No mandated by the people. Things are going to change and I’m okay with that, but as a law abiding citizen I should be able to buy a freaking cannon if I want to, this is still America after all. I am; however, willing to prove I’m a sane and compotent owner. I think that’s reasonable to ask and I’m happy to ablige if it means keeping the 2nd ammendment alive.
[/quote]
The very fact that you feel you need a canon proves you are not sane and have only the slightest grasp on reality.
Permit denied.
Next!
[/quote]
But it’s okay for the overlords to have them and use them against defenseless people, right?[/quote]
Please stay where you are, we’ll be sending someone for you shortly.[/quote]
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You screen for known mental illnesses and take a drug test. Our gov isn’t perfect, but I think the majority of people would pass just fine. If you fail you get treatment and if your treatment works your good to go. Is that not reasonable?[/quote]
Many states already have laws in place and a permit process and background check. And you want to bring the federal government in on it? My gosh from health care to gun ownership. We can’t make a move without big daddy involved.
Look, I know your heart is in the right place on the issue. But I could not disagree more.[/quote]
I never said fed involved. You jumped to that conclusion.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You screen for known mental illnesses and take a drug test. Our gov isn’t perfect, but I think the majority of people would pass just fine. If you fail you get treatment and if your treatment works your good to go. Is that not reasonable?[/quote]
Many states already have laws in place and a permit process and background check. And you want to bring the federal government in on it? My gosh from health care to gun ownership. We can’t make a move without big daddy involved.
Look, I know your heart is in the right place on the issue. But I could not disagree more.[/quote]
I never said fed involved. You jumped to that conclusion.
Edit: I suppose my post isn’t that clear though.[/quote]
Fair enough, but it comes with an implicit fact that some central authority would have to regulate such “organized” screening process.
If it is just regular people doing their own screening (i.e. practicing discrimination against lunatics and the like) then we already have that in our own capacity and we need no more intervention on anyones else’s behalf.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You screen for known mental illnesses and take a drug test. Our gov isn’t perfect, but I think the majority of people would pass just fine. If you fail you get treatment and if your treatment works your good to go. Is that not reasonable?[/quote]
Many states already have laws in place and a permit process and background check. And you want to bring the federal government in on it? My gosh from health care to gun ownership. We can’t make a move without big daddy involved.
Look, I know your heart is in the right place on the issue. But I could not disagree more.[/quote]
I never said fed involved. You jumped to that conclusion.
Edit: I suppose my post isn’t that clear though.[/quote]
Fair enough, but it comes with an implicit fact that some central authority would have to regulate such “organized” screening process.
If it is just regular people doing their own screening (i.e. practicing discrimination against lunatics and the like) then we already have that in our own capacity and we need no more intervention on anyones else’s behalf.[/quote]
The problem is people with mental health issues aren’t getting help on their own, no one is pushing them to get help, and they are buying gins/using them on others. They are infringing on your and my right to life. So do we allow them to infringe on our right to life or do we infringe on their and possibly our right to bear arms? It’s not an easy question I think.
None are infringing on my rights until they threaten me physically. I will not pretend to feel threatened by something that will probably never happen to me.
Furthermore, I highly doubt there are many insane people standing on line at the gun factory.
All I’m saying is we as responsible gun owners should be doing all we can to promote safe and responsible ownership. We should want to stop people from abusing our 2nd ammendment right and more importantly ending the right of others to life and the pursuit of happiness. Should we give into this cowardly terrorist, no. We should want our kids to be safe though. We can do more and we can do better as gun owners.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
None are infringing on my rights until they threaten me physically. I will not pretend to feel threatened by something that will probably never happen to me.
Furthermore, I highly doubt there are many insane people standing on line at the gun factory.[/quote]
I’m not really talking about those in straight jackets, but if you suffer from long term depression maybe you shouldn’t own a Hun until it’s under control.
Any screening anyone could come up with would arbitrary and thus ineffective at protecting people - we would, in fact, be doing the exact opposite for those we would disarm.
You were owned Zeb. It’s crystal clear. Let it go. [/quote]
Hey, the man who wants to ignore me continues to attack me. This reminds me of your political positions. One moment you are a libertarian and the next a liberal. LOL…you’re the schizophrenic poster.
I’ve won and lost debates, over the years that one I won. But I wonder why you would bring that here? I thought you were worried about the integrity of the thread. No…I guess that was the other H factor. By the way I posted a pretty lengthy piece on why gun control is not the answer. Yet you didn’t respond to that. Which H factor was that who wanted to stay on topic?
Well, one thing for sure, people may like me or hate me but at least they know what I’m all about and where I’m coming from. Unlike you I don’t run all over the site trying to play both sides from the middle.
And since you are a libertarian (at least part of the time) you should be really upset over Barack Obama raising the debt and his many other liberal policies like national health care.
But for some reason I’ve not read much from you on these things. Yet, you find the time to attack GW Bush and Ronald Reagan.
Now why do you suppose that is?
As a liberal are you still blaming GW Bush, as you did in prior threads?
Here’s why your so upset with me H factor…
You don’t like the fact that I’m calling you out on your bullshit. I’ve outed you for the lefty that you are. And that pisses you off to no end.
Simple.[/quote]
You annoy me, you don’t piss me off. You stalk me from thread to thread with your bizarre obsession over my posts. You ignore any post I make that doesn’t fit the description of what you hope I am. You don’t try to run from who you are? Read the national debt thread again. You constantly rail against big government when it’s the Democrats and talk about how government is the problem but lap it up from the right side. No one knows who you are. A guy who hates expanding government except for when Reagan did it? A guy who hates the government getting bigger except where GWB did?
I called you out on your bullshit and it pissed YOU off. You’ve been trying to call me out ever since that happened. You started by calling me a stalker (funny from a guy who attacks every thread I post in). That didn’t work and people called you out. So you started calling me a liberal. People called you out again and told you to shut up again. You’re a troll who should have been banned a long time ago. You add nothing to this place. Your only purpose is to troll people and that has pretty much what you’ve done for years on here. A very sad life you must lead. [/quote]
Still can’t seem to find the ignore button huh? I guess that was the side of you that want’s to run away and hide. The other side that just can’t believe that you’re being called out for your bullshit is in charge right now- LOL. Part of your schizoid personality…“I’m a libertarian…I’m a liberal”
As for stalking it seems that you were the one who was following me all over T Nation. But at the time you thought it was funny. Do you have that poor of a memory? As for me I’ve only called you out on a couple threads…just getting warmed up.
So far, (since your comeback shall we say) as I’ve pointed out you’ve attacked conservatives yet shy away from criticizing Obama. I bring it up again only to point out the fact that the many times I’ve called you on it you’ve still not responded. You think Obama is a really good President and it’s all Bush’s fault right? You’ve said it before. That’s when you were being liberal and not a libertarian…Ha.
In short your a phoney. While I disagree with the many liberals on this site I actually respect them for their beliefs. I think they’re wrong, but at least they have the courage to stand by what they believe. They don’t pretend to be one thing while trying to play both ends from the middle.
You’re a spineless poser who got caught and doesn’t like it very much.
[/quote]
I don’t know how to ignore someone on this site, but I know you’re completely and utterly full of shit.
Course of events:
You make post whining about the national debt. I provide evidence showing you sucking off George W. Bush for 7 years on here as he expanded the government OVER AND OVER. I did that by google site searching your name. You looked like a moron. This angered you so you called me a stalker. You KNEW you looked like a hypocrite and everyone could see you got caught looking like one. Again, this really made you mad so you called me a stalker. You NEVER approached the argument, just personally attacked me.
Finally, you SEEMED to move on from this until recently where you decided that again you would need to attack me. You did this by claiming I was a liberal. Which is fine, go for it. I asked for evidence of this and said show me ONE TIME where I’ve applauded the left’s expansion of government and did anything but show how BOTH sides were full of shit. You couldn’t do this so once again you NEVER approached the argument just personally attacked me. You decided to bring that into multiple threads and throughout multiple posts.
You can’t provide ONE shred of evidence for what you say despite being repeatedly asked. I provided the evidence to prove you were full of shit and you can’t do the same. You’re a troll coward who’s really upset by the fact that the world figured out how much you sucked off the big government’s cock when the Republicans are in power and how sanctimoniously against it you are now. You don’t mind licking Big Daddy’s dick as long as it’s a Republican in office, but damn do you hate Big Daddy when a Democrat is in.
I POINT that out to you over and over and you have to find some reason why the problem is me and not your pussy ass unprincipled bullshit stance on things. That’s the story in a nutshell old man. And none of your attempts to paint me as anything else will EVER change any of that. One of us can prove what he’s saying, the other one can assert it. You are absolutely full of shit, a troll, a coward, and possibly suffering from dementia.
‘If guns were outlawed, people bent on killing others will find a way to get a gun no matter what’.
^I’d also say, with regards to the above argument that this tends to pre-suppose that these kind of atrocities are carried out with a lot of cogent, aforethought as opposed to much more… within in a highly emotional moment of: You know what, FUCK THIS SHIT!!! I’m just gonna do… Insert heinous act^
When you here some guy down the pub talking about just how badly he’s going to beat someone up, strangely, 90% of the time, he never does.
More time think= 99% of the time= Less crazy/rash decisions.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
This about sums up my ideas on the issue:
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.[/quote]
Again, not sure what you mean there. I was on your side here. I would prefer my wife kill the attacker vs the police arresting them if I had to choose between the two cases.
[/quote]
Fair enough.
Let’s just put it down to miscommunication.
[quote]GorillaMon wrote:
In order to drive a car (by yourself) you have to pass a test, why should it be any different with firearms?
Also, with the regards to the: Because it’s a basic human right argument, well, unfortunately rights are pretty much ALAYS conditional.
[/quote]
There is no constitutional right guaranteeing your rights having anything to do with cars. Driving a car is a privilege your state extends to you. Gun rights were intended to help fight the little perfect dictators, I mean politicians in case they decided to overextend the powers of their office.
CAREER POLITICIANS with these 20+ years in power were never the intention at the beginning of our country.
YOU and I were expected to give service to our country from time time to time when needed then go back to our homes and regular jobs. Not collect outrageous pensions and power over our citizens. Most importantly never attack the constitution, your rights are not " pretty much ALAYS conditional" - don’t know where you received your education but that is a lie.
The most protected people: FEDERAL PRISONS cannot even PREVENT prisoners from rioting and murdering one another. NO GUNS & KNIVES allowed in there. Why does OBAMA believe taking away more gun rights is the #1 Answer?
They couldn’t even stop the GUN MASSACRE at FORT HOOD. OBAMA visited to console the families of 13 murdered and 29 maimed and wounded soldiers but failed to include this incident when his speech included the other mentally ill massacres.
Remember it is a MUSLIM on trial for that horrific carnage. Soldiers aren’t even allowed to walk around with guns on base, yet a MENTAL NUTT JOB Muslim Army psychiatrist managed to murder his fellow soldiers.
Again I ask you, what happened to the ignore function you threatened to ignore me yet you just can’t huh? Know why? The truth hurts bud. You have to stay in there slinging away at me because I hit on the truth. Ouch! Maybe the liberal side wants to fight with me while your libertarian side wants to ignore me. I’d say at this point you liberal side is pretty dominant-LOL
You are a poser of the highest order and you just can’t stand the fact that I called you out on it.
Keep blabbing away H factor, but at this point I think it’s pretty clear that you are mostly a liberal who hides behind the libertarian mask. Most know now that when they talk to you they’d better be watching for the mask to come off.
By the way we’re still waiting for all those posts talking about how Obama has run up the debt and nationalized health care. As a um…libertarian that should infuriate you. But in reality you’re so liberal you can’t even fake a post against Obama can you? LOL…But attacking Ronald Reagan comes pretty easy for you.
Yeah…you’re a libertarian…Ha ha ha…
You’re actually nothing new one more Internet poser only you’ve been exposed.
