The ugly and dangerous truth

shawn474

seabeerob213 wrote: »

on a happy note, and something that shows some proactivity with government controlling guns, my guncards expire in a few weeks and i get to go re-quall on the 9 mil and the 12 gauge, it is required to be re-qualified annually in order to carry a firearm in our armed services, and those in charge of the few ranges i have been to have been nothing but professional when someone has a gun in their hands, and we are required to learn with de-militarized weapons how to properly use and maintain a firearm, as well as respect it,

im hoping i can improve over my previous score

Thats cool; i didnt know that was required. Good luck.

seabeerob213

shawn474 wrote: »

Thats cool; i didnt know that was required. Good luck.

thank you,

brgman

shawn474 wrote: »

Well it had been a productive, mature dialogue; now it seems rather than be a productive contributor you would rather use immature emoticons to express your viewpoint.

Telling someone their opinion is ignorant is mature huh?
Typical liberal.

shawn474

brgman wrote: »

Telling someone their opinion is ignorant is mature huh?
Typical liberal.

And the downward spiral; i told you the statement "chepan the value" was ignorant, which i believe it is and gave you my reason for saying so. Again, this has been mostly a productive thread and appreciate other viewpoints.

And for the record, i am a registered and voting Republican. Just because people dont agree with you doesnt make them a liberal bud.

BlueFox

shawn474 wrote: »

And for the record, i am a registered and voting Republican. Just because people dont agree with you doesnt make them a liberal bud.

If you have not noticed yet, some of these guys are so far right they make Reagan a flaming liberal. Their closed minds, along with their sense of being absolutely right regardless of the subject, makes any attempt at logic and conversation an exercise in futility. I appreciate your attempt, and others, to have a mature conversation.

brgman

shawn474 wrote: »

And the downward spiral; i told you the statement "chepan the value" was ignorant, which i believe it is and gave you my reason for saying so. Again, this has been mostly a productive thread and appreciate other viewpoints.

And for the record, i am a registered and voting Republican. Just because people dont agree with you doesnt make them a liberal bud.

I'm not your bud and you are what is wrong with the Republican party today.
Bluefox is another one.Disagree and you are closed minded,racist,extreme,immature,etc.
Just push the Easy button.
Default to calling names and being abusive.
YAWN!

Face

There's a lot wrong with that party nowadays: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/02/king-blasts-his-own-party-over-scrapped-vote-on-sandy-relief-measure/?hpt=hp_c1

Syndil

shawn474 wrote: »

Gun rights are individual fringe rights...

I believe it is a matter of personal responsibility, not "individual fringe rights." If you are a responsible adult in this world, you are responsible for feeding yourself, sheltering yourself, and taking care of your family. That includes defending yourself and your family from harm. So if you live in a society where criminals might have guns, then it is your responsibility to have a gun as well (a better one) and learn how to use it. IMO if someone breaks into your house and holds your family at gunpoint (or worse) without any resistance from you or your family because you have no guns, that is a failure on your part. Simply hoping that never happens is about as responsible as hoping you earn enough money to buy food or pay the rent without actually doing something to ensure that it happens.

The right to defend yourself isn't just a fundamental human right, it's a fundamental right of all living things that even animals understand. So if you give up that right or fail to exercise it properly and something bad happens because of it, you are partially at fault. And IMO, living in a society where you know the potential for someone to do gun violence against you or your family exists and not having an adequate response to such a threat--that is a failure to properly exercise your right to defend yourself.

Follow that logic and yes, that does mean Sandy Hook was a failure of responsibility. As tragic as it was, the parents of the kids that went there, the town of Newtown itself, and the school are all partially responsible for not taking adequate steps to ensure their children's safety. School shootings are not new in this country, as sad and as ugly as it may be. So if you send your child to a school that has no adequate means of defense against a shooter...


Take the logic even further and you'll understand why the 2nd amendment is in the Constitution. It is the responsibility of the people to keep the government in check. Who else is going to come to the rescue should the government go awry? Yes, you can play the odds and say that such talk is ridiculous and that we will never have to worry about such a thing, just as you might play the odds that no one will ever hold your family at gunpoint, and you might turn out OK. But if the odds are not in your favor, the cost of being wrong is far too great to not be prepared.

And I can understand why someone might roll their eyes when they hear talk about people taking up arms against the government, I really can. There are those who preach "the end is nigh" far too much. But the thing is, even if the end isn't near, that doesn't mean it will never come. And to give up our rights to defend against tyranny now just because we are comfortable today... the cost later may be too great. That is one of the ideals this country was founded upon, and while you might say such an ideal doesn't apply today, to say that it will never apply again and therefore we will never need the ability to resist tyranny--IMO that is a fool's bet.

cnh

Top ten nations for gun related deaths:

El Salvador
Jamaica
Honduras
Guatemala
Swaziland
Colombia
Brazil
Panama
Mexico and number 10
U.S.A.

Not very good "company" above is it? All figures for this list are corrected by population for rates per 100,000 people so they are proportional!

Canada, to our north has almost 80 percent less gun related deaths than we do?

The Swiss 64 percent less.

France 70 percent less.

Greece 85 percent less.

Italy 87 percent less.

Germany 89 percent less.

Spain 92 percent less.

United Kingdom 97.25 percent less

Japan more than 99.3 percent less?

What do we do with these figures, especially when we cast such derision on Europe all the time?

cnh

seabeerob213

cnh wrote: »

What do we do with these figures, especially when we cast such derision on Europe all the time?
cnh

buy more guns

sucks2beme

So now it's the school's fault? What about the local playground?
Preschool? Gee, none of you were on lockdown? Bottom line, nowhere
is going to be secure enough to stop this kind of thing.
And getting rid of "military style weapons" won't help much either.
A good pistol with clips, or a revolver with speed loader(granted, more skill needed there)
would of been almost as bad. Once again, the weapons to this are everywhere.
I'm very tired of both sides going down these rat holes. I don't think making public
places look like bunkers or disarming everybody is going to fix this.
The source problem is getting to the mentally ill , booze and drug addicts.
Yes, alcohol and drugs pretty much go hand in hand with any non-gang shooting.
And most domestic violence as well can be traced back to booze, drugs, and mental illness.
So, how to take guns from that guy with 3 DWI's and calls for beating his wife?
Or the junkie?

shawn474

brgman wrote: »

I'm not your bud and you are what is wrong with the Republican party today.
Bluefox is another one.Disagree and you are closed minded,racist,extreme,immature,etc.
Just push the Easy button.
Default to calling names and being abusive.
YAWN!

You couldn't possibly be more wrong; show me where I called anyone a name, show me where I am racist, show me anything that you reference above. Unreal; look in the mirror much? Who's the one name calling? You're not my bud because you can't handle anyone disagreeing with your narrow point of view. And as long as we are calling people out, you are the one that wants to exclude **** in church ceremonies (like matrimony), do you not? So that MUST mean that you feel as though they are not worthy of the same rites that you are. You exclude them. Its hypocritical and if you cant see that then you and I have nothing to speak about. I am whats wrong with the Republican party? Thanks for your judgement. It means jack to me. At least others in the thread can maturely discuss differences of opinion. You get so bent out of shape with your grandstanding that you can't possibly see another side to it. It is sad really.