My kids just got home from school...and I'm pissed

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

So, the whole debate is really moot until or unless the make up of the Court changes..and THEN another case comes before them to change the current law of the land. Even the President and his Branch must respect it.

And hopefully that happens this term.

If not, Hillary will be elected for 8 years and it will happen under her.

It's a shame we have to wait for the SCOTUS to decide it, it's a shame that more Americans can't think logically.

I think the shame comes in how quickly people want to take apart a system that has served our people and in many ways, the world..quite well. Right up to the last 15 years or so when things really went downhill at a 45 degree angle, this was a fine nation with a fine history and tradition. That's simply how much it's changed.

If anything, those changes mean the reason least talked about or desired by any sane person for the 2nd amendment is the one most important for retaining it.

If the world dislikes a U.S. Military run by civilians facing 120 million armed Americans to argue with if it gets TOO far out of hand....Oh, you'll all love it when those same power drunk civilian leaders have UNARMED people that can't argue at all. The thought of a totally rogue military free to rampage around the world ought to be sobering because nothing WOULD prevent that outcome IF over 260 million guns could magically be made to vanish by a stroke.

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery

 

I have heard this all before I do have advanced tactical training, I work in the security field. I don't doubt that there are people like you discribe, I do know that we are not all that way. That is beside the point though, you do not understand what the 2nd is for yet you argue to have it removed. You are not from the US by the sounds of it, maybe it is just envy you are suffering from....then again ignorance on the subject is more likely. People like you think that taking the guns from citizens will solve the issue, but it don't and never will. The only thing it does is ensure that criminals and cops are the only ones with access....backwards logic.

Well, like I said in my first post. No CIVILIAN needs a gun.
You having actual training, should know best that anyone armed can be disarmed. And as you are working in the security field, you should be skilled in unarmed combat? You as a professional are one of the people exempt from my statement.

And just to make this clear, although this is none of anyone's buisiness, as the son of an American Soldier, and a German civilian, I have dual citizenship. Noone in this thread is "more" american than I am regardless of how much you'd love to believe you are.

reply to post by xedocodex

Not unorganized, unfunded by the FG. The NG are the State (notice the capitol S) militia.Guns are well regulated go try and by one, FBI background check for everyone, waiting period for questionable persons, many restrictions on the types you can own, we have more gun laws than most nations...

Did you realise that the worst school killing in history was done with explosives?? (Not guns!) In the 1920's, some nut went crazy and killed about 40 kids, I think it was because of an increase in taxes. You can google "Bath School disaster" and read about it yourself.

I live in the upper midwest (I'm almost Canadian) We have quite a few guns up here, and I think the people that own them are responsible people. I know a lot of people that produce a lot of food for their families, and their children this way. When you live an hour from the regular grocery store, you hunt. Our culture here is a little different from most of the U.S. A friend of mine had a bear try to come right in through the kitchen door once. Her kids might not be here, if she wasn't able to protect them. Try coming up here, to northern MN. Survival can be tough - especially in the winter. Try being snowed in, with - 40 (Yes, 40 below zero) We garden, we hunt. Life would be a lot harder if we could not do these things.

If you made it illegal for law abiding citizens to have guns, the criminals would still have them. - It would go as well as the war on drugs.

OP, it is good little subjects like yourself and monkeyboy who believe every fairy tale that the anti-gun crowd feeds you because you lack the ability to reason on your own. If you and yours succeed in implementing some sort of gun grab, and I assure you that is a BIG if, you will find yourself in the crossfire. If it does by some fluke succeed, you will find yourself living in a country where you can no longer speak your mind on websites like ATS. The internet and every other media outlet will have NO dissenting viewpoint whatsoever. Only the government's opinion will count. Look at the MSM now - it's 90% there. Perhaps you agree with today's government, but maybe someone else gains power - who will have absolute power - that you do NOT agree with. Guess what? TFB buddy. You gave up your right to dissent when you gave up your right to defend yourself, or gave up your neighbor's right to defend themselves.

Tragic as it is, today's shooting has nothing to do with the second amendment. Perhaps you should be bitching about how the restrictive Connecticut gun laws prevented anyone from doing anything to stop the killer. Maybe he wouldn't have done it if he knew some of the teachers could be carrying concealed...

Bu there is no convincing you, is there? You and your lot are sloooowwwww learners and do not employ logic in your thought processes.

By the way, when the S does H the F, I bet you run to your neighbor's house... ya know, the one who has all the guns.

reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery

Who the hell are you to tell the rest of us that we as civilians have no rights to Constitutionally guaranteed protections? You're the kind of creature who pat searches six-year-old girls and grandmas in diapers.

You go ahead and surrender your rights if you want. Don't expect the rest of us to bend over the table next to you.

reply to post by xedocodex


Again demostrating your lack of understanding on a subject. Not all of the Founding Fathers were hypocites as you imply Jefferson argued to free them and even arranged for his to be freeed (others did the same). The southern states were dependant on the slaves (they were holding up the booming economy) like it or not they were essential to the success of our nation..but hey lets not understand our history...

reply to post by PrplHrt


Wow, someone's getting real snappy now

First of all, you better keep it on a neutral level without getting offensive, otherwise I'll make sure you router's IP gets a lifetime ban, friends in HLS will be more than willing to do that for you

Second of all, calm the hell down. Stop acting like a 90 year war hero and snap back to reality. We are having a discussion here and if you can't discuss without insulting your best bet is to shut down your computer and keep watching sons of anarchy.

As a legal citizen I am entitled to have and express my opinion regardless of how bad it pi$$es you off.

Just for thought ponder this...

A car driven by an elderly man plows through a restraunt killing 20 innocent children eating lunch on a school field trip. The man is impaired.

DO you lobby to have ALL OLD people revoke their drivers licenses? OF course NOT.

You make a sound rationalization that it was ONE old man driving impaired and although the loss of the children is horrific, taking drivers privelages from ALL old people is irrational.

The same is true in this instance. GUNS do not kill people. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

By the way, automobiles kill more people annually than guns in the United States.

I own 12 guns, one of which is a high powered sniper rifle. I am female. Dont judge me. MY GUNS have never killed one human being yet. However, if one happens to threaten me or my family, that number will change.

Please think about what you are saying. Do you think that making guns illegal will remove the ILLEGAL guns and criminals using guns? Of course not. ONLY the criminals will have them. Imagine our world then. Someone breaks in to your home and they have a gun and want your stuff or you will die. I guess you will die.

Your theory makes no sense.

Originally posted by xedocodex

Originally posted by PrplHrt
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.

I'm all for it, let's have that WELL REGULATED MILITIA.

If you want a gun, join the National Guard.

"Regulated" used to mean "prepared". Glad to see you're coming to your senses--we ARE the National Guard!!

reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery


I am a civilian though...I work private sector security, Phys Sec., Personal Sec., CPTED, systems, and Tech. Sec., ect. I am no different other than I have had advance firearms training and hand-to-hand training.

I'm out, going to spend the night hanging out with my kids and family.

There are 20+ parents out there tonight that don't have the ability to do that tonight, and yes, I am placing part of the blame on all of you that love your guns so much that you can't see that you are part of the problem.

Fear and paranoia cloud your thoughts, sleep tight tonight, with your gun. Please think of those parents that can't tuck their kid into bed tonight because you are so hell bent on owning your little piece of metal.

Originally posted by Pakd-on-mystery

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery

 

I have heard this all before I do have advanced tactical training, I work in the security field. I don't doubt that there are people like you discribe, I do know that we are not all that way. That is beside the point though, you do not understand what the 2nd is for yet you argue to have it removed. You are not from the US by the sounds of it, maybe it is just envy you are suffering from....then again ignorance on the subject is more likely. People like you think that taking the guns from citizens will solve the issue, but it don't and never will. The only thing it does is ensure that criminals and cops are the only ones with access....backwards logic.

Well, like I said in my first post. No CIVILIAN needs a gun.
You having actual training, should know best that anyone armed can be disarmed. And as you are working in the security field, you should be skilled in unarmed combat? You as a professional are one of the people exempt from my statement.

And just to make this clear, although this is none of anyone's buisiness, as the son of an American Soldier, and a German civilian, I have dual citizenship. Noone in this thread is "more" american than I am regardless of how much you'd love to believe you are.

edit on 14/12/2012 by Pakd-on-mystery because: (no reason given)

If you have dual citizenship and many of us here are only US citizens, wouldn't that make us twice as American as you? Just sayin'

Originally posted by k21968
Just for thought ponder this...

A car driven by an elderly man plows through a restraunt killing 20 innocent children eating lunch on a school field trip. The man is impaired.

DO you lobby to have ALL OLD people revoke their drivers licenses? OF course NOT.

You make a sound rationalization that it was ONE old man driving impaired and although the loss of the children is horrific, taking drivers privelages from ALL old people is irrational.

The same is true in this instance. GUNS do not kill people. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

By the way, automobiles kill more people annually than guns in the United States.

I own 12 guns, one of which is a high powered sniper rifle. I am female. Dont judge me. MY GUNS have never killed one human being yet. However, if one happens to threaten me or my family, that number will change.

Please think about what you are saying. Do you think that making guns illegal will remove the ILLEGAL guns and criminals using guns? Of course not. ONLY the criminals will have them. Imagine our world then. Someone breaks in to your home and they have a gun and want your stuff or you will die. I guess you will die.

Your theory makes no sense.

Tell me, what exactly does a civilian need a Sniper Rifle for?
Snipers are manhunters, (My father is and has been a sniper for over 25 years. 1st of the 82nd) and other than for killing things there is absolutely no use for anyone outside of the army to have a sniper rifle.

Wanna shoot rifles and sh*t?
JOIN THE ARMY!

reply to post by xedocodex

That don't sell here. Sleep tight.

reply to post by TruthSeekerMike


It makes you twice the idiot to think you're something better than me or entitled to more of an opinion than I am.

just saying.

reply to post by Pakd-on-mystery

You know it isn't very wise to make such threats when you don't know who's on the other end.

reply to post by ParanoidAmerican


Yes I understand, but you are a trained civilian. Not some redneck that puts his family in the bed of his lifted pick up once a week to go scream yee haw while shooting at a shooting range.

Originally posted by Pakd-on-mystery
reply to post by sixswornsermon

 

I would not feel comfortable in any of both cases, because chances are pretty high that the intruder has a gun loaded and ready to shoot.

If someone breaks into your home, do you think they won't bring their guns?

REVOLVER>>>>dont need a frigging clip...BOOM

Keep it loaded don'tcha know...I also have a doggy that will bite a big hole in your arse while you're trying to aim your stupid gun at me....he doesn't bark just bites. Always best to look before you leap, no? Wouldn't want to land in a hole filled with spikes or something. Eeeesh....