGTON — Is your workplace getting shot up by a crazed gunman? No problem — just grab a pair of scissors and fight back!

That’s some of the helpful advice in a new instructional video from the Department of Homeland Security that was posted on the agency’s Web site just a month after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

http://www.nypost.co...upuVezePd6trYoM

That should work since the bad guy will only have a registered rifle that only holds 7 rounds (here in NY at least). So just wait until he shoots seven of your co-workers then jump him with your scissors. And thanks to Gov. Cumo, you won't even have to worry about him bayoneting you because he banned bayonet lugs.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know why everybody keeps on comparing apples with pears here. If I were a former Vietcong fighter I would feel offended to be compared with an average overweight and short of breath American gun owner that tries to play Django taking on the government in a totally uncoordinated fashion. I know, I know, founding fathers, continental army and all that, but show me one of them grossly overweight and incapable of climbing ten flights of stairs without turning blue in the face.

Guys, take a look in the mirror before trying to act like Pancho Villa.

Henry Knox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henry Knox

him?:

knox.jpg

Besides being in his sixties at the time he hardly had to move ten flights of stairs nor did he he have (at least according to the picture) a BMI of more than 30. Many would love to be that thin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

him?:

knox.jpg

Besides being in his sixties at the time he hardly had to move ten flights of stairs nor did he he have (at least according to the picture) a BMI of more than 30. Many would love to be that thin.

I'm sure you know that portraits tend to be a little more flattering then real life, and age has nothing to do with this. You said "one of them grossly overweight and incapable of climbing ten flights of stairs without turning blue in the face". I said "Henry Knox". He was grossly overweight and probably couldn't have climbed ten flights of stairs with running short of breath.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure you know that portraits tend to be a little more flattering then real life, and age has nothing to do with this. You said "one of them grossly overweight and incapable of climbing ten flights of stairs without turning blue in the face". I said "Henry Knox". He was grossly overweight and probably couldn't have climbed ten flights of stairs with running short of breath.

Even if, that would be the exception that confirms the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if, that would be the exception that confirms the rule.

You only asked for one example. So one is not enought for you now? Do you really want me to look for more? If so, and I list ten more, would that be enough or will you then want 50 or 100? Sorry but you asked for one and one is what you got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only asked for one example. So one is not enought for you now? Do you really want me to look for more? If so, and I list ten more, would that be enough or will you then want 50 or 100? Sorry but you asked for one and one is what you got.

And I thank you very much, now tell me how one overweight guy in 2.5 million compares to the situation today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I thank you very much, now tell me how one overweight guy in 2.5 million compares to the situation today.

I can't find any statistics on the weight of each of the 2.5 million colonists at the time of the Revolution. However I will say that odds are very, very heavily stacked in my favor that more than one of the 2.5 million were overweight.

I understand what you are saying, just having a little fun.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't find any statistics on the weight of each of the 2.5 million colonists at the time of the Revolution. However I will say that odds are very, very heavily stacked in my favor that more than one of the 2.5 million were overweight.

I understand what you are saying, just having a little fun.

We also have to understand that being "fat" has changed over the ages, in the 60s Dan Blocker (Hoss) was the "fat guy in Bonanza". Today the others would fall under the chapter "undernourished".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.