|
 foghorn
enthusiast
Registered: 12/13/01
Posts: 308
Last seen: 19 years, 1 month
|
 The NRA 
#722955 - 07/04/02 05:22 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
this question is aimed mainly towards luvdem, but im sure rail and invertigo and others will share their thoughts too
your quote luvdem, "Join The National Rifle Association" - why? and do your reasons apply only to Americans, or mankind in general?
im just curious as to how the NRA appeals to Americans that support it
|
stan
member
Registered: 09/15/00
Posts: 99
Loc: Sydney Australia
Last seen: 21 years, 4 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#723701 - 07/04/02 09:05 PM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Im a little perplexed about the whole gun issue in the US as well. In Australia there are hardly any guns which means far less armed robberies and less innocent people getting killed. Guns are a means for adults AND children to cause much destruction. If i were a US citizen I would be much happier to give up my right to bear arms if it could save one life out of the thousands of deaths attributed to guns.
But, this is just my opinion - and it comes from someone who lost a dear friend in an armed robbery in the US
--------------------
There is always a need for intoxication: China has
opium, Islam has hashish, the West has woman."
Andr? Malraux
|
 luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: stan]
#724009 - 07/05/02 12:12 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
In reply to:
In Australia there are hardly any guns which means far less armed robberies and less innocent people getting killed.
Actually, the violent crime rate in both Austrailia and England has shot up since private ownership of guns was legislated against.
In a state such as Florida, when carry permits were made "must issue", the violent crime rate has plumeted. This pattern has been seen repeatedly as more states go to "must issue permit" laws.
Now take Washington, D.C. as our next example. The strictest gun laws in the US but the highest murder rate. This example is also repeated in states with stricter gun laws and restrictions on concealed carry.
Are you really so naive as to believe taking guns away from people will reduce the violent crime rate. The weapon most often used in murders just happens to be the human hands. Should we ban those as well?
Far more crimes are prvented by the use or even the simple showing of a gun each year than are actually comitted with guns.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#724018 - 07/05/02 12:36 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry to reply to the original post second but the opinions of the second poster called out to me.
Why the NRA? The most simple answer would have to be...there is power in numbers. One man screaming out for his rights to be protected can easily be shouted over. It's more difficult to silence millions. Do a little reading of the Federalist papers written by the founders of this nation and you'll see just how strongly they felt that gun ownership is one of our most important rights.
You rarely read about the many positive uses of firearms each year, but there are many. The NRA has programs that teach gun safety to kids (Eddie Eagle) who's main message to kids is "Don't touch, tell an adult", there are "Refuse to be a victim" seminars, competitions, trining for law enforcment, and much more.
Click on the link, check it out.
A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
The "Militia" of the time period when the Bill of Rights was written, was considered to be every able bodied person. Not, as many claim, the National Guard. There was no National Guard or anything remotely like it at the time so those who claim it only applies to the National Guard are being more than a little dishonest. It is a right of the people, always has been, despite the attempts to take this right away from us.
On top of all that.... guns are fun!
There are many more reasons, but I think you get the idea.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
Edited by luvdemshrooms (07/05/02 12:38 AM)
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#724097 - 07/05/02 03:50 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Many people have already answered this questions numerous times throughout history. Here are their words:
"Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power."
-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author,(LA Times 15 Oct 1992)
"If gun laws in fact worked, the sponsors of this type of legislation should have no difficulty drawing upon long lists of examples of criminal acts reduced by such legislation. That they cannot do so after a century and a half of trying -- that they must sweep under the rug the southern attempts at gun control in the 1870-1910 period, the northeastern attempts in the 1920-1939 period, the attempts at both Federal and State levels in 1965-1976 -- establishes the repeated, complete and inevitable failure of gun laws to control serious crime.
-- Senator Orrin Hatch, in a 1982 Senate Report
"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."
-- Patrick Henry
"Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms..."
-- Samuel Adams
"If I were to select a jack-booted group of fascists who are perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could pick today, I would pick BATF [the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms]."
-- U.S. Representative John Dingell, 1980
"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
-- James Madison, The Federalist Papers
"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
-- Mohandas Gandhi
"False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes."
-- Cesare Beccaria, as quoted by Thomas Jefferson's Commonplace book
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton,
The Federalist Papers at 184-188
"To disarm the people is the best and most effective way to enslave them."
-- George Mason
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
-- US 2nd Amendment
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 8 months, 30 days
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724101 - 07/05/02 04:01 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I agree with the fact that citizens have the right to bear arms...provided that you can't conceal them..ie..handguns.
--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: Rono]
#724127 - 07/05/02 04:29 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
In reply to:
provided that you can't conceal them
And why is that? I've had a concealed weapons permit for years and have never felt the need to pull my weapon. Well maybe that time a pit bull latched into my arm.
You'll find in most states that those who take the time to obey the firearms laws, are those who most seldom violate firearms laws or who commit crimes in general. (Leaving drug possesion and usage laws, and obviously speed limits out of the picture)
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 8 months, 30 days
|
|
Why would citizen have to the need to carry a concealed weapon? I'm sure you are a very responsible gun owner, unfortunately the same can't be said for everyone...
--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: Rono]
#724165 - 07/05/02 05:12 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Guns are a tool. One of the reasons for concealed carry is to not disturb others who may have an dislike of guns. Another is the fact that many surveys of criminals in jail show that if they suspect the victim might have a weapon, they will seek an easier victim. By allowing concealed carry, they don't know who might be able to fight back. This is why states that allow concealed carry most often have the lowest crime rates.
Are you aware that Vermont requires no concealed carry permits? For either residents or non-residents? Which U.S. state do you suppose has the lowest violent crime rate? A hint... the name of the state is in this paragraph.
There are many reasons to carry concealed. Perhaps living in a high crime rate area? Perhaps a woman who has been raped and wants to be sure it doesn't happen again? Perhaps a victim of domestic violence whos significant other has threatened to kill them? Perhaps someone who has a business that requires handling large sums of cash?
You are right about one thing, not everyone is responsible. That's why we have jails to punish those who misuse firearms.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Rono
DSYSB since '01
Registered: 01/25/01
Posts: 16,259
Loc: Calgary, Alberta
Last seen: 8 months, 30 days
|
|
Although I still have reservations about concealed fire-arms, your post is well stated and your arguments are valid...well done.
--------------------
"Life has never been weird enough for my liking"
|
bivalve
Stranger
Registered: 07/21/00
Posts: 3,121
|
 Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#724291 - 07/05/02 07:35 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: bivalve]
#724320 - 07/05/02 07:53 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Check into their facts. I'm not going o sit here and debunk them one by one. Check for yourself
Don't go to the NRA site or any other pro-gun sites, but don't go to an anti-gun site either. Try a site like the Justice Dept., or maybe the FBI's crime statistics.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The NRA [Re: bivalve]
#724377 - 07/05/02 08:43 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
GUN CONTROL MYTHS
Click on the hyperlinks below to read short, concise answers to these commonly heard myths about gun control.
Myth No. 1: Gun Control Saves Lives
Myth No. 2: Handguns should be illegal because studies have shown they are 43 times more likely to be used against your own family than a criminal.
Myth No. 3: The family gun is more likely to kill you or someone you know than to kill in self-defense.
Myth No. 4: 13 children a day are killed by guns.
Myth No. 5: We'd All Be Safer If There Were Fewer Guns.
Myth No. 6: Friends or relatives are the most likely killers.
Myth No. 7: We live in a civilized society--we don't need guns.
Myth No. 8: Guns should be banned because they kill thousands of people each year.
Myth No. 9: We need to do something about the increasing access to firearms.
Myth No. 10: When One Is Attacked, Passive Behavior Is the Safest Approach.
Myth No. 11: If our representatives are passing gun control laws it must be because a majority of citizens is demanding that. So, if a majority of the people decides owning a gun is no longer a right, maybe it's time to change the Constitution.
Myth No. 12: Individual citizens do not have the right to keep and bear arms because the Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the Second Amendment.
Myth No. 13: Doesn't the Second Amendment only guarantee the right of the states to maintain militias?
Myth No. 14: The Militia Mentioned in the Second Amendment Has Been Replaced by the National Guard.
Myth No. 15: This is America. The government is never going to turn into a tyranny.
Myth No. 16: If the government uses the military and police to confiscate our guns, we can't fight them and win.
Myth No. 17: The United States Has Such a High Murder Rate Because Americans Own So Many Guns.
Myth No. 18: In countries like Japan and England, where handguns are banned or heavily regulated, the murder rate is a fraction of what it is in the U.S.
Myth No. 19: Only the police are trained enough and responsible enough to carry guns.
Myth No. 20: The police do a fine job of protecting us.
Myth No. 21: Most police personnel favor gun control and they know more about crime control...
Myth No. 22: It?s too dangerous for the average citizen to try to apprehend criminals and the police are there to protect us.
Myth No. 23: Allowing people to carry concealed weapons in public will mean automobile accidents turn into shootouts.
Myth No. 24: Realistically, if you are robbed, carjacked, or attacked, you won?t have enough time to pull your gun out, anyway.
Myth No. 25: The average citizen with a gun is a bigger threat to himself and others than the criminal is.
Myth No. 26: No One Really Needs an Assault Weapon.
Myth No. 27: Innocent People Are Killed by Stray Bullets.
Myth No. 28: Guns Will Make My Kids Glorify Violence.
Myth No. 29: Guns Are Inherently Unsafe and Should Be Made to Conform to Product Liability Laws.
Myth No. 30: Guns cause so many injuries every year that cities were forced to sue gun manufacturers to get back emergency room and medical costs.
Myth No. 31: Firearms Aren't Worth It Because of the Medical Costs They Cause.
Myth No. 32: What?s wrong with limiting purchases to one gun a month? Why would you need to buy more than 12 guns a year, anyway?
Myth No. 33: What?s wrong with a short 5-day waiting period so the authorities can conduct a background check?
Myth No. 34: I?m not saying they should be banned, but what?s wrong with registering handguns?
Myth No. 35: We license cars, marriages, attorneys, doctors, dentists, even hairstylists; why not license people who want to own handguns?
Myth No. 36: There's no harm in requiring a license before a person can buy a firearm.
Myth No. 37: Handgun Control, the Violence Policy Center, and the major news media say they don't want to ban all guns, just the bad ones that criminals use. What's wrong with that?
Myth No. 38: The fact so many prominent people are against citizens owning guns must mean they're right and I'm wrong.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724397 - 07/05/02 08:56 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Excellent links. They have been added to my favorites list. I wish I had known of this site before now.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724403 - 07/05/02 08:59 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
You might as well re create Waco for all the love and trust you have in ownership of guns.
|
Anonymous
|
|
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Nugs you nitwit. Did you even read any of those links before making such an inane reply?
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724434 - 07/05/02 09:16 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Do you carry assualt rifles? Why not? I would.
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
|
no
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
|
I would like to see you educate the general public in such a long string of information that you obviously did'nt even write yourself, wheres the use?
|
Anonymous
|
|
Please define "assault rifle."
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724443 - 07/05/02 09:20 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
any gun, that are military or foreign military uses, and has determined safe to use.
Edited by nugsarenice (07/05/02 09:20 AM)
|
Anonymous
|
|
I would like to see you educate the general public in such a long string of information that you obviously did'nt even write yourself, wheres the use?
I'd like you to educate yourself on the use of the English language and rational thought. Why should I "reinvent the wheel" when this suits my purpose?
Edited by Evolving (07/05/02 09:24 AM)
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Nugs, I'll put this as nicely as possible.
Forgive your parents for not using birth control. They didn't mean to conceive an idiot child.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724455 - 07/05/02 09:24 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
thanx for your thought towards me,, I don't understand what you are getting at though. I belive in gun ownership,, in all equality.
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
|
thanx for forgiving my parents, I have a very large stupid family.
|
Anonymous
|
|
Evolving:
Please define "assault rifle."
nugsarenice:
any gun, that are military or foreign military uses, and has determined safe to use.
So, according to this definition a model 1911A1 .45 ACP service pistol is an assault rifle?
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#724473 - 07/05/02 09:32 AM (21 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
sorry, I don't know much about guns. Does'nt mean my political veiw is different.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#728437 - 07/07/02 05:25 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Here are plenty more reasons to own guns.
Too bad these stories are rarely reported by the mainstream media.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcInfoBase.asp?CatID=43
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
Edited by luvdemshrooms (07/07/02 05:25 AM)
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
|
I live in a country where gun permit is hard to get. I turned down military service so I will never be able to get it but I don't know anybody who has it and I was never threatened by someone who has it.
I was very impressed when I visited my relatives in USA. My uncle has a rifle near front door, a rifle near rear door and a hand gun in a drawer beside his bed. He said: "If someone comes in I will shoot him before he shoots me!".
I prefer less freedom than living like that.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#730576 - 07/08/02 04:35 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I prefer less freedom than living like that
Do you think the Jews in the Weimar Republic said that years ago?
Edited by Evolving (07/08/02 09:09 AM)
|
Innvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
|
|
you are getting dumber by the moment fool..
to the rest of ya i have nothing to add that i haven't said a billion times, however that list that evolving listed makes all my points. I have about 5 guns and rifles as i am a part of the regulated militia 
--------------------
America....FUCK YEAH!!!
Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
|
Innvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
|
 Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#731011 - 07/08/02 08:32 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
***I prefer less freedom than living like that.***
you're painting america with a rather broad brush aren't you? as far as living with less freedom, please go to that place while i enjoy the freedom i have. Where does you're uncle live BTW? It's a pretty common thing to run across these types of people in the South where they think that someone is coming to get them, dare i say redneck?
--------------------
America....FUCK YEAH!!!
Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
|
"you're painting america with a rather broad brush aren't you?"
I didn't want to say that all america is like that. Weirdos are everywhere but in USA they can be armed.
My opinion is that who wants to have a weapon is weird enough that he shouldn't be allowed to have it.
"Where does you're uncle live BTW?"
Colorado Springs
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#731381 - 07/08/02 11:18 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
In reply to:
My opinion is that who wants to have a weapon is weird enough that he shouldn't be allowed to have it.
Well, since many times more are killed in auto accidents... does that mean that those who desire a drivers license are weird enough not to have one?
More are killed in falls down a set of stairs.... does this mean that any one who wants a two story house is weird enough not to be allowed one?Cigs and alchohol... well you get the idea. The weakness of your quoted statement is so bizarre as to have come from nugs. And believe me, that's not a compliment.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#731405 - 07/08/02 11:30 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
My opinion is that who wants to have a weapon is weird enough that he shouldn't be allowed to have it.
So those who run governments shouldn't be allowed weapons either if they want them?
It is not the lone individual we should most worry about. Take a quick look at the history of the 20th century. The governments which killed the greatest numbers of people within their own borders are those that outlawed the private ownership of guns. Coincidence? I think not.
How come Switzerland was never invaded by Germany? Every citizen was armed.
|
foghorn
enthusiast
Registered: 12/13/01
Posts: 308
Last seen: 19 years, 1 month
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#732095 - 07/08/02 05:19 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
is the notion of militia in american society still based on why it was found? that is, to protect citizens from possible governmental force/opression (thats my understanding of militia in america)
and a question for fun!
if that is the case, would you (as a member of your local militia) shoot at an American soldier to defend your rights?
not invading switzerland was more a geographical consideration, i think (cause of the mountains?)
Edited by foghorn (07/08/02 05:22 PM)
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#732390 - 07/08/02 07:00 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
is the notion of militia in american society still based on why it was found? that is, to protect citizens from possible governmental force/opression
That is one purpose, to protect the states and the citizens from an over-reaching federal power. In the Constitution there is no provision for a standing army. The funding for the army is to be for only a two year period (if memory serves). The individual states were to supply the organized militias. The unorganized militias were understood to be composed of all able bodied male citizens. The founders understood the danger to liberty of a permanent federal military force, hence the reliance on the individual states to provide the organized militia, the limits on funding and the inclusion of the 2nd amendment. The constiution does provide for a Navy to protect shipping from predation by pirates and other hostile forces.
and a question for fun!
if that is the case, would you (as a member of your local militia) shoot at an American soldier to defend your rights?
I don't consider that a fun question. My trepidation to provide an answer to this question is illustrative of how far our liberties have been eroded and how dangerous our government has become, especially since the passage of the enabling acts, uh.. er I mean The Patriot Act. Should I have been living in or about the year 1800 I would answer that question with a hearty "Yes," with no fear of government suspicions or reprisal from agents of the federal police force. In fact, it would have been the only correct answer from a man who considers himself a patriot. Suffice to say, one should always keep his options open.
not invading switzerland was more a geographical consideration, i think (cause of the mountains?)
Terrain is always a consideration in any military operation, but usually not the most important. The following is from a piece by Dave Kopel, Research Director of the Independence Institute:
"The Wehrmacht expected 200,000 German casualties; it would have taken a very long time to remove the Swiss military from the Alpine ?Reduit? to which they planned to make a stand. And by the time the Swiss were defeated, every bridge and train track and everything else of value to the conquerors would have been destroyed."
"The reason that Switzerland was too difficult to invade?in contrast to all the other nations which Hitler conquered in a matter of weeks?was the Swiss militia system. Unlike all the other nations of Europe, which relied on a standing army, Switzerland was (and still is) defended by a universal militia. Every man was trained in war, had his rifle at home, was encouraged to practice frequently, and could be mobilized almost instantly. The Swiss militiaman was under orders to fight to the last bullet, and after that, with his bayonet, and after that, with his bare hands. Rather than having to defeat an army, Hitler would have had to defeat a whole people."
"From the Anschluss of Austria to the Fall of France, Hitler swallowed nation after nation where cowardly ruling elites surrendered the country to the Nazis?either before the shooting began, or a few weeks afterward. But such a surrender would have been impossible in Switzerland... The Swiss governmental system was decentralized, with the separate 26 cantons, not the federal government, having the authority. The federal government did notify the Swiss people that in case of a German invasion, any claim that there had been a Swiss surrender should be disregarded as Nazi propaganda. And because the military power was in the hands of every Swiss man, the federal government would have been unable to surrender had it ever wanted to. Nothing could stop the Swiss militiamen from fighting to the very end. "
Edited by Evolving (07/09/02 08:54 AM)
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#732458 - 07/08/02 07:19 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
You could also say that all wars start because politicians convince their people that they need to defend themselfs:
Nazis had to defend from jews
Iraquis from Kuwait
Soviets from Afghanistan
USA from Vietnam
Communists from Capitalists
Capitalists from Communists
Serbs from Croatians
Croatians from Serbs
Russians from Chechens
Tutsis from Hutus
Palestinians from Izraelis
...
It's really a good thing there are so many guns around so we can defend ourselves. 
The North Coreans are threatening civilized world, if we don't defend they will take over.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#733012 - 07/09/02 06:12 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
You could also say that all wars start because politicians convince their people that they need to defend themselfs:
So you're beginning to see the problem is not freedom, but government.
|
Innvertigo
Vote Libertarian!!
Registered: 02/08/01
Posts: 16,296
Loc: Crackerville, Michigan U...
|
Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#733299 - 07/09/02 08:30 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
***The North Coreans are threatening civilized world, if we don't defend they will take over.***
you're sounding a bit naive....i'm glad i'm the one with the gun.
--------------------
America....FUCK YEAH!!!
Words of Wisdom: Individual Rights BEFORE Collective Rights
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson
|
PGF
square
Registered: 07/20/00
Posts: 8,642
Loc: Malaysia
|
|
I don't want to sift through all these posts; just want to add that i support the NRA. They are a strong lobbying force that has kept the gov from taking away our weapons. We have a right to bare arms. It is in our constitution. Thank you NRA.
--------------------
***The Real Shroomery nigger
|
nugsarenice
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/04/00
Posts: 3,442
Loc: nowhere
Last seen: 18 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: PGF]
#733459 - 07/09/02 09:27 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
think of the children....
|
PGF
square
Registered: 07/20/00
Posts: 8,642
Loc: Malaysia
|
|
what about the children?
think of all the neegrits on the street waiting to break into your house and shoot you and steal your TV for they crack habit....
think about that.
--------------------
***The Real Shroomery nigger
|
francisco
Richman Sporeman
Registered: 01/15/02
Posts: 133
Loc: USA
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#751015 - 07/16/02 12:28 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It is a last defense against tryanny.the old "give me liberty or give me death."All of mankind has this right,america enumerates it.I would die defending the constitution and it's principalsThe NRA has brought together like minded people who will never lay down thier arms,who will never give up their freedom.
--------------------
Well...Maybe just a little.
|
francisco
Richman Sporeman
Registered: 01/15/02
Posts: 133
Loc: USA
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: stan]
#751032 - 07/16/02 12:36 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Do you take the teeth out of children that bite?Do you cut the feet off of people that kick?No,you punish them.You don't ban teeth or feet.One thing i can tell you,if someone comes into my house in the dead of night to hurt me or take my belongings,I have the means and the right to protect mine.You should stay in Australia where it is safe.
--------------------
Well...Maybe just a little.
|
krispyfi
lumber tyrant
Registered: 10/03/01
Posts: 320
Loc: se usa
Last seen: 19 years, 7 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#751080 - 07/16/02 01:15 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
nobody has answered your question yet.
according to the history channel, an assualt weapon is a fully automatic rifle that fires small calibre hangun (as opposed to rifle) ammunition, making it less unweildy than a machine gun in an fast assault.
--------------------
If i get into some trouble TURBO BOOST will set me free.
Michael Knight you watch the bass with the K I T T.
|
francisco
Richman Sporeman
Registered: 01/15/02
Posts: 133
Loc: USA
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: zeronio]
#753498 - 07/17/02 11:52 AM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
well,You have less freedom.Bet you wished you had a gun when commies had you by the short hairs..
--------------------
Well...Maybe just a little.
|
I_Fart_Blue
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 3,495
Loc: SItting on the Group W Be...
Last seen: 19 years, 10 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: ]
#753780 - 07/17/02 01:52 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Let me first start out by saying I am not giant fan of the NRA because I think they spread just as much propoganda as the extreme-leftists who wish to ban all guns. However the NRA does do a lot of good to A)protect the rights of American citizens to own arms, an B) do a good job at educating children, and adults for that matter, the responsibility of gun ownership. I love to shoot personally, and while I do not own a gun as I am a poor assed college student, I hope to own one one of these days. However I have a few questions about some previously mentioned things.
Would somebody, preferably Evolution or luvdemshrooms, please define a high-capacity, semi-automatic pistol? An assault weapon? Please don't blow this off as I am trying to have a serious discussion. So please don't try and play politican as I find that many of you are too intelligent to be a poltician, so the act does not fit you well.
luvdemshrooms, on the first page you posted the following:
"You rarely read about the many positive uses of firearms each year, but there are many. The NRA has programs that teach gun safety to kids (Eddie Eagle) who's main message to kids is "Don't touch, tell an adult", there are "Refuse to be a victim" seminars, competitions, trining for law enforcment, and much more. "
While I agree with your statements about the gun safety program I would like you to expound on the first sentence. While I agree with you for the most part I am curious to see your thoughts on the subject.
What are people's opinions on wating periods? I personally agree with them, and while I feel that a criminal is more likely to buy a gun off the black market rather than through a reputable dealer, I also feel that such laws may prevent the average joe from commiting a crime/murder out of passion. On the Gun Control Myths page that Evolution posted I did not see any good rebutle to the Brady other than the fact that it infringed upon the rights of a citizen to own a firearm and that "if you or a family member face an immediate threat, a five-day wait can be a death sentence. The police cannot be everywhere when they are needed. You must be prepared to defend yourself and your family when necessary." Gimme a break. How rational is that statement? What kind of threat are we talking about. Can anybody provide evidence where somebody has died because they had to wait to purchase a firearm. Comments, thoughts, etc?
Consider the following quotation taken from the seventh amendment:
"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; "
Can somebody point me to where I have the constitutional right to kill another human in defence of myself or family? Being that it is constitutional law would this make any state law which says otherwise unconstitutional? Mind you this is not saying that I would no kill in defense of myself or a loved one, I'm just an inquireing mind. 
Well that should be enough for now......
--------------------
"A study of the history of opinion is a necessary preliminary to the emancipation of the mind. I do not know which makes a man more conservative-to know nothing but the present, or nothing but the past." -John Maynard Keynes
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
In reply to:
please define a high-capacity, semi-automatic pistol? An assault weapon?
This is not a joke, it's exactly what you called it. A a high-capacity, semi-automatic pistol. It is not an assault weapon. The so called "assault rifles are fully automatic weapons. While full autos are still legal for purchase, they are generally quite expensive and require something called a "tax stamp". The last I checked these cost $200 and one must be purchased for each full auto weapon. Sometimes these are also refered to as Class 3 permits. The more commonly used (by the anti gun crowd) term "assault weapons is an incorrect usage of the term chosen to make the weapons sound more destructive.
I'll respond to the rest later as I have an oppourtunity to dip my own private weapon in a nice warm location. 
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
I_Fart_Blue
Stranger
Registered: 06/25/02
Posts: 3,495
Loc: SItting on the Group W Be...
Last seen: 19 years, 10 months
|
|
Ok, good, I just wanted to clarify that there was a significant difference between an assualt rifle and a "a high-capacity, semi-automatic pistol". If you follow the link about assault rifles posted in the myths links by Evolution, you will see that the incedent they give states that she may have been able to defend herself if she had the aformentioned firearm. This is why I why I was kinda curious as to what one defined as an assault rifle vs. what one defined as a "a high-capacity, semi-automatic pistol".
So having that being clarified please justify the ownership of assualt rifles. Also consider that durring the framing of the constitution automatic weapons and handguns as we know them today did not exist. Please be prepared to defend against this. Also I will not accept the "defense against the government" as a justifyable reason for automatic weapon ownership. The government will always have the upperhand as far as weapons/technology. I do not buy into the BS in the link provided by Evolution that the government could seriously be defended agaisnt with simple firearms. I think any military stategist would find that link rather comical. I really don't have an opinion one way or the other on automatic weapons so I was just kinda curious.
--------------------
"A study of the history of opinion is a necessary preliminary to the emancipation of the mind. I do not know which makes a man more conservative-to know nothing but the present, or nothing but the past." -John Maynard Keynes
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
I'm back.
In reply to:
"You rarely read about the many positive uses of firearms each year, but there are many. The NRA has programs that teach gun safety to kids (Eddie Eagle) who's main message to kids is "Don't touch, tell an adult", there are "Refuse to be a victim" seminars, competitions, trining for law enforcment, and much more. "
While I agree with your statements about the gun safety program I would like you to expound on the first sentence. While I agree with you for the most part I am curious to see your thoughts on the subject.
There are thousands of cases each year where firearms are used to defend ones self and others. The major media has a well known bias, and as such gives little if any notice to them. A commonly quoted statistic is that Americans use gun 1 to 1.5 million times a year to prevent crimes. Assume for the sake of arguement that the true number is half that. Why are these incidents not covered by the press?
Waiting periods? Silly in most instances. I already own firearms. I won't say how many but I'm quite proud of my collection. How, if I wish to do someone bodily harm, will a waiting period stop me? As for the info from Evo's link, there are actually quite a few cases where had people been able to quickly get a firearm they would have been the better for it. Try this link and go to the archives.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
In reply to:
Can somebody point me to where I have the constitutional right to kill another human in defence of myself or family? Being that it is constitutional law would this make any state law which says otherwise unconstitutional?
Doesn't this count?
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
I don't believe there is a state in which it is illegal to kill in self defense, or to kill while protecting another. Here in NH it's even legal to shoot and kill a rapist or arsonist.
In reply to:
So having that being clarified please justify the ownership of assualt rifles.
The second ammendment isn't enough? Well, quite simply, they're fun. Until you've shot one, you'll never understand.
In reply to:
Also I will not accept the "defense against the government" as a justifyable reason for automatic weapon ownership.
You don't have to. It's still a valid reason. I would take up arms against my government should the be sufficent reason. And what about other governments? While the chances may be slim we should ever need full auto weapons on U.S. soil, better safe than sorry.
In reply to:
Also consider that durring the framing of the constitution automatic weapons and handguns as we know them today did not exist.
Neither did radio or television. Should they not be protected by the first ammendment?
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
zeronio
Stranger
Registered: 10/16/01
Posts: 2,349
Loc: Slovenia
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
|
Re: The NRA [Re: francisco]
#754978 - 07/17/02 10:33 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
"well,You have less freedom.Bet you wished you had a gun when commies had you by the short hairs.. "
Yes I live in an ex-communist country, but funny... more people wish to have guns now when capitalists have them by the short hairs.
Since you are all well informed about bad sides of communism (most of them is true) but there is also some good stuff. We had things like free medical care, free education, almost 0% of unemployment, companies you worked for gave you apartments and payed for vacations, no crime (at least organized...), possesion of drugs was tolerated, ... (all this was a nightmare for company owners, of course). We were not a part of easten block, so we didn't have to sponsor cold war and we were free to travel to all western and easten countries. Our passports were the most wanted in the black market of fake ID's.
When democracy came, newly elected politicans caused war, destroyed the country and killed thousands. The war happened when armed people decided to defend themself from each other. You all now the results.
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
|
PISTOL: Synonymous with "handgun." A gun that is generally held in one hand. It may be of the single-shot, multi-barrel, repeating or semi-automatic variety and includes revolvers.
ASSAULT RIFLE: By U.S. Army definition, a selective-fire rifle chambered for a cartridge of intermediate power. If applied to any semi-automatic firearm regardless of its cosmetic similarity to a true assault rifle, the term is incorrect.
ASSAULT WEAPON: Any weapon used in an assault (see WEAPON).
HIGH-CAPACITY MAGAZINE: An inexact, non-technical term indicating a magazine holding more rounds than might be considered "average."
I hope you don't mind my putting forth these definitions. As you can see these are clear, mostly, to the true nature of the weapons in question.
What constitutional article purports to allow me to take the life of another person? The second amendmant of course. Do we not have the right to life? If this is so, how may we protect that right from those that would seek to infringe upon it? We could learn, effective, hand-to-hand techniques; this would be good if the instigator were unarmed and we were not a 5' tall 105 pound woman. We could learn, effective, edged weapon fighting techniques, provided of course, using the same 105 pound woman example, that our attacker were not 6' tall, having a full foot advantage in edged weapon combat. Or, and I'm just spitballing here, we could ensure, through some sort of "written constitution" that the MEANS for self defense were adequately enunciated to allow for no confusion as to what was available for self-defense. This is most assuredly a broad interpretation of the second amendmant, but surely your right to life would insist that you had some means to provide for that defense, and so it is included in the constitution; this does not remove the right to defend ones self from government entitys.
Your assertion that the argument that another entity, namely the federal government, has much larger guns negates the right to bear arms with significant firepower is insufficient. Just because the bully is bigger is no reason to turn tail and run. For an historical example one need look no further than our own countrys founding. We took on the most powerful empire ever built, we were outnumbered, out gunned and over matched, and, if I remeber my history correctly, we kicked their asses. Granted, we did have a little help from the French.
Gun ownership is essential to individual liberty. One MUST have the means to defend ones self, be that in defense of home and family from a criminal or a government bent on removing from us our liberty. One can argue for the less violent means available, but, if you removed the second amendmant, by what means would you be able to insist on being respected? By what means can we ensure our liberty, if not with the means of violence that is being used against us? I abhore violence, as I am sure most of you do also, but, and I say this without bravado of any kind, their exists in this world violent persons, both of the individual and political entitys, I have no wish to engage in a fight with some entity that has very large tanks, but as a U.S. citizen, I have every right to do this should it be neccesary.
By the way, since when did defending ones self become a "wrong" act? Even if that self defense resulted in the attackers death.
My father once told me, long,long ago, "son, when confronted with the evil of violence smite them hip and thigh". My father, being of a religous background, and my being young at the time, led me to question his wisdom. When I asked the purpose of stiking an individual "hip and thigh" he relented and suggested that I strike them "BETWEEN the thighs", and even at a young age I could see the sense in this.
I'm afraid I don't see the sense in NOT striking at all; I will be just as dead and the offender will continue on to the next unaware person.
|
Senor_Doobie
Snake Pit Champion
Registered: 08/11/99
Posts: 22,678
Loc: Trump Train
|
Re: The NRA [Re: foghorn]
#757388 - 07/18/02 07:10 PM (21 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I just shot your grand dad with a shotgun.
DOESN'T MATTER!
--------------------
"America: Fuck yeah!" -- Alexthegreat
“Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.” -- Thomas Jefferson
The greatest sin of mankind is ignorance.
The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. --Salena Zeto (9/23/16)
|
mr freedom
enthusiast
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 232
Last seen: 18 years, 6 months
|
|
Ok, I'll try to be short here.
It's simple, in a civilized society, guns would not be necessary; we do not live in a civilized society. The society that I live in, namely the U.S., is quite a violent society. I have no major concern in this, I accept my role and responsibility in providing for my own self-defense. I learned this responsibility from my father, a, not to unintelligent man, who belives in the RESPONSIBILITY of defending oneself. Since when did defending ones self become a "wrong" act. "Two wrongs don't make a right"? My father once told me, long,long ago, "son, when confronted with the evil of violence smite them hip and thigh". My father, being of a religous background, and my being young at the time, led me to question his wisdom. When I asked the purpose of stiking an individual "hip and thigh" he relented and suggested that I strike them "BETWEEN the thighs", and even at a young age I could see the sense in this.
I'm afraid I don't see the sense in NOT striking at all; I will be just as dead and the offender will continue on to the next unaware person.
It is in no way an immoral act to respond to a deadly attack with deadly force; "There is no such thing as a fair in a fight involving death".
The primary defence of handguns is and always has been, self defense. Perhaps in your world the police and authoritys are very fast in responding to your plight, that is not true here, in the U.S.; the authoritys are to busy tearing up marijuana gardens.
The primary argument AGAINST handguns is that "they are more likely to be used against the owner of the gun, or the owners family". I can't argue this point, I have no statistics that are not disputed by the NRA(lifetime member ) or these researchers: http://www.ereliant.net/~tagvhou/homicide.htm
I can't dispute these facts, nor would I try,
the question as to handgun ownership is not about what they might be used for but for what they are INTENDED to be used for.
In this country, a long time ago, free persons were held to a responsibility of defending themselves and their property, also, in cooperation, to defend ones neighbors and property. This responsibility goes hand in hand with the right to be free; from intrusion in our lives by those that would injure us in any way, this INCLUDES government agencies.
This RIGHT AND RESPONSIBILITY has been, mostly, removed from todays society. We turn a blind eye to the violence and theft commited against our neighbors and they in turn ignore our plight.
My first memory of violence was as a small child. My father was in the U.S. Navy and my mother and I were on base in San Diego, while he was at sea. I remember a woman screaming, and my mother ran outside, I was at the open door. I don't remember what the woman was screaming, I was told later, I do remember that the sailors, that were on leave, were beating up some man, he was quite bloody when the shore patrol arrived.
What was the woman screaming? Rape; that was what she was screaming, and her neighbors came to her defense in numbers, women as well as men. Would that be the case today? Hell NO!!Go to any rape prevention center and read their pamplet on how to prevent rape. The pamplet tells women to scream FIRE, because no one responds to someone screaming rape or help.
This sickens me, that people today would so eagerly give up their rights and ignore their RESPONSIBILITY to defend themselves and their neighbors. Instead they happily foist this responsibility on government and local police. The governments responsibility in the defense of my home is and must be limited, I MUST have the right to defend myself, my family, my property and my neighbors and, if necesary, to defend myself from GOVERNMENT intrusion.
This is the reason for people to own and be trained in the use of fire arms, all fire arms; M16's, M60's and my personal favorite the Action Arms UZI .45 caliber. The REASON for fire arm ownership is to allow us the right to defend ourselves and our neighbors from ANY invader; be that a rapist or a government gone bad.
I am sure that those not from the U.S. have studied U.S. history. But, I doubt that they will ever be able to get a sense of the responsibility that some US citizens, still feel, about self defense. I also doubt that any history book you read will give any thing, other than some twisted notion, that guns are some obsolete method of self defense that is no longer required.
I also understand that, without a history of liberty of the individual, and individual responsibility, which are not a factor in any country but this one, one will never beleive that a person should rely on himself and his neighbors; NOT THE GOVERNMENT for protection.
I hope, one day, to live in an age where guns are only put on space ships to prevent attack of the earth. I hope, one day, the only discussions of guns is in an historical reference to our past.
Until that time I will ask of NO MAN to defend me with his life, if I am unwilling to denfend it myself. For if I do, then I have NO right to live; this is the essence of COWARDICE.
------------------
"He that would make his own liberty secure,
must guard even his enemy from oppression;
for if he violates this duty, he establishes
a precedent that will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Anonymous
carbonhoots
Tao
ray40cal