Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: The gun is civilazation!

World Class Peach





Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 12:46 PM


"The Gun Is Civilization"
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force . If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it .

In a truly moral and civilized society , people exclusively interact through persuasion . Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force .

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat - it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly .

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force, watch too much TV , where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier, works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply would not work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded . I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... And that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act !!

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)


 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the
Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 
Visit User's Homepage
Replies:

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4772
(4786 all sites)
Registered: 12/5/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 01:56 PM
I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid.

In other words you are afraid , you pussy.

And we all know armed people never make mistakes.

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 02:04 PM
That's one perspective. An opinion. It isn't the only perspective or opinion on the matter.

My problem with this opinion is that I don't believe any of these things, which form the basis of his overall point, to be correct...

"the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm"

"The gun is the only personal weapon that [evens the playing field in the examples given]"

"Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser."

"The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter."

"[A gun] doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force."

"[A gun] removes force from the equation"


He and I would have to have much more discussion/debate in order to convince me that any of those things are correct.

The author seems to rely almost exclusively on the difference in stature of the potential victim (as smaller, weaker) against a stronger attacker to make his case to make his case for why the gun is so necessary. But that doesn't seem to be the case in the recent example of the Houston man that fatally shot an unarmed teenage boy in his daughter's bedroom that has generated so much discussion here, in fact it seems to be the exact opposite of what this author is describing...how would that situation have been different if the father had been armed with a non-lethal weapon, perhaps a taser?

I would also like to ask him the same question I asked in the "those who hate obama more than they love America" thread...how does he define "gun" in this context? Anything that shoots a bullet of any size in any configuration without limitation? How much firepower is required to put a 75-year old retiree on "equal footing" with a 19-year old gang banger? I wish I could hear his answer to that.




[Edited on 3/25/2014 by gondicar]

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5246
(5252 all sites)
Registered: 6/7/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 02:35 PM
If only there was a 'Chuck Norris' app.

 

____________________
"There's only two kinds of music...The Blues and Zip-A-Dee-Do-Dah"- Townes Van Zandt

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3233
(3236 all sites)
Registered: 1/7/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 02:42 PM
quote:


"The Gun Is Civilization"
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force . If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it .

In a truly moral and civilized society , people exclusively interact through persuasion . Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force .

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat - it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly .

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.

People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force, watch too much TV , where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier, works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply would not work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded . I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation... And that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act !!

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)





You do like to fall for those old chain letters don't you? There is no Maj L Caudill who wrote that.

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2242
(2243 all sites)
Registered: 3/23/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 02:44 PM
Every time I hear Bloomberg open his mouth about gun control I always think of the interview (which I can't seem to find anywhere anymore. Hm.) where he told the interviewer that if you are keeping a gun for security "people can't go through life like that." The interviewer then immediately asked, "Do you have armed security?" to which he said, "Uh, well sure." The interviewer then pointed out that he had something on the order of 5 armed NYPD bodyguards and 4 or 5 more armed private security guards wherever he went. She then left it there and moved on which I thought was a good move.

Can't find that interview but the below video of Bloombeerg makes the point too. "Uh, I'll get back to you" and the the group of guys around Bloomberg tells you all you need to know what he thinks about the value of guns and personal safety. The question is why is there is such a strong push to get rid of guns all of a sudden. I am not a gun owner or really even a fan of them, but this massive push to ban guns suddenly is easily the strongest I have seen in my lifetime and it reminds me of the massive push to de-regulate the finance industry. And that turned out great didn't it?

Bloomberg and his personal collection of gun protection:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCC-rEx81PE


 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 03:26 PM
Ladies and gentlemen, it does not matter if there is or there is not a Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.) it is a few paragraphs to make you think..... agree or disagree there is no right answer which Gondicar seems to understand what side of the fence you are on is how you make up your mind..... but none the less there are some valid if vague points .

 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the

Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 10353
(10352 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 06:09 PM
The "gun" also forced native americans off their land, and killed many of them.

 

____________________

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3223
(3222 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 07:21 PM
Civilization is shooting someone that flings popcorn at you in a movie theater because you are a grumpy old dick?


[Edited on 3/26/2014 by OriginalGoober]

 

____________________

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 07:39 PM
quote:
Civilization is shooting someone that flings popcorn at you in a movie theater because you are a grumpy old dick?


[Edited on 3/26/2014 by OriginalGoober]


Now that is a answer right from the mouth of someone who is part of the problem and not part of the solution come on now goober you surely can do better than that.. talk about trolling....

 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the

Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4277
(4275 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 08:41 PM
I was just thinking the other day while watching a news story about a drive by shooting that it was so civilized.
 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 10353
(10352 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 08:53 PM
quote:
Civilization is shooting someone that flings popcorn at you in a movie theater because you are a grumpy old dick?


[Edited on 3/26/2014 by OriginalGoober]
He was texting, so its justified. [in his mind]

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8410
(8411 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 09:21 PM
You had to know the response you'd get here Ryde with such a post.

The problem ultimately lies in one's definition of liberty. Pro-gun supporters are fine with those who chose not to avail themselves of the opportunity to own or carry. They would encourage those do not feel comfortable around firearms to simply stay away. Those who support legal gun ownership are probably more aggressive in their desire to see criminal gun usage (and gun mis-usage by those unprepared) prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. In these regards, their beliefs support individual liberty to the fullest extent possible.

Not so with the anti-gun crowd. They want multi-faceted registration and highly subjective qualifications. They are soft on prosecuting where gun crime is most prevalent. They want illogical bans on weapons that are rarely used in gun crime, but just look scary to them. And ultimately, they hide behind endless weasel language about preserving the 2nd Amendment and legal gun ownership, when in truth they wouldn't lose a moments sleep over confiscating every gun from every legal owner in America. Their actions and desires disrespect and seek to limit the basic liberties we are born with as Americans.

Fortunately, the anti-gun crowd is on the losing end of the argument for the time being, and has been for well over a decade. The outcome of Newtown has seen far more expansion of gun rights than restrictions. I'm not too concerned about that changing any time soon.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4277
(4275 all sites)
Registered: 8/26/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 10:10 PM
quote:

Fortunately, the anti-gun crowd is on the losing end of the argument for the time being, and has been for well over a decade. The outcome of Newtown has seen far more expansion of gun rights than restrictions. I'm not too concerned about that changing any time soon.


I would agree with you, but apparently Obama signed 23 executive orders and now all of Ryde's 2nd Amendment rights are gone.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4772
(4786 all sites)
Registered: 12/5/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 06:18 AM
I'm not anti gun I'm just anti carrying guns in public and then killing someone because your a scared pussy.
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8410
(8411 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 07:05 AM
quote:
I'm not anti gun I'm just anti carrying guns in public and then killing someone because your a scared pussy.
If you're carrying in a public place, and kill someone with your gun where circumstances don't show that your life was threatened by force and/or a weapon that could harm your life, that's called murder. I think we're pretty clear on that one.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5032
(5027 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 10:24 AM
The anti gun people simply want a better system for preventing mentally ill and irresponsible people from legally purchasing guns. The anti-gun people cannot accept the choice to do nothing in the wake of Sandy Hook. The anti-gun people are optimistic that the US can create a better system while preserving the 2nd amendment. And it's the anti-gun people who are the ones seeking and proposing ideas for a better system while the pro-gun people prefer to do nothing, even after Sandy Hook. There are many pro-gun people in the US and on this site like Rydethewind who are open and willing to improve gun education and tougher testing system. As usual, it's the leaders on TV who spew dysfunctional and destructive rhetoric that only hurts us all.
 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 10:34 AM
You are right Fuji, I knew the response I would get here , but no matter how hard I try I just can not understand how these people think or where do they think their freedom to post on this website and say just what they want came from? how they get to live the life they live, and all the comforts they have ... no instead you get a answer like this

Peachypete<> I'm not anti gun I'm just anti carrying guns in public and then killing someone because your a scared pussy. <>

So because someone carries a gun they are a pussy, wow what a revelation , so if the same person protects himself and his or her family against a carjacker or mugger they are a pussy BUT if they did not have a gun and got beat to death they are what? brave?

Or another really enlightening answer.
2112<> I would agree with you, but apparently Obama signed 23 executive orders and now all of Ryde's 2nd Amendment rights are gone.<>

instead of reasoning he exaggerates and has nothing to add just make light of the topic that always works right? If you can not see how those executive orders effect your freedoms then I truly feel sorry for you.

But the best one is

Gooberman <> Civilization is shooting someone that flings popcorn at you in a movie theater because you are a grumpy old dick?<>

Now that answer is so intelligent that is defies explanation....!



 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the

Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 11:07 AM
quote:
You are right Fuji, I knew the response I would get here , but no matter how hard I try I just can not understand how these people think or where do they think their freedom to post on this website and say just what they want came from?

Sorry, but this makes no sense whatsoever. We are talking about gun ownership among private citizens, and more specifically gun ownership by individuals with history of mental illness. Have no idea what you are getting at with this.

quote:
So because someone carries a gun they are a pussy, wow what a revelation , so if the same person protects himself and his or her family against a carjacker or mugger they are a pussy BUT if they did not have a gun and got beat to death they are what? brave?

That's obviously not what he was saying.

quote:
If you can not see how those executive orders effect your freedoms then I truly feel sorry for you.

So far you have been either unwilling or unable to make a case as to why/how those 23 specific "executive orders" (which are not really executive orders, more on that below) effect our freedoms. Rather than feel sorry for someone, why not try to help them see them from your point of view? If it is so obvious to you, then it should be easy to explain, yes?

As to what those 23 things really are...they are executive ACTIONS, not executive orders. I would have expected Forbes to get it right when they published the list, but they and other media outlets did not so I understand how you might be confused (worth noting though the FOX News did get it right). The difference it is not immaterial. So going forward please stop saying they are executive orders, because they are not. Here is an explanation for you...

quote:
Executive Actions Versus Executive Orders

Executive actions are any informal proposals or moves by the president. The term executive action itself is vague and can be used to describe almost anything the president calls on Congress or his administration to do. But most executive actions carry no legal weight. Those that do actually set policy can be invalidated by the courts or undone by legislation passed by Congress.

The terms executive action and executive order are not interchangeable. Executive orders are legally binding and published in the Federal Register, though they also can be reversed by the courts and Congress.

A good way to think of executive actions is a wish list of policies the president would like to see enacted.

Source: http://uspolitics.about.com/od/Gun-Control/a/Executive-Actions-Versus-Execu tive-Orders.htm


Also worth noting, at the end of that article on orders vs. actions, you'll read this:
quote:
Here's what the administration said at the time the 23 executive actions were proposed:

"While President Obama will sign 23 Executive Actions today that will help keep our kids safe, he was clear that he cannot and should not act alone: The most important changes depend on Congressional action."


You may want to take all this into account when you explain to us specifically how these executive actions effected have limited our freedoms.







[Edited on 3/26/2014 by gondicar]

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8410
(8411 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 11:17 AM
quote:
The anti gun people simply want a better system for preventing mentally ill and irresponsible people from legally purchasing guns.
I think there is much agreement and cooperation on this point between both sides of the debate. The problem is how.

You can't test everyone for mental illness in a way that is universally objective and affordable. Irresponsibility is hard (if not impossible) to outlaw, though in regard to children getting access to firearms I believe that parents or guardians should be subject to full criminal prosecution for acts that any minors in their care commit. Registration of firearms touches off fears of confiscation. Micro-chipping, ID systems, and magazine limits are answers to questions that will have little to no impact on how and where the majority of gun crime happens. Really effective answers are not easy to come by.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 11:30 AM
quote:
Really effective answers are not easy to come by.

So the answer is to do nothing then?

Which of the executive actions do you specifically object to? (and Ryde could use this as a refresher as he teaches us how they effecting our freedoms, or at least the two that have actually been completed)...

Here are Obama's executive actions on gun violence:

1.Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

2.Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

3.Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

4.Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5.Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

6.Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

7.Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

8.Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

9.Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

10.Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

11.Nominate an ATF director.

12.Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.

13.Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

14.Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

15.Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

16.Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17.Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

18.Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

19.Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

20.Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

21.Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22.Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23.Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

Status of 23 Executive Actions

Six months after Obama announced his 23 executive actions, Vice President Joe Biden announced the administration had completed two and "made significant progress" on others. The two it had completed were the issuance of guidance to schools, colleges and ministries on how to plan with first responders for emergencies, and providing expanded access to federal training to police officers, medical technicians and schools.

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5032
(5027 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 11:31 AM
Fujirich, if both sides want that, then what has the NRA and Ted Nugents of the world proposed?

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 01:51 PM
Why would the BATF raid a California gun parts supplier and seize it's customer list?
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8410
(8411 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 02:40 PM
quote:
Fujirich, if both sides want that, then what has the NRA and Ted Nugents of the world proposed?
Are we really taking the Ted Nugents of the world seriously in this discussion? I'm not.

I understand that opponents of the NRA won't like anything they do. That's politics. But in regard to supporting, educating, and funding gun safety, no one does more than the NRA. In terms of aggressively wanting to see prosecution of gun-related crime, they again lead the call. Dislike their overall goal, but they certainly walk-the-walk in terms of wanting responsible gun ownership.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/26/2014 at 03:01 PM
quote:
Why would the BATF raid a California gun parts supplier and seize it's customer list?


That is a great question since the customers they want the names of purchased a product sold all over the U.S. and approved by the BATFE...

Gondicar, I have explained in many posts how some of those actions effect me JUst the Hippa action is intolerable , my doctor has no right to ask me anything about guns period. and no one else has the right to any of my medical records.

#4 is horrible as well as it now wants some agency to start labeling people this can not be done without abuse and abuse means some innocent folks will be effected...

#6 is stupid gun dealers are like any other business they make their money on profit so who will pay them to run a backround check on some guy who wants to sell his gun to his cousin vinny? it takes the gun dealers time and that is money so they will attach some fee to this so that he makes money and then no one will do it anyway just making more innocent citizens into criminals. I know that some gun sales are straw purchases I do not know how to stop that but it can not be at the cost to everyone of more money!

That is two examples I am more than willing to talk about look what has happened in the eastern states like conn. they have passed gun confiscation laws and guess what no one ,well 13 % are complying but the other 87 percent are saying FOOK you .... so not the pro gun people have given the Conn. legislature a ultimatum put up or shut up they have till may 1st to either enforce the law or rescind it my money is on the latter because their is no way they can enforce it this is a prime reason to watch the slippery slope of registration!

my own opinion is prosecute the hell out of criminals with guns in fact all criminals make crime not pay when they can do that a lot of this will go away but also some of this is due to the economy .. and the amount of poor people in this country, I live in the poorest county in my state business's are closing by the droves and we are not shooting each other I do not know why people feel the need to do this but putting more restrictions and outlawing certain guns will have zero impact on nut cases killing folks.

 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the

Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 
<<  1    2    3  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com