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.
I said nothing about not needing force. What we don't need is force from fools.
Oh, you mean things like para-military SWAT teams busting down 87-year-old grandma's door. I'd consider those folks, or at least their commanding "officer," fools.
There would be far less of those sorts of foolish stunts if the slimeballs committing the crimes knew the house they were about to knock over was armed and manned by an individual capable of preventing said slimeball from committing said crime in the first place.
I said nothing about not needing force. What we don't need is force from fools.
Translation: what we need is a police state, where the government rules every aspect of everyone's life and everyone becomes dependent on the government.
Quite frankly, the most foolish people I know are well-educated. I'd far rather be surrounded by a dozen rednecks with firearms than hang out with half that number of highly educated people who are armed. The rednecks, at least, tend to have common sense. In the words of the old man who gave me my first job as a carpenter, there's no point in buying an expensive screwdriver when all you need is a butter knife.
Even though I'm "well-educated," I agree with you. Most of academia, especially in certain disciplines, tend to completely lack common sense, even though they are highly "educated." Being in a roomful of those sorts of folks armed would be a worst nightmare. Especially the most "liberal-minded" among them. I'm quite sure there would be a shootout if the folks I work around were all armed. There is a lot of hate in certain circles of academia.
It is my belief that many of the hard-core liberals that want to ban guns feel this way based on their own psychology and tendencies more so that anyone else's. They don't trust themselves to not become a homicidal maniac, thus they trust nobody else either in that regard. Which may have some merit if we look at the political/social leanings of mass murderers. Might be an interesting line of research.
Because I certainly don't think that the boy who went and shot tin cans with his dad in his youth turned gunman in a mass murder simply because he knew how to use a gun or owned one. Again, the psychology of a killer is not addressed in our upside-down society. Only the tools used in their murder spree. Guns kill; people don't. SUV's run over deer; the driver doesn't.
translation: What we need is a police state, where the government rules every aspect of everyone's life and everyone becomes dependent on the government.
Even though I'm "well-educated," I agree with you. Most of academia, especially in certain disciplines, tend to completely lack common sense, even though they are highly "educated." Being in a roomful of those sorts of folks armed would be a worst nightmare. Especially the most "liberal-minded" among them. I'm quite sure there would be a shootout if the folks I work around were all armed. There is a lot of hate in certain circles of academia.
It is my belief that many of the hard-core liberals that want to ban guns feel this way based on their own psychology and tendencies more so that anyone else's. They don't trust themselves to not become a homicidal maniac, thus they trust nobody else either in that regard. Which may have some merit if we look at the political/social leanings of mass murderers. Might be an interesting line of research.
Because I certainly don't think that the boy who went and shot tin cans with his dad in his youth turned gunman in a mass murder simply because he knew how to use a gun or owned one. Again, the psychology of a killer is not addressed in our upside-down society. Only the tools used in their murder spree. Guns kill; people don't. SUV's run over deer; the driver doesn't.
A lot of the "highly educated" have never experienced life outside of academia. They go from high school to pre grad, then post grad then teach at high school/community college then to teaching at a university. All along the way they were never questioned, everyone agrees with them because they stay within the same cork lee their whole life. Students rarely challenge their idiology for fear of a failing grade and even if they do challenge the professor the professor will use his/her bully pulpit to drown out whoever does not fall in line.
The best teachers I have ever had were at community college who worked a day job in the field they were teaching and actually had real world experience to pass to students on how to be successful.
I remember those days. Nobody batted an eye if you brought a gun to school (for shooting teams, hunter's safety, etc). I did it many times. Nowadays, I'd be carted off to jail.
And there was VERY little firearm-related trouble back then related to that. Certainly nothing like today. Thing is, it's not the guns that have changed. We've had full autos since the early twentieth century (and they were LEGAL for the public at one time) and "assault weapons" since the M1 Carbine and German Sturmgewehr. It's not the guns that changed, it's the human brain that has changed. It's society's tendencies that have changed. Why is that? Nobody seems to want to research that out. It's too politically incorrect. They'd rather keep confronting the symptoms rather than the disease. A band-aid approach is never successful in the long run.
The little kids on my school bus used to use my gun case as a footstool! Times change!
The big difference between then and now is responsibility. Even at 12 I was responsible for my gun. It was a privilege to shoot on the HS rifle team. If I did not follow the rules; I would loose that privilege. Back then; everything was our responsibility - even things that we were not responsible for.
Today nobody is responsible for anything. Everybody and everything is responsible besides our actions. Government is responsible, teachers are responsible, parents are responsible, the gun is responsible - we do not accept responsibility! The buck has to stop someplace; but we just don't want it on our doorstep!
The little kids on my school bus used to use my gun case as a footstool! Times change!
The big difference between then and now is responsibility. Even at 12 I was responsible for my gun. It was a privilege to shoot on the HS rifle team. If I did not follow the rules; I would loose that privilege. Back then; everything was our responsibility - even things that we were not responsible for.
Today nobody is responsible for anything. Everybody and everything is responsible besides our actions. Government is responsible, teachers are responsible, parents are responsible, the gun is responsible - we do not accept responsibility! The buck has to stop someplace; but we just don't want it on our doorstep!
Remember liberals were against the Patriot Act, though it was about foreigners, saying to not let the terrorists win, that if we interrogated terrorists too harshly that means we are compromising our values and letting al-Qaeda win?
if we give up our 2nd amendment rights because of these shootings, that is an act of surrender and it shows that we are letting people like Aaron Alexis, James Holmes, Adam Lanza and Cho Seung Hui win. If we change our way of life and give up our freedoms because of them.
Remember liberals were against the Patriot Act, though it was about foreigners, saying to not let the terrorists win, that if we interrogated terrorists too harshly that means we are compromising our values and letting al-Qaeda win?
if we give up our 2nd amendment rights because of these shootings, that is an act of surrender and it shows that we are letting people like Aaron Alexis, James Holmes, Adam Lanza and Cho Seung Hui win. If we change our way of life and give up our freedoms because of them.
When know the funny thing is? if you goggle them as well as most most shooters, they are Liberal Democrats.
Remember liberals were against the Patriot Act, though it was about foreigners, saying to not let the terrorists win, that if we interrogated terrorists too harshly that means we are compromising our values and letting al-Qaeda win?
if we give up our 2nd amendment rights because of these shootings, that is an act of surrender and it shows that we are letting people like Aaron Alexis, James Holmes, Adam Lanza and Cho Seung Hui win. If we change our way of life and give up our freedoms because of them.
You are a wise man......... Nice work rep forth coming
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.
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.
