U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-13-2009, 09:26 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,087,589 times
Reputation: 3718

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCGranny View Post
Why do you allow someone to bait you with what you know are untruths and purposeful misinterpretations? Someone who so obviously loathes America and Americans, doesn't understand them, and refuses to understand them - but who only repetitively posts for personal, self-aggrandizement?

Especially this one, SCG! I suggest readers try the "ignore" option. It saves the mind from unnecessary disruption.

Consider the source, ladies and gentlemen. I always have in the back of my mind that every poster on here could be a teenager who's mommy doesn't know that her darling child is down in the basement on the Internet, or whose adult child chooses to endlessly dance from forum to forum, getting vicarious and pathetically needy joy from torpedoing others rather than holding a real job, having real relationships, and making a real input into society, as well as having a real life. Not everyone is whom they say that they are... One can pity such people but one does not have to respond to them.

Don't feed the trolls.
Sincere thanks for this valuable observation, SCGranny. Truer words were never spoken.

So, in quick summary, we have those here who feel they know how many guns, and of which type, we should be "allowed" to own. And which parts of the Constitutional Amendments they'd like to selectively tear down, all in the name of urbane civility, of which they so intellectually typify, sipping on their "slightly oaky yet annoyingly arrogant" Chardonnays.

Ditto for their stipulating the number of rounds of ammo we should be "allowed" to own, with a personal rant-comment about the value of target shooting as well as hunting.

Then there's the deflective argument, rather than addressing my point-by-point refutations:

"Rifleman, I'm sorry you went to all that trouble to write all those things in those pretty fonts.

....sorry you didn't enjoy the easier visibility. I'll make sure I make 'em all in grey for you in particular next time, jtur. I didn't realize you were so uncreative under that veneer of serene urbanity and poshness.

Nobody is trying to disarm you or any other law-abiding American. If you had spent the same amount of time providing me with a quote from any credible person who said they want to disarm all American civilians, it would have been enlightening for me to see it.

That's just not the case, as has been proven time and again. You don't respond to anything of factual value; you just recycle and disregard.

Next time you have that much free time, you might offer that up."

Seems to me I did, and have done so in much more detail in the past, and it had the same effectiveness back then.
________________________________________________

Details, facts, true statistics, apparently don't count with this type of (and I use the term very loosely here) "debator".

I and others have provided detailed reviews of the status of gun homicides in America versus the TEN OTHER COUNTRIES that easly out-kill us, despite the fact that all ten have significantly more Draconian (legislated and enforced and inflexible) gun registrations, limitations and penalties.

But, as I've said; why should we let facts get in the way of a good "holier than thou" rant by the special interest anti-gun lobby?

Many here provide a horrid head-in-sand (or other more odious place) approach to this; they have their emotions, their sense of liberal Knowing Best, and nothing else. They cite incorrect facts, but when shown up, they change the subject or fire off a statement about my use of color and fonts. How insightful and fascinatingly convincing!

They don't even have an actual voter majority on this, as shown by their easy incorporation of the simpleton talking points provided, gratis, by the liberal media, despite the truth.

Here's one accurate citation for you all though: Obama noted in an open speech, during his recent trip to Mexico, that to tamper with existing gun laws, to add to the already 20,000 on the books in the US, would be political suicide right now. (Meaning, BTW, that he'd like to, but realizes that he can't right now. Maybe later though...)

He then made the statement of his career on this topic:

"We'd do better just enforcing the laws we already have on the books."

To wit, far as I know, it's already agin the law to drive down the streets of any city or town firing at innocents out the car window, even with a slingshot. You gonna register them as well if someone kills someone else with a slingshot?

Murder is murder, no matter what the tool. Apparently this point is too hard to grasp by many here, or by TD, who lives in a country where a fellow Dutchman recently took the idea to heart and ran down five people with his car, which, BTW, was "registered".

As for those who wish to "amend" the 2nd Amendment, fear not. It takes a 66% national mandate, ratified by that percentage number of states wanting it, not by the simple number of mis-informed whining liberal voters, hiding in their vast urban sprawl, that wish it were "safer" out there... sob sob.

To your off-the-cuff comments about hunting, jtur:

"it looks like you aim very few (if any) of your rounds at harmless, defenseless animals. "

...those very same lib-yup-urbanites intent on saving Bambi nevertheless keep demanding more and more of the agricultural community to provide for their ravenous appetites, biofuel, recreation, tract home developments, golf courses, freeways and clothing (from cotton & wool).

Of course any first-year wildlife management student with a GPA over 2.0 knows that such uncontrolled agricultural conversion of land has and is killing vastly more wildlife, Bambi's, California quail, Canada geese, cougars, ducks, wolves, bears, coyotes, etc. than ANY hunters ever did.

It's precisely because of the money from hunting licences and dedicated sportsmen (as in: Ducks/Quali/Whitetail Unlimited. or the Rocky Mtn. Elk Foundation, Great Bear Society/Natl. Turkey Federation, Ntl. Shooting Sports Foundation, and on and on and on and on, that you get to enjoy wildlife at all any more. But you don't know that, and would thus stop "the slaughter of innocent cute little animals" by banning hunting.

Or that wasteful resource consumer, target shooting. Better to go shopping at WalMart and buying cheap Chines-made crap. Yeppers. That's a LOt better use of our time & resources, you betcha.

Ahhh, the vast and unbridled ignorance.....

BTW, when was the last time, and in what $$$ amount, did any of you anti-gunners or anti-hunters personally direct part of your income to a worthy wildlfe cause? I, for instance, gave over $500 to Ducks Unlimited in the past several years, they are in my will, and I was in their employ for a season as a consultant, evaluating duck habitat improvement projects they funded to the tune of millions of donated dollars.

And yet, contrary to some mental image you probably just erroneously conjured up, I've NEVER shot a single duck; I like 'em too much. They're much nicer than a lot of humans I've met......

How quaint your many management concepts and pronouncements are. Completely bypassing the natural predator-prey relationships that exist in nature, and that man can take a natural part in if he chooses. Rather than being knuckle-dragging Neanderthals, we are, in fact, the knowledgeable ones here, in touch with the natural world, leaving the emotional nonsense to those who are illiterate in both firearms and wildlife management, and yet feel compelled to blurt out their opinions here.

I say again: how quaint the usual anti-gun/anti-hunting liberals' technical knowledge of wildlife & firearms management. Thanks to the animal gods that it's not you guys in charge of that; the mayhem would be massive!

Last edited by rifleman; 05-13-2009 at 09:49 PM..

 
Old 05-13-2009, 10:03 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,804,168 times
Reputation: 35909
Rifleman, I asked you to cite a source advocating to completely disarm all civilians in the USA. You called my question a "rant" and refused to answer, and then proceeded to waste another couple of screens of bandwidth with blather unrelated to my question.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 10:09 PM
 
11 posts, read 40,321 times
Reputation: 30
I have not read this thread...these are my thoughts.

If you don't like guns for whatever reason, fine. No one is forcing you to buy one or learn to shoot. I however am not just going to walk around unarmed. No, I really don't "need" an assault weapon, but ya know what y'all don't "need" high performance cars/motorcycles either and they can be just as dangerous in the wrong hands.

Gun bans and gun free zones are only going to be obeyed by law abiding citizens. Criminals do not care about the law, hence why they are criminals. Look at DC, Chicago, and other places that have bans on guns...the good citizens are left defenseless against the thugs.

There are three kinds of people in this world...the sheep, the sheepdogs, and the wolves. If you've never heard of the analogy, here ya go: On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs
I'm not a sheep and I'm not a wolf...I'm a sheepdog. If you want to be a sheep, fine. It is your life, not mine. Do not however expect me to leave myself defenseless too. I am not going to permit myself to be a victim and I am going to be ready to defend myself.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 10:10 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,087,589 times
Reputation: 3718
Default Ask, and Yea Shall Receive...

Eric Holder, the new Attorney-General, on gun control:

Newsmax.com - Eric Holder Was a Gun Control Nightmare (http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/holder_gun_control/2008/11/21/153808.html - broken link)

The Volokh Conspiracy - Eric Holder on firearms policy:

The Two Malcontents » Eric Holder: Gun Grabber (http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2009/01/14/eric-holder-gun-grabber/ - broken link)

Barak Obama:

Barack Obama on Gun Control

This one from Oregon Democrat gun owners fearful of their own national leader:

Blue Steel Democrats: Senator Obama's Position on Gun Ownership Rights

McCain's comments:

McCain Criticizes Obama, Clinton on Gun Control - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

or Senators: First, Chuckles Schummer [the most egregious]:

http://www.guncontrolkills.com/154/guncontrol/charles-schumerbarbara-boxer-gun-control-bills-soon/ (broken link)

Chucky Schumer

Or, Barbara Boxer? (banning "cop killer bullets"? Such patently illiterate nonsense, but then, we elected them, now didn't we?)

Gun Law News - Barbara Boxer

Or, say, Nancy Pelosi?

Nancy Pelosi Calls for “Compromise” on Guns - PAFOA Blog

Never Yet Melted » Nancy Pelosi Wants Guns Registered

Ms. Feinstein? Ted Kennedy? Bloomberg? Gregoire? Shall I go on? Want more links, jtur?

You're right... there's no federal or state interest in any new gun control / confiscation / "management options" with this new Admin. How could I have been so mis-informed?

Well, if you want more of this, and can't find it yourself, just ask. I've got all night, and the Internet's loaded with this stuff. I won't even distract you with font changes.
 
Old 05-13-2009, 10:30 PM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,296,043 times
Reputation: 8265
Quote:
Originally Posted by rarch View Post
Would a gun free USA be possible for the USA or just a ideal of pacifists, and religous types or would this mark the US becoming a moral and decent society if this were to occur
It would be a very very dangerous place to live and work. Home invasions will be rampant, as there will be no fear on the part of the bad guys that the home owner has a gun to defend himself and family.

It has nothing to do with religion and morality, except perhaps to point out that the least moral hide under the cloak of religion.
 
Old 05-14-2009, 02:59 AM
 
919 posts, read 1,671,253 times
Reputation: 478
Default a guy in his underwear said

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."
Mahatma Gandhi
 
Old 05-14-2009, 05:55 AM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,338,391 times
Reputation: 2559
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
Eric Holder, the new Attorney-General, on gun control:

Newsmax.com - Eric Holder Was a Gun Control Nightmare (http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/holder_gun_control/2008/11/21/153808.html - broken link)

The Volokh Conspiracy - Eric Holder on firearms policy:

The Two Malcontents » Eric Holder: Gun Grabber (http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2009/01/14/eric-holder-gun-grabber/ - broken link)

Barak Obama:

Barack Obama on Gun Control

This one from Oregon Democrat gun owners fearful of their own national leader:

Blue Steel Democrats: Senator Obama's Position on Gun Ownership Rights

McCain's comments:

McCain Criticizes Obama, Clinton on Gun Control - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

or Senators: First, Chuckles Schummer [the most egregious]:

http://www.guncontrolkills.com/154/guncontrol/charles-schumerbarbara-boxer-gun-control-bills-soon/ (broken link)

Chucky Schumer

Or, Barbara Boxer? (banning "cop killer bullets"? Such patently illiterate nonsense, but then, we elected them, now didn't we?)

Gun Law News - Barbara Boxer

Or, say, Nancy Pelosi?

Nancy Pelosi Calls for “Compromise” on Guns - PAFOA Blog

Never Yet Melted » Nancy Pelosi Wants Guns Registered

Ms. Feinstein? Ted Kennedy? Bloomberg? Gregoire? Shall I go on? Want more links, jtur?

You're right... there's no federal or state interest in any new gun control / confiscation / "management options" with this new Admin. How could I have been so mis-informed?

Well, if you want more of this, and can't find it yourself, just ask. I've got all night, and the Internet's loaded with this stuff. I won't even distract you with font changes.

Excellent post RM.
It amazes me to hear people that support Democrats say that they're not supporting folks that want to take guns off the street. The only democrats that believe in gun rights are a few small town & rural politicians.
By & large they run on an anti gun/anti reality ticket.
 
Old 05-14-2009, 06:11 AM
 
Location: In a house
5,230 posts, read 7,338,391 times
Reputation: 2559
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
Eric Holder, the new Attorney-General, on gun control:

Newsmax.com - Eric Holder Was a Gun Control Nightmare (http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/holder_gun_control/2008/11/21/153808.html - broken link)

The Volokh Conspiracy - Eric Holder on firearms policy:

The Two Malcontents » Eric Holder: Gun Grabber (http://www.the-two-malcontents.com/2009/01/14/eric-holder-gun-grabber/ - broken link)

Barak Obama:

Barack Obama on Gun Control

This one from Oregon Democrat gun owners fearful of their own national leader:

Blue Steel Democrats: Senator Obama's Position on Gun Ownership Rights

McCain's comments:

McCain Criticizes Obama, Clinton on Gun Control - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

or Senators: First, Chuckles Schummer [the most egregious]:

http://www.guncontrolkills.com/154/guncontrol/charles-schumerbarbara-boxer-gun-control-bills-soon/ (broken link)

Chucky Schumer

Or, Barbara Boxer? (banning "cop killer bullets"? Such patently illiterate nonsense, but then, we elected them, now didn't we?)

Gun Law News - Barbara Boxer

Or, say, Nancy Pelosi?

Nancy Pelosi Calls for “Compromise” on Guns - PAFOA Blog

Never Yet Melted » Nancy Pelosi Wants Guns Registered

Ms. Feinstein? Ted Kennedy? Bloomberg? Gregoire? Shall I go on? Want more links, jtur?

You're right... there's no federal or state interest in any new gun control / confiscation / "management options" with this new Admin. How could I have been so mis-informed?

Well, if you want more of this, and can't find it yourself, just ask. I've got all night, and the Internet's loaded with this stuff. I won't even distract you with font changes.

Excellent post RM.
It amazes me to hear people that support Democrats say that they're not supporting folks that want to take guns out of the hands of the citizenry or severly limit what & how much you can have. I went to the range yesterday with close to 800 rounds. I did not shoot them all but I could have. Nobody got hurt in the expending of over 400 rounds, thats not counting the thousands sent down range by the 10 or so others there.
Guns, ammo & the ammount a person has or has the supplies to make are personal things & nobodies business as long as they arent being misused, just like any other personal belongings.
The only democrats that believe in gun rights are a few small town & rural politicians.
By & large they run on an anti gun/anti reality ticket at the national level.
 
Old 05-14-2009, 06:20 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 49,723,994 times
Reputation: 24555
If all guns magically disappeared there would be a really huge market of knives, stones and clubs.
 
Old 05-14-2009, 06:35 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,179 posts, read 9,141,786 times
Reputation: 9523
Ditto, Rifleman and Tin Knocker.

I have good friends in SC who describe themselves as "Yellow-dog Democrats" who belong to hunting and preservation groups, who hunt deer, coons, ducks, turkeys, etc. They simply do NOT understand that the higher ups in their Party want to take away their guns. No matter how many times they give speeches both on the Congressional floor and in front of anti-gun groups against individual ownership of guns, when they talk to more 'moderate' Dems, butter wouldn't melt in their mouths. And folks pay no attention to voting records. It's all about inspiring emotional passion for physical control - something so many folks, Republican and Democrat, can't seem to see. Or, don't want to, because it conflicts with their ideology. Politicians, no matter how fervent, don't have ideology, but choose to use it to exert power. They convince their adherents that the US can and should be gun-free, ignoring the truth as hard as they can for personal power.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top