To Arm or to Disarm.

[smmatrix 11]

You might also take note that the gun was a legally purchased firearm. Another individual who is allowed to have a firearm who cannot discern between reality and fantasy. If he would not have had a firearm, no bystanders would have been injured.

 

Sure, you can look at it as Thank Goodness the off duty cop was there.

 

To protect your unlimited ability to have firearms, guns are going to fall into the hands of completely deranged individuals. All this to protect yourself from the boogie man.

 

[smmatrix 11]

"You're a hatchet man of the New World order": Gun advocate Alex Jones has on-air meltdown in explosive interview with Piers Morgan - Yahoo! News UK

 

The king of the conspiracy theorists gets a chance to rant (his default mode) at Piers Morgan- a man whose skin is so thick you'd need several high calibre bullets to pierce it (Pierce Morgan?)

 

Sweeeeet! Alex ripped that lib-faggot a new asshole. Get that scum out of the U.S. He doesn't deserve to live within our borders and enjoy our rights that guns have procured for him.

[SunTrader 10]

"an off duty county deputy" not a Dirty Harry wannabe.

 

Kinda like Jimmy Johnson on Daytona racetrack and Jethro Bodine on the interstate.

[Patuca 13]

You might also take note that the gun was a legally purchased firearm. Another individual who is allowed to have a firearm who cannot discern between reality and fantasy. If he would not have had a firearm, no bystanders would have been injured.

 

Sure, you can look at it as Thank Goodness the off duty cop was there.

 

To protect your unlimited ability to have firearms, guns are going to fall into the hands of completely deranged individuals. All this to protect yourself from the boogie man.

so now the truth comes out. you are really for a total gun ban not just assault weapons. there is absolutely no indication the guy was deranged when he purchased the LEGAL firearm. he may not have been deranged when he did the shooting..but he was sure pissed off...now how the hell you gonna tell through some test or something that a person may be get pissed off 8 years down the road and try to shoot their ex girlfriend? you get so mad MM just arguing about gun control that you might hit me in the head with your famous gof club if i was there in person. i think they should ban all golf clubs. especially people like MM should not be allowed to have them.

 

this deranged stuff in this case is all fantasy in your liberal mind. you really want a total ban on all fireams. better drop your trousers and check to see if you are wearing pink lacy underwear.

[SIUYA 11]

this deranged stuff in this case is all fantasy in your liberal mind. you really want a total ban on all fireams. better drop your trousers and check to see if you are wearing pink lacy underwear.

 

LOL

Patuca - it is nice to see you indulging in your own fantasy of MM in pink lacy underwear and the fact that you feel anyone who might not agree with you is wearing them.........

is there an emoticon for raised eyebrows and a sultry look?

[Patuca 13]

To protect your unlimited ability to have firearms, guns are going to fall into the hands of completely deranged individuals. All this to protect yourself from the boogie man.

um seems like you haven't learned from history MM or forgot your history lesson.

 

The ratification of the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution--which banned the manufacture, transportation and sale of intoxicating liquors--ushered in a period in American history known as Prohibition. The result of a widespread temperance movement during the first decade of the 20th century, Prohibition was difficult to enforce, despite the passage of companion legislation known as the Volstead Act. The increase of the illegal production and sale of liquor (known as "bootlegging"), the proliferation of speakeasies (illegal drinking spots) and the accompanying rise in gang violence and other crimes led to waning support for Prohibition by the end of the 1920s. In early 1933, Congress adopted a resolution proposing a 21st Amendment to the Constitution that would repeal the 18th. It was ratified by the end of that year, bringing the Prohibition era to a close.

 

source:history.com

 

banning does not work. see you are really against the right to own any firearms. you just hide behind the skirt of controlling them so they don't fall in the hands of deranged individuals.

 

as for me i will be against any efforts of individuals or the gov to take away the right to keep and bear arms. if there come unwanted consequences from this stance such as public shootings then they will just have to happen much like cars on the highway and people getting killed in cars but nobody says ban cars. people get killed because of drunk drivers and irresponsible deranged drivers. nobody says ban cars. deranged individuals will always exist. how come nobody is saying a word about taking the drivers license away from the perp of this school tragedy (that they shouldn't allow people like him to have lic) or this guy that went to kill his ex GF in the movies. how come none of you people are shouting that he "shouldn't have drivers lic?" because you are only interested in taking away the guns. that is the total sum of the story. that is exactly what you are after.

 

you probally will never want to ban cars because that would imply walking..something i am quite sure you aren't willing to do yourself.

 

to make it easy on you i have highlighted in red what will happen with a total ban of guns ....same a thing.

[Patuca 13]

LOL

Patuca - it is nice to see you indulging in your own fantasy of MM in pink lacy underwear and the fact that you feel anyone who might not agree with you is wearing them.........

is there an emoticon for raised eyebrows and a sultry look?

LOL you must be wearing them too????:rofl: i bet you got a few earings also :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :haha:

[SIUYA 11]

no earings - but i guess that would make someone who has them --- what? WTF does wearing panties, gun laws or any other such thing have to do with gun laws.....side track.

 

Re the prohibition - so you agree prohibition does not work, and that people should be free to exercise personal freedoms in most things (assuming it does no harm to others).....or does it only apply to areas of personal defense, where is the line drawn?

 

It cant be because it is in the constitution - the prohibition act was added, then taken away, so i assume its based on some other measure? is this a personal choice measure or should society/government legislate.

 

You see where i am going on this......basically is this an issue about guns, or is it more than that. It does seem contradictory that one might support some bans but not others......or is it?

[MightyMouse 12]

so now the truth comes out. you are really for a total gun ban not just assault weapons. there is absolutely no indication the guy was deranged when he purchased the LEGAL firearm. he may not have been deranged when he did the shooting..but he was sure pissed off...now how the hell you gonna tell through some test or something that a person may be get pissed off 8 years down the road and try to shoot their ex girlfriend? you get so mad MM just arguing about gun control that you might hit me in the head with your famous gof club if i was there in person. i think they should ban all golf clubs. especially people like MM should not be allowed to have them.

 

this deranged stuff in this case is all fantasy in your liberal mind. you really want a total ban on all fireams. better drop your trousers and check to see if you are wearing pink lacy underwear.

 

What if you could tell through some test? would it be worth it to take a gun away from some deranged guy?

 

There are plenty of licenses that require ongoing testing education. It's common. If you are a maniac, you don't need a gun. You'll find creative ways to kill people anyway.

[MightyMouse 12]

LOL

Patuca - it is nice to see you indulging in your own fantasy of MM in pink lacy underwear and the fact that you feel anyone who might not agree with you is wearing them.........

is there an emoticon for raised eyebrows and a sultry look?

 

I have questioned his infatuation with genitalia in past posts. I am OK with his orientation as long as he keeps his distance. Gotta be careful with him. He does carry a gun.

[Patuca 13]

I have questioned his infatuation with genitalia in past posts. I am OK with his orientation as long as he keeps his distance. Gotta be careful with him. He does carry a gun.

we have a few names for you guys (MM and suiya) but since i am not allowed to post them i'll have to let it slide...but i'll give you a hint. for one of them it start with synonym for backbone and ends the name of a reptile that eats mosquitos..etc..:haha: :haha: :rofl:

[Patuca 13]

There are plenty of licenses that require ongoing testing education. It's common. If you are a maniac, you don't need a gun.

 

maybe they should ban maniacs? the line is open for anyone that wants to get in line?

Edited January 8, 2013 by Patuca

[Patuca 13]

What if you could tell through some test? would it be worth it to take a gun away from some deranged guy?

um no but we could send him to live with you so you could like maybe educate or reform him???:rofl:

[smmatrix 11]

[Patuca 13]

well i am leaving this thread. it is getting to be a waste of time.

 

i will just say this: IF we allow any bastard to take our guns we will regret it in the future and there will be no recourse. so americans better think long and hard about this because there will be no return back to the right to keep and bear arms if we give them up.

 

 

adios

[Perrin 10]

Everyone fears change. But some things are worth changing for.

[smmatrix 11]

"The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the power of the Federal Government, NOT the American People."

[MightyMouse 12]

um no but we could send him to live with you so you could like maybe educate or reform him???:rofl:

 

no interest in reforming anyone. You have the wrong label. I just would like to keep a gun out of his hand. You shouldn't worry if you are sane.

 

I do believe that people can be taken off of drugs and alcohol if at least temporarily.

[SIUYA 11]

we have a few names for you guys (MM and suiya) but since i am not allowed to post them i'll have to let it slide...but i'll give you a hint. for one of them it start with synonym for backbone and ends the name of a reptile that eats mosquitos..etc..:haha: :haha: :rofl:

 

 

Boo hoo.....you have already been through the name calling and other insults. The 'we' you refer to.....your posse?

 

A bit of comedy aside......once the question is asked about where you draw the line on freedoms and rights you decide to withdraw....? You insult MM with both the insinuation that he is a woman (i am sure 50% of the population appreciate that one), and then leave a final insult for both of us that i think is quite flatterring....if also bizarre.

 

Backbone

Part of Speech: noun

Definition: strength of character

Synonyms: courage, determination, firmness, fortitude, grit, guts, hardihood, heart, intestinal fortitude, mettle, moral fiber, nerve, pluck, resolution, resolve, spunk, stamina, steadfastness, tenacity, toughness, will, willpower

 

Reptile that east mosquitoes.....any that does that is a good one in my book.

 

Stick that in the BlueHorseshoe brain teaser please.

thanks

 

..............

 

It might be a surprise but - not everyone has an agenda to take away all weapons, or impose a one world government or even larger government. Most would just prefer to see some sort of solution to problems without an escalation of weapons, or violence.

 

Here is a question for you - when criminals are let go on a legal technicality is that because of some bleeding heart liberal agenda or the checks and balances to ensure that individual rights are upheld - those things that many liberals and conservatives hold dear? What determines who is a criminal - a good guy or a bad guy? etc; etc; etc;

................

................

For me just call me an agitator and one who believes that its a good thing to have moderate but not extreme views, to question the extremists from both sides of any debate and that a peaceful compromise solution is far better than any that is based in violence.

(Yes I am openly biased to one side in any debate - that of moderation i would hope. I would like to be an extremist on many issues - it makes life easier to confirm everything to my view - alas my non conformity streak wont even allow that)

I like to learn from the other side of my initial bias - that way my bias might change, i can better understand why/how/what and dont need to think the other side has some sort of character trait that is considered a flaw or an abomination.....or would that in some circles be considered a mental illness?

Plus US history and politics is very interesting.

 

zdo - is this being part of the collective maya?

[SIUYA 11]

"The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the power of the Federal Government, NOT the American People."

 

isn't that through through states rights representing the people more than individual rights????

[MightyMouse 12]

"The purpose of the Constitution is to limit the power of the Federal Government, NOT the American People."

 

The purpose of the Constitution is not to arm whacked out freaks with firearms.

 

When the time comes to rise up against your government, all sorts of weapons and explosives will be available to those willing to take part in the cause.

 

Don't be concerned if laws are passed to help reduce some of the needless violence. If you are responsible and not a whack job you will be just fine.

[MightyMouse 12]

we have a few names for you guys (MM and suiya) but since i am not allowed to post them i'll have to let it slide...but i'll give you a hint. for one of them it start with synonym for backbone and ends the name of a reptile that eats mosquitos..etc..:haha: :haha: :rofl:

 

The only synonym for backbone that comes to mind that describes siuya and I is moral fiber, but it doesn't end with a reptile name.

[Perrin 10]

There's a selfish, evil part of me that really does not want the rest of humanity educated or intelligent or thinking, because without those traits, I can take every single penny that they have and leave them broken and destitute.

 

However the reason I am writing on this thread is because I can see that in reality it would do me no good for others to be ignorant. They would become that very intruder that we are so afraid of. And then I'd need a gun to defend myself. What would be the point? What is the point in me trying to become wealthy if people around me are getting murdered, I would have to live in a gated community with barbed wire and machine guns all around, living in constant fear. Why would I want that? Is there a better way? How do we go about breaking the cycle of violence?

 

Anyone can call others silly names – the problem is (for the name caller) that when a person does that it shows that they have lost the argument and all they have to fall back on is name calling and childish behaviour. What good does that do you or your side of the argument? Where are the benefits to you to acting in this manner? And what happens when your behaviour causes you pain? Will you use your guns and violence to desperately cling onto your beliefs? At what point will you look long and hard at yourself and accept the fact that more children will be murdered until you look at how broken the system is and figure out (sensibly, logically, intelligently) how to fix it.

 

We have to be selfish and accept responsibility for the deaths of those children if we would like things to change. If you want more children to be murdered then you should continue with the same system. It's logical. You're a trader, you know this.

 

Guns = violence. You cannot solve violence with more violence. It seems to work on an individual scale (e.g. woman shoots intruder, that's great (that's assuming we ignore the huge amounts of problems, fear, pain, etc, that it's created for all concerned – if you were the husband how would you feel leaving your wife in the house on her own from now on? What happens when 2 intruders come next time? 5 intruders?)). In any kind of society, in the long term, violence makes things worse. We need to break the cycle. Sometimes it takes a catastrophic loss in order to change behaviour.

 

You can keep ignoring the problem and allowing more children to be murdered, and you could call that acceptable losses (of course it's not acceptable – but if you were to completely strip away all emotion you could), for as long as it happens to someone else and not to you personally. At what point does it become unacceptable? What happens when it happens to your family? Instead of ending up at the point where we are facing the risk-of-ruin and we have to kill or be killed, how about pulling back from the abyss and thinking things through.

Edited January 9, 2013 by Perrin

[MightyMouse 12]

A bit of comedy aside......once the question is asked about where you draw the line on freedoms and rights you decide to withdraw....? You insult MM with both the insinuation that he is a woman (i am sure 50% of the population appreciate that one), and then leave a final insult for both of us that i think is quite flatterring....if also bizarre.

 

It's funny that I am the guy who wants to use a club or a bat instead of a gun to crack the skull of the 280 boogieman and I am the woman.

[SIUYA 11]

i just clicked.....its Scarface....

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPzDLGfyjw0]Money and the Power from Scarface - YouTube[/ame]

 

First control the money - bankers know this

Then you get the power - politicians, and bankers.....

what for....all to get the woman....

 

Maybe Patuca and Smmatrix are on to something....one is hiding in your momma's bedroom, the other is fantsizing about MM being a woman......

 

(I am bored today - heading off to look at houses - what fun - thinking about paying for it with a minted platinum coin i was thinking of making )