Re: Open Carry - check this website for a lot of useful info. Personally I prefer concealed, but if my state allowed open carry, I would definitely do it once in a while just to make a statement and watch scared libs piss themselves.
To be perfectly honest, I would not want to live in a country where the “ruling class” didn’t trust the “common man” to carry weapons for personal defense. The fact that there are so many of those “commen men” who similarly don’t trust one another today is perhaps the saddest fact of all.
And as for the 2nd Amendment in general, the day it is outlawed or revoked, is the day I stop being proud of my country. Here’s a lady who will tell you in no uncertain terms exactly what that amendment is there for:
[quote]MrRezister wrote:
Re: Open Carry - check this website for a lot of useful info. Personally I prefer concealed, but if my state allowed open carry, I would definitely do it once in a while just to make a statement and watch scared libs piss themselves.
To be perfectly honest, I would not want to live in a country where the “ruling class” didn’t trust the “common man” to carry weapons for personal defense. The fact that there are so many of those “commen men” who similarly don’t trust one another today is perhaps the saddest fact of all.
And as for the 2nd Amendment in general, the day it is outlawed or revoked, is the day I stop being proud of my country. Here’s a lady who will tell you in no uncertain terms exactly what that amendment is there for:
[quote]GCF wrote:
Huh? They can’t because most of them don’t have them. Now that the review from the trial has been done they will be phased in. Usage will always have guidelines but I’m sure that’s the case anywhere in the world.[/quote]
I certainly hope so. But I see so many people arguing for police to “stop and talk” with the criminals that it’s gone beyond funny.
My mistake RE Meth.
BZP. But I don’t agree with many man-made drugs at any rate.
But do you really think it’s necessary for a three inquiries into the shooting? I’ll break this one down for those unfamiliar with the story:
Police called to domestic disturbance
Police officer shoots man after be charged at with claw hammer
Paramedics called
Man dies
To me it’s seems pretty simple. Several witnesses too.
There was another big racket about a shop owner who shot a man in the stomach after said man charged the counter WITH A MACHETE.
Again, I’m going off what I’ve heard. The guy was facing criminal charges. For what? Defending himself?
Defend themselves legally. People DO end up in prison for defending themselves and I’ve seen it happen. Do you think every story like this gets reported? These are two recent cases in the public eye, and thank God they worked out against the criminal element - this time.
Are you familiar with the cases in Auckland recently where dairy owners/workers have been killed? Do you think it’s legal for them to have weapons in their store? What if they have shot and injured (or even killed) the robbers in their store?
Can you not pick up on sarcasm? I knew what I wrote would fly right over the pussie’s heads. But you?
Wow.
[/quote]
Come on RJ. Gimme a break. I thought your post was actually funny. Of course I could see you were being sarcastic for fucks sake.
“In fact, we like killing so much, we put in an express lane at the prisons. Texas loves killing. You might say it is a hobby for most of us.” Jesus how else could anyone take it?! It couldn’t have been more obvious if you put a ‘YEEHAW’ after it.
I was imagining you walking around with a “vistit texas! We are running out of shit to shoot at!” t-shirt in Paris.
[quote]MrRezister wrote:
Re: Open Carry - check this website for a lot of useful info. Personally I prefer concealed, but if my state allowed open carry, I would definitely do it once in a while just to make a statement and watch scared libs piss themselves.
To be perfectly honest, I would not want to live in a country where the “ruling class” didn’t trust the “common man” to carry weapons for personal defense. The fact that there are so many of those “commen men” who similarly don’t trust one another today is perhaps the saddest fact of all.
And as for the 2nd Amendment in general, the day it is outlawed or revoked, is the day I stop being proud of my country. Here’s a lady who will tell you in no uncertain terms exactly what that amendment is there for:
NH allows open carry. Free State Project people routinely open carry in order to challenge/educate cops about the concept. They often film the encounters. Here’s a video of what happened when a Concord, New Hampshire cop stops a Free Stater carrying openly on the way to a libertarian gathering. As it turns out the cop and the Free Stater both speak an obscure Slavic language…
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
You’ve dragged this thread out to 5 pages for what? So you can lecture us on our Constitution? Give me a fucking break. No one here needs it, definitely not from you. At this point the only reason you’re still arguing is to save face.
You and Ms Peters need to stay at home and focus your own domestic problems.
It’s much more fun for them to stick their ignorant noses into the business of the US.
I mean they live in fucking Australia, where they allow the government murder their cultural icons for owning a gun.
How anyone can justify that is beyond me.
[/quote]
Rainjack and Sifu you are both looking like silly little boys. They didn’t kill him for owning a gun, they shot him because he shot a motorist and a police officer without warning.
No-one is sticking their nose into US business. My first comment in this thread related to Finland. Guess what? The politicians over there are promising tougher gun laws.
Rainjack, you haven’t done anything useful except point out that I didn’t hit ‘y’ hard enough on my keyboard.
Sifu, am I using statistics as part of an agenda? Probably, I don’t rate people dying that highly so I guess there is an agenda. If it weren’t for the stats you’d argue that more people weren’t killed in gun toting areas.
As for yourself and many others you have persisted in using a flawed study which has be proven wrong that says violent crime has increased in Australia since the buyback. And I don’t care that there is a lower murder rate in some piss ant anomalous town like Plano.
[/quote]
Did you watch the video in the original post? Because Rebbeca Peters, a foreigner, obviously [b]is[/b] trying to change US law without the consent of the US people. That’s what this whole thread is about.
If we wanted tighter restrictions on gun ownership here we have a democratic process by which we can amend the US constitution and override the 2nd amendment.
No one has made a serious attempt to do that because it would fail miserably. So instead, this aussie cunt is actually trying to use the UN to take rights away from US citizens.
That is despicable beyond words. And if you come into this thread start arguing in favor of gun control it looks like you support what she is doing.
[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
That is despicable beyond words. And if you come into this thread start arguing in favor of gun control it looks like you support what she is doing.[/quote]
Really? I stated I support gun control.
She supports banning them from the public sector altogether. And probably stop police from using them too.
Didn’t watch the video, still on dial up here mate. You can argue in favour of gun control as a principle without arguing in favour of diminishing the sovreignty of the US.
[quote]AndyG wrote:
Didn’t watch the video, still on dial up here mate. You can argue in favour of gun control as a principle without arguing in favour of diminishing the sovreignty of the US.[/quote]
You admit twice that you don’t take the time to know what the fucking thread is about?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
That is despicable beyond words. And if you come into this thread start arguing in favor of gun control it looks like you support what she is doing.
Really? I stated I support gun control.
She supports banning them from the public sector altogether. And probably stop police from using them too.[/quote]
I support some gun control too. A convicted felon should not be allowed to own handguns, and guns shouldn’t be sold to children. That’s common sense and such laws could easily be written so that they do not infringe on the rights of law abiding citizens to own firearms.
But your posts show that you believe in the in-alienable right of people everywhere to defend themselves, and that includes with guns. Obviously Ms. Peters does not. There is no mistaking that.
[quote]AndyG wrote:
Hey rainjack, do you post copious amounts of shit to hide your idiotic remarks on the previous pages?[/quote]
Do you? What the fuck am I saying - everything you post is shit.
If it will give you a little woody, feel free to repost all of my shit on every page. It is obvious to anyone with a fucking brain who is full of shit - and it’s not me.
As a matter of fact, I watched the video before ever posting in this thread. Unlike you - who had a gun banning orgasm at the thought of getting to post yet again about how the US is ruining the world with their guns.
[quote]AndyG wrote:
Didn’t watch the video, still on dial up here mate. You can argue in favour of gun control as a principle without arguing in favour of diminishing the sovreignty of the US.[/quote]
But you don’t seem to be arguing for anything intelligent. Your posts are all over the place, pissing on guns, gunowners, and the men we americans are proud to call our Founding Fathers.
They weren’t perfect, but they had the balls to take their freedom. They didn’t wait til someone was generous enough to give it to them.
You haven’t said anything dickhead. All you have done is insulted everyone on here then had a cry when someone did the same to you.
You aren’t full of shit. You are actually quite vacuous. Being full of shit would mean you had made a variety of comments, all of which were shit. You have just posted the same shit over and over again.
You can’t make a decent point and every single post contains an insult to hide this. You wouldn’t talk to anyone in real life like on here, but you fell tough being a keyboard warrior.
Uncle Gabby, can you back up what you have said with examples. You are blinded by what you believe is right. In the end the number of dead people and gun related crime proves I am right.
[quote]AndyG wrote:
Uncle Gabby, can you back up what you have said with examples. You are blinded by what you believe is right. In the end the number of dead people and gun related crime proves I am right.[/quote]
Examples of what? What would change your mind? What would change Ms. Peters’ mind? The fact is, innocent people sometimes get killed by guns and that sucks.
But even if the US’s annual gun-deaths were as low as Switzerland’s Ms. Peters would still be trying to outlaw all guns. Obviously she can’t live with the fact that guns are tools designed to kill human beings.
I’m sorry she is so squimish, but guns are inanimate objects, they don’t cause good people to do bad things. They can be, and are used by good people to defend themselves from bad people.
Until recently my 90+ year old grandfather slept with a revolver under his mattress because his home had been broken into one night while he and his wife were not home.
If he had been home, what would happened to my grandfather if the burgler had decided to bash in his head with a wrench because he didn’t need any witnesses, and my grandfather didn’t have a gun? What kind of chance would he have?
The fact that a pistol would have given my grandfather a fighting chance to defend himself proves that I am right.
Edit: Ok, Mr Fuckingwithmyparagraphsguy, that made me laugh out loud.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
GCF wrote:
Huh? They can’t because most of them don’t have them. Now that the review from the trial has been done they will be phased in. Usage will always have guidelines but I’m sure that’s the case anywhere in the world.
I certainly hope so. But I see so many people arguing for police to “stop and talk” with the criminals that it’s gone beyond funny.
There was an investigation into the policeman’s conduct as I’m sure there would be anywhere (and rightly so). He was completely exhonerated (and rightly so). (BTW there were no methamphetamines in his system just party pills).
My mistake RE Meth.
BZP. But I don’t agree with many man-made drugs at any rate.
But do you really think it’s necessary for a three inquiries into the shooting? I’ll break this one down for those unfamiliar with the story:
Police called to domestic disturbance
Police officer shoots man after be charged at with claw hammer
Paramedics called
Man dies
To me it’s seems pretty simple. Several witnesses too.
There was another big racket about a shop owner who shot a man in the stomach after said man charged the counter WITH A MACHETE.
Big racket? By his supporters. Yes. Every poll in the country was overwhelmigly in his favour. By law he had the gun illegally but all charges against him were dropped. Justice served.
Again, I’m going off what I’ve heard. The guy was facing criminal charges. For what? Defending himself?
I’d say that judging by your examples you do. 2 examples of people shooting people who were not armed with guns and not ending up in prison really doesn’t suggest you live in a country where law abiding ppl can’t defend themselves.
Defend themselves legally. People DO end up in prison for defending themselves and I’ve seen it happen. Do you think every story like this gets reported? These are two recent cases in the public eye, and thank God they worked out against the criminal element - this time.
Are you familiar with the cases in Auckland recently where dairy owners/workers have been killed? Do you think it’s legal for them to have weapons in their store? What if they have shot and injured (or even killed) the robbers in their store?
Do you think they would have escaped charges?[/quote]
First off let me just say before our conversation turns into an argument over an agreement, I think we have a very similar stance on gun laws. The main thing I was responding to was you saying that NZers can’t defend themselves against crims. I don’t think this necessarily holds true. I think in NZ common sense more often than not prevails.
WRT the policeman. 3 inquiries seems like a lot to me yes. But it wasn’t nearly as black and white as you make out. Even in the article you cited. Some say he was advancing, some say he wasn’t, questions over whether he was a real threat to the cop etc…
Police will always be scrutinised when they kill someone in the line of duty and so they should. I wasn’t there but to me it sounds like they made the right choice. Chalk one up to common sense.
WRT gun shop owner. He was facing charges for illegaly having the gun. NOT for defending himself with it. The police even state that in your article. In the end all charges dropped. By the letter of the law he should’ve been charged with use of an illegal firearm. 2 to common sense.
I’m sure people end up in prison for defending themselves just like people go to prison for crimes they didn’t committ. But proving self defence isn’t always easy. Look at Nich’s story. Self defence if ever I heard it, stacks of witnesses and still he went through hell. Regardless of the laws this will always be an issue.
I can’t comment on the store owners. The ones I’m thinking of is where they were killed. Horrible. I have no idea what would’ve happened if it was the other way round. Personally I think they should be able to arm themselves and protect themselves. If they had I hope common sense would’ve prevailed again.
[quote]GCF wrote:
First off let me just say before our conversation turns into an argument over an agreement, I think we have a very similar stance on gun laws.[/quote]
Similar? I think their probably the same. I’m just more of a cynic.
[quote]AndyG wrote:
You haven’t said anything dickhead. All you have done is insulted everyone on here then had a cry when someone did the same to you.
You aren’t full of shit. You are actually quite vacuous. Being full of shit would mean you had made a variety of comments, all of which were shit. You have just posted the same shit over and over again.
You can’t make a decent point and every single post contains an insult to hide this. You wouldn’t talk to anyone in real life like on here, but you fell tough being a keyboard warrior.[/quote]
I have already invited you to Texas. Take me up on the invite, and find out for yourself.
You really need to brush up on your whining. It’s really getting boring.
Oh - and the little boy-crush you have on me? It’s getting a little played as well. Maybe you should find another object for your affections.