Gun Issues page 22

2293 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by jhco50:

And yet you keep forgetting the “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

And you keep forgetting you’re being too anal about that.

There is your damn slippery slope!

Do you even fully understand just why people keep saying that thet argument you keep pushing is a slippery slope fallacy?

Originally posted by jhco50:

Oh yes, that isn’t biased in the least.

Who said it wasn’t?

Although, I am curious, could you specify which parts you think are biased and why?

You people are getting pretty desperate now.

It’s not like you’re just trying to drag people down or anything.

Name calling (liar), stupid links, and flagging posts. You guys are real pieces of work.

Good God, I had no idea just how… You (well, most of what has already been said about how you act (especially when you get grumpy) and your posts) you could get. Especially in just under two lines, I’m kind of impressed, actually.

Originally posted by jhco50:

All hunting uses the meat. None of it is wasted. If the hunter doesn’t want the meat it is donated to organizations that distribute it to the needy.

So I’m guessing that when someone doesn’t do that it just isn’t called hunting.

Kinda continent.

Originally posted by jhco50:

The socialistic mess you and your ilk have created.

I’m calling it: you’re just trying to provoke people to get pissed at you now.

No! I am not being too anal about a constitutional right. You are too willing to give them up.

Obviously not, I can see that slippery slope. I have seen this kind of thing in action too many times.

All of that link is biased. All it is, is a rant against the NRA.

Maybe you people need a wake up call to the real world. Seems like most of you have a problem with reality.

Thank you. I’m just a little short with people who can’t think logically.

Hunting is a sport, but people who hunt respect the animals they take. Don’t let a real hunter catch you acting a fool in the woods. They get grumpy fast.

I really don’t care it they get pissed at me or not. Like I said above, they are shallow thinkers.

 
Flag Post

If the constitution is so perfect, why did it have to be amended?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Why does everything have to be some rule, a law of some kind?

Because if its not made law, then not everyone will do it. This should surely be self-evident.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

No! I am not being too anal about a constitutional right. You are too willing to give them up.

So, just how are YOU “judging” the willingness of tenco desire to give THEM up?
After all, at the moment, we are discussing ONLY the 2nd Amendment…..as something that was CHANGED about//in the Constitution. Which means that such “adaptation” is recognized as being a possible (even likely?) event…..all in the rational realization that if a Constitution is to survive the passing of time, it will need to also be “flexible” as well as strong.

Congress passes laws to conform the law-of-the-land as life evolves is the “flexible” part.
The Supreme Court decides if such laws keep the “strong” in the Consitution.

I truly hope YOU will someday be able to understand this concept. Obviously, ya aren’t yet able, even after many different ppl on this forum have made repeated effort in a number of ways. Since the “more extreme conservative base” is fond of touting "Show me where in the Constitution it says (and I’ve see YOU do it numerous times),,,YOU show me where in the Constitution that ANY PART OF IT isn’t subject to change as a given by that Constitution itself. After all, as I said above, judging the Constitutionality of changes (new laws) is the realm of SCOTUS… and outright amendments to it, the realm of the states.

Obviously not, I can see that slippery slope. I have seen this kind of thing in action too many times.

“Obviously not”….WHAT?
When in hell are YOU going to learn about antecedent?
Have YOU so soon forgotten how to format each quote so that we may know what the fuck ya’re talking about?

Slippery slopes vary in the curve of them, what is “lubricating” them, and what is “pushing” them on//down it. AND, all of this is extremely SUBJECTIVE.
BUT, the big thing YOU don’t understand is the difference between WILL HAPPEN and COULD//might HAPPEN. For YOU, even knowing that your precious, iron-grasp on YOUR ideology of the 2nd Amend is being question has it (both yer ideology & the 2nd) whizzing down the slope at break-neck speed.

All of that link is biased. All it is, is a rant against the NRA.

SO?
Show us why it is biased…
show us where the “rant” is….
give us something,,ANYTHING,, other than just your standard: That doesn’t agree w/ me, so it is obviously WRONG.

Maybe you people need a wake up call to the real world. Seems like most of you have a problem with reality.

Well, I guess ya haven’t noticed that “us ppl” think the same—and a lot more—about YOU.
AND, we back up our opinion of YOUR “presentations” w/ facts, data, links, etc.
But, what is it that YOU do?
Oh yeah, since most of us here on this forum already well know this…I really don’t need to make the effort to answer that question.

Thank you. I’m just a little short with people who can’t think logically.

NO!
YOU are A LOT short w/ ppl who merely DISAGREE with YOU.
Ya just are “a little short” w/ them when ya have nothing relevant with which to respond.
And, usually this is due to YOUR simply not being logical in the pathetic little which ya do respond to.

Is this getting “a little short” what YOU mean by: “Poking the bear w/ a stick”?
As I’ve stated before regarding your highly diminished capacity for responding to direct questioning,,, YOU REALLY HAVE YET TO clarify that.

Hunting is a sport, but people who hunt respect the animals they take.

Hyperbole alert.
Your ignorance in this area is abysmal.
But, I believe it is a “cultured ignorance” in order for ya to remain blind to anything that could make gun ownership//use look bad in any way, shape, or form.
I think YOU call that: Head up your arses//netherregions.

Don’t let a real hunter catch you acting a fool in the woods. They get grumpy fast.

Grumpy?
Please clarify.
OR, is this merely another of your thinly-veiled innuendos about how righteous, judgemental, & capable of punishment gun owner//users are?

I really don’t care it they get pissed at me or not. Like I said above, they are shallow thinkers.

OH…so now we are switching our non-antecedented pronouns from you to them?

Once again, I must remind YOU of the difference between being “pissed” and being passionately CONCERNED about issues raised on this forum.
As far as YOU specifically go, I think several of us are now on board w/ the position that your offerings (as few,pathetic, & repetative as they are) have become little more than a “mouse for the cats to play with”.

I well imagine that until YOU & the NRA et.al. realize this and change tactics on how you address issues claimed to be so deeply passionate about and so deem this passion to be the ONLY thing necessary to “win the debate”,,,,then your side of the debate will remain to be seen as some silly mouse armed to the hilt shouting: I’m right & the 2nd Amend. proves it.

 
Flag Post

I’m making a new post because the other one is sooooooo damn long.

NOW, in a hope that if I make it extreeeeemely easy for YOU to directly answer a few points, I’m gonna formate an OP-ED in our local newspaper so that all YOU have to do is just put yer responses in the quote boxes (as indicated by: your response: ). Okay, let’s see if ya’re up to the task:

Armed guards are not the answer

The National Rifle Association’s proposal that every school have armed security guards in place continues the NRA’s long-standing position that the problem with violence in our society is not that we have too many guns, but that we have too few.

_your response:

Does the NRA also propose that every store at the mall have armed security? Should the ushers at the theaters be armed? If more guns were the answer, then the fact that we have only 5 percent of the world’s population but own 50 percent of the world’s guns already should make us the safest society on the planet, but we are not.

your response:

They say the problem is that our children play violent video games and watch violent movies. But children in many countries play the same games and watch the same movies, and those countries don’t experience the same level of violence as we do.

your response:

Many countries also struggle in dealing with their mentally ill, yet don’t have to deal with so many mass killings.
your response:
{and don’t give ME any of this shit of: "you other countries mind your own business and aren’t “qualified” to have an opinion on us Americans}

Requiring background checks at gun shows and tightening the restrictions on the ability to purchase guns via the Internet would make us safer than if we simply added more guns.

your response:

Reasonable people also should agree that there is no sensible reason for people to own assault rifles and high-volume magazines.
your response:

JACK E. NIBLACK
Wichita
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
NOW, all YOU have to do is simply hit “quote” right under my icon and type YOUR responses in the indicated boxes.
Go for it.
And, good luck.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

If the constitution is so perfect, why did it have to be amended?

If you didn’t learn that in school I’m sorry. I could write a whole essay on it, but I’m not going to.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by JohnRulz:

A comparison of the first ammendment to the second:
The solution to someone yelling ‘fire’ in a theater is not prohibiting that speech. It’s hiring fact checkers in every theater.

Oh yes, that isn’t biased in the least. You people are getting pretty desperate now. Name calling (liar), stupid links, and flagging posts. You guys are real pieces of work.

I never said it wasn’t biased. It’s a political cartoon, of course it is biased. I have also remained civil. I don’t see why you choose that post to respond to, but ignored my others.

 
Flag Post

karma, I may answer some of your long winded post this evening. for now let me say, You think this forum represents the real world out there? You are really naive if your think the people on this forum represent anything but a bunch of windbags, people who want to be accepted as intelligent beyond others in the world. Look at you for instance. By your own admission you are not well liked by your neighbors because of your political stance. You are swimming up stream in a big stream. So here you are, on a game forum spouting the same old BS that makes your neighbors dislike you. It’s obvious my political views are more accepted in the real world since my neighbors are friends. I come on this forum as a side distraction to fill in slack time.

You and Vicka have made a campaign to try and discredit me in an effort to make yourselves sound important, as if you two are so intelligent. I have to laugh at that. In reality you two go on threads you really haven’t got much knowledge of and make fools of yourselves. This is one of them. I will admit, at times Vika amuses me with her bombs, incendiary grenades in her trunk, perimeter detector’s and land mines, just to mention a few. But she doesn’t believe in people having guns…..LOL!

And you, what can I say. You believe only you and your liberal friends should have firearms because only you have enough sense to be able to figure them out…hahahahhaha! Bubba, I could shoot rings around you. And this isn’t to mention the workings of the firearm and how they operate.

What are you really on this forum for? To spread your ideals of an omnipotent government? To push all of your socialism and socialist programs to help the downtrodden with Joe worker’s money? Yep! I have a total lack of respect for someone who would like nothing better than a socialist regime to spread the wealth to all of you slackers.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

If you didn’t learn that in school I’m sorry. I could write a whole essay on it, but I’m not going to.

If you obviously didn’t want to answer or act like you understood what he said, then why respond in the first place?

Originally posted by jhco50:

And you act like you have no idea why people don’t take you seriously here.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JohnRulz:
Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by JohnRulz:

A comparison of the first ammendment to the second:
The solution to someone yelling ‘fire’ in a theater is not prohibiting that speech. It’s hiring fact checkers in every theater.

Oh yes, that isn’t biased in the least. You people are getting pretty desperate now. Name calling (liar), stupid links, and flagging posts. You guys are real pieces of work.

I never said it wasn’t biased. It’s a political cartoon, of course it is biased. I have also remained civil. I don’t see why you choose that post to respond to, but ignored my others.

Sorry buddy, I was feeling jumpy last night. You and your cartoon are fine.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Sorry buddy, I was feeling jumpy last night. You and your cartoon are fine.

So now that he’s admitted that you were right, you apologize as if you made a mistake… Is black still white?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by jhco50:

If you didn’t learn that in school I’m sorry. I could write a whole essay on it, but I’m not going to.

If you obviously didn’t want to answer or act like you understood what he said, then why respond in the first place?

Originally posted by jhco50:

And you act like you have no idea why people don’t take you seriously here.

Tenco I have been reading on just that subject for a few weeks now, admittedly part time. It is quite involved as to the reasons the bill of rights were amendments instead of part of the main document itself. You learned that in school I’m sure. Obviously the other poster hasn’t gotten to that yet.

I can give you a quick synopsis though. The Constitution was written and passed by a constitutional convention, the first. It was decided it would have to be brought before the states for acceptance. Virginia, being the biggest state, would be the most important in the acceptance of this new document. The writers knew this and decided only nine states would have to agree on the new document, making it easier to have acceptance. Any state that didn’t want to accept it would not be part of the new government. There were two factions debating this document, the federalists and the anti-federalists. The federalists wanted the Constitution exactly as it was and the anti-federalists wanted a guarantee that the peoples God given rights would be spelled out in the document. It was finally settled on passing the Constitution and adding amendments after it went into affect. That is why the Bill of Rights are amendments.

I guess I will answer Karma’s post while I’m at it. This is the only part I feel compelled to answer.

Congress passes laws to conform the law-of-the-land as life evolves is the “flexible” part.
The Supreme Court decides if such laws keep the “strong” in the Consitution.

I truly hope YOU will someday be able to understand this concept. Obviously, ya aren’t yet able, even after many different ppl on this forum have made repeated effort in a number of ways. Since the “more extreme conservative base” is fond of touting "Show me where in the Constitution it says (and I’ve see YOU do it numerous times),,,YOU show me where in the Constitution that ANY PART OF IT isn’t subject to change as a given by that Constitution itself. After all, as I said above, judging the Constitutionality of changes (new laws) is the realm of SCOTUS… and outright amendments to it, the realm of the states.

Congress passes laws in the hope they are constitutional. If a law is challenged and reaches the SCOTUS, it is then compared to the constitution to see if it compares favorably to the interpretation of that document. If it doesn’t, the court throws it out. They are not lawmakers. They interpret the constitution.

The main body of the Constitution is not a living document as you would like it to be. It does not give government unlimited power over the country. This is not my ideology, it is a fact. The first Ten Amendments are the Bill of Rights. This includes the 2nd Amendment you so scoff at. These first ten Amendments are not open for congress or the president to decide on. They are there and they are there to protect the people of our country. Our founding fathers made adding or taking amendments extremely difficult so none of our three parts of government could come along and play with it. It is not up to federal politicians or bureaucrats to make changes to the law of the land. It was purposely set up to prevent that.

Then along come socialists, (liberals or progressives if you wish to be called that) wanting to implement a tyranny, an all powerful government that can, at a whim, hand out money or change the constitution with impunity. It so bothers you that you cannot make this happen. So here we are, a second term socialist president that has shown us his stripes in his first term, and people with ideologies like yours manage to reelect him. But there are still people who believe in freedom, people like me that you just hate because we won’t conform to your idea of perfect sheeple. It just sticks in your craw doesn’t it? Well get over it, people like me are not going away.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

Tenco I have been reading on just that subject for a few weeks not, admittedly part time. It is quite involved as to the reasons the bill of rights were amendments instead of part of the main document itself. You learned that in school I’m sure.

I also know why they made it in the first place.

Obviously the other poster hasn’t gotten to that yet.

Are you being serious here, because if you are, then I had no idea just how oblivious you could get until now.

I can give you a quick synopsis though.

Wait, as far as you’re concerned, wouldn’t this be better directed at NaturalReject?

 
Flag Post

So do I but I don’t want to write that essay. You can explain it if you like. Yes, I suppose I should have directed it to him, but you were the one who questioned my answer to him. He can read it. See you this evening.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:

But she doesn’t believe in people having guns…..LOL!

If you must tell me what my beliefs are, at least try and get them right, would you?

 
Flag Post

Ya might like reading my post while listening to this musical video about NOT HAVING A CLUE.

Originally posted by jhco50:
Originally posted by NaturalReject:

If the constitution is so perfect, why did it have to be amended?

If you didn’t learn that in school I’m sorry. I could write a whole essay on it, but I’m not going to.

Deeeeerrrrrrr…..do ya even know what a rhetorical question is?
Originally posted by jhco50:

karma, I may answer some of your long winded post this evening.

Can YOU not see that YOU are just as guilty as those YOU accuse of insulting YOU?
How utterly arrogant of ya…..lol

for now let me say, You think this forum represents the real world out there?

I’m most glad ya had the temerity to put that in the form of a question. How utterly ignorant of YOU to even ask such a question….let alone ASSUME it might even begin to have merit. Beside, even though this forum MOST CERTAINLY DOES NOT REPRESENT “the real world”, what I do fine represented here is some really astute minds that have shown just how ridiculously out of touch w/ reality that YOU are on many of the issues discussed here.

You are really naive if your think the people on this forum represent anything but a bunch of windbags, people who want to be accepted as intelligent beyond others in the world.

Insult much?
AND, if YOU have such a low opinion of the “regulars” on this forum…
what the fuck are YOU doing here….other than getting yer ass kicked on most every post of YOURS?

What YOU haven’t yet figured out is that I (& very likely some others here) just luv to “poke-the-bear” simply because it is STRICTLY AN ENTERTAINMENT to see childish pap….as is proven by this entire post of yours.

As YOU have been told, scolded, mocked, ridiculed so many times by so many ppl that posts like this one of yours is just one of the many tricks ya use in order to divert attention from the fact that YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the way of a good response. So, ya fall back on silly insults…..and, we laugh.

Instead of this whole post of your dedicated to insults….just address some of MY POINTS….eh?

Look at you for instance. By your own admission you are not well liked by your neighbors because of your political stance.

Look at YOU.
YOU are not well liked by your “forum neighbors”.
YOU DO NOT KNOW my neighbors.
The fact that YOU presume to do so ONLY shows us one more time how obtuse YOUR “logic” (yeah, YOU insult us for having a lack of it) actually is. I’ve told ya that I live in a “Red state”. Ergo, it is extreeeemely likely that MY “politics” would be different than theirs.
Hell, even though Republican….SOME OF THEM very likely would find YOU to be someone they would identify with because of the extremity of your views.

You are swimming up stream in a big stream.

Whatever that means.
Please, try to make some sense,,,,
it helps make your insults all the more fun.

So here you are, on a game forum spouting the same old BS that makes your neighbors dislike you.

So, here YOU are, on a game forum (which is about SERIOUS DISCUSSIONS…rather than “games”) spouting the same old BS that makes YOUR forum neighbors dislike YOU.
What is most interesting is: Why do YOU stay here and constantly have yer ass handed to ya?

It’s obvious my political views are more accepted in the real world since my neighbors are friends.

Thank you….thank you…THANK YOU.
I now have the quitessential “poster statement” of just how utterly illogically skewed some ppl’s analytical skills can be.

THANK YOU. I am going to have “buisness cards” make up w/ that fine representation on it.

I come on this forum as a side distraction to fill in slack time.

LOL….is THAT whay ya callit?

You and Vicka have made a campaign to try and discredit me in an effort to make yourselves sound important, as if you two are so intelligent.

Overrate yerself much?
Underrate others too much?
Be utterly silly in the effort?
LOL

I have to laugh at that. In reality you two go on threads you really haven’t got much knowledge of and make fools of yourselves. This is one of them.

As they say: The proof of the pudding is in the eating of it.
I think I, vika, and a host of others are quite handily making YOU to be the fool….via many different venues on this issue.

Sure, your knowledge of guns is probably at the top.
BUT, there is a thread for that.
This thead is about THE NEGATIVE USAGE of guns.
Anyone with ANY SENSE AT ALL can see that vika’s offering on the issue is quite astute and worthy of serious thought. A goodly number of others do likewise.

I will admit, at times Vika amuses me with her bombs, incendiary grenades in her trunk, perimeter detector’s and land mines, just to mention a few.

And YOU somehow deem that such personal applications for defense somehow totally negates any-&-all other thinking on the issue?

As I said, this whole post of yours is a “lulu”. LOL

But she doesn’t believe in people having guns…..LOL!

That YOU are unable to see, understand, grasp, differenitate the various nuances involved there speaks a lot more about YOU than ever could be used to diminish her input.

All anyone w/ a lick-0-sense need do is hear what she says w/ an UNBIASED MIND to see the merit extended.

And you, what can I say. You believe only you and your liberal friends should have firearms because only you have enough sense to be able to figure them out…hahahahhaha!

So THAT is the attitude YOU bring to this forum.
THIS is the thought process (as in processing data) that is the basis which comes up w/ a most absurd statement like that?
Is THAT your answer to my continual expressioning concern about ppl having//carrying guns who demonstrate such cognative//emotional-management skills? That YOU so idiotically CONNECT weaponry proficiency w/ being able to enjoin a serious discussion about how a society at large should be handling the entire issue of guns…..only serves to prove that the arrogance shown by “gunners” is matched only by their ignorance of the issue.

Bubba, I could shoot rings around you. And this isn’t to mention the workings of the firearm and how they operate.

And, ya KNOW this….HOW?
Do YOU not understand that it is when YOU make statements like that which causes me to have serious concerns about ppl w/ such proclivity for the absurd to be even around guns….much less owning &/or carrying them?
>What are you really on this forum for? To spread your ideals of an omnipotent government? To push all of your socialism and socialist programs to help the downtrodden with Joe worker’s money?

At this point….I’m absolutely certain that such is ALL that YOU are able to see what ANYONE WHO DISAGREES W/ YOU is doing here.

Yep! I have a total lack of respect for someone who would like nothing better than a socialist regime to spread the wealth to all of you slackers.

And I (we?) have an utterly total lack respect of and a heaping amount of PITY for ppl who are sooooooo fucking ignorant as to hold ideology that actually isn’t in their own best interests…that are so eaten up w/ bigotry, intolerance, prejudice, bias, etc. that they are unable to see that those qualities so deeply go against the grain of the American Spirit they so luv to tout as being sacrid to them.

AND, pray tell us….just who are these “slackers” of which YOU speak?
Antecedents…..antecedents….ANTECEDENTS.

Hopefully, as promised by YOU, later on 2nite….ya’ll actually come to this forum and stay on topic rather than entertain us w/ posts like the one above. Hell, at least respond to the very “simple” fill-in-the-blank" post I made JUST FOR YOU.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

I’m making a new post because the other one is sooooooo damn long.

NOW, in a hope that if I make it extreeeeemely easy for YOU to directly answer a few points, I’m gonna formate an OP-ED in our local newspaper so that all YOU have to do is just put yer responses in the quote boxes (as indicated by: your response: ). Okay, let’s see if ya’re up to the task:

Armed guards are not the answer

The National Rifle Association’s proposal that every school have armed security guards in place continues the NRA’s long-standing position that the problem with violence in our society is not that we have too many guns, but that we have too few.

Nice. I never said I agreed with the NRA on this. You are just thinking I run in lockstep with every thing they say. Actually I don’t agree with having armed guards in the school. I would contemplate arming the teachers, but even that is iffy. The first thing I would do is eliminate the 1000’ no guns zone so schools wouldn’t be targeted.

Does the NRA also propose that every store at the mall have armed security? Should the ushers at the theaters be armed? If more guns were the answer, then the fact that we have only 5 percent of the world’s population but own 50 percent of the world’s guns already should make us the safest society on the planet, but we are not.

I don’t know what the NRA proposes. It wouldn’t hurt to have armed security patrolling the malls, but since they are a private business it would be up to them. No, ushers are usually high school kids and don’t have the maturity to take on a shooter or carry a weapon on them. the last question is loaded.

They say the problem is that our children play violent video games and watch violent movies. But children in many countries play the same games and watch the same movies, and those countries don’t experience the same level of violence as we do.

It is said that games are getting way to bloody. I’m sure that has an effect on kids. I know I have had to explain to a few that what happens on their games is not what happens in reality.

Many countries also struggle in dealing with their mentally ill, yet don’t have to deal with so many mass killings.

We don’t deal with the mentally impaired at all. They closed down all of the institutions when people found out they were experimenting on the impaired. They went from one extreme to another.
{and don’t give ME any of this shit of: "you other countries mind your own business and aren’t “qualified” to have an opinion on us Americans}

Requiring background checks at gun shows and tightening the restrictions on the ability to purchase guns via the Internet would make us safer than if we simply added more guns.

All guns sold, except private sales and gifts to family and friends require a background check. Gun shows are no different. Internet sales must be delivered to an FFL and a background check performed. Tightening restrictions becomes a constitutional question and the way the gun organizations are gearing up, there will be one hell of a fight coming up. I believe SCOTUS will end up involved.

Reasonable people also should agree that there is no sensible reason for people to own assault rifles and high-volume magazines.
This last question is just plain liberal crap!

JACK E. NIBLACK
Wichita
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
NOW, all YOU have to do is simply hit “quote” right under my icon and type YOUR responses in the indicated boxes.
Go for it.
And, good luck.

There you go. Did you get a better idea of how I feel about leftist ideals?

Most of the post above mine is just you jacking your jaw because I spoke the truth about you and vika. A few were interesting though.On the question of shooting rings around you, I would love a good challenge. If we ever cross paths, I would love to go shooting.

This thread is about the left passing more gun control. It left the realm of the original OP long ago. As to Vika and her array of weapons, she would be spending jail time in the states. You sticking up for her is kind of….well….romantic.

Have you asked all of the other forum members how they feel before you drag them in on our exchange? I think it would be nice since the are kind of involved with this thread. Of course not. They can speak for themselves, they don’t need you to be a spokesman for them. There ya go with the name calling again. You know, you calling me a bigot is like the bigot calling me a bigot. What do you know about the American Spirit? You spend your life trying to suck the spirit out of this country. Your ideals paint a bleak picture for all who believe in freedom and the American Dream.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
Nice. I never said I agreed with the NRA on this. You are just thinking I run in lockstep with every thing they say.

How do you know? He didn’t say if he did or not. Actually, I’m not that clear if he made this up at all, or just copied parts of it from somewhere else.

The first thing I would do is eliminate the 1000’ no guns zone so schools wouldn’t be targeted.

So why exactly do you think that is that sole reasoning behind the choice of local? (Well I don’t see you bringing up any other reasons, so it seems safe to assume this is the only important one to you.)

the last question is loaded.

It wasn’t a question.

I know I have had to explain to a few that what happens on their games is not what happens in reality.

Care to explain in a little more detail?

We don’t deal with the mentally impaired at all.

Yes we do.

They closed down all of the institutions when people found out they were experimenting on the impaired. They went from one extreme to another.

Yeah, I don’t remember this happening. At least not as how you say it happened.

This last question is just plain liberal crap!


Way to dodge a… Statement.

There you go. Did you get a better idea of how I feel about leftist ideals?

Yes, you just shoot them down with an exclamation point. We already knew this.

As to Vika and her array of weapons, she would be spending jail time in the states. You sticking up for her is kind of….well….romantic.

… Okay, you lost me now.

Have you asked all of the other forum members how they feel before you drag them in on our exchange?

Ignoring the usual “what?” because of confusing wording, does he have to?

They can speak for themselves, they don’t need you to be a spokesman for them.

Yeah, I don’t really see it. I know he does say “we” or “us” sometimes, but usually in a more restricted sense (as in, in this forum), and it’s more uncommon for be to really disagree with his usage when it seems like he’s trying to include me in it.

There ya go with the name calling again.

Wait, when did that happen in his post? Or is it a general character assessment?

You know, you calling me a bigot is like the bigot calling me a bigot.

… I don’t hear you saying he’s wrong. And I’m sure he’s bigoted in some sense in at least one of his views, all you need left to do is give an example of why, not that he just is.

What do you know about the American Spirit? You spend your life trying to suck the spirit out of this country. Your ideals paint a bleak picture for all who believe in freedom and the American Dream.

Not this shit again…

And I say that instead of trying to be more specific, because almost every description that could cover that has already been used, and anything bad about you is just ignored as per the “Negative Things Have Been Said About Me” contingency you have. Well, there are some exceptions, but in the most recent case I can think of (Karma calling you a bigot a few posts ago) it was something similar to “No, ur a(n) X!”

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:
Originally posted by jhco50:
Nice. I never said I agreed with the NRA on this. You are just thinking I run in lockstep with every thing they say.

How do you know? He didn’t say if he did or not. Actually, I’m not that clear if he made this up at all, or just copied parts of it from somewhere else.

Tenco, I had formated an OP-Ed from our local newspaper so that it would have “answer boxes” at the appropriate places that needed to be addressed. But, he fucked that up….making it a lot harder to follow than it should have been.

But, NO….of course I’ve NEVER even inferred his position on the NRA,,other than knowing he is a member (I’m sure that most members aren’t even near in lock-step on issues at all, either) and therefore STRONGLY (obsessively?) supports “gun rights”.

The first thing I would do is eliminate the 1000’ no guns zone so schools wouldn’t be targeted.

tenco: So why exactly do you think that is that sole reasoning behind the choice of local? (Well I don’t see you bringing up any other reasons, so it seems safe to assume this is the only important one to you.)

Yeah, I don’t understand at all his “logic” on this. Is it akin to having “dummy” security cameras? Doesthe mere removal of the “No Gun” zones somehow make the maniac fear that someone in the school might have a gun and be “afraid”? Why NOT go for the obvious. Actually post (“dummy” or not) signs that state armed personel are on premisses?

the last question is loaded.

tenco: It wasn’t a question.

Yeah, it’s kinda hard to carry on a convo w/ someone who gets lost in it…lol
I know I have had to explain to a few that what happens on their games is not what happens in reality.

tenco: Care to explain in a little more detail?

I know that SERVERAL OF US have had to explain to YOU that what happens in YOUR mind, in YOUR family, in YOUR neighborhood…isn’t necessarily what is happening all over the rest of the world.
We don’t deal with the mentally impaired at all.

tenco: Yes we do.

And, obviously….we should be doing even more. This includes PREVENTION research (into “brain chemistry” anomolies). But, what do we do? We call such tax-supported assistance for mental health ENTITLEMENTS and it is one of the first things on the chopping block for cutting spending.

This is like how our school system believes it is saving tax dollars by eliminating driver’s education. It is like how we won’t spend tax dollars for abortions, but are okay w/ paying out the ass for the problems wrought by unloved, unwanted kids.

They closed down all of the institutions when people found out they were experimenting on the impaired. They went from one extreme to another.

tenco: Yeah, I don’t remember this happening. At least not as how you say it happened.

LOL….good grief. How utterly warped can reality get?
This last question is just plain liberal crap!


tenco: Way to dodge a… Statement.

Yeah, that’s how he “debates”. Just call it “lefty” and that automatically dismisses it. LOL

There you go. Did you get a better idea of how I feel about leftist ideals?

tenco: Yes, you just shoot them down with an exclamation point. We already knew this.

Yup…ya nailed it, tenco.
He’s pretty much already made it abundantly clear that—whether it be most anything at all—if if doesn’t “agree” with him….he doesn’t like it.
As to Vika and her array of weapons, she would be spending jail time in the states. You sticking up for her is kind of….well….romantic.

tenco: … Okay, you lost me now.

Yeah, it IS kinda hard to sort it all out when listening to jake-o….he’s so all over the place. Now, just because (at least 2) two forum posters have a concensus in some major areas of an issue, his method of “handling” such opposition is to distort the reality of it to a diminished point that can be easily dismissed (in HIS mind).

Have you asked all of the other forum members how they feel before you drag them in on our exchange?

tenco: Ignoring the usual “what?” because of confusing wording, does he have to?

jake-o, the plural pronouns can mean as few as TWO PEOPLE. I feel very safe in assuming that at least ONE OTHER POSTER is in very close agreement w/ me when i make such a statement.

YOU aren’t even making ANY sense. Excluding YOUR idiotic penchant for the hyperbole (ALL of the other),,,,dontchya think that (of course NOT ALL) a lot of the other (regular SDer’s) posters are already “drug into” the discussion on this thread? YOU do know it isn’t exclusive to just YOU & I? Gwad, at least I hope ya do. But, then…YOU have accussed me of “stalking” YOU around the forum just so I could “rant” at ya. LOL

They can speak for themselves, they don’t need you to be a spokesman for them.

tenco: Yeah, I don’t really see it. I know he does say “we” or “us” sometimes, but usually in a more restricted sense (as in, in this forum), and it’s more uncommon for be to really disagree with his usage when it seems like he’s trying to include me in it.

Yeah, I will make use of the plural pronoun when (as pointed out above) I feel I can do so & the concensus be quite obvious…at least to anyone who keeps up w/ the thread.

But, that statement by him is just another childish trick he uses to diffuse the “assault” on his point by use of an really stoooopid, back-handed ad hominem.

There ya go with the name calling again.

tenco: Wait, when did that happen in his post? Or is it a general character assessment?

Yeah, when ever is that boy gonna learn about ANTECEDENTS?
I suppose he is refering to the word BIGOT

I guess I could drop the word “bigot” and just say: That guy who: has the state of mind of a bigot, defined by Merriam-Webster as “a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance”.1 Bigotry may be based on real or perceived characteristics, including age, disability, dissension from popular opinions, economic status, ethnicity, gender identity, language, nationality, political alignment, race, region, religious or spiritual belief, sex, or sexual orientation. Bigotry is sometimes developed into an ideology or world view.

He wants to espouse such viewpoints….yet is unhappy when the “glove fits”.

You know, you calling me a bigot is like the bigot calling me a bigot.

tenco:

I don’t hear you saying he’s wrong. And I’m sure he’s bigoted in some sense in at least one of his views, all you need left to do is give an example of why, not that he just is.

I freely admit to having positions on issues that—COMPLETELY DEPENDING UPON THE RELEATIVISTIC VIEWPOINT OF THE OBSERVER—could be seen as being of a highly bigoted nature.

BUT, if one we to “overlay” MY ideology on top of that of the entire (let’s limit it to the U.S.) population (let’s limit it to those over age 21),,,,it really wouldn’t be all that far removed from center (w/ some of it actually being RIGHT of it, AND very often a few of those being ALWAYS to the right of center).

Of course, I must mention that this is “measured” using the bell-shaped-curve-of-natural-distribution. And, I need to point out that each issue that makes up my total ideology has its own bell-curve. That is to say; While I consider myself to be a “lukewarm” liberal….the totality of me is made up of many different things with EACH of them running the gamut of being hot to cold….at different times, in different ways, affected by widely differing events.

This is how an OPEN MIND—as opposed to a bigoted one—operates. Much like an ameoba, the mind grows via what it is fed. It sends out psuedo-feet (ventures into new areas of thinking) to see if the food there is nurturing. If so, it feeds on that area. BUT, it certainly doesn’t abondon the current areas that have been the life-source thus far. UNLESS the new food is far more nutricious and helps the mind grow even better. And, even if the mind did move ENTIRELY into that new area (left, right, up, down, etc.), it would still be a vestage of that area which previously nurtured it (childhood?).

BUT, an open mind is NEVER AT REST. It continues to send out “psuedo-feelers” to see if any other knowledge “out there” could be even the better for taking the effort to “go get it”.

It’s really a matter of “degrees”…shades-of-gray. Just because one is passionate about and holds strong to a belief doesn’t mean they are a bigot. It is when they have closed their mind to ANY & ALL thinking about other input on the issue that they then are bigoted about it.

The NRA is extremely “bigoted” in its views about guns. Of course, I’m NOT AT ALL talking about the many fine areas it does have. I’m speaking ONLY about its arrogance about even coming to the table to discuss what part it might be able to play in trying to avoid such tragedies. I think jake-o has quite well shown ALL OF US just how deeply bigoted a person can be on a vital issue that WILL NEVER HAVE a “good resolution”.

BUT, the “best resolution” obtainable is the one that ALL FACTIONS have had a hand in fashioning.
I’m talking about REAL, EARNEST, CONCERNED efforts to keep the American Spirit of freedom, rights, AND RESPONSIBILITIES alive & well.

What do you know about the American Spirit? You spend your life trying to suck the spirit out of this country. Your ideals paint a bleak picture for all who believe in freedom and the American Dream.

tenco: Not this shit again…


And I say that instead of trying to be more specific, because almost every description that could cover that has already been used, and anything bad about you is just ignored as per the “Negative Things Have Been Said About Me” contingency you have. Well, there are some exceptions, but in the most recent case I can think of (Karma calling you a bigot a few posts ago) it was something similar to “No, ur a(n) X!”

Tell me, jake-o….just how do MY “ideals” suck the spirit out of this country when the things I cherish the most and fight the hardest for are: To ensure EVERYONE has equal rights to opportunity & a fair playing field on which to pursue those opportunities. To try to reduce any unnecessary harm & pain inflicted on my fellow citizens….esp. at the hands of extremist assholes.

YOU “hate” Gays because they “prance” in front of yer kids & grandkids.
YOU “hate” ppl having abortions because….because….well, fuck, I still don’t know why other than that YOU say they are “bad” because they kill “babies”.
YOU “hate” gun controls//regulations because they absoutely become a greased-lightning slope that takes the whole Constitution into oblivion,,,, and the pinko, commie, fascist, socialist, leftist, ISTist ppl are going to round up the real Americans and led them on a trail of tears

In looking for images of the indiginous Americans, I came across this.
I think it addresses jake-o’s thoughts on Real Americans.
OH, have a look at this. Talk about “toleraance”….LOL

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by jhco50:
We don’t deal with the mentally impaired at all. They closed down all of the institutions when people found out they were experimenting on the impaired. They went from one extreme to another.

I like the way you assume that locking the ‘mentally ill’ up in institutions is the only way we could deal with them. I honestly had thought those who promoted the stigma of mental health were all long-gone.

Have you seriously never considered that mental health issues can be treated and cured, Jhco? That we don’t have to lock them up any more?

As to Vika and her array of weapons, she would be spending jail time in the states.

When I actually used a weapon, it was ruled self-defense by the state. Everything I have done since has been to try and feel safe, whilst dealing with the resultant mental scarring the incident has left me with.

Aren’t you the one who said that if ‘they’ come for your guns, you’ll kill them all? You’re the one who should already be in prison, Jhco. Lucky for you, when you do start killing cops, jail isn’t where they’ll send you.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by jhco50:
We don’t deal with the mentally impaired at all. They closed down all of the institutions when people found out they were experimenting on the impaired. They went from one extreme to another.

I like (enjoy the show?) how he assumes a lot of things to be true because such is either WHAT HE JUST WANTS IT TO BE,,,or, it is what he has experienced in his own limited personal life.

As I type this, I’m having a thouand bumper-stickers made (for friends, etc.) of his infamous: It’s obvious my political views are more accepted in the real world since my neighbors are friends.

Others I have made over the years: Are you spirit filled? Nah, I’m a quart low.
Have you found Christ? I didn’t even know he was lost.
Are you saved? Yeah, but the interest rate is low.
God is my co-pilot. Yeah, but I see ya’re still wearing a parachute.
_In the event of rapture, this car will be driverless. And this will be different than right now? Or. Good, I’ve been wanting a second car.
Jesus saves I spend all of mine.
Are you Heaven bound? Only if I don’t have to walk.

I like the way you assume that locking the ‘mentally ill’ up in institutions is the only way we could deal with them. I honestly had thought those who promoted the stigma of mental health were all long-gone.

Have you seriously never considered that mental health issues can be treated and cured, Jhco? That we don’t have to lock them up any more?

Oh, hell no. We yet have ppl who defend their “right” to use the word “retard”, insult ppl w/: ride the short bus, etc.

BUT, erectile dysfunction is openly attacked w/ glitzzy TV ads.
Be all the man you are meant to be….but, not over four hours.

As to Vika and her array of weapons, she would be spending jail time in the states.

When I actually used a weapon, it was ruled self-defense by the state. Everything I have done since has been to try and feel safe, whilst dealing with the resultant mental scarring the incident has left me with.

For the most part, all I see from her is a strong support for tasers…for herself and for others. Her personal options are kept just that…personal.

Unlike YOU, jake-o who doesn’t understand that PERSONAL doesn’t mean everyone has to do as YOU DO,,,,,even though they reject the concept.

Aren’t you the one who said that if ‘they’ come for your guns, you’ll kill them all? You’re the one who should already be in prison, Jhco. Lucky for you, when you do start killing cops, jail isn’t where they’ll send you.

Well, in his defense….he really hasn’t expounded on this “revolution is coming” thing of his. But then, he rarely does go into much depth on his ideologies. Perhaps there is none?
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Oh, hell no. We yet have ppl who defend their “right” to use the word “retard”, insult ppl w/: ride the short bus, etc.

I suppose that’s the disadvantage of loving on the Eastern side of the pond. Here, education standards are far higher, and you just don’t get that sort of thing. The stigma of mental health has all but faded. It still gets the short thrift of healthcare spending, but even that is slowly changing.

For the most part, all I see from her is a strong support for tasers…for herself and for others. Her personal options are kept just that…personal.

He was claiming that I use land mines for personal defense. Which is odd, as the one time I did make one – as I said – I couldn’t bring myself to actually use it. It is still sitting on the shed shelf; all it needs is power cells, and a mix of explosives made up for it. That counts as self-defense-worthy, right?

Sure I use a weird mix of weaponry for personal defense, but as you said, it is personal defense. I would not advocate anyone else using these weapons – you need to have quite a bit of knowledge as to what you are doing, and understanding of the consequences to use them. For most people a gun is easier to understand and deal with.

There’s nothing wrong with that, but its still a lethal weapon. A car is just as much a lethal weapon. For both, we need to mandate a basic level of competency, and a basic level of understanding the ‘road ahead’. If you cannot master both, you don’t get to use it. It doesn’t matter whether it is a car, a gun, a taser, or a sonic migraine-inducer. If you cannot use it in a competent manner, you don’t get to use it at all.

Well, in his defense….he really hasn’t expounded on this “revolution is coming” thing of his. But then, he rarely does go into much depth on his ideologies. Perhaps there is none?

Quite probably. He accuses others of being shallow-minded, but lacks depth himself. Possibly he got the two words ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ muddled in his earlier education, and means the other when he says one.

 
Flag Post

Ok, for all of you who can’t understand what the 2nd Amendment is about, I’m going to give you a link. This is a true incident that happened in Athens, Georgia in the 1940’s. There is a clip from a movie that was made about it to give you a visual look at it. If nothing else, it is entertaining, but keep in mind that this incident is true. Corruption eliminated by Americans using their 2nd Amendment.

http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/Battle-of-Athens.html

 
Flag Post

And this totally would not have been possible by bringing the issue in front of a federal court…

 
Flag Post

I agree with jhco, we need the 2nd amendment to have firearms in our possession. A 60% plurality of firearm deaths being suicide are a small price to pay for safety in our home. I’m even willing to take the additional 18% of firearm deaths being interpersonal between loved ones and 4% of accidents, just so I can feel safe against that 18% of criminally related firearm deaths.