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.
Another alphabet agency has ordered automatic weapons , Why is every government agency ramping up on their weaponry, and suppressing ours??
Does any one stop to think about that?
Long arms have not been the weapon for most crime on the streets yet they are the ones under attack by the government.
Liberals are a tool and the government knows it.
Psychopath doctors are believe every one is as they are. and they willingly fallow government mandate.
I believe something much bigger is on the rise ,and it points to the economy failing and parts of the country being taken by those whom we owe more than we are capable of paying off.
Our gutless spineless government are likely to let this happen, they created the problem. Phoney money.
We already have hundreds if not thousands of fee trade zones all over the country and they are not subject to our laws at all.
Thanks to Hillery. China has many of them .
This new word order begins to take on a very different light as agenda 21 is continuing to be implemented.
Some talk of civil war but the war the government is manipulating the media and shredding the constitution and the turmoil the world is in , another false flag event enough to seriously move people that otherwise would have stayed in the shadows like Bundy, media will get shut down so the government can do as they please .
They already have the power now to shut off your phone ,did you know that ?
This is how I see it.
A man does. He has to say things like "One Taniqua Hall is one too many," as a New York radio talk show host did in referring to the 9-year old New York girl who was accidentally shot last year by her 12-year old cousin playing with his uncle's gun. But the truth is he desperately needs Taniqua Hall, just like he needs as many Columbines and Santees as can be mustered, until they spell an end to the Second Amendment. And not for the benefit of the masses, but for the benefit of his self-esteem.
He often accuses men with guns of "compensating for something." The truth is quite the reverse. After all, how is he supposed to feel knowing there are men out there who aren't intimidated by the big bad inanimate villain? How is he to feel in the face of adolescent boys who have used the family gun effectively in defending the family from an armed intruder? So if he can't touch a gun, he doesn't want other men to be able to either. And to achieve his ends, he'll use the only weapon he knows how to manipulate: the law.
Of course, sexual and psychological insecurities don't account for ALL men against guns. Certainly there must be some whose motives are pure, who perhaps do care so much as to tirelessly look for policy solutions to teenage void and aggressiveness, and to parent and teacher negligence. But for a potentially large underlying contributor, psycho-sexual inadequacy has gone unexplored and unacknowledged. It's one thing to not be comfortable with a firearm and therefore opt to not keep or bear one. But it's another to impose the same handicap onto others.
People are suspicious of what they do not know-and not only does this man not know how to use a gun, he doesn't know the men who do, or the number of people who have successfully used one to defend themselves from injury or death. But he is better left in the dark; his life is hard enough knowing there are men out there who don't sit cross-legged. That they're able to handle a firearm instead of being handled by it would be too much to bear.
Such a man is also best kept huddled in urban centers, where he feels safer than he might if thrown out on his own into a rural setting, in an isolated house on a quiet street where he would feel naked and helpless. Lacking the confidence that would permit him to be sequestered in sparseness, and lacking a gun, he finds comfort in the cloister of crowds.
The very ownership of a gun for defense of home and family implies some assertiveness and a certain self-reliance. But if our man kept a gun in the house, and an intruder broke in and started attacking his wife in front of him, he wouldn't be able to later say, "He had a knife--there was nothing I could do!" Passively watching in horror while already trying to make peace with the violent act, scheduling a therapy session and forgiving the perpetrator before the attack is even finished wouldn't be the option it otherwise is.
No. Better to emasculate all men. Because let's face it: He's a lover, not a fighter. And he doesn't want to get shot in case he has an affair with your wife.
Of course, it wouldn't be completely honest not to admit that owning a firearm carries with it some risk to unintended targets. That's the tradeoff with a gun: The right to defend one's life and way of life isn't without peril to oneself. And the last thing this man wants to do is risk his life-if even to save it. For he is guided by a dread fear for his life, and has more confidence in almost anyone else's ability to protect him than his own, preferring to place himself at the mercy of the villain or in the sporadically competent hands of authorities (his line of defense consisting of locks, alarm systems, reasoning with the attacker, calling the police or, should fighting back occur to him, thrashing a heavy vase).
In short, he is a man begging for subjugation. He longs for its promise of equality in helplessness. Because only when that strange, independent alpha breed of male is helpless along with him will he feel adequate. Indeed, his freedom lies in this other man's containment.
I like to think that the founding fathers weren't so set in their ways, that even they "themselves" couldn't see a point in time where what they thought to be "truth" might be debated.
Whether we would like to think it or not, Man's nature never changes. Tyranny will rise if we allow it.
Lumping a niche platform position of the progressive liberals, such as gun restriction, with 'Left' is like lumping the 'Right' with the platform positions of the Westboro Baptist church or the KKK.
In short, by and large, the American 'Left' does not hate guns anymore than the American 'Right' hates gays or Blacks.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,326 posts, read 54,350,985 times
Reputation: 40726
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreeBeard
The left does not hate "guns"', they hate the rampant and senseless violence that are the product of gun violence. They put the value and safety of the living above uncontrolled gun proliferation.
I'm not too fond of looney RW O-P-I-N-I-O-N-S put forth as fact either.
... lefts true agenda is to burn the constitution!!!
The proliferation/use of weapons of mass destruction aren't guaranteed by the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. And I don't think people of all political persuasions who oppose the proliferation of these weapons "hate" guns ... they want to stop the carnage caused by those weapons of mass destruction. As the Constitution says, the nation should have an armed "militia", nothing more.
The reality is they replaced societies ole norm with whatever turn you on. Now they are trying to control the results of what some have chosen. They think that war is drugs is useless but fail to see fighting violence by war on guns is even less successful .In fact its the whatever turn you on that has increase gun ownership to new levels.
Lumping a niche platform position of the progressive liberals, such as gun restriction, with 'Left' is like lumping the 'Right' with the platform positions of the Westboro Baptist church or the KKK.
In short, by and large, the American 'Left' does not hate guns anymore than the American 'Right' hates gays or Blacks.
I agree with you.
This board is filled with right and left wing zealots, excuse makers, unthinkng party-line spewers, keyboard anarchists and keyboard sheeple (to use an overused but adequate description).
There are also clear thinking, educated about the issues, reasonable people who quietly live their lives, don't infringe (and don't WANT to infringe) on the rights of others (including those damned guns that people like me are so fond of), understand the need for cooperation to move the country forward, and who walk the middle of the road because they realize that stepping too far right or too far left will take us all into the ditch (to badly torture a metaphor).
I believe in the people of this country. You. Me. Our neighbors. I believe in them because they are our most valuable resource. I'm afraid of where we're headed because the inmates are running the asylum right now. And the inmates are emboldened and very freakin noisy. But I believe that eventually we'll figure it out.
If I'm wrong and if we DON'T figure it out, I guess I'll eventually be measuring for those drapes for the cave we'll be living in.
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.
