The outdated 2nd amendment.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago
0 
Your cavalier attitude belies the fear manifested here in these Forums. Only a man who lives in fear desires a gun to protect himself. Only a fearful man would sanction the continued slaughter of innocents in elementary schools, high schools, and churches, because of his paranoia, and his own guilt. I see you find it great sport to ridicule those who do not live in the imaginary world of Lee Greenwood, but there are no secrets you can conceal.
Surely you are aware that the government monitors Facebook, and Forums like this throughout the internet. They have sophisticated algorithms to flag certain keywords. But of course, this is old news. But there is an even older story that many of you were either never told, or you have long since forgotten.
With all of the great technological advances we have seen in the last 150 years, who among you could actually believe that God is somewhere "behind the curve", and not on the cutting edge? A man's heart and soul: yesterday, today, and tomorrow, is an open book. Nothing is ever lost , and nothing is ever deleted. And so, your ridicule, contempt, and indifference, are now legendary. And these are all coals heaped upon your own head; not mine.- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
What a bizarre, and absurd comparison !!! Do you realize that you are comparing war to violent crime? Perhaps the end result is the same, which is an act of murder, but they are predicated on two separate and distinct motives. Not only that, but violent crime is usually of a personal nature, involving only a small group of participants, whereas wars of conquest engage a cast of thousands!
In the absence of guns, not only are you suggesting that individuals would resort to wearing body armor, using swords, lances, crossbows, and the big iron balls with spikes, but you want us to believe that this archaic weaponry would match numbers with automatic weapons firing lead bullets. Got Potatoes?
Why not make a comparison to wooden spoons? It has about as much relevance. I have always had a weakness for women. But your fascination, and love of guns seems to not only be on par with my insatiable craving for seafood, but may even surpass my desire. I'm sorry, but after following this thread for weeks, I'm getting the feeling that something here just ain't right. And so I have to ask. Do you guys love women as much as you do your guns, or do you take your guns to bed with you? If so, how does that work?
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
I've got some advice , If you don't like guns ......stay away from them and this thread because YOU obviously don't understand either the interest in them or the facts and statistics dealing with the controversy , That alone would eliminate three quarters of the posts in these threads . I have never seen so much misinformation , misquotations , misguided agend-izing , by pseudo intellectuals in my life . It seems like the entire left side of the knob on this radio is out of order .
But hey , I guess that's why the left is so aligned to juvenile postings to begin with. Every time I read an anti- gun post or an anti- second amendment rant , I'm reminded of note passers in forth grade they just got their new box of Crayola's and a fresh piece of paper . Its so obvious that many people don't have a clue about guns , crime or the constitution .
I have one of those! And I gave one to my son as well, when he couldn't find an old fashioned waffle iron anywhere (they've all gone to the belgium style).
We're all set then, and can sell our guns. Should make a tidy profit if we can find those that have tried to defend themselves with their waffle iron.
I can only imagine if you were on the board of directors of a school system. During a discussion concerning the safety of a cross walk, you would likely bring out charts and graphs detailing speed,velocity, the earths gravitational pull etc., when all you really needed was a crossing guard, a stop sign, and a lower speed limit.
You state the obvious and miss the point entirely. Of course guns, don't kill people by themselves.The hillbilly's penis didn't rape Ned Beatty in the movie "Deliverance" either. But the hillbilly holding the penis most certainly did. Unfortunately we can't take the penis out of the hands of a rapist. But we can take the guns out of the hands of potential killers and mass shooters. But according to you, and the Sons of the Pioneers, that would create an intolerable inconvenience.
P.S. I forgot to add your quote: "... it also doesn't take a genius to know that asbestos actually causes death to people, while guns do not ." Huh? Can you please explain what has happened to all of the people in the world who have been shot and killed with guns. If guns don't cause death then we have been greatly deceived. Where have all the people gone if they are not dead? Perhaps the man from Idaho can enlighten us.- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
The tragedy of the divisiveness between progressives and conservative ideology . IS that no cures ever present themselves from the ideology of two separate hemispheres of political thought or action . Why ? Only the clearest minds seem to understand . Merely that COMMON SENSE never mingles long enough to breed with the progressive mind and produce offspring ..This same left IS all about the journey towards utopian servitude . Self indulged as it is , it becomes evident only when deeper minds truly begin to ask why . Why such deeply scarring wounds between two parties continue to fester unhealed , in spite of the seriousness of issues . And only then does it become clear . The left doesn't care about the immediacy of any issue , it cares more about the 'end game '
What can I get for me at the expense of All Others .
A perfectly safe world with no kind of violence at all .
Where the lion lays down with the lamb.
Freedom and boundaries are two sides of the same coin.
The highest good is that which is for the sake of itself AND something else.
( Not just for the sake of itself or only for the sake of something else.)
We have, in this country with our laws and and the liberty given to us by our Constitution, equality of opportunity,
Not outcome.
One's success is only guaranteed by oneself,
Unless the govt. gets too big for its britches.
.
You commented: "... equality of opportunity,Not outcome.
One's success is only guaranteed by oneself..."
I've been in the workforce since I joined the Navy at the age of 17. But I started out with a very big advantage: 2 parents who were always home, who never fought, who never drank alcohol or did drugs, who went to church on Sunday, who never beat me like a punching bag, and to top it off, I lived on a 200 acre farm. I'm talkin "Little House On The Prairie", with all the amenities. Other than the racist Billy Bob rednecks I had to occasionally deal with, life was damn good.
My success has a lot to do with how I got started. How do you think these kids in the inner city are getting started? I got started with the Deluxe Green Acres Package, whereas they're getting started with the standard no-frills Inner City Package.That's the package that includes drive by shootings, prostitutes,drug dealers, and pimps. I didn't get to choose mine, and they didn't get to choose theirs. How can anyone like me claim that my success was guaranteed by my own motivation. Even for people who grow up poor in the country, it's like growing up with a silver spoon compared to growing up in the ghetto. I have no doubt that a majority of the people raised, and still living in poverty, would have succeeded with my advantage. The system is evil, and it is the system that has created the underclass, and must be abolished. Many of these people are standing in quicksand, and personal motivation has little to do with the outcome.
Amen Jean ~
~
If individuals are PERSISTANT in their defense of a 2cnd Amendment claim which they believe gives them the "Right to Own A Gun", when in REALITY the right is reserved for a "Militia" such as the ARMED Forces, they must remember the FACT that when the draft was originally ratified way back in the 1700's, "arms" essentially consisted of SINGLE Shot Muskets & Cannons ~
I Agree, Automatic Weapons belong in the Military, not in the hands of private citizens ~- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
wilderness commented:
What a foolish thing to say! I did finish the 6th grade, after all! (Although the President DID dictate that millions of illegal aliens should remain HERE regardless of the law).
History is not defined through the imagination of white supremacy, but only through actual events. You say you have a 6 grade education, and that is good. But you should have continued in the series, all the way through grade 12. Perhaps then you would understand that if Obama deported all of the illegals , then every American of European descent would be on their way back to the fatherland.
Doug, it appears you have confused the issue. Inviting someone into your home does not give them the right to rape your wife, to kill your son, and to render you homeless. Anyone convicted of such behavior today would receive a very long prison sentence And just because the Indigenous may not have possessed a "proper" physical deed to the land, fashioned in the style of the European, this in no way indicates that an entire continent was "up for grabs". Might does not make right. If so, then the recent terrorist attacks can only be seen as acts of justifiable homicide.
I know that I am often critical of Obama, but to be fair he has to be the greatest gun salesman ever! Since he took office acting-as-president there have been 100 million guns sold. Not a very good acting job I might add in all fairness.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Your concept of the "Black Market" is pure suburban / trailer park fantasy. There isn't a store called "The Black Market". You can't just get in your car and drive to "The Black Market" and go shopping for guns. It doesn't work that way, and it's not always so easy to find what you're looking for. And it involves connections, more time, effort, money, and a certain amount of risk; all of the cumbersome hurdles that just might discourage a would be mass shooter. In other words, it's not your friendly neighborhood Walmart.
You are the master of hyperbole. Which of course is quite ironic since you are the same one always demanding proof. Where is your proof that if a killer can't get a gun at Walmart he can simply go over to your imaginary "Black Market" store and buy one? Of course that's rhetorical because there is no proof.Yet, you and "The Sons of The Pioneers" continue to defend the indefensible.
Seriously Doug, this has got to be some of your best commentary. From a creative standpoint, it's very entertaining, which is why I am awarding you with one of my best girls.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
You commented: Stop the criminal element , that's what needs fixing , I have said it a hundred times . When will the left let maturity catch up with" intelligence" ? That's the reality of the problem here .
And if you say it a thousand times, then what will you achieve? How will this prosper the world? There is no intelligence in offering an answer without a solution. We can clearly see that it serves no good purpose to help a blind man half way across the street. Better to leave him standing in his place than to help him at all. What other purpose could we ascribe to such an action, other than a desire to injure, aggravate, or even to kill?
From such judgments and proclamations we can clearly see that original thought is not an option. Your answers of hyperbole and vitriol exist only to proffer a non-existent solution that necessarily will lead to further argument. A hot cup of cocoa topped off with marshmallows might make you feel better.
Many of your notions and concepts come from a Eurocentric view of the world. Islam is no more dangerous than Christianity. Let the gun lover's take their own advice. They say "Guns don't kill,people do". It only follows that "It's not the religion that kills, but the believer."
One of the things that confuses you the most is theft and ownership. Let me simplify it for you. If you are walking down the road, and you pick a flower to take home to your boyfriend, or girlfriend, you are then in possession of that flower. Regardless of the fact that you have no receipt of purchase, we can understand that in a sense that flower "belongs" to you. Should I come along and steal the flower, then I have literally stolen your property, as you have possessed, and laid claim to said property before my arrival. Americans have used Christianity to justify Manifest Destiny; murder,rape. and theft against non-Christians. This is no different than what you have suggested about Islam.
America comprises some of the greatest terrorist nations of the world. And we can see the inhumanity, and bloodthirsty nature of many Americans throughout the commentary in this Forum. But many of you do not see it that way simply because the Indigenous are considered by the white racist to be an inferior race; a people not deserving of any consideration under the white man's law. If this were not still true today, Manifest Destiny would not still be accepted.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Its all about Aroma Therapy!
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Once again we see a biased assessment. You left out the drug epidemic among white teens, as well as the propensity of young white males to become mass shooters. You didn't exactly tell a lie, you just left some things out in order to paint a better picture.
But most importantly, you still have offered no solutions. You have simply given an overview of what you perceive to be the problems, and then suggested that we must "back up to square one". OK onhorseback, where is square one? Is it when Columbus landed? Is it when the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade began? Is it when Irish immigrants fleeing the potato famine were being denied jobs, adequate housing, and often accused of contributing to a rise in violent crime? Was it when women didn't have the right to vote? Was it when the Japanese Americans were herded to the Konzentrationslager? Was it when Rosa Parks said "no" to your cousin? Please, take us to square one.
Peace, Doug.
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
It is good to see your expression of honesty. It is always about the money, isn't it onhorseback? Your opening salvo begins with the money. Mighty American of you. And there are millions who think the same way, so I realize you will never get lonely. The great Merle Haggard, who unlike Lee Greenwood, actually knows how to write songs, said in "The Fightin Side of Me":
"If you don't love it leave it
Let this song that I'm singin be a warnin'
When your runnin' down our country man
You're walkin' on THE FIGHTIN SIDE OF ME"
But what Merle doesn't understand is that leaving America just ain't enough. I really want off this planet yesterday. Because something just ain't right. In my "imaginary" world, one human life is worth more than the right to own a gun. But I realize that's not practical in your world.
I have expressed a legitimate desire to leave the planet Earth. Consequently, buying a ticket to Russia will not solve my problem. The only way I can leave here is through natural death, divine intervention, or alien abduction. None of those options are presently on the table. You manufactured an irrelevant solution simply to illustrate the popular nationalist fiction that the United States is a better place to live than Russia. If only for the sake of argument, if Russia is truly a bad place, that is like suggesting throat cancer is preferable to lung cancer. It is absurd.
You continue with another well worn fiction that I owe my rights and freedoms to the United States. However, I was created by God, not George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, or any other miscreant slave-owner. But it is not uncommon for the American to take credit for the accomplishments of other men, other races and nationalities, and in this case, even divine beings. Of course, the purpose of that comment was to put me at odds with American soldiers who have been killed in various wars during the last 200+ years. By doing so, it is your hope to paint me as an insensitive, unpatriotic, uninformed, and ungrateful person.
But I have served my time in the military.I was suckered and coerced into participating in the maintenance, and further development of a killing machine toward the end of the Vietnam War; just like all of the rest. Unfortunately, many good men and women have not died for freedom, but for the enrichment of a ruling elite that now stands at the helm of the New World Order. But be of good cheer, when Jesus comes to Idaho, he will provide the remedy, and all weapons of war and destruction will be beaten into plowshares. And all of those who have embraced evil will simply fold back into the dust.
You have commented that : ".. it is probable that a third of these deaths involved alcohol.” Now let's compare probability to fact. It is an indisputable fact that 100% of the 400,000 firearm-related deaths involved a firearm! The superior intellect can reason that without the availability of firearms, a large percentage of that number would still be alive.Read,Comprehend, and Learn. Come out of the wilderness and get a better biscuit.
When we look at mass shooters like Alan Lanza, Dylan Roof, Eric Harris, and Dylan Klebold, we see that they are/were wimpy little boys that couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. It was the guns that leveled the playing field and made them "tough guys". You and wildebeast would have us believe that these wimps would have used a baseball bat, or a car battery to get the job done if no gun had been available. And it is laughable to suggest that these cowards would have had the nerve to attack a large group of people with a butcher knife, and then succeed at killing 9, 10, 20 or more people. What you are suggesting is simply not realistic. It is also not realistic to expect that a white kid from the suburbs would have the nerve to approach unsavory and violent characters in search of an illegal firearm. We need to remember who these "tough guys" targeted: 6 and 7 year old kids, suburban teenagers, and people praying in a church.
And concerning your remark about cars. Yes, it would be a good idea to de-escalate motor vehicles, and eventually ban the personal automobile altogether. Contrary to popular belief, cars and guns are not essential for human life. The public has been suckered into believing these foolish notions by industries that profit from human misery. When someone you love is killed with a gun, or is paralyzed from the neck down as the result of a Motor Vehicle Collision, you can console yourself with the notion that their sacrifice was necessary and unavoidable.
Please tell the parents who will forever live with the memory of Sandy Hook Elementary that the death of their children "...makes up only the tiniest of minutiae of gun-caused death..." Also remind that they should not let their emotions prevent others from owning a commodity designed primarily to kill people. Gee, how American of you! Emotion is what separates a human being from a reptile. I am a warm-blooded human being who stands far and above the station of a cold-blooded reptile. But I am not surprised that my subordinates continue in their vain attempts to ridicule the superior intellect. Jesus stood above the whole Earth, yet he was tormented and crucified by the talking monkeys he came to deliver. I would not expect to be treated any better than the master of time and space.
You don't understand my comment about automobiles because you have obviously been brainwashed. Your analogy is irrelevant: Clothes do not usually kill people unless someone takes a dirty sock and chokes the life out of a gun advocate. Over 40,00 people a year are not being killed by pre-faded jeans and crotchless panties. The lack of permanent housing creates a hardship but does not necessarily cause death, nor paralysis. And a central government is only essential for those who seek to subjugate the masses. Anarchy is the superior condition of mankind. Jesus was an Anarchist. But you would need to read a book in order to understand this.
Trains are not killing 0ver 40,000 people annually. Neither are buses or jet airliners. Dismantling capitalism would be a good idea, as the world would function more efficiently, and would progress more quickly without the use of money. And computer technology doesn't routinely kill as guns and cars do. Yes computers are used to detonate bombs and to carry out U.S. drone airstrikes on innocent civilians. But you could also drown a gun advocate by tying his feet to an AK-47, attaching a rope to the weapon. and then lowering the gun advocate head first into a heated swimming pool filled with baby alligators; all the while singing God Bless America. It is ridiculous to suggest that as a consequence we should ban the use of water! Your argument attempts to ridicule my argument by presenting irrelevant and absurd comparisons befitting of an 8th grade student.
Your last comment puts the cake right in your face.This is not all about you and how you feel. This is about 32,000 gun deaths and 40,000 auto deaths annually. I cannot speak for an American, but needless slaughter and human sacrifice is something that a human being might get emotional about. Especially since there is a practical remedy.
You commented: " ...It doesn't work. It doesn't work because the killer will kill whether he can find a gun or not; it is what he wants to do and WILL do. So you take his gun - so what? He will find another way. The train won't..."
And so , where is your proof that an individual unable to procure a firearm would resort to another method? Of course, you have no proof, only hyperbole. It is interesting that you seem to know so much about the motivations of a killer. How do you explain this ? Dylan Roof was paranoid. He believed that black people were taking over the world, and that he was defending the white race. We already know that you possess assault weapons. Who is it that you are defending, and how far are you willing to go?
Have you heard of Love? I already understand the cause and the effect, and it is not a matter of rocket science. Yes, we could put together a panel of scientists to explore why men trip over their shoelaces, but from a practical standpoint, a 5 year old kid , even a kid from Idaho, can easily figure out that by simply tying his shoes he can solve the problem.
Practical application rarely requires any deeper understanding. Consider the millions of people who use cell phones without understanding the science behind cell phone technology. Love has never been applied on a large scale. Love is the only thing that can stop gun violence. There can be no other solution, and the historical record agrees with me. I am sure that to a baboon suffering from a serious infection, the painful injection of penicillin would seem like going off on a tangent. How could she possibly associate the pain of the needle with the restoration of her health?
wilderness explained, <"… by incessantly claiming that it is the inanimate object which causes severe and mortal wounds, rather than the unbridled emotions and deranged thinking of a shooter, we REFUSE to isolate the true difficulty.
AND
<"… the damage has been DECREASING for a number of years as we address social problems such as:
1. Poverty
2. Ignorance
3. Racism
… for reasons other than reducing violence.">
!
What are those reasons, wilderness?
Could it be informed, capable parents and EDUCATION?
Yes.
I believe American society can and will increase its focus on mental and spiritual health as time marches on … Failing that, NO, we should not have guns.- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Your Tieyrt amendment is absolutely necessary because of monetary lawsuits being used to break the backs of the firearms industry through frivolous or tort lawsuits . A very famous tool of the left . ' If you can't beat them on the streets sue them to death' . The motto of the socialist activist , Too bad it isn't working out for you ! ---------- Here's your free gift ................
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
Remove all the assault weapons in America and leave me my 22 caliber target plinker . this gun holds ten small 22 caliber bullets , capable of plenty of protection , AND capable of " mass killings" in the wrong hands . This is why , for the left , its all or nothing ! A war of attrition on all guns .
Another non - assault weapon , a single action revolver capable of mass killing as well . Perhaps carrying two or more of these six guns one can still take out 12 to 18 people .
Assault weapons bans are stupid and would accomplish absolutely nothing ! - ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
This may come as shock to everybody. But in another life as a teenager, I used to go hunting with my father. We use to hunt ducks, geese, quail, partridge, and pheasants. My dad raised hunting dogs that were trained. I always felt that when I carried a gun and shot it that it was an extension of my will and empowered me to force that will upon the animals that I was hunting. It was a very powerful feeling. I suspect most hunters if they told the truth would have similar feelings. I can imagine what is like to fire an assault weapon. When I was in the Air Force, we went on alert and they gave me a grease gun with 45 rounds. I had no training as to how to use it. They told me, pull the slide back, hold it sideways, pull the trigger and spray it. It did give me a feeling of real power. Thank God, I never had to use it.
<"I always felt
that when I carried a gun and
shot it
that it was
an extension of my will
and empowered me
to force that will
upon
the animals
that I was hunting.
It was a very powerful feeling.">
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
- ahorsebackposted 9 years ago0
I'm glad you brought that up. And now , once again, I will take you to school. When people are paranoid, they imagine someone, or something is coming after them. Invariably, that something or someone isn't real. The people you hear complaining the most about guns are people like me; people who don't matter to the government. The people who are advocating guns are people like you; people who also don't matter to the government.
It is good for the government when people like me and you argue and don't get along. It is also good for the government when the races hate each other. It makes their job a whole lot easier. As far as politicians pandering to one side or the other, that's just part and parcel of the Dog and Pony Show; all very well staged and choreographed.
And it doesn't matter one way or another if the NRA is victorious or not. Like they say, "The House Always Wins". Like it or not wilderness, you and your buddies are right out there in the hot sun with me picking cotton. The only difference between us, is that I am wide awake, and you are still dreaming: that good ol' American Dream!
In spite of the machinations of Big Brother, there is the problem of people being killed with guns. Your charts and figures are meaningless down here on the ground. Not in a million years do I believe a wimp like Adam Lanza could have killed all of those little kids at Sandy Hook with a butcher knife, a ball-bat, or a pair of channel locks. No, without a gun , the massacre would have never taken place. It is the same in the inner cities.
Most of the killings are done with guns. Most of the killers are cowards. For a coward, the gun is the weapon of choice. A coward will not choose a weapon like a knife that is up front and personal. It's too cumbersome. It's too slow. It's not going to happen. Plus killing a bunch of people, and then taking yourself out with a shot to the head, is preferable to slicing your own throat and then bleeding out. Yes, the gun is the perfect weapon for a coward, from every angle. That is why we must eliminate these weapons. Just look at the picture. Can you honestly tell me that Adam Lanza could have killed 20, 6 and 7 year old kids without a gun? And please, as you are thinking about this, imagine what the first responders saw when they got to the school.
Related Discussions
- 51
Who needs guns? The world is full of mentally ill people, what is going on?
Who needs guns? The world is full of mentally ill people, what is going on?This tragedy wouldn't have happened if people weren't allowed guns. Why the hell do people need gun's anyway?
- 35
What are your thoughts on gun control?
What are your thoughts on gun control?With the recent mass shooting in Oregon, it makes me think that there needs to be better gun control laws. "But criminals are still going to break laws and get guns, so you're really just controlling law-abiding citizens" ... maybe, but how many of...
- 29
Gun Violence in America Year, to Date, as of April 22, 2023
I watched Fareed Zakaria's show yesterday and saw these shocking statistics that I thought were worthy of sharing.According to the Gun Violence Archive (The link to the site is at the end of this post)19,942 Americans have died in gun-related incidents this year.541 Children and Teenagers (0-17)...
- 26
How Do We Solve These Mass Killings??
We've had three mass killings (that we've heard about) in the last month. Here they are:1. Las Vegas - Oct. 1 - a man using various guns kills 58 people and injures another 546.2. New York - Oct. 31 - a man uses a truck and kills 8 people and injures 11 others.3. Sutherland Springs, Texas - Nov. 5...
- 57
Do you believe modifying the Second Amendment is going to prevent mass acts of v
Do you believe modifying the Second Amendment is going to prevent mass acts of violence?This questions is for all of those situational or sunny day anti-gun advocates. Pro-gun advocates spend a lot of time and effort, not mention millions of dollars protecting the Second Amendment. If...
- 264
Evidence of Satan
I went to a cat lover's site on Facebook page. Somebody posted a picture of a man holding up the head of a decapitated cat. Can someone explain why somebody would do something like this? Is it necessary for the evolutionary process? Was evolution responsible for that? If you...