Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:03 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,198,564 times
Reputation: 5240

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
How many times has the feds raided your house to take your guns away?


since 1991? once. I had a class 3, and they got bad information from someone, but the atf did not give a crap, they just came in and took everything, and gave it back after they found the information to be bad.

I got rid of my class 3 about a few years ago.

Last edited by monkeywrenching; 04-06-2013 at 06:31 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:04 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,051,128 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siskiwit View Post
Analogies aren't exactly your strong point... (maybe some day you'll actually find out what is your strong point... )
Perhaps you need to learn what an analogy is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:07 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,198,564 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhenomenalAJ View Post
Who said "mama bear" cant protect herself? Just don't like ballless losers with assault weapons mowing people down. Don't see the contradiction?

really? want to go there? if you look at the democrats view on assault weapons, then any weapon can be considered an assault weapon. better start banning those hammers, steak knives and pools, since all have killed more than rifles have.

if you want cowards, then you have to look no futher than a person who refuses to arm themselves and to only rely on the cops to protect them, when the cops have no duty to protect the individual citizen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:08 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,855,263 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Do we have an unalienable right to protect ourselves?

What's unalienable cannot be taken away or denied. Its most famous use is in the Declaration of Independence, which says people have unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
To find the origins of the word unalienable, we can look at the root, alien, which comes from the Latin alienus, meaning "of or belonging to another." This provides the basis for our word, with the prefix un- providing the turnaround "not," and the suffix -able providing the idea of capability. Therefore, we get “not able to be denied.†Oh, and if you are wondering about the common argument as to whether it is "unalienable" or "inalienable," either is correct.


Who has the right to try and take this right from us?
I suspect the momma bear got the protective feeling as soon as she saw those "baby browns" looking up at her. Before that, she couldn't care less.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:17 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,051,128 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
I suspect the momma bear got the protective feeling as soon as she saw those "baby browns" looking up at her. Before that, she couldn't care less.
What about merely entering a bear's territory?

Generally, bears will avoid confrontation.....unless they're surprised.

The bottom line is that animals have a natural right to protect themselves.

We too were given the right to protect ourselves and our property. No man can take that right away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:29 AM
 
Location: The Brat Stop
8,347 posts, read 7,241,253 times
Reputation: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Do we have an unalienable right to protect ourselves?

What's unalienable cannot be taken away or denied. Its most famous use is in the Declaration of Independence, which says people have unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
To find the origins of the word unalienable, we can look at the root, alien, which comes from the Latin alienus, meaning "of or belonging to another." This provides the basis for our word, with the prefix un- providing the turnaround "not," and the suffix -able providing the idea of capability. Therefore, we get “not able to be denied.†Oh, and if you are wondering about the common argument as to whether it is "unalienable" or "inalienable," either is correct.


Who has the right to try and take this right from us?
Quote:
From where did momma bear get the right to protect her cub?
IDK, can bears read?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:33 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,855,263 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
What about merely entering a bear's territory?

Generally, bears will avoid confrontation.....unless they're surprised.

The bottom line is that animals have a natural right to protect themselves.

We too were given the right to protect ourselves and our property. No man can take that right away.
I don't think the momma bear has any clue what a black helicopter is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Montgomery County, MD
3,236 posts, read 3,938,592 times
Reputation: 3010
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
really? want to go there? if you look at the democrats view on assault weapons, then any weapon can be considered an assault weapon. better start banning those hammers, steak knives and pools, since all have killed more than rifles have.

if you want cowards, then you have to look no futher than a person who refuses to arm themselves and to only rely on the cops to protect them, when the cops have no duty to protect the individual citizen.

That's ridiculous to bring up such nutty things. You've convinced yourself George Washington and Thomas Jefferson wanted ignorant rednecks to have any weapon they want up to nuclear bombs. You're injecting your own irrational beliefs into what people should have, assault weapons' only purpose is to mow people down. Sane people do not feel the need to brutally murder people they disagree with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 06:45 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,198,564 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhenomenalAJ View Post
That's ridiculous to bring up such nutty things. You've convinced yourself George Washington and Thomas Jefferson wanted ignorant rednecks to have any weapon they want up to nuclear bombs. You're injecting your own irrational beliefs into what people should have, assault weapons' only purpose is to mow people down. Sane people do not feel the need to brutally murder people they disagree with.


since you really do not know what you are talking about.

mow people down? guess what, obama was wrong in his speech when he said that the firearms used were automatic, so dont go believing your idol.

both thomas jefferson and george washington wanted the entire people to have and use firearms. too bad you cant see that. all you have to do is look up quotes by both presidents and see for yourself.

if you cant find any then let me know and i will gladly provide them for you.

you are still in the mistaken idea that government or cops have to protect you, since neither has to protect any single individual, that is a responsiblity that is left to the individual.

as far as calling people derogatory names, if you want to see someone that is ignorant, then you have no further to look than in the mirror.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2013, 07:04 AM
 
4,130 posts, read 4,461,152 times
Reputation: 3041
Rights are fundamental to society, which requires sentience to know what those concepts are.

Comparing rights of humans to bears in nature makes no sense.

Rights can be taken away, and they have been. Blacks didn't have the right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness that the OP says cannot be taken away for over a century in the US. Rights are abstract concepts about how we want to live in society, and what we think are ethically right. Without laws and enforcement those rights don't truly exist.

We can also take away many rights when some one breaks the laws of society. Which is why we can lock up murderers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:54 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top