Let me make my stance clear.
To me; all of these measures only place limits on law-abiding gun owners. Anyone Hell-Bent on attacking an elementary school or a movie theater will use what ever means possible to get it done.
I’m with Push in that the focus should be on severe punishments ("ONE stike, you’re out?)…for those who abuse their Constitutional Freedoms and/or deprive others of theirs.
So…I disagree with the President on the vast majority of his proposals.
Mufasa
Votes are not there, not even in the Senate, Harry Reid admits it.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Let me make my stance clear.
To me; all of these measures only place limits on law-abiding gun owners. Anyone Hell-Bent on attacking an elementary school or a movie theater will use what ever means possible to get it done.
I’m with Push in that the focus should be on severe punishments ("ONE stike, you’re out?)…for those who abuse their Constitutional Freedoms and/or deprive others of theirs.
So…I disagree with the President on the vast majority of his proposals.
Mufasa[/quote]
Couldn’t agree more.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Would any of these measures have stopped Adam Lanza?
[/quote]
Possibly, or at least reduce the deaths
Adam may have failed the background check before he stole the guns from his mom. He may have failed to quickly reload a 2nd 10 round magazine and only killed 10 instead of 20 kids. With no armor piercing bullets he would have failed to kill any children wearing their bullet proof vests. The school counselor may have talked him out of the whole thing.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Let me make my stance clear.
To me; all of these measures only place limits on law-abiding gun owners. Anyone Hell-Bent on attacking an elementary school or a movie theater will use what ever means possible to get it done.
I’m with Push in that the focus should be on severe punishments ("ONE stike, you’re out?)…for those who abuse their Constitutional Freedoms and/or deprive others of theirs.
So…I disagree with the President on the vast majority of his proposals.
Mufasa[/quote]
Couldn’t agree more. [/quote]
Same. Disarming those not commiting the crimes.
Time to organize a million round march
[quote]smh23 wrote:
AlphaF: I shoot occasionally. My father owns two shotguns, a 12 and a 20, and I’ve been shooting them since I was a kid. I shoot clay pigeons every now and again as well.
With regard to my debate style not coming from the heart: emotion is rarely productive and never persuasive in this kind of discussion. I just like to hear good arguments.
[/quote]
Passion is a sensation of fire burning for what you believe in, what you stand up for, what you are prepared to live and to die for. “Do not put out the fire of the spirit” - Being spirited and or having strong, passionate convictions is not the same as emotion.
One can have a fiery debate without being emotional at all.
You would be more lethal if you did, I believe.
But to each his own.
I am not bothered by your debate style, I respect whichever way you chose to do so and I welcome and appreciate different the ways in which our minds operate.
What got to me was your attitude regarding platitudes:
I can appreciate and do not mind you think my posts are platitudinous - once again: to each his own.
But condescending on a lot of people who express their core values and inner convictions through moral quotes just because they seem boring to you was uncalled for.
I would like to remind you it is these “platitudes” that make up the back bone of a strong society.
It is these “boring, unoriginal, moral” century old society proven quotes that your generation can speedily access and therefore take for granted at the click of a mouse that have built:
Great soldiers, great husbands, great fathers, great lovers, great workers, great citizens.
You have just barely began to contribute to society.
Please remember that just as you are entitled to your dispassionate, morally free, radical counter arguments, these men who have and who still do support your country on their shoulders due to these inner platitudinous beliefs also have a right to post what has given them a spine and a strong hand.
You are very sharp and have great command of language.
I kindly suggest that a touch of humility would make you great to read.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[/quote]
…and then he marches kids out when talking about gun regulation. I don’t think he knows what the word hypocrite means. [/quote]
But, but, but, he’s doing it for the children.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[/quote]
…and then he marches kids out when talking about gun regulation. I don’t think he knows what the word hypocrite means. [/quote]
But, but, but, he’s doing it for the children.
TC, awesome as always!
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Would any of these measures have stopped Adam Lanza?
[/quote]
That’s not the point and you know it. Sandyhook provided the opportunity for a major power grab. The election is barely over and we haven’t even started the second term. But as soon as Obama had “more flexibility” along with an opportunity to massively change the balance of power between the people and the state, he took it.
This next four years is going to see America turned into Britain.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Would any of these measures have stopped Adam Lanza?
[/quote]
Possibly, or at least reduce the deaths
Adam may have failed the background check before he stole the guns from his mom. He may have failed to quickly reload a 2nd 10 round magazine and only killed 10 instead of 20 kids. With no armor piercing bullets he would have failed to kill any children wearing their bullet proof vests. The school counselor may have talked him out of the whole thing.[/quote]
I sincerely hope you’re joking here…
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
I can appreciate and do not mind you think my posts are platitudinous - once again: to each his own.
But condescending on a lot of people who express their core values and inner convictions through moral quotes just because they seem boring to you was uncalled for.
[/quote]
Fair enough. For the record, no offense was intended. And I don’t think anything close to all of your posts were platitudinous.
Anyway, no hard feelings.
And for the record, I think a lot of what’s been proposed today will do very little to help anybody.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Would any of these measures have stopped Adam Lanza?
[/quote]
Possibly, or at least reduce the deaths
Adam may have failed the background check before he stole the guns from his mom. He may have failed to quickly reload a 2nd 10 round magazine and only killed 10 instead of 20 kids. With no armor piercing bullets he would have failed to kill any children wearing their bullet proof vests. The school counselor may have talked him out of the whole thing.[/quote]
I sincerely hope you’re joking here…[/quote]
I believe so, and it was pretty on target.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[/quote]
…and then he marches kids out when talking about gun regulation. I don’t think he knows what the word hypocrite means. [/quote]
But, but, but, he’s doing it for the children.
TC, awesome as always![/quote]
Yes he is. I miss his writings.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Would any of these measures have stopped Adam Lanza?
[/quote]
Possibly, or at least reduce the deaths
Adam may have failed the background check before he stole the guns from his mom. He may have failed to quickly reload a 2nd 10 round magazine and only killed 10 instead of 20 kids. With no armor piercing bullets he would have failed to kill any children wearing their bullet proof vests. The school counselor may have talked him out of the whole thing.[/quote]
I sincerely hope you’re joking here…[/quote]
I believe so, and it was pretty on target.[/quote]
Just re-read the first line of what he wrote, realized he’s obviously kidding. Phew.
It’s like the underwear bomber and the “security measures” they put in place after that incident…none of which would’ve even stopped the original attack. Good job TSA lol.
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
It’s like the underwear bomber and the “security measures” they put in place after that incident…none of which would’ve even stopped the original attack. Good job TSA lol.[/quote]
If you want to hear some funny shit about security measures, a convicted sex offender illegal alien was found working for NJ Senator Bob Menendez as an aide.
How the fuck does a convicted sex offender illegal alien (who ended up with probation only and not even deported) get access to a US Senator ?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
How the fuck does a convicted sex offender illegal alien (who ended up with probation only and not even deported) get access to a US Senator ?[/quote]
Constituency outreach?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
It’s like the underwear bomber and the “security measures” they put in place after that incident…none of which would’ve even stopped the original attack. Good job TSA lol.[/quote]
If you want to hear some funny shit about security measures, a convicted sex offender illegal alien was found working for NJ Senator Bob Menendez as an aide.
How the fuck does a convicted sex offender illegal alien (who ended up with probation only and not even deported) get access to a US Senator ?[/quote]
Yes, I recall hearing about that. Just read up on it a bit more, just so ridiculous. Yep, that’s not shady at all.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
How the fuck does a convicted sex offender illegal alien (who ended up with probation only and not even deported) get access to a US Senator ?[/quote]
Constituency outreach?
[/quote]
They put off arresting him from just before the election to a month after…
Why?
[quote]2busy wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
How the fuck does a convicted sex offender illegal alien (who ended up with probation only and not even deported) get access to a US Senator ?[/quote]
Constituency outreach?
[/quote]
They put off arresting him from just before the election to a month after…
Why?[/quote]
Lol I think the “why” is quite apparent.