PDA

View Full Version : Obama wants national ban on concealed carry




SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 01:30 PM
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

That position alone could almost make me vote for McInsane. Would you like to vote for evil, semi-evil, or absolute-evil? What a gagglef*ck of an election this is turning out to be.

ronpaulblogsdotcom
02-16-2008, 01:33 PM
Wow. Talk about a state issue get ruled on at the national level.

AJ Antimony
02-16-2008, 01:34 PM
Are you serious?

Do you know what a write-in is?

Why are you letting the TV tell you your vote either belong to McCain or Obama?

itsnobody
02-16-2008, 01:35 PM
Ok so I'm voting for McCain

Obama really IS the most liberal Senator

ronpaulblogsdotcom
02-16-2008, 01:42 PM
Ok so I'm voting for McCain

Obama really IS the most liberal Senator

Or you could you know vote for the guy whose name is the same as this forum.... Probably as a writein in a blank spot. Hopefully as the GOP guy somehow.

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 01:43 PM
Are you serious?

Do you know what a write-in is?

Why are you letting the TV tell you your vote either belong to McCain or Obama?

A write-in is a throw away protest. No write-in candidate will win. I might as well stay home.

If the 'machine' asks me to choose between "gun-grabbing" Obama, and "nuke first, nuke often" McCain, I'm going to have a real dilemma. I could symbolically throw my vote away, or I hold my nose and vote 'against' one of the choices.

I'm hoping Paul runs as independent or something so that I have something to vote FOR, rather than against.

tmg19103
02-16-2008, 01:53 PM
The key is the D.C. gun ban case the Supreme Court is ruling on this summer on whether the right to bear arms is an individual right or a collective right. The court is lined up to agree with an individual right.

This is prefect timing for the federal government to clear this up before a Dem gets to be president. Then, there won't be much regulation to do on a federal level and it wil be left up to the states. Fortunatley, I live in a gun friendly state, but a SCOTUS ruling in favor of the obvious idividual right will help those in CA and NY and other anti-gun states.

Bubba
02-16-2008, 01:54 PM
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

That position alone could almost make me vote for McInsane. Would you like to vote for evil, semi-evil, or absolute-evil? What a gagglef*ck of an election this is turning out to be.

Ooops! Pardon moi. I thought I was on the Ron Paul Forums. Must have had my browser high-jacked. As in jack-off you jerk.

jbuttell
02-16-2008, 01:54 PM
Come on everyone - you've played their game for how many elections now? End it NOW, do NOT vote for the lesser of two evils - what has it EVER gotten us?

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 01:58 PM
Ooops! Pardon moi. I thought I was on the Ron Paul Forums. Must have had my browser high-jacked. As in jack-off you jerk.

The thread title pretty clearly spelled out the subject of this thread. If you weren't interested why did you open the thread?

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:04 PM
Come on everyone - you've played their game for how many elections now? End it NOW, do NOT vote for the lesser of two evils - what has it EVER gotten us?

Well, in this case it appears that we may be pressured to choose between nuking Tehran, or turning in our personal firearms to the homeland gestapo. I can't decide which is worse. If I lived in Tehran, then the choice would be easy.

I just don't know if I can get on board with making a protest vote that ushers in an ultra-liberal gun-grabbing racist nitwit. I'm afraid I may have to express my condolences to the people of Iran in advance.

mczerone
02-16-2008, 02:04 PM
A write-in is a throw away protest. No write-in candidate will win. I might as well stay home.

If the 'machine' asks me to choose between "gun-grabbing" Obama, and "nuke first, nuke often" McCain, I'm going to have a real dilemma. I could symbolically throw my vote away, or I hold my nose and vote 'against' one of the choices.

I'm hoping Paul runs as independent or something so that I have something to vote FOR, rather than against.

Please don't vote, then. A vote for a lesser evil is still a positive endorsement of evil.

It is more meaningful to vote what you believe with a 0% of winning, than to vote for someone with whom you fundamentally disagree, to keep someone with whom you fundamentally disagree more out of an office.

Only if you know that your vote can be the one to switch the winner, then it may have been worth it - but in a general election its the electoral college that counts, so your one vote has less chance of having meaning than Ron Paul has of winning.

Thanks!

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:06 PM
The key is the D.C. gun ban case the Supreme Court is ruling on this summer on whether the right to bear arms is an individual right or a collective right. The court is lined up to agree with an individual right.

This is prefect timing for the federal government to clear this up before a Dem gets to be president. Then, there won't be much regulation to do on a federal level and it wil be left up to the states. Fortunatley, I live in a gun friendly state, but a SCOTUS ruling in favor of the obvious idividual right will help those in CA and NY and other anti-gun states.

I expect we'll all be dissapointed with the supreme court ruling. I predict they will make some vague ruling that resolves nothing. I certainly am not hopeful that the court will aggressively defend our 2nd amendment rights.

A Ron Paul Rebel
02-16-2008, 02:06 PM
A write-in is a throw away protest. No write-in candidate will win. I might as well stay home.

If the 'machine' asks me to choose between "gun-grabbing" Obama, and "nuke first, nuke often" McCain, I'm going to have a real dilemma. I could symbolically throw my vote away, or I hold my nose and vote 'against' one of the choices.

I'm hoping Paul runs as independent or something so that I have something to vote FOR, rather than against.

Please stay home !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are obviously closeminded and malfunctioning.

mikeInAZ
02-16-2008, 02:06 PM
Don't hate me for asking, but why does one need to carry a concealed firearm? I'm all for personal liberties, but that seems a bit extreme to me.

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:08 PM
Please don't vote, then. A vote for a lesser evil is still a positive endorsement of evil.

It is more meaningful to vote what you believe with a 0% of winning, than to vote for someone with whom you fundamentally disagree, to keep someone with whom you fundamentally disagree more out of an office.

Only if you know that your vote can be the one to switch the winner, then it may have been worth it - but in a general election its the electoral college that counts, so your one vote has less chance of having meaning than Ron Paul has of winning.

Thanks!

To be honest, my vote is meaningless at this point. I live in California, and the demwit nominee is 99% certain of carrying this state. I guess I might as well write in Yosemite Sam for all the good it will do.

mczerone
02-16-2008, 02:09 PM
Well, in this case it appears that we may be pressured to choose between nuking Tehran, or turning in our personal firearms to the homeland gestapo. I can't decide which is worse. If I lived in Tehran, then the choice would be easy.

I just don't know if I can get on board with making a protest vote that ushers in an ultra-liberal gun-grabbing racist nitwit. I'm afraid I may have to express my condolences to the people of Iran in advance.

Sean - first, its going to be one of those two anyway (right?), regardless of who you vote for, one of them or Paul, or nobody.

Your vote is more meaningless going to one of the general candidates than if you were to stay home or write in your own name and not give either of them numbers. You want to avoid war with Iran and keep your arms? VOTE RON PAUL

A Ron Paul Rebel
02-16-2008, 02:09 PM
Don't hate me for asking, but why does one need to carry a concealed firearm? I'm all for personal liberties, but that seems a bit extreme to me.

It's not whether they should or not, but whether they CAN.

These shootings that we are having could be prevented if
responsible people carried weapons (concealed or not).

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:11 PM
Don't hate me for asking, but why does one need to carry a concealed firearm? I'm all for personal liberties, but that seems a bit extreme to me.

On October 16, 1991, Hennard drove his 1987 Ford Ranger pickup truck through the front window of a Luby's Cafeteria at 1705 East Central Texas Expressway in Killeen, yelled "This is what Bell County has done to me!", then opened fire on the restaurant's patrons and staff with a Glock 17 pistol and later a Ruger P89. About 80 people were in the restaurant at the time. He stalked, shot, and killed 23 people and wounded another 20 before committing suicide. During the shooting, he approached Suzanna Gratia Hupp and her parents. Hupp had actually brought a handgun to the Luby's Cafeteria that day, but had left it in her vehicle due to the laws in force at the time, forbidding citizens from carrying firearms. According to her later testimony in favor of Missouri's HB-1720 bill[1] and in general [2][3], after she realized that her firearm was not in her purse, but "a hundred feet away in [her] car", her father charged at Hennard in an attempt to subdue him, only to be gunned down; a short time later, her mother was also shot and killed. (Hupp later expressed regret for abiding by the law in question by leaving her firearm in her car, rather than keeping it on her person[4].)

Shaun
02-16-2008, 02:13 PM
I agree with Obama on this.
This country is OUT OF CONTROL in terms of shootings and general violence.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has the level of violence we do, no first world country that is.
I'm all for it. Ban the bastards.

jsgolfman
02-16-2008, 02:14 PM
Even in the RP camp we have people who still don't understand what liberty means.

libertythor
02-16-2008, 02:15 PM
I will be voting for the LP or CP candidate if McCain and Obama/Hillary are the nominees for the Republicrats.

webber53
02-16-2008, 02:18 PM
Are you serious?

Do you know what a write-in is?

Why are you letting the TV tell you your vote either belong to McCain or Obama?

SAY IT AGAIN!!

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:19 PM
Sean - first, its going to be one of those two anyway (right?), regardless of who you vote for, one of them or Paul, or nobody.

Your vote is more meaningless going to one of the general candidates than if you were to stay home or write in your own name and not give either of them numbers. You want to avoid war with Iran and keep your arms? VOTE RON PAUL

Yes, the winner will be either the Dem or GOP nominee, and I lose either way. But there is significance in evaluating those two lose propositions, and determining which is the bigger loss for me.

As I mentioned before, since I live in California my vote really doesn't matter, and in light of that I probably will write in Paul. If I lived in a contested state however, I'd seriously have to consider which of the two potential winners was worse for me, and vote accordingly.

charger
02-16-2008, 02:19 PM
Don't hate me for asking, but why does one need to carry a concealed firearm? I'm all for personal liberties, but that seems a bit extreme to me.

To protect yourself!
I carry every day. It is my right!

We have entered into a state of Tyranny because I fear any of the candidates that they are pushing down our throats more than any Radical Islamic Extremist.

kyleAF
02-16-2008, 02:23 PM
I agree with Obama on this.
This country is OUT OF CONTROL in terms of shootings and general violence.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has the level of violence we do, no first world country that is.
I'm all for it. Ban the bastards.

Mark my words. You won't be voting your way out of this one...

Without an armed populace, there's nothing standing in the way of complete control and tyranny.

And I disagree with your statement that no other country sees as much violence as we do. Even with the "no true scotsman" fallacy of "no first world country, that is".

Just remember what Hitler did... he banned and confiscated guns. The people outnumber the government ONLY AS LONG as our bullets outnumber theirs.

And banning the guns will *actually* result in confrontations with the police in some parts of this country by the militias. Do you really want homefront battles?

kyleAF
02-16-2008, 02:27 PM
It would seem that Obama would allow those of us who are / were in the military to carry firearms.

Convenient for me...

But not for you. RP08.

Dr.3D
02-16-2008, 02:30 PM
I agree with Obama on this.
This country is OUT OF CONTROL in terms of shootings and general violence.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has the level of violence we do, no first world country that is.
I'm all for it. Ban the bastards.

Let me get this straight in my mind.

You are saying you would rather have all law abiding people unable to carry a firearm and let only the lawbreakers carry firearms?

Doesn't that seem a little one sided to even you?

What that would mean is, law abiding people would be defenseless against criminals who would carry firearms anyway.

Wake up! Guns don't kill people, criminals kill people. I want to be able to defend myself rather than let some punk with a gun kill me because I was not allowed to carry one.

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
02-16-2008, 02:30 PM
Come on everyone - you've played their game for how many elections now? End it NOW, do NOT vote for the lesser of two evils - what has it EVER gotten us?

No kidding. McCain will take your vote as an endorsement of everything he stands for.

Did you guys know around 17 americans have died in Iraq this month? Anyone seen it anywhere? Anyone seen any names? Anyone wonder why? If any of you guys vote for McWar, I hope you understand the implications of that. Same with Obama. Neither will do a single freaking thing to make you more free.

Keep voting for the slightly nicer tyrant. See where it gets you. Got you, I mean.

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:31 PM
It would seem that Obama would allow those of us who are / were in the military to carry firearms.

Convenient for me...

But not for you. RP08.

Interesting. Guess I'll be dusting off my DD-214 and laughing at all the unarmed and helpless suckers.

jbuttell
02-16-2008, 02:33 PM
Shaun - if you honestly think people are driven to this because of easy access to guns, you're very mistaken.

In all respect, you need to refresh yourself with the necessity and right to bear arms.

It is out of control - no doubt about it- something must be done, but once we implement these gun control bans - what will you say when these shootings don't stop?

I assure you, they won't with that kind of tactic.

With that reasoning, you might as well just support the Patriot Act and other anticonstitutional efforts.

.jeremy

ChickenHawk
02-16-2008, 02:37 PM
Obama could be the greatest gift to the limited government movement in years. If he becomes president and starts pushing his socialist authoritarian political agenda there is going to be serious blow-back. 2010 could be 1994 all over again. Those of us who support limited government need to be ready for this because if we aren't you can bet the neocons will be.

Merk
02-16-2008, 02:57 PM
Barack Obama's security guards defend him with concealed plastic forks right?

I hate that shit. He's not willing to give up protection via firearms but he wants to demand I do? He thinks he's "special"?

The thought of him telling me I can't carry makes vomit come out of my ears.

It's called a "right". It's guaranteed to me in this little thing called the "Constitution." Maybe Obama should read it?

Molon Labe!

Carole
02-16-2008, 02:58 PM
Since most of us could not possibly vote for either of the evils selected by the MSM, I am adament that I will write in my vote for Dr. Paul.

My vote would be pointless if cast for the MSM candidates. A major write-in campaign is our only alternative, if Dr. Paul cannot secure the nomination, which is doubtful, but still a strong effort by us to be acknowledged.

We really need to target the no-voters, too, who do not participate because they refuse to vote for either MSM candidate.

SeanEdwards
02-16-2008, 02:59 PM
Barack Obama's security guards defend him with concealed plastic forks right?


Yeah I was wondering the same thing. I say, "Disarm everyone? OK, you go first Barrack."

mikeInAZ
02-16-2008, 03:02 PM
To protect yourself!
I carry every day. It is my right!

We have entered into a state of Tyranny because I fear any of the candidates that they are pushing down our throats more than any Radical Islamic Extremist.

Interesting. I'm curious if anyone has ever been in a situation where their concealed weapon "protected" them.

Dr.3D
02-16-2008, 03:13 PM
Interesting. I'm curious if anyone has ever been in a situation where their concealed weapon "protected" them.

I have to ask, if you were being chased down the street by someone with a gun, would you feel protected if you had a gun in your pocket?

A better question is, would you feel protected if you didn't have a gun in your pocket?

In one of these cases, you would at least have a chance of protecting yourself.

ChickenHawk
02-16-2008, 03:14 PM
Interesting. I'm curious if anyone has ever been in a situation where their concealed weapon "protected" them.


I've never had been in a situation where a concealed pistol "protected" me. I have talked to people who have been in a situation like that. There have been a few high profile shootings recently where someone with a concealed pistol stopped the shooting or ended it early saving many lives. It's hard to get statistics on this sort of things because in most cases no shots are fired. For most people just the thought of being impaled with hot chunks of copper coated lead tends to alter their behavior.

Merk
02-16-2008, 04:56 PM
I agree with Obama on this.
This country is OUT OF CONTROL in terms of shootings and general violence.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has the level of violence we do, no first world country that is.
I'm all for it. Ban the bastards.

I carry a gun constantly, everywhere I go that I legally can. Please don't try and make decisions for me. The Constitution guarantees me the right.

When citizens carry crime rate drops.

If you choose not to take your personal protection into your own hands then please feel free to call 911 as you get carjacked.

Quotes below from:

http://power.consumercide.com/aust-uk-us-crimefigs.html

...snip The United States didn't even make the "top 10" list of industrialized nations whose citizens were victimized by crime. ...snip


...snip
In March 2000, WorldNetDaily reported that since Australia's widespread gun ban, violent crime had increased in the country.

WND reported that, although lawmakers responsible for passing the ban promised a safer country, the nation's crime statistics tell a different story:


Countrywide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.
Assaults are up 8.6 percent.
Amazingly, armed robberies have climbed nearly 45 percent.
In the Australian state of Victoria, gun homicides have climbed 300 percent.
In the 25 years before the gun bans, crime in Australia had been dropping steadily.
There has been a reported "dramatic increase" in home burglaries and assaults on the elderly.
...snip

Doktor_Jeep
02-16-2008, 05:10 PM
Carry anyway.

angelatc
02-16-2008, 05:15 PM
I expect we'll all be dissapointed with the supreme court ruling. I predict they will make some vague ruling that resolves nothing. I certainly am not hopeful that the court will aggressively defend our 2nd amendment rights.

Indeed. If the court believed the ban was unconstitutional, they would have refused to hear the case, thus leaving the lower courts ruling intact.

FreeTraveler
02-16-2008, 05:20 PM
A write-in is a throw away protest. No write-in candidate will win. I might as well stay home.

If the 'machine' asks me to choose between "gun-grabbing" Obama, and "nuke first, nuke often" McCain, I'm going to have a real dilemma. I could symbolically throw my vote away, or I hold my nose and vote 'against' one of the choices.

I'm hoping Paul runs as independent or something so that I have something to vote FOR, rather than against.

If you vote for McCain or Obama, you're telling the powers that be that you were happy with the two choices presented. Talk about a wasted vote!

ARE you happy with the two choices presented? If not, vote for any third-party candidate who you can support, or write in Dr. Paul. DO NOT tell the Republicrats that the options they gave you were satisfactiry. THAT's a WASTED VOTE.

angelatc
02-16-2008, 05:20 PM
I agree with Obama on this.
This country is OUT OF CONTROL in terms of shootings and general violence.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has the level of violence we do, no first world country that is.
I'm all for it. Ban the bastards.

Then move to England, where the government films you practically every second you're outside, and your taxes are

We're fine. Our biggest problem is that the government doesn't mandate that every citizen own a gun, and carry it at all times. People wouldn't be so keen on bursting into a public venue if they knoew they'd be facing a firing squad.

bluefish
02-16-2008, 07:57 PM
I have to ask, if you were being chased down the street by someone with a gun, would you feel protected if you had a gun in your pocket?

A better question is, would you feel protected if you didn't have a gun in your pocket?

In one of these cases, you would at least have a chance of protecting yourself.

If I have a gun, it won't be in my pocket and I sure won't be chased anywhere.

SWATH
02-16-2008, 09:35 PM
Is anyone else disgusted at Ron Paul's 2nd amendment description?


Mike Huckabee
Opposes reauthorization of the assault weapons ban. Opposes mandatory trigger locks for handguns. Opposes waiting periods for gun purchases. Owns a variety of firearms. NRA member. Has a concealed carry permit.


Ron Paul
Opposed 3-day gun show background check requirement in favor of a 24-hour check. Has a B rating from the NRA.

Mother fuck the NRA!

Dr.3D
02-16-2008, 09:43 PM
Mother fuck the NRA!

Joint the GOA instead.

fedup100
02-16-2008, 09:47 PM
I think a national ban on the savior Obama would be more in order.

IPSecure
02-16-2008, 09:49 PM
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

That position alone could almost make me vote for McInsane. Would you like to vote for evil, semi-evil, or absolute-evil? What a gagglef*ck of an election this is turning out to be.


Who care what oBomba wants!

Ever google "bush wants", amazing they want, want, want, want......

NMCB3
02-16-2008, 10:05 PM
Don't hate me for asking, but why does one need to carry a concealed firearm? I'm all for personal liberties, but that seems a bit extreme to me.Well to defend yourself, your family, and yes even sheep who think carrying a concealed weapon is extreme from attack by two legged predatory animals, and cowards who like to shoot up schools, Churches, malls etc. Your 70 year old grandmother or your pretty wife may be no match physically for a 25 year old gang banger who wants to assault or rape them, but arm them with a snub nose 38, or a 9mm and they have a chance. I don't hate you for asking, but you really should have known. :cool:

FreeTraveler
02-16-2008, 10:09 PM
Don't hate me for asking, but why does one need to carry a concealed firearm? I'm all for personal liberties, but that seems a bit extreme to me.

A question I've heard from L. Neil Smith, stark but compelling:

Would you rather see your wife or girlfriend with a gun in her hand, or raped and strangled in an alley with her own pantyhose?

Shaun
02-17-2008, 04:50 AM
Shaun - if you honestly think people are driven to this because of easy access to guns, you're very mistaken.

In all respect, you need to refresh yourself with the necessity and right to bear arms.

It is out of control - no doubt about it- something must be done, but once we implement these gun control bans - what will you say when these shootings don't stop?

I assure you, they won't with that kind of tactic.

With that reasoning, you might as well just support the Patriot Act and other anticonstitutional efforts.

.jeremy

Jeremy, I'm Irish, I'm real Irish and my family was deeply involved in the Armed struggle with the British. We know something about guns in Eire and we also understand what it's like to actually fight oppression and how important access to weapons was in winning that struggle. However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society. This Culture extends to our foreign policy and our nasty habit of bombing first, using military muscle to control others and asking questions later. I mean, did you ever stop to think about the possiblity of a link between the USA's bellicose foreign millitary exploits and the "right to bear arms" on the streets of the USA by citizens? No link? Think again...I don't think it's a coincidence at all. America is a nation of violence within it's own borders and over the past eight years a nation of violence on the international scene. W
When Ron Paul says that the attackers at 9/11attack us because "we are over there" 80% or more of the Republicans jeer him.....
Well let me ask you guys, if the terrorists have a motive to attack us, and we believe that by simply " pulling out, JUST COME HOME" we can remove that motivation, does not the same logic apply at home? In other words, what's the motivation of the "bad guys" in all these shootings? Can't we change that motivation? You see where I'm going.......it's a complex situation that's for sure and many factors are involved, however, I AM CERTAIN and it's proven in the statistics that keeping guns on the streets with "sane" gun owners is going to perpetuate a culture that CONTINUES to turn to violence as a first resort.

Dr.3D
02-17-2008, 06:53 AM
http://gallery.allinthefamilysit.com/albums/userpics/10001/oh%20archie.jpg


"Oh my Archie, did you hear what he just said?"

Kingfisher
02-17-2008, 07:11 AM
I wouls suspect McCain and Huckabee want gun bans just as badly as Obama and Hillary. They cant reveal it yet. They have to keep the neocons, NRA members, Republican sheeple fooled.

Truth Warrior
02-17-2008, 07:44 AM
"IF the government cannot trust the people with guns, can the people trust the government?"

"Governments prefer unarmed peasants."

"Politicians love disarmed peasants."

Dr.3D
02-17-2008, 08:18 AM
SNIP~ In other words, what's the motivation of the "bad guys" in all these shootings? ~SNIP

Perhaps the bad guys would like to have our money. Or perhaps they are crazy and would like to take our lives. Just because I carry a concealed pistol, it does not mean the bad guys are more likely to attack me. Actually, if the bad guys thought most people might be carrying a pistol, they would probably leave them alone.

From what I am hearing from you, I would suspect you believe only criminals should be carrying pistols. You see, if it is illegal to carry a pistol, then only criminals would be carrying pistols. Making something illegal only stops those who abide by the law from doing it.

Why do you want only criminals to have pistols while the rest of us go around unarmed?

pcosmar
02-17-2008, 08:28 AM
Jeremy, I'm Irish, I'm real Irish and my family was deeply involved in the Armed struggle with the British. We know something about guns in Eire and we also understand what it's like to actually fight oppression and how important access to weapons was in winning that struggle. However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society. This Culture extends to our foreign policy and our nasty habit of bombing first, using military muscle to control others and asking questions later. I mean, did you ever stop to think about the possiblity of a link between the USA's bellicose foreign millitary exploits and the "right to bear arms" on the streets of the USA by citizens? No link? Think again...I don't think it's a coincidence at all. America is a nation of violence within it's own borders and over the past eight years a nation of violence on the international scene. W
When Ron Paul says that the attackers at 9/11attack us because "we are over there" 80% or more of the Republicans jeer him.....
Well let me ask you guys, if the terrorists have a motive to attack us, and we believe that by simply " pulling out, JUST COME HOME" we can remove that motivation, does not the same logic apply at home? In other words, what's the motivation of the "bad guys" in all these shootings? Can't we change that motivation? You see where I'm going.......it's a complex situation that's for sure and many factors are involved, however, I AM CERTAIN and it's proven in the statistics that keeping guns on the streets with "sane" gun owners is going to perpetuate a culture that CONTINUES to turn to violence as a first resort.

What a pile of bullshit you have dumped.
By far, most gun owners are peaceful. The violence is the result of a very few, and a lot of bad laws.
There are millions of gun owners that have never shot anyone, and have no desire to.
I every place that Gun Laws have been relaxed and concealed carry allowed, the crime rate has dropped.
There will always be violent criminals. The only real defense is for citizens to have the ability to protect themselves.

This however,

However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society. This Culture extends to our foreign policy and our nasty habit of bombing first, using military muscle to control others and asking questions later.
Is complete HorseShit. Go the fuck away. Don't spread this lying crap here.
This nasty habit is a new phenomenon. The same folks that are doing this want do disarm their opponents.

Dr.3D
02-17-2008, 08:35 AM
Make Your Own "Gun Free Zone"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhgzcioPet8

FreeTraveler
02-17-2008, 08:51 AM
Make Your Own "Gun Free Zone"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhgzcioPet8

Great! I want some of those signs. I'll offer one to anyone who's anti-gun, as long as they are willing to put it in the front window of their house.

That will do more to shut up the hypocrisy than any number of arguments. Talk about a "put up or shut up moment!" :D

pcosmar
02-17-2008, 09:27 AM
Here are a couple more signs.

http://www.wmsa.net/images/gun_free_zone.jpg

http://jeffersonian.name/sdf.gif

AisA1787
02-17-2008, 01:10 PM
I agree with Obama on this.
This country is OUT OF CONTROL in terms of shootings and general violence.
NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has the level of violence we do, no first world country that is.
I'm all for it. Ban the bastards.

WRONG. The only difference is that (1) the American media sensationalizes handgun violence because they have an agenda to disarm law-abiding American citizens and (2) gun control advocates are full of b.s.

For example...


Homicide and the Prevalence of Handguns: Canada and the United States, 1976 to 1980
Brandon S. Centerwall

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/134/11/1245

From the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington Seattle, WA

Reprint requests to Dr. Brsndon S. Centerwall, 611 33rd Avenue E., Seattle, WA 98112

As compared with Americans, Canadians in the 1970s possessed one tenth as many handguns per capita. To assess whether this affected the total criminal homicide rate, the mean annual criminal homicide rates of Canadian provinces were compared with those of adjoining US states for the period of 1976 to 1980. No consistent differences were observed; criminal homicide rates were sometimes higher in the Canadian province, and sometimes higher in the adjoining US state. Major differences in the prevalence of handguns have not resulted in differing total criminal homicide rates in Canadian provinces and adjoining US states. The similar rates of criminal homicide are primarily attributable to underlying similar rates of aggravated assault.

firearms; homicide; violence

coastie
02-17-2008, 02:00 PM
Jeremy, I'm Irish, I'm real Irish and my family was deeply involved in the Armed struggle with the British. We know something about guns in Eire and we also understand what it's like to actually fight oppression and how important access to weapons was in winning that struggle. However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society. This Culture extends to our foreign policy and our nasty habit of bombing first, using military muscle to control others and asking questions later. I mean, did you ever stop to think about the possiblity of a link between the USA's bellicose foreign millitary exploits and the "right to bear arms" on the streets of the USA by citizens? No link? Think again...I don't think it's a coincidence at all. America is a nation of violence within it's own borders and over the past eight years a nation of violence on the international scene. W
When Ron Paul says that the attackers at 9/11attack us because "we are over there" 80% or more of the Republicans jeer him.....
Well let me ask you guys, if the terrorists have a motive to attack us, and we believe that by simply " pulling out, JUST COME HOME" we can remove that motivation, does not the same logic apply at home? In other words, what's the motivation of the "bad guys" in all these shootings? Can't we change that motivation? You see where I'm going.......it's a complex situation that's for sure and many factors are involved, however, I AM CERTAIN and it's proven in the statistics that keeping guns on the streets with "sane" gun owners is going to perpetuate a culture that CONTINUES to turn to violence as a first resort.


However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society

Hmm, by "your estimation", huh? Oh, wait...you've been watching too much TV, havent you? I grew up playng video games where the goal was to kill as much as possible, and:

1. I carry on a daily basis in the US Coast Guard...have'nt shot anyone in the last 6 years I've been in, or even wanted to.

2. I carry on a daily basis when I'm not on duty. Better to "have it and not need it", then "to need it and not have it".

Shaun, your type ("liberals"), never cease to amaze me with your utter fucking stupidy and lack of common sense when you bring this "argument" up...because there is no argument. Go back to fucking Ireland, or England maybe, then maybe you'll feel "safe", as only the criminals have guns there.

Banning guns only disarms "THE LAW ABIDING". As has been beaten to death in this thread, what part of that are you not grasping?

By your logic, I guess, my father, stepmom and myself should be on our way to the morgue, being that we just spent the entire morning at the gun range with no less than 20 other people there, and guess what, Shaun? THEY ALL HAD GUNS!!!!111!1! OMG!!1!!:eek: Of all places on the planet, by your logic i should be dead 100 times over from my membership/participation in the local gun club/range, with all those "crazy" concealed carry holders. I have never felt more SAFE, than at the gun range.


I AM CERTAIN and it's proven in the statistics that keeping guns on the streets with "sane" gun owners is going to perpetuate a culture that CONTINUES to turn to violence as a first resort.

OK, Shaun, now you're not only a liberal, but a LIBERAL LIAR. There is no evidence to support that claim, your just spouting shit out of your ass now...I was going to go on, but I'm done with you as your making my blood pressure rise to unhealthy levels...:mad:

Kingfisher
02-17-2008, 02:18 PM
I grew up with guns all around me. Our house, my grandfathers house, I think the great majority of my adult relatives. I've had a carry permit for years. May have saved my life once. Guess what? not one of us ever shot anyone....................p.s. I definitely think Shaun needs one of those signs in his yard.

Shaun
02-17-2008, 04:31 PM
Hmm, by "your estimation", huh? Oh, wait...you've been watching too much TV, havent you? I grew up playng video games where the goal was to kill as much as possible, and:

1. I carry on a daily basis in the US Coast Guard...have'nt shot anyone in the last 6 years I've been in, or even wanted to.

2. I carry on a daily basis when I'm not on duty. Better to "have it and not need it", then "to need it and not have it".

Shaun, your type ("liberals"), never cease to amaze me with your utter fucking stupidy and lack of common sense when you bring this "argument" up...because there is no argument. Go back to fucking Ireland, or England maybe, then maybe you'll feel "safe", as only the criminals have guns there.

Banning guns only disarms "THE LAW ABIDING". As has been beaten to death in this thread, what part of that are you not grasping?

By your logic, I guess, my father, stepmom and myself should be on our way to the morgue, being that we just spent the entire morning at the gun range with no less than 20 other people there, and guess what, Shaun? THEY ALL HAD GUNS!!!!111!1! OMG!!1!!:eek: Of all places on the planet, by your logic i should be dead 100 times over from my membership/participation in the local gun club/range, with all those "crazy" concealed carry holders. I have never felt more SAFE, than at the gun range.



OK, Shaun, now you're not only a liberal, but a LIBERAL LIAR. There is no evidence to support that claim, your just spouting shit out of your ass now...I was going to go on, but I'm done with you as your making my blood pressure rise to unhealthy levels...:mad:

1) I DO FEEL SAFE IN AMERICA. I live in Los Angeles which is at the top of gun crime list...and you know it's a strange thing Coastie...but I do feel safe, you see it's people who are insecure and DON'T feel safe that need to carry guns. Makes the Feeeel better, tougher more able to FUCK the other guy.
2) In my company, that I have run since the early 90's I provide training equipment to the Military, Police and other Law enforcement agenices all over the world (www.Battlefieldsports.com) we are the worlds leading combat simulation company.
3) Myself and my family and many friends are involved in training and supporting the US and other military organisations. WE BELIEVE in the usefullness of guns, IN THE RIGHT HANDS.
4) Look how YOUR BLOOD PRESSURE goes up in response to a simple email. I mean, you have gone completely ballistic on me because of a difference in viewpoint...and you expect me or any other sane person to trust untrained and average citizens with a gun??? How? Even as a professional person, You have a flash temper, easily demonstrated to any objective observer of your last message. And that's my point, (not you ) bu there are WAY too many loose cannons running around this country, depressed, anxious, fearful or just downright angry... And they are shooting people. In schools, in malls, in parks, in council chambers, AS SNIPERS FOR GOD'S SAKE. It's out of control. EVERYDAY it's another one. OUT OF CONTROL.
Now,
ALL guns should be banned here, taken away from KNOWN criminals and only owned by people with a demonstrated CONTROL of their temper ( how the hell do we measure that..)
Ask the guys in uniform if they want average citizens carrying guns....
They don't.
And by the way, I'm as Liberal as Ron Paul.

Dr.3D
02-17-2008, 04:36 PM
Seems Shaun likes to see how many people he can get to answer his posts.
He only answers one of the many reply posts people make when he finds the time to log in and make any kind of reply at all.
I suggest we ignore him and see if he stops posting.

NMCB3
02-17-2008, 05:49 PM
Jeremy, I'm Irish, I'm real Irish and my family was deeply involved in the Armed struggle with the British. We know something about guns in Eire and we also understand what it's like to actually fight oppression and how important access to weapons was in winning that struggle. However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society. This Culture extends to our foreign policy and our nasty habit of bombing first, using military muscle to control others and asking questions later. I mean, did you ever stop to think about the possiblity of a link between the USA's bellicose foreign millitary exploits and the "right to bear arms" on the streets of the USA by citizens? No link? Think again...I don't think it's a coincidence at all. America is a nation of violence within it's own borders and over the past eight years a nation of violence on the international scene. W
When Ron Paul says that the attackers at 9/11attack us because "we are over there" 80% or more of the Republicans jeer him.....
Well let me ask you guys, if the terrorists have a motive to attack us, and we believe that by simply " pulling out, JUST COME HOME" we can remove that motivation, does not the same logic apply at home? In other words, what's the motivation of the "bad guys" in all these shootings? Can't we change that motivation? You see where I'm going.......it's a complex situation that's for sure and many factors are involved, however, I AM CERTAIN and it's proven in the statistics that keeping guns on the streets with "sane" gun owners is going to perpetuate a culture that CONTINUES to turn to violence as a first resort.
Your a fucking asshat, not to mention an enemy of individual liberty....FUCK OFF!

coastie
02-17-2008, 06:03 PM
1) I DO FEEL SAFE IN AMERICA. I live in Los Angeles which is at the top of gun crime list...and you know it's a strange thing Coastie...but I do feel safe, you see it's people who are insecure and DON'T feel safe that need to carry guns. Makes the Feeeel better, tougher more able to FUCK the other guy.

Are you kidding me? There's a reason its on the top of the list...because law abiding citizens are forbiden to have them, you think criminals give a flying fuck about the law? You seem like a smart guy (just lackng common sense) do some real research on the statistics you quote, but I expect what you'll find may blow your "point" out of the water.

2) In my company, that I have run since the early 90's I provide training equipment to the Military, Police and other Law enforcement agenices all over the world (www.Battlefieldsports.com) we are the worlds leading combat simulation company.

And???

3) Myself and my family and many friends are involved in training and supporting the US and other military organisations. WE BELIEVE in the usefullness of guns, IN THE RIGHT HANDS.

So did the Founding Fathers...read the constitution much? Or any of their writings?
Here's some reading for you...

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." --Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. ME 16:45

"One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them." --Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. ME 9:341

"I learn with great concern that [one] portion of our frontier so interesting, so important, and so exposed, should be so entirely unprovided with common fire-arms. I did not suppose any part of the United States so destitute of what is considered as among the first necessaries of a farm-house." --Thomas Jefferson to Jacob J. Brown, 1808. ME 11:432

Alexander Hamilton:
"The Supreme Being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He invested him with an inviolate right to personal liberty and personal safely

Sam Adams, Father of the American Revolution:
"The Constitution should never be construed to prevent the people of the United States...from keeping their own arms."

Patrick Henry:
"The great object is that every man be armed... Everyone who is able may have a gun"

Thomas Jefferson:
"And what country can preserve it's liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."

George Mason, Co Author of the Bill of Rights:
"Divine Providence has given to every individual the means of self defense."

George Washington:
"A free people ought to be armed."

James Madison:
"The advantage of being armed the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation..the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

Thomas Paine:
"Arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property."

Edmund Randolph:
"A people who mean to be free must be prepared to meet danger in person , and not rely upon the falacious protection of armies.


"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements)." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution (with his note added), 1776. Papers 1:353

"None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army. To keep ours armed and disciplined is therefore at all times important." --Thomas Jefferson to -----, 1803. ME 10:365



4) Look how YOUR BLOOD PRESSURE goes up in response to a simple email. I mean, you have gone completely ballistic on me because of a difference in viewpoint...and you expect me or any other sane person to trust untrained and average citizens with a gun??? How? Even as a professional person, You have a flash temper, easily demonstrated to any objective observer of your last message. And that's my point, (not you ) bu there are WAY too many loose cannons running around this country, depressed, anxious, fearful or just downright angry... And they are shooting people. In schools, in malls, in parks, in council chambers, AS SNIPERS FOR GOD'S SAKE. It's out of control. EVERYDAY it's another one. OUT OF CONTROL.
Now,
ALL guns should be banned here, taken away from KNOWN criminals and only owned by people with a demonstrated CONTROL of their temper ( how the hell do we measure that..)

How can you not fathom what this country would have to become to make your dream possible? If there was a way to do it, I'd be all for it. But I live in this little place called reality...Guns are here, and guns will be here forever. Wake up. If you feel so safe, then why do you want to get rid of all the guns?


Ask the guys in uniform if they want average citizens carrying guns....
They don't.

"Ask the guys in uniform..." Umm, OK, "Hey, Coastie, do you want average citizens carrying around firearms?" "Why, yes, I do believe "average" citizens should carry around firearms, AS THEY ALREADY DO, IN MY STATE...besides, the Constitution/Bill of Rights says they can, and since I have, in fact, taken an oath to uphold the US Constitution, I have no choice but to respect their right to bear arms."


And by the way, I'm as Liberal as Ron Paul

^^^heh, that last sentence of yours is just too funny to even respond to. Have a good day, sir.

Shaun
02-17-2008, 06:19 PM
Seems Shaun likes to see how many people he can get to answer his posts.
He only answers one of the many reply posts people make when he finds the time to log in and make any kind of reply at all.
I suggest we ignore him and see if he stops posting.

Well I Understand your point of view. Of course I do, there are a lot of lunatics running around with guns. No question. It's complex and unlikely to change anytime soon. My basic point is that there an awful lot of people who's FIRST gun crime is when they go mad and kill others. No track record, they just SNAP and lash out. It's called being a human under pressure. With so many guns in so many hands it's inevitable that you are going to see more of this.
I have no problem with guys like you having guns, at least 99.99% of the time.
Anyhow I'm done on this, but thanks for a more civil post and full defence of your position.
I got it.

Shaun
02-17-2008, 06:21 PM
^^^heh, that last sentence of yours is just too funny to even respond to. Have a good day, sir.

Well I Understand your point of view. Of course I do, there are a lot of lunatics running around with guns. No question. It's complex and unlikely to change anytime soon. My basic point is that there an awful lot of people who's FIRST gun crime is when they go mad and kill others. No track record, they just SNAP and lash out. It's called being a human under pressure. With so many guns in so many hands it's inevitable that you are going to see more of this.
I have no problem with guys like you having guns, at least 99.99% of the time.
Anyhow I'm done on this, but thanks for a more civil post and full defence of your position.
I got it.

Shaun
02-17-2008, 06:25 PM
Your a fucking asshat, not to mention an enemy of individual liberty....FUCK OFF!

YOU are a classic example of a non thinking hot head.
Your comments prove my point about the insanity of putting guns and weapons in the hands of the unstable.
Instead of refuting my points, as Coastie did in his last post, YOU just lash out.
Again, there are too many in America who lash out first and calm down later.
Take some vallium or go get a woman, something is wrong, when someone has a different point of view than you and you tell them to FUCK OFF.
Amazing.

pcosmar
02-17-2008, 06:28 PM
3) Myself and my family and many friends are involved in training and supporting the US and other military organisations. WE BELIEVE in the usefullness of guns, IN THE RIGHT HANDS.
Those are the wrong hands. We were warned of the danger of a standing Army.


Ask the guys in uniform if they want average citizens carrying guns....
They don't.
Of course not, How would they exert and enforce their will on free and armed people.

pcosmar
02-17-2008, 06:41 PM
Shaun ,
I question your reality.

2) In my company, that I have run since the early 90's I provide training equipment to the Military, Police and other Law enforcement agenices all over the world

I live in Hollywood, I'm CEO of an entertainment company with 2,000,000 customers,
Training?
Entertainment?
Hollywood? Hollywood?
I question anything that comes out of there.

BTW, Kalifornia has some of the more strict and oppressive gun control, and they have a crime problem you say.
I believe that it has been statistically proven that criminals prefer disarmed victims.

NMCB3
02-17-2008, 07:23 PM
YOU are a classic example of a non thinking hot head.
Your comments prove my point about the insanity of putting guns and weapons in the hands of the unstable.
Instead of refuting my points, as Coastie did in his last post, YOU just lash out.
Again, there are too many in America who lash out first and calm down later.
Take some vallium or go get a woman, something is wrong, when someone has a different point of view than you and you tell them to FUCK OFF.
Amazing.
Your point of view is anti-freedom, YOU are the enemy within America who is collectively working to steal what liberty's the people have left. I have been fighting for my freedoms against assholes like yourself who want to take them away my whole life. I have nothing but disdain for you and your ilk. Whats amazing is that you are here spewing your vile collectivist bullshit...again FUCK YOU!!!

ryanmkeisling
02-17-2008, 07:31 PM
To be honest, my vote is meaningless at this point. I live in California, and the demwit nominee is 99% certain of carrying this state. I guess I might as well write in Yosemite Sam for all the good it will do.

Not to mention the electoral college makes the final choice for all of us, but no one around here ever speaks about that. A democrat is sure to be elected as Mcain is unelectable in every way, especially considering it was a Republican that has caused most of our current problems.... I will write Paul in regardless but I have no faith in our so-called "democratic" system, it is a corrupt farce, in every way.

ChickenHawk
02-17-2008, 07:48 PM
Why is it that in every state that has liberalized their concealed carry laws there has not been an increase in gun violence? Why is it that no country that has implemented strict gun control has seen a drop in gun violence? Why is it that some countries that have implemented strict gun control have seen a dramatic rise in gun violence? Why is it that areas of the country with the strictest gun control often have the highest rates of gun crime? Why is it that in areas of the country that have the highest rates of gun ownership there is often some of the lowest rates of gun crime? Why was gun crime so rare in the past when anyone could walk into a corner store and walk out with a gun and a box of ammo no questions asked? Why do the majority of mass shootings take place in "gun free zones"? Why would anyone want to take away a right that is the firewall between liberty and tyranny to gain some potential security when the statistics don’t even suggest it will work?

CountryboyRonPaul
02-17-2008, 09:54 PM
Many of these gun-grabbers actually have the misguided belief that taking the right to bear arms will actually make us safer.

Perhaps in the way Russians were safer under Stalin's rule.

My Guns are here to protect my freedom. They are not here for hunting, they're not here for sport, they are here for the citizens to enforce the constitution on the Government which is restrained by the constitution.

Perhaps you would be safer from criminals if there were no guns in the country(which has been proven wrong anyway), but there would be no reason for the government to fear their people. That is where the REAL danger lies, not with petty murderers and rapists, which can be dealt with quite easily, but with Tyrants and Usurers who entrench themselves in the system, and will fight to take away their subjects' weapons.

Shaun
02-17-2008, 11:39 PM
Your point of view is anti-freedom, YOU are the enemy within America who is collectively working to steal what liberty's the people have left. I have been fighting for my freedoms against assholes like yourself who want to take them away my whole life. I have nothing but disdain for you and your ilk. Whats amazing is that you are here spewing your vile collectivist bullshit...again FUCK YOU!!!

I really understand that I should go away and die. I got it completely. What a wonderful example you are of my point. I wouldn't let a person with an attitude like you within 100 yards of any gun, anywhere. You are pissed off, unhappy and emotionaly unstable on this board. Why? I mean come on!! We are having a discussion for God's sake, it's not like I have my hands around your throat. You live in one of the most free societies in the world and you are writing things like this? And you don't think I should have a problem with allowing "normal" people to have guns?
Anyway you are the final straw for me here. I wish you well in your life and hope you get some help for that temper of yours. Life's too short to be on a fuse all the time.
Good luck to you all, I'm sure your guns will save your life sometime, somewhere.
I can certainly see your points of view because there sure are some very dangerous criminals out there and the police can't be relied upon. I certainly understand that. It would have been good to be able to have a serious talk about this instead of the insult hurling, but so be it..
Thanks.

micheshi
02-18-2008, 01:56 AM
I really understand that I should go away and die. I got it completely. What a wonderful example you are of my point. I wouldn't let a person with an attitude like you within 100 yards of any gun, anywhere. You are pissed off, unhappy and emotionaly unstable on this board. Why? I mean come on!! We are having a discussion for God's sake, it's not like I have my hands around your throat. You live in one of the most free societies in the world and you are writing things like this? And you don't think I should have a problem with allowing "normal" people to have guns?
Anyway you are the final straw for me here. I wish you well in your life and hope you get some help for that temper of yours. Life's too short to be on a fuse all the time.
Good luck to you all, I'm sure your guns will save your life sometime, somewhere.
I can certainly see your points of view because there sure are some very dangerous criminals out there and the police can't be relied upon. I certainly understand that. It would have been good to be able to have a serious talk about this instead of the insult hurling, but so be it..
Thanks.

Shaun,
You shouldn't "go away and die" but your manner of thinking should be given a proper burial. Nobody who's been raised around guns would shoot willy-nilly at somebody with whom he had a forum disagreement. The problem with your "in the right hands" qualifier is that somebody has to determine right. That changes decade to decade and even faster in most cases.

SCOTUS has said that you've no right, as a taxpaying American, to police protection. The 2nd isn't about food, it's about life and liberty. Whether the criminal is civilian or government, you must retain the right to defend your freedom as defined by the Constitution.

You seem to be in favor of freedom for those you identify with. That's sad because a truly free society would identify with you more than what you've experienced on this board and you are missing a big time opportunity to identify with your fellow unwashed man.

Nicketas
02-18-2008, 04:00 AM
............

JosephTheLibertarian
02-18-2008, 05:04 AM
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

That position alone could almost make me vote for McInsane. Would you like to vote for evil, semi-evil, or absolute-evil? What a gagglef*ck of an election this is turning out to be.

Sean Edwards is a guy that supports socialized medicine. Now he's pushing McCain. hm

Mini-Me
02-18-2008, 07:54 AM
Jeremy, I'm Irish, I'm real Irish and my family was deeply involved in the Armed struggle with the British. We know something about guns in Eire and we also understand what it's like to actually fight oppression and how important access to weapons was in winning that struggle. However, the situation here in the USA with guns is absolutely and totally OUT OF CONTROL. Why? Well, first of all, by my estimation the USA has a CULTURE of VIOLENCE now deeply ingrained at all levels of US society. This Culture extends to our foreign policy and our nasty habit of bombing first, using military muscle to control others and asking questions later. I mean, did you ever stop to think about the possiblity of a link between the USA's bellicose foreign millitary exploits and the "right to bear arms" on the streets of the USA by citizens? No link? Think again...I don't think it's a coincidence at all. America is a nation of violence within it's own borders and over the past eight years a nation of violence on the international scene. W
When Ron Paul says that the attackers at 9/11attack us because "we are over there" 80% or more of the Republicans jeer him.....
Well let me ask you guys, if the terrorists have a motive to attack us, and we believe that by simply " pulling out, JUST COME HOME" we can remove that motivation, does not the same logic apply at home? In other words, what's the motivation of the "bad guys" in all these shootings? Can't we change that motivation? You see where I'm going.......it's a complex situation that's for sure and many factors are involved, however, I AM CERTAIN and it's proven in the statistics that keeping guns on the streets with "sane" gun owners is going to perpetuate a culture that CONTINUES to turn to violence as a first resort.

You're comparing apples and oranges. People around the world hate us because we're the bully of the world. Are you trying to say that criminals commit crimes because law-abiding citizens are too-well-armed to allow them to? Are you then trying to make some kind of a connection between the two? That's absolutely absurd.

Do we have a culture of violence? Well, perhaps - but it's not because law-abiding citizens are permitted to carry guns. While others in this thread have shown that we are nowhere near the most violent industrialized nation, we do have relatively high crime rates. I attribute this to several things:


As far as "ordinary bad guys" go: Our wealth gap and poverty is to blame: In America, we have one of the worst wealth gaps ever for a "civilized" society, if not the worst (yes, third world countries are worst in this area, but the vast majority of people are poor, so the culture is quite different). Typically, ordinary crimes (murders, rapes, robberies, etc.) are not committed by middle-class citizens with a steady job, a home, and a family. Rather, they're committed by people of little means who have spent their entire lives in a culture of poverty, desperation, and moral ambiguity. A significant percentage of people in our country are in poverty or worse. As an example of one relevant subculture (the "have-nots" called "white trash" by arrogant "haves" are another good example), allow me to present a stereotypical generalization of what some people's lives are like: Black children in inner cities grow up in a high-crime environment, no money, and no father half the time. Their mom is either working three jobs or on welfare (and hated by the other moms with three jobs). Their schools are piss-poor. The only people they see making any money are rappers and drug dealers. Many of these kids simply grow up without any hope for a better future, and they grow up to live in desperation. Also, since many don't have a father, and since their mothers are usually working day in and day out just to keep them fed, nobody really takes the time to really raise them and teach them the difference between right and wrong. When you grow up in a culture like this, you have one instinct: Survive - by any means necessary. To add insult to injury (and to contrast with poor countries), they see tons of other people all around them wearing suits and living in suburban homes, "without a worry in the world!" Obviously, the middle class and even upper-middle class has its own growing problems to worry about, but the fact remains that we have people growing up in desperation when just a few miles away, people are living the "good life." This breeds resentment and additional discontent, as opposed to the situation in the third world where, for generations, everyone's been pretty much equal (except for the ruling warlords). Miraculously, most of these kids don't go on to become violent criminals! However, should we really be surprised when a good portion of them do?

The murders in this category are usually committed for the following reasons: To silence people after you've raped or robbed them, for revenge and/or rivalry (among people who have grown up in a morally ambiguous subculture where this is prevalent), or when gangs of common criminals confront one another (which comes down either to rivalry or fear that the other guy is planning to shoot first, which turns into a confusing firefight). In other words, these murders are the result of a culture of desperation and moral ambiguity.
The rapes in this category are usually committed for the following reasons combined: A desire for power over someone (anyone), moral depravity, and lastly, sexual gratification. Once again, this is a result of a culture of desperation and moral ambiguity.
The robberies in this category are committed for the following reason: Desperation and desire...

This is the category that "hardened criminals" fall into, and the takeaway here is that the root cause of all of this is poverty, not the legality of owning guns. Gun control advocates operate under the false premise that banning guns would make them magically disappear from existence, but this is not the case; hardened criminals who plan on committing crimes don't give a damn if guns are legal or illegal. Instead, banning guns would expand a violent black market for them, much like the war on drugs. Furthermore, if banning guns did somewhat restrict the availability of contraband guns, it would only put them in the hands of a smaller minority of criminals, who could then go about committing crimes with less fear of running into armed citizens or competitors.

The war on drugs: Just like prohibition resulted in a rampant mafia in the 20's, our war on drugs has resulted in a violent black market for drugs. The illegality of drugs has made their prices skyrocket, turning the business into a lucrative career option for those in category 1. Furthermore, the whole "underground" nature of it makes it violent:

When some guy doesn't pay up, break into his home house, beat the hell out of him, and threaten his life. What is he going to do...call the cops? When he still doesn't pay up, kill him as an example to others.
When you run into a competitor...perhaps there's some kind of "no-fire truce," but if not...kill him.
If you're nonviolent and you get caught just possessing, using, or buying drugs, you'll get sent to prison - which, of course, is such a desperate and violent environment that you probably won't be the same person when you get out.

Of course, making guns illegal would expand the black market for them, making it even more lucrative to trade them "underground." Similarly, an increased culture of violence would sprout up around this as well.

Now, as far as "crimes of passion" and "crazy people" go:
These are the instances that the media capitalizes on the most to further their anti-gun agenda. These are the cases where "otherwise normal people just snap." First, I'll give a brief overview of these crimes and whether or not gun control might help mitigate them. Then, I'll explain the true root cause of both of these types of crimes.

Now, some of these murders are spur-of-the-moment, such as "crimes of passion":

A pissed off and emotional husband/wife feels betrayed and kills the other for cheating.
Enraged motorists start shooting at each other.

Sometimes, people get out of control and let their emotions dominate them. Occasionally, people become so irrational that they kill each other in a fit of rage. In these instances, could such crimes have been prevented if the otherwise normal people didn't have access to a gun? Well, perhaps. Personally, I think people need to be taught better to value human life over their own selfish impulses in the first place, but that's beside the point. If the crime was totally "heat of the moment" and no gun was available, maybe the murderer wouldn't have even thought, "You know, I could kill him/her..." Then again, the murderer might have decided to kill the victim anyway, in which case there are a whole slew of options: knives, scissors, a baseball bat, or their bare hands. In reality, we probably have a mixture of both. Obviously, guns are not the only weapons people use to kill other people. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole "I have a gun" thing does give some others the little extra "push" to consider murder. While I'll give you that, you have to weigh it against the tremendous benefit legal guns have in reducing crime from the first category (as well as the fact that, without guns, a populace is at the absolute mercy of the state - any government can become totalitarian and oppress the people if the people are completely unable to resist).

In the "crazy people" category:

A mother kills all of her children and then herself.
A crazy kid shoots up his school.

These crimes are premeditated. Regardless of whether guns are legal or illegal, anyone wanting to commit one of these crimes (with or without a gun) will be able to get one...or many. Besides, when parents kill their children and themselves, they're so friggin crazy that they'll do it come hell or highwater. If they don't have a gun (and don't plan on getting one), they still have a car, and they still have a whole bunch of knives in their kitchen cupboard. Furthermore, in the case of "a crazy kid shoots up his school," there's a lot to be said about the possibility to either prevent or quickly stop such a crime if, say, 10% of the rest of the class was also carrying a gun! The way it is today, you will have crazy people, and they will be able to access guns. There's not a damn thing anybody can do to change that...so the real question is, "What are we going to do to offset this simple fact?"

The legal availability of guns does not cause these crimes (although in the "crimes of passion" category, it might occasionally make the already existent possibility more likely). "Crimes of passion" have been occurring since biblical times, and it's foolish to think that criminalizing guns would stop them. They might be occurring more often now, especially in America, and I think the root cause of this is the same as the "crazy people" crimes:
Stress. The world itself moves a lot faster than it used to, but in America, we're overworked and overstressed (in school and the private sector) more than anywhere else in the world except for a few countries in Asia (where the phenomenon seems to be expressed by suicide rates). Life is no longer simple...in the "normal family," both parents have to work. Both are overstressed from work (both the work itself and the drama), from bills, and from trying to balance that with their duties at home and raising the kids and taking them to soccer, baseball, and football practice. Their irritability extends to their relationship with each other. A lot of kids are overstressed from school. Not only do they have to worry about academic pressures, but bullying and groupthink is rampant among children. In college, the academic pressure is intense. Because of the way our economy works, we've really gone off the deep end with "credentialism," where everyone needs to go to college, get a degree, and do quite well if they want to have a chance to get a good job (instead of companies competing for workers and consumers, the balance of supply and demand has shifted to force workers into cutt-throat competition with each other).

The bottom line is that the breakneck pace and competitive nature of our culture is very taxing on people's mental health. We're seeing record numbers of people with depression, anxiety disorders, etc. (and yes, a lot of the diagnoses are due to the nature of our healthcare industry and pharma companies, but I digress). Not everyone is fazed by such levels of stress, but it really wears down on some people, and many of them become a bit "loopy" because of it. When people are really stressed out, they're irrational and overly emotional. Some just...snap. Seriously, why do we act surprised when some mothers go absolutely batshit insane and think they need to kill their kids to save them from the devil? Why do we act surprised when some kids go absolutely batshit insane and shoot up their schools? People "snap" because they're stressed to their breaking point, and that's a function of our overall lifestyle, not the legality of gun ownership.

Most people are able to deal with overwhelming levels of stress in either productive or mildly negative ways (irritability, etc.), but we need to face the fact that some people just can't take it. If you really want to stop these crimes, don't take the easy way out and blame guns (and in fact, in the case of school shootings, you'd do well to beg for less restrictions)...instead, take a serious look at our lifestyle and ask what we can do to fix it.


Now, if our country was run by Ron Paul Republicans, we'd have a much more balanced economy and monetary system, far less poverty, no war on drugs, and less stress (due to a more balanced economy and monetary system). It seems to me that if Ron Paul Republicans were running the country, they'd be addressing all three of the root causes of crime: Poverty, black markets, and stress...all the while respecting our inalienable right to own and bear arms.

Dr.3D
02-18-2008, 08:12 AM
Well said Mini.

coastie
02-18-2008, 08:16 AM
^^^ well, there you go.

I appologize, Shaun, if I came off pissed. Well, I was'nt pissed at you; it's that I'm pissed at societie's attitudes towards gun control, and Mini-Me hit everything squarely on the head. You were displaying this same ignorance that most gun control people display, and yes-it pisses me off sometimes when I hear people present that side of it, because its irrational, to say the least.

I'm not as good as articulating everything he just said, but what's posted above is where my issue comes, and I have a hard time understanding how/why people cant understand it, seems pretty cut and dry to me...

wv@SC
02-18-2008, 09:05 AM
The purpose of keeping and bearing arms is part of the checks and balances built into the Constitution.

The 10th Amendment says that the powers not delegated to Congress by the Constitution is reserved to the States, or to the People. This means that Congress (the Federal Government) is limited by the Constitution, and anything that Congress is not authorized by the Constitution to do is the prerogative of the State governments and that of the people.

So, the 2nd Amendment guarantees us our right to protecting our lives and liberties, not just from the thief or murderer who would steal our life or property, but also our right of protection from the federal government trying to take away or infringe upon our right to keep and bear arms.

From this it is clear that the Supreme Court (in the event of a national ban of firearms being proposed) must constitutionally rule against a national ban because it violates the Constitution in the two points made above (that anyone with simple comprehension should understand).

Those who desire the disarming of this country are ignorant of the reasons for the 2nd Amendment, and perhaps even the reasons for having a constitutional government at all.

maeqFREEDOMfree
02-18-2008, 09:43 AM
I couldn't ever vote for McCain. i don't get what makes people vote for him just to prevent someone worse getting elected. i'm standing on my principles no matter what people think or tell me. and my principles are not aligned with McCain so he won't get my vote. If obama tries to take my guns, he'll get the ones that i own on paper and that's about it.

maeqFREEDOMfree
02-18-2008, 09:45 AM
It seems to me that if Ron Paul Republicans were running the country, they'd be addressing all three of the root causes of crime: Poverty, black markets, and stress...all the while respecting our inalienable right to own and bear arms.

+100

NMCB3
02-18-2008, 12:43 PM
I really understand that I should go away and die. I got it completely. What a wonderful example you are of my point. I wouldn't let a person with an attitude like you within 100 yards of any gun, anywhere.

Fortunately some of the founders were intelligent enough to add a Bill of Rights expressly to protect all men from people like you. Who seem to think they can abolish God given Rights for "the common good."


You are pissed off, unhappy and emotionally unstable on this board. . If you think I`m scary, you would be terrified of the men fighting for their freedom in the American Revolution. In less temperate times you would pay dearly for usurping a mans freedom.



Why? I mean come on!! We are having a discussion for God's sake, it's not like I have my hands around your throat. No you have your hands around my freedom, ready to crush it through use of the ballot box.
You live in one of the most free societies in the world and you are writing things like this? And you don't think I should have a problem with allowing "normal" people to have guns? Living in "one of the most free societies" does not cut it. At one time it was simply FREE, until people like YOU fucked it up for all of us.

Anyway you are the final straw for me here. I wish you well in your life and hope you get some help for that temper of yours. Life's too short to be on a fuse all the time.Good riddance, and my temper will subside when my liberty is no longer threatened by people like you...which will be never.

Good luck to you all, I'm sure your guns will save your life sometime, somewhere.
I can certainly see your points of view because there sure are some very dangerous criminals out there and the police can't be relied upon. I certainly understand that. It would have been good to be able to have a serious talk about this instead of the insult hurling, but so be it..
Thanks.There is no point in having a "serious talk" about dismantling my liberty`s, there is absolutely no room for compromise. Maybe you should remember Thomas Jefferson's advice when he said...

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." --Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791. ME 8:276

Shaun
02-18-2008, 12:56 PM
Thanks for your very long and detailed response. It's by far the most logical and well thought out post I have seen. I'm going to study it later today when I can give it the time it deserves. At first glance there seem to be a number of areas that I'll be very interested to study.
Thanks again.
Shaun.

Laja
02-18-2008, 01:02 PM
Yes, the winner will be either the Dem or GOP nominee, and I lose either way. But there is significance in evaluating those two lose propositions, and determining which is the bigger loss for me.

As I mentioned before, since I live in California my vote really doesn't matter, and in light of that I probably will write in Paul. If I lived in a contested state however, I'd seriously have to consider which of the two potential winners was worse for me, and vote accordingly.

If you are a woman and voting for Sen. Hillary Clinton because she is a woman, please stay home.
If you are black and voting for Sen. Barack Obama simply because he is black, stay home.
If you are voting for Sen. John McCain, just because he is the likely winner, stay home.
Voting is the one opportunity people have to express their views. It is not simply a vote to choose a candidate; it is a vote for what you believe in.

One of the worst phrases ever uttered is, “You are wasting your vote,” or some derivative of that. The only wasted vote is the one irresponsibly or ignorantly cast.

NMCB3
02-18-2008, 01:03 PM
Delete

Shaun
02-18-2008, 01:06 PM
You and I can agree to disagree. Although, that said, the arguments made by Mini me may cause me to change some of my positions on this. To me, REAL freedom is the ability to change one's point of view based on a change in the KNOWN facts or how one views those facts. Anyway, RP supporters agree and disagree on lots of subjects. You talk about a "God" given right as though everyone believes that? The RP tent has been a big tent allowing many points of view. At this moment I don't agree with your stance on guns, but I would argue for your side of the fence in terms of staying with the constitution, that's why I am an RP supporter. But I don't agree with him on everything. Anyway, thanks for your response and I'll leave it at that. And don't call me names anymore will you? If you do, I'm going hunt you down, string you upside down and pound you into unconciousness with an Organic Carrot.:D

Merk
02-18-2008, 01:20 PM
1) \
Ask the guys in uniform if they want average citizens carrying guns....
They don't.


Wrong!!! Cops like us to carry because it makes their job easier and saves lives.

If you don't want to carry don't but please keep your "interpretations" of the Constitution to yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKbencrdF_8

Dr.3D
02-18-2008, 01:35 PM
Wrong!!! Cops like us to carry because it makes their job easier and saves lives.

If you don't want to carry don't but please keep your "interpretations" of the Constitution to yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKbencrdF_8

This is true, it was a police officer who trained us in our concealed carry class.

maeqFREEDOMfree
02-18-2008, 02:31 PM
This is true, it was a police officer who trained us in our concealed carry class.

same here... and the range that gives the class is owned by police officers as well as former officers.

To be honest i was suprised when i realized how much cops (at least the ones by me) respect civilians right to keep and bear arms ("legally") and as for the range by me, they encourage it.

kyleAF
02-18-2008, 03:21 PM
I personally feel much safer at gun shows than anywhere else. Everyone is armed to the teeth, and everyone is correspondingly MUCH more polite :)

Also, Shaun: reference Kennessaw, Georgia. There is a law on the books there that requires that every household have a gun. Their violent crime rate is nearly non-existent.

I believe this is similar to Switzerland, where almost everyone is a part of the militia and there are even full-auto weapons in a lot of households?? I'm not 100% familiar with the Swiss situation, though. I used to live near Kennessaw.

1836
02-18-2008, 03:48 PM
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.gun.html

That position alone could almost make me vote for McInsane. Would you like to vote for evil, semi-evil, or absolute-evil? What a gagglef*ck of an election this is turning out to be.

WOW!

Just noticed this!

Limit firearms purchases to ONE PER MONTH!?!?!?

This is completely unconstitutional and NUTS!

1836
02-18-2008, 03:48 PM
I personally feel much safer at gun shows than anywhere else. Everyone is armed to the teeth, and everyone is correspondingly MUCH more polite :)

Also, Shaun: reference Kennessaw, Georgia. There is a law on the books there that requires that every household have a gun. Their violent crime rate is nearly non-existent.

I believe this is similar to Switzerland, where almost everyone is a part of the militia and there are even full-auto weapons in a lot of households?? I'm not 100% familiar with the Swiss situation, though. I used to live near Kennessaw.

If you can get past the grit, gun people are some of the nicest people you'll ever meet.

Shaun
02-18-2008, 05:57 PM
I personally feel much safer at gun shows than anywhere else. Everyone is armed to the teeth, and everyone is correspondingly MUCH more polite :)

Also, Shaun: reference Kennessaw, Georgia. There is a law on the books there that requires that every household have a gun. Their violent crime rate is nearly non-existent.

I believe this is similar to Switzerland, where almost everyone is a part of the militia and there are even full-auto weapons in a lot of households?? I'm not 100% familiar with the Swiss situation, though. I used to live near Kennessaw.

OK, OK so your point is that if a household has a gun the criminals leave you alone? Sure, I can certainly understand that. Of course.
This entire situation is complex, but I will look into the Swiss situation. Very interesting.
Thanks for the information. You guys have made me think deeper about this.:confused:

coastie
02-18-2008, 07:36 PM
OK, OK so your point is that if a household has a gun the criminals leave you alone? Sure, I can certainly understand that. Of course.
This entire situation is complex, but I will look into the Swiss situation. Very interesting.
Thanks for the information. You guys have made me think deeper about this.:confused:

That is precisely the point...if you knew that every household could possibly have a gun, then you're not going to rob it, or at the very least, move on to a "softer" target...
Statistics have proven that removing the guns from the people has the exact OPPOSITE effect than intended. When we'll learn that, who knows. Its glaringly obvious by the numbers, guess some people dont like when the facts usurp their rediculous notions of a Utopia with no guns....

Obviously, most criminals dont have the sense to think like this, so thats where the secondary advantage of having a gun in the house comes in.:D

ChickenHawk
02-18-2008, 10:09 PM
That is precisely the point...if you knew that every household could possibly have a gun, then you're not going to rob it, or at the very least, move on to a "softer" target...
Statistics have proven that removing the guns from the people has the exact OPPOSITE effect than intended. When we'll learn that, who knows. Its glaringly obvious by the numbers, guess some people dont like when the facts usurp their rediculous notions of a Utopia with no guns....

Obviously, most criminals dont have the sense to think like this, so thats where the secondary advantage of having a gun in the house comes in.:D

If you want to see evidence of this phenomenon look at the 'hot' burglary rates in the US compared to countries with strict gun control.

Merk
02-18-2008, 10:15 PM
OK, OK so your point is that if a household has a gun the criminals leave you alone? Sure, I can certainly understand that. Of course.
This entire situation is complex, but I will look into the Swiss situation. Very interesting.
Thanks for the information. You guys have made me think deeper about this.:confused:


Here is a good book. The author started out to write an anti book but when he actually compilled the data he had to change his mind and is now very pro gun.

More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws

by John R. Lott Jr.

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/