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.
how are "blacks" being targeted? because of the S.C incident? is there a pattern that blacks are being targeted by guns because of their skin color?
Why'd you single out blacks out of all of the groups listed?
Quote:
We already have laws for criminals and the death penalty.
There are no laws for criminals, remember they don't follow them.
Quote:
Tell me how are you going to confiscate 340 million guns in the streets and homes? change the 2ND Amendment?.....do you want to put in place the "Stop and Frisk" program from New York City nationwide, a program that liberals and minorities dislike?
Liberals say we can't deport 11 million ILLEGALS in our country, then explain how are liberals going to confiscate 340 million firearms?.....deporting 11 million ILLEGALS is more attainable than confiscating 340 million firearms and building more prisons.
Woah, where'd that come from?
There really isn't a movement to ban or confiscate all firearms. It's not very practical as you not so eloquently put, much like mass deporting of illegal immigrants.
Quote:
we deal with that less than 1% of our society that break laws with smart policing and families being involved and don't punish the 99% of responsible gun owners and violate the 2nd amendment.
How are gun owners being punished by gun regulations and control?
Actually, the odds are against you if you have a weapon at home. You don't know this?
Actually, there is absolutely no way that you or anyone can know this.
There is no way to ascertain how many break-ins are aborted because the criminal fears the home-owner may be armed or knows that the home-owner is armed.
Why'd you single out blacks out of all of the groups listed?
'cause I'm a racist and didn't know it. ......I didn't have time to go to each group of your list since it was so bogus your claim, don't take it personal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
There are no laws for criminals, remember they don't follow them.
I didn't say there are no laws for criminals, I said we already have laws in the books and the death penalty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Woah, where'd that come from?
There really isn't a movement to ban or confiscate all firearms. It's not very practical as you not so eloquently put, much like mass deporting of illegal immigrants.
there isn't a movement to ban firearms in our country????? where you been in the last decade, I guess GUN CONTROL from liberals to you is just a piece of paper and cheap politics.....
Actually its easier to deport ILLEGALS out of the country because ITS THE LAW already in the books and there is NO AMENDMENT in our constitution that gives them amnesty.....now the right to bear arms is in our constitution.....see the difference?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
How are gun owners being punished by gun regulations and control?
I think most gun owners have stated their case why most proposals by Obama and liberals who are anti-gun won't work and is a big intrusion from the federal government...........if you don't want to see their point of view then I can't help you, you already made up your mind about this topic.
Actually, there is absolutely no way that you or anyone can know this.
There is no way to ascertain how many break-ins are aborted because the criminal fears the home-owner may be armed or knows that the home-owner is armed.
Actually, we do know this. The statistics prove that having a gun at home comes with real risks (we can argue about how much risk) that outweigh the possibility of maybe perhaps actually using it in the unlikely event that a) your home is invaded, and 2) you are home when it is.
I will acknowledge that there is a chance you could protect yourself, but you cannot deny that it is still irrational.
sure..because we all expect an invasion of this country to take place with foot soldiers arriving in landing craft and troops parachuting from the sky
Well, the 2nd Amendment pretty much guarantees that. Having to deal with not only our military forces but an armed populace would be a nightmare for any would be invader. It sure as hell deterred Japan from trying to invade the US mainland during WWII, as per that famous Japanese Admiral's quote.
Anyway... I am not interested in further legislation, control, more laws, altering, or repealing the 2nd Amendment, and compromising my rights, or the rights millions of other American citizens who have done nothing wrong because of the lowlifes in society, who commit criminal acts. Crack down hard on them, instead of this pre-emptive BS that only hinders us from protecting themselves.
Constitutional stipulated rights and freedoms are to be held inviolate.
An amendment to the constitution is possible but should only come after extensive debate and some form of referendum or plebiscite giving citizens their option.
Enforced confiscation of legitimately owned firearms held by private citizens against their wishes is an IMPOSSIBLITY.
A major culture shift in thinking is required by the entire populace as it applies to the use of firearms for dispute resolution .
There needs to be a complete 180 degree turn in Police mandated mission statement BACK to "serve and protect".
The rights of someone already diagnosed with a mental illness are not infringed upon by removal of licensed firearms any more than they would be for any other "impairment of abilities".
The rights of ALL citizens to the domestic environment being sustained for the reasonable expectation you can all engage in the "pursuit of happiness" is paramount to all other rights.
Well, the 2nd Amendment pretty much guarantees that. Having to deal with not only our military forces but an armed populace would be a nightmare for any would be invader. It sure as hell deterred Japan from trying to invade the US mainland during WWII, as per that famous Japanese Admiral's quote.
Anyway... I am not interested in further legislation, control, more laws, altering, or repealing the 2nd Amendment, and compromising my rights, or the rights millions of other American citizens who have done nothing wrong because of the lowlifes in society, who commit criminal acts. Crack down hard on them, instead of this pre-emptive BS that only hinders us from protecting themselves.
All your private rifles did nothing to deter Yamamoto against invading America; the realities of warfare in general did that long before he even thought of Pearl Harbour.
There is this one though: "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."[
Ooooopsy...also unsubstantiated by any facts:
"The line serves as a dramatic ending to the depiction of the Pearl Harbor attack, but it has yet to be verified that Yamamoto ever said or wrote anything resembling the quote. Neither At Dawn We Slept, the definitive history of the Pearl Harbor attack by Gordon Prange, nor The Reluctant Admiral, the definitive biography of Yamamoto in English by Hiroyuki Agawa, contains the line.
Randall Wallace, the screenwriter of the 2001 film Pearl Harbor, readily admitted that he copied the line from Tora! Tora! Tora! The director of Tora! Tora! Tora!, Richard Fleischer, stated that while Yamamoto may never have said those words, the film's producer, Elmo Williams, had found the line written in Yamamoto's diary. Williams, in turn, has stated that Larry Forrester, the screenwriter, found a 1943 letter from Yamamoto to the Admiralty in Tokyo containing the quotation. However, Forrester cannot produce the letter, nor can anyone else, American or Japanese, recall or find it.
Regardless of the provenance of the quote, Yamamoto believed that Japan could not win a protracted war with the US. Moreover, he seems to have believed that the Pearl Harbor attack had become a blunder—even though he was the person who came up with the idea of a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. It is recorded that "Yamamoto alone" (while all his staff members were celebrating) spent the day after Pearl Harbor "sunk in apparent depression".[3] He is also known to have been upset by the bungling of the Foreign Ministry which led to the attack happening while the countries were technically at peace, thus making the incident an unprovoked sneak attack that would certainly enrage the Americans.[4]
Hollywood History should be avoided at all costs. All it does is support a false supremacy silliness.
You have not been invaded for the same reason Great Britain wasn't. In order to invade you need only one soldier with a rowboat.
In order to occupy and subdue you need a force equal to or greater than ALL of the countries you have already occupied and also those you are attempting to. Hitler learned that the hard way when he INVADED Russia. Japan learned it the hard way when it invaded innumerable island nations in the Pacific along with nations on the mainland of Asia while attempting to prosecute a war with an equal opposing force in the Pacific that still had access to manufacturing and resources to support constant supplying.
Every war in the 20th century onward has been lost because the aggressor has bitten off more than it could chew. That goes for the U.S. as well in places like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghaistan, ...you can invade but you cannot occupy and subdue. Yamamoto may have known this as he was an intelligent guy.
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.
