Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-12-2011, 22:04   #81
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider View Post
Jerry,

I'm glad to see that we are not at odds. Keep up the good fight. To anyone who hasn't thought about it, what are you going to do to protect your freedoms. That is actually just a question for you to think about and requires no response here. If you haven't given it some serious thought, when the time comes to act, you will not act and you will lose whatever they have come to take.

Iíll be happy to answer that one. I lived through Katrina and the aftermath. Guess whoís guns they did not take and who had no intention of letting them take them.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 06:33   #82
eracer
Where's my EBT?
 
eracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
Are you that slow? Bottle + gasoline + fire = arsonist. Do you know how many people are killed yearly in arson fires? Probably not!
Please...



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
So let me see… Because habitual “violent” offenders will have guns if our right is not restricted we should be OK with having our right infringed. Right? Here's a little clue for you. They have guns anyway. So you want to restrict a right because YOU have irrational fears. Name me a case where a law has stopped a criminal from committing a criminal offense.
How is a background check restricting my right to own a gun? I own many handguns, and before I got my C/C permit I passed many backgrounds checks. My right to own a handgun has never been infringed.

(As an aside, perhaps you should tone down the patronizing attitude. You are a moderator, and should be setting an example for rational, respectful dialog.)
__________________
Matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration; we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. And now...the weather! ---- Bill Hicks

Last edited by eracer; 12-13-2011 at 06:34..
eracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 10:14   #83
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
Please...



How is a background check restricting my right to own a gun? I own many handguns, and before I got my C/C permit I passed many backgrounds checks. My right to own a handgun has never been infringed.
Did you read this thread? Evidentially not! Either that are you are that slow? Many, many people have holds put on their purchases or are out right denied when they have done nothing wrong.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
(As an aside, perhaps you should tone down the patronizing attitude. You are a moderator, and should be setting an example for rational, respectful dialog.)
Tone it down? I have dealt with your type for far too many years. Itís not enough you want to control my 2nd. Amendment right you want to control my 1st. as well. I have said nothing that brakes GT rules.

I have stated fact and asked questions seeking answers from people who donít have facts, only emotional notions, in order to open their eyes. Some are just too stupid to comprehend.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 10:33   #84
Javelin
Silver Membership
Got Glock?
 
Javelin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: N. Dallas
Posts: 14,638


What the hell is wrong with people anymore? It seems that there is a huge liberal shift and sheeple movement that has taken hold in the US and I am seeing it even here on GT.

Did the liberal underground shut off it's servers or something and folks are ending up here?
Javelin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 12:38   #85
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javelin View Post
What the hell is wrong with people anymore? It seems that there is a huge liberal shift and sheeple movement that has taken hold in the US and I am seeing it even here on GT.

Did the liberal underground shut off it's servers or something and folks are ending up here?

They have become far to dependant on gummeyment nanny. They are willing to give up REAL freedom in lieu of PERCEIVED freedom. The false sense of security. They believe they are more safe being watched over and told what to do than they could be depending on their own abilities. Problem is, for too many need a nanny telling them what to do. Just look how they think. Poor things are scared of their own shadows.

Still others just like to ďbelieveĒ they can control others. Truth is they have no control because free men wont knuckle under and criminals will do as the damn well please regardless of laws. They arenít smart enough to understand that controlling honorable men has no bearing on controlling criminals, crime, or keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals or idiots.

They donít have to be liberal to be an idiot. However being an idiot lends very well to liberal tendencies.

Iím sure that will bring the MORONS out of the woodwork.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-13-2011 at 12:43..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 14:23   #86
eracer
Where's my EBT?
 
eracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
Did you read this thread? Evidentially not! Either that are you are that slow? Many, many people have holds put on their purchases or are out right denied when they have done nothing wrong.




Tone it down? I have dealt with your type for far too many years. It’s not enough you want to control my 2nd. Amendment right you want to control my 1st. as well. I have said nothing that brakes GT rules.

I have stated fact and asked questions seeking answers from people who don’t have facts, only emotional notions, in order to open their eyes. Some are just too stupid to comprehend.
I suppose you think that we shouldn't teach the English language to our children. Rules and regulation that govern speech? Force them to live by society's rules? Outrageous! A clear violation of their right to free speech!!

Next time someone starts a thread asking for opinions, perhaps you could lay off the personal attacks when someone gives an opinion that differs from yours (which is all you've stated - opinion.)

Or are you incapable of that?
__________________
Matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration; we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. And now...the weather! ---- Bill Hicks

Last edited by eracer; 12-13-2011 at 14:35..
eracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 15:04   #87
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
I suppose you think that we shouldn't teach the English language to our children. Rules and regulation that govern speech? Force them to live by society's rules? Outrageous! A clear violation of their right to free speech!!

Next time someone starts a thread asking for opinions, perhaps you could lay off the personal attacks when someone gives an opinion that differs from yours (which is all you've stated - opinion.)

Or are you incapable of that?

I've given more than openion. I’ve stated verifiable facts. More Guns Less Crime, John Lotts Jr. Read it you need it.

Show me where I personally attacked you. No, never mind, because you are trying to use a typical “liberal” trick. If you don’t have facts and a logical argument muddy the waters with physicobable. Doesn't work on me.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with teaching on not teaching the English language. What rock did you crawl out from under? The more you post the more proof there is that you are clueless of the U. S. Constitution and common sense.

Honorable men don’t need to be forced to live by societies rules and criminals cannot be forced to and don’t. But then I wouldn't expect you to comprehend that.

Post factual information and or a “sensible” arguments or you may as well crewel back under your liberal rock.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-13-2011 at 15:06..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 15:10   #88
ChadN.
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 41
"Do you support gun control"

Don't know why this question was asked in the first place...

Last edited by ChadN.; 12-13-2011 at 15:13..
ChadN. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 15:14   #89
eracer
Where's my EBT?
 
eracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
I've given more than openion. I’ve stated verifiable facts. More Guns Less Crime, John Lotts Jr. Read it you need it.

Show me where I personally attacked you. No, never mind, because you are trying to use a typical “liberal” trick. If you don’t have facts and a logical argument muddy the waters with physicobable. Doesn't work on me.

Freedom of speech has nothing to do with teaching on not teaching the English language. What rock did you crawl out from under? The more you post the more proof there is that you are clueless of the Your failu U. S. Constitution and common sense.

Honorable men don’t need to be forced to live by societies rules and criminals cannot be forced to and don’t. But then I wouldn't expect you to comprehend that.

Post factual information and or a “sensible” arguments or you may as well crewel back under your liberal rock.
You have absolutely nothing to say that interests me anymore. Failing to accept reality is not the path to liberty - as much as you and your pointless, patronizing comments say otherwise.
__________________
Matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration; we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. And now...the weather! ---- Bill Hicks

Last edited by eracer; 12-13-2011 at 15:20..
eracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 18:22   #90
IhRedrider
Not a walker
 
IhRedrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 521
Quote:
"Do you support gun control"

Don't know why this question was asked in the first place...

I believe I answered this question when I said that I wanted people to truly examine their motivations for supporting ANY measure of gun control by legislation. As we see there are a lot of shills and tares in the fold. I think they are more dangerous than the professed enemy and they ned to be exposed for what they are.

eracer

Quote:
How is a background check restricting my right to own a gun? I own many handguns, and before I got my C/C permit I passed many backgrounds checks. My right to own a handgun has never been infringed.
I think you missed the point. The Constitution is not to protect just eracer's freedoms. The Constitution is here to protect ALL free men's RIGHTS. So if a background check dose not infringe on a free man's RIGHT to own and bear arms. Why even waste time money and effort to enact ANY background checks? Before anyone else chimes in I'll say why. It is so one group of men can regulate/control/deny another group of men their RIGHTS.

Some of us swore an oath to protect the Constitution and by proxy ALL free men's RIGHTS as documented in the Constitution.

Quote:
I suppose you think that we shouldn't teach the English language to our children. Rules and regulation that govern speech? Force them to live by society's rules? Outrageous! A clear violation of their right to free speech!!
I'm sorry, but WTF? That's a comment even a yellow-bellied liberal would be embarrassed to say. Maybe your computer was in the process of crashing when that got posted and you can change what was posted to what you actually meant to say.
IhRedrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 18:42   #91
WarCry
Senior Member
 
WarCry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: IL, on the banks of the Muddy River
Posts: 7,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider View Post
I believe I answered this question when I said that I wanted people to truly examine their motivations for supporting ANY measure of gun control by legislation. As we see there are a lot of shills and tares in the fold. I think they are more dangerous than the professed enemy and they ned to be exposed for what they are.


Perhaps - not certainly, just perhaps - you're trying to FORCE an issue to be black and white when it is NOT that simple.
__________________
"I'm your priest, your shrink, your main connection to the switchboard of souls. I'm the Magic Man, the Santa Claus of the Subconscious. You say it, you even think it, you can have it." - Lenny Nero
WarCry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 19:27   #92
IhRedrider
Not a walker
 
IhRedrider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 521
warcry

I will admit that I tend to see the world through a Right/Wrong Black/White lens.

However, you have to admit that the terminology of "shall not be infringed" in the context of the second amendment is very firm and without room for interpretation.

I also have a very strong opinion on what many men will do to other men in their pursuit of their own agenda. This opinion is based on what history tells us about the action of evil men, not to mention what I have personally seen other people do to their fellow man. People are twisted and bent on self satisfaction at the expense of others. I don't plan to participate in this equation as "others" and I would like to see others plan to not participate with me filing the roll of the oppressor. The best way I see for this to happen is a strict adherence to all of the rights documented in the Constitution. Freedom of expressing what you think/feel/witness is paramount in keeping people "in check". Freedom to keep and bear arms is paramount to keeping the a fore mentioned freedom. I cannot expect to have the freedom afforded me by my Creator as documented in the Constitution, and deny ANY other free man the same freedoms. I refuse to be a hypocrite, even if it puts me at risk.
IhRedrider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 19:41   #93
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
You have absolutely nothing to say that interests me anymore.
Yet you keep reading an posting replies.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
Failing to accept reality is not the path to liberty - as much as you and your pointless, patronizing comments say otherwise.
You really didnít need to post that. You have made everyone quite aware that you have no concept of reality and have no intension of following the path of liberty set in motion by the forefathers and guaranteed by the Constitution.

"Posterity: you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it." (John Quincy Adams)

You and your ilk have no idea what they sacrificed or how to preserve what they gave us.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2011, 19:46   #94
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider View Post
warcry

I will admit that I tend to see the world through a Right/Wrong Black/White lens.

However, you have to admit that the terminology of "shall not be infringed" in the context of the second amendment is very firm and without room for interpretation.

I also have a very strong opinion on what many men will do to other men in their pursuit of their own agenda. This opinion is based on what history tells us about the action of evil men, not to mention what I have personally seen other people do to their fellow man. People are twisted and bent on self satisfaction at the expense of others. I don't plan to participate in this equation as "others" and I would like to see others plan to not participate with me filing the roll of the oppressor. The best way I see for this to happen is a strict adherence to all of the rights documented in the Constitution. Freedom of expressing what you think/feel/witness is paramount in keeping people "in check". Freedom to keep and bear arms is paramount to keeping the a fore mentioned freedom. I cannot expect to have the freedom afforded me by my Creator as documented in the Constitution, and deny ANY other free man the same freedoms. I refuse to be a hypocrite, even if it puts me at risk.
So simple a concept yet so difficult for so many grasp.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 06:58   #95
eracer
Where's my EBT?
 
eracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 6,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by IhRedrider View Post
I believe I answered this question when I said that I wanted people to truly examine their motivations for supporting ANY measure of gun control by legislation. As we see there are a lot of shills and tares in the fold. I think they are more dangerous than the professed enemy and they ned to be exposed for what they are.

eracer



I think you missed the point. The Constitution is not to protect just eracer's freedoms. The Constitution is here to protect ALL free men's RIGHTS. So if a background check dose not infringe on a free man's RIGHT to own and bear arms. Why even waste time money and effort to enact ANY background checks? Before anyone else chimes in I'll say why. It is so one group of men can regulate/control/deny another group of men their RIGHTS.

Some of us swore an oath to protect the Constitution and by proxy ALL free men's RIGHTS as documented in the Constitution.


I'm sorry, but WTF? That's a comment even a yellow-bellied liberal would be embarrassed to say. Maybe your computer was in the process of crashing when that got posted and you can change what was posted to what you actually meant to say.
Hopefully I can answer without igniting another round of insults (yellow-bellied liberal is pretty lame, so I'll just ignore that.)

We live in a society with rules that protect free men. The founding fathers knew this, and those of us who understand that there are people who ignore those rules (dangerous recidivist felons and deranged individuals) are not 'gun-grabbing liberals', but realists. We desire democracy, not anarchy.

The laws that limit our rights exist because we have a judicial system that doesn't work to keep dangerous criminals in prison, or insane people off the street. If it did, if we could somehow identify rapists and murderous psychopaths at birth, then we wouldn't need laws to protect us from them. Are the laws perfect? No, but they do some good.

Anarchists live in a fantasy world where codified laws are not needed, where 'free men' protect their lives, property, and family with force and firepower. Nice dream, but just a dream.

You see background checks as in infringement. I see them as an inconvenience - one I accept as a free man. One that does filter out felons (although doesn't do a good enough job filtering out nutjobs) during the firearm purchase process.

Would I like to live a world where anyone could buy any weapon without any restrictions? Sure. But that world doesn't exist, and I've never been denied the right to own any gun I want, because the laws don't prohibit me from doing so. Nor do they prohibit any free man. They inconvenience us, and the question should be: "What inconvenience are you willing to accept as the price of freedom?" In a perfect world? None. In the world in which we live, more than I like. But I accept it because I'm a realist.

I know and have heard all the arguments. Screaming them back at me doesn't help to 'open my mind' or 'make me see' anything. I've been shooting for 35 years, and have been a Life Member of the NRA for most of that time. I get that there are gun-grabbers out there. I'm simply not one of them. I do however happen to differ with those who believe in absolutes.

As for the comments about 'English'...OK, that was a bit 'out there.'

What I was trying to say is that we accept that there are rules governing the tools we use to express our thoughts. Why do we accept those rules, but think that there should be no rules governing whether dangerous felons and psychopaths own guns? Because they will get them anyway? You want to make it easier for them? They'll just use knives? Do you honestly believe that a knife is the same as a gun? Limes? Really?

The 'give an inch, take a mile' argument has some merit, and I wish it wasn't relevant, but in this world, a world with laws and prisons in which we are still under assault from criminals and untreated lunatics, the danger is real, and while we need to rely on ourselves to protect the things we care about, we need to accept that we can't do it alone. We need to give an inch to GET a mile.

I spend a lot of time on primary school campuses. I can't carry my gun there. Does that bother me? A little. I also have to submit to and pass Level II background checks in order to be allowed on school property (the Jessica Lunsford act - look it up.) Does it bother me that I have to jump through those hoops in order to have rules in place that will stop a known sex offender from having access to the children in those same schools? A little. But I accept it as a good thing. Will it eliminate the danger altogether? Nope. But it adds a filter that makes it more difficult for a criminal to commit a heinous crime against a child.

The answer is not to give give dangerous felons and lunatics unfettered access to weapons. Again (and a point that seems to be missed and/or willfully ignored by the anarchists) WE CAN'T LOCK UP OR CURE ALL THE DANGEROUS PEOPLE FOREVER. And more importantly, as a law-abiding, gun-carrying citizen, I can't be judge, jury, and executioner.

I've lived my whole life able to purchase any gun I want, and have never been more than slightly inconvenienced (except for NFA items, which have been more than a slight inconvenience, but merely an inconvenience nonetheless.) Sorry for those who have had a problem due to a bureaucratic screw-up, but that's the nature of things. No system is perfect. I live in the best country in the world, partly because tomorrow I can walk into any gun shop and purchase a handgun or rifle (NFA items aside - and yes, I think the NFA should be repealed,) and walk out the door with it. Because I'm a law-abiding FREE MAN. Are the current laws that affect me 100% right? No. But the alternative (none at all) is simply not rational.
__________________
Matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration; we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. And now...the weather! ---- Bill Hicks

Last edited by eracer; 12-14-2011 at 09:32..
eracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 08:09   #96
expatman
Senior Member
 
expatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cape Coral, Fl. & Kampala, Uganda
Posts: 658
It all seems pretty cut and dry to me. The only constitutional way to regulate ownership and/or possession of firearms of any kind is through a constitutional amendment. Therefore all laws that infringe upon the 2A in anyway are by their nature unconstitutional. We have a process for enacting amendments. If some of you want to change what the constitution says then feel free to begin the amendment process.
__________________
Formerly SW.Fla.Glocker and.... EVIL, CRIMINAL, VERY BAD AND SCARY SECURITY CONTRACTOR....(insert evil, sinister laugh here)
expatman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 10:46   #97
Gunnut 45/454
Senior Member
 
Gunnut 45/454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,049
WarCry
I love this! All coming from a guy that lives in one of the most restricted states for gun ownership! So you like having to beg the state to own a gun, you like the fact that they can come get your guns at anytime and will if your FOID is not renewed on time! You like the fact you can't transfer a firearm to anyone with out going to a FFL, Can't even buy ammo with out the FOID. Can't get a permit to carry unless your one of the privileged few politians! You do relise that all your restrictions you have on ownership are even in violation of your own States Constitution!!! Even thought the SCOTUS said you have a right to own and carry your state still feels the need to violate that right! If you so love having your rights restricted I say you go right ahead we Free Americans will not tolerate any Infringements! And to your stats on the amount of people killed with firearms maybe you should qualify that with the truth that most of those killed with firearms are criminals or by criminal acts! We kill way more people with cars so are you for banning driving! Understand one thing we that respect the COTUS will never bow to those that want to remove it and its protections from Government interfearance in our lives.
__________________
Gunnut45/454-One shot one kill!

Last edited by Gunnut 45/454; 12-14-2011 at 10:48..
Gunnut 45/454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 10:49   #98
glock30user
Senior Member
 
glock30user's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: U.S.A
Posts: 316
i believe in the same controls as we have on the first and forth amendments, very little to none. How can you limit God given rights?!?!
__________________
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
glock30user is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 11:28   #99
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by eracer View Post
Hopefully I can answer without igniting another round of insults (yellow-bellied liberal is pretty lame, so I'll just ignore that.)

We live in a society with rules that protect free men. The founding fathers knew this, and those of us who understand that there are people who ignore those rules (dangerous recidivist felons and deranged individuals) are not 'gun-grabbing liberals', but realists. We desire democracy, not anarchy.

The laws that limit our rights exist because we have a judicial system that doesn't work to keep dangerous criminals in prison, or insane people off the street. If it did, if we could somehow identify rapists and murderous psychopaths at birth, then we wouldn't need laws to protect us from them. Are the laws perfect? No, but they do some good.

Anarchists live in a fantasy world where codified laws are not needed, where 'free men' protect their lives, property, and family with force and firepower. Nice dream, but just a dream.

You see background checks as in infringement. I see them as an inconvenience - one I accept as a free man. One that does filter out felons (although doesn't do a good enough job filtering out nutjobs) during the firearm purchase process.

Would I like to live a world where anyone could buy any weapon without any restrictions? Sure. But that world doesn't exist, and I've never been denied the right to own any gun I want, because the laws don't prohibit me from doing so. Nor do they prohibit any free man. They inconvenience us, and the question should be: "What inconvenience are you willing to accept as the price of freedom?" In a perfect world? None. In the world in which we live, more than I like. But I accept it because I'm a realist.

I know and have heard all the arguments. Screaming them back at me doesn't help to 'open my mind' or 'make me see' anything. I've been shooting for 35 years, and have been a Life Member of the NRA for most of that time. I get that there are gun-grabbers out there. I'm simply not one of them. I do however happen to differ with those who believe in absolutes.

As for the comments about 'English'...OK, that was a bit 'out there.'

What I was trying to say is that we accept that there are rules governing the tools we use to express our thoughts. Why do we accept those rules, but think that there should be no rules governing whether dangerous felons and psychopaths own guns? Because they will get them anyway? You want to make it easier for them? They'll just use knives? Do you honestly believe that a knife is the same as a gun? Limes? Really?

The 'give an inch, take a mile' argument has some merit, and I wish it wasn't relevant, but in this world, a world with laws and prisons in which we are still under assault from criminals and untreated lunatics, the danger is real, and while we need to rely on ourselves to protect the things we care about, we need to accept that we can't do it alone. We need to give an inch to GET a mile.

I spend a lot of time on primary school campuses. I can't carry my gun there. Does that bother me? A little. I also have to submit to and pass Level II background checks in order to be allowed on school property (the Jessica Lunsford act - look it up.) Does it bother me that I have to jump through those hoops in order to have rules in place that will stop a known sex offender from having access to the children in those same schools? A little. But I accept it as a good thing. Will it eliminate the danger altogether? Nope. But it adds a filter that makes it more difficult for a criminal to commit a heinous crime against a child.

The answer is not to give give dangerous felons and lunatics unfettered access to weapons. Again (and a point that seems to be missed and/or willfully ignored by the anarchists) WE CAN'T LOCK UP OR CURE ALL THE DANGEROUS PEOPLE FOREVER. And more importantly, as a law-abiding, gun-carrying citizen, I can't be judge, jury, and executioner.

I've lived my whole life able to purchase any gun I want, and have never been more than slightly inconvenienced (except for NFA items, which have been more than a slight inconvenience, but merely an inconvenience nonetheless.) Sorry for those who have had a problem due to a bureaucratic screw-up, but that's the nature of things. No system is perfect. I live in the best country in the world, partly because tomorrow I can walk into any gun shop and purchase a handgun or rifle (NFA items aside - and yes, I think the NFA should be repealed,) and walk out the door with it. Because I'm a law-abiding FREE MAN. Are the current laws that affect me 100% right? No. But the alternative (none at all) is simply not rational.
Again you have posted a load of manure. You admit you can’t control criminals but you believe in restricting the rights of honorable men to control criminals. Too bad you can’t see the idiocy in that.

You say you’ve lived your whole life being able to purchase just about any firearm you wanted with just minor inconvenience. Just about? Sounds like infringement. Last rifle I purchased, a .22LR bolt action I drove 100 miles to purchase. I had to drive that distance twice because of a hold put on me by NICS. I’m not a criminal; I gave them my full name including my middle name which isn’t a common one and my SS#. Yet I had to drive 400 miles rather 200 to purchase a 5 SHOT BOLT ACTION 22 LR. I suppose you’d call that a minor inconvenience. I call it an infringement.

When I was boy “surplus” military rifles could be ordered through the mail for $18.00. Now one must pay to go through a course to have the PRIVILEGE of paying over $500.00 for a beat to death M1 or you can pay a premium and get one in decent shape. Just a minor inconvenience right?

I’ll bet you are the type that believes the government should robe the rich and give to the poor but believe if a man can’t afford to pay to jump through all the government hoops he should not be ALLOWED to own a firearm. Do you know the origin of gun control? The white man was AFRAID of freed slave having guns. What keeps gun control going? PEOPLE THAT ARE AFRAID! It’s emotionally driven and has no basis in reality. YOU CANNOT CONTROL CRIME OR CRIMINALS THROUGH GUN CONTROL.

Quote:
If, by the mere force of numbers, a majority should ever deprive a minority of any clearly written constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify revolution—certainly would, if such a right w"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of ere a vital one. Abraham Lincoln, First Inaugural Address, March, 1861

tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." William Pitt, 1783

They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. [Benjamin Franklin, 1759]



Read expatman’s post #96. Then reread it again and then at least one more time and maybe it will sink in. AS OF TODAY ALL FIREARMS RESTRICTIONS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-14-2011 at 20:22..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2011, 11:32   #100
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunnut 45/454 View Post
WarCry
I love this! All coming from a guy that lives in one of the most restricted states for gun ownership! So you like having to beg the state to own a gun, you like the fact that they can come get your guns at anytime and will if your FOID is not renewed on time! You like the fact you can't transfer a firearm to anyone with out going to a FFL, Can't even buy ammo with out the FOID. Can't get a permit to carry unless your one of the privileged few politians! You do relise that all your restrictions you have on ownership are even in violation of your own States Constitution!!! Even thought the SCOTUS said you have a right to own and carry your state still feels the need to violate that right! If you so love having your rights restricted I say you go right ahead we Free Americans will not tolerate any Infringements! And to your stats on the amount of people killed with firearms maybe you should qualify that with the truth that most of those killed with firearms are criminals or by criminal acts! We kill way more people with cars so are you for banning driving! Understand one thing we that respect the COTUS will never bow to those that want to remove it and its protections from Government interfearance in our lives.
Take note! Those that have the most restrictions placed on them want more restrictions place on others. I’m pretty sure it’s the old… IF I CAN’T HAVE IT NOBODY SHOULD MENTALITY.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 12-14-2011 at 20:24..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 17:31.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,061
302 Members
759 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31