Our Gun Rights

Bijou said:
I didn't thank you and I don't thank you. You're entitled to feel and act as you do, including kidding yourself that you're providing some 'service'. The destroyed habitat is due to human interference and encroachment; what you do is a band-aid on what humanity does and continues to do. With all due respect, there's nothing to be gained by either of us in this discussion. You're not going to 'enlighten' me on the subject. Your assumption that I am ignorant or naive about hunting is erroneous. My position is an informed one. I simply don't respect it as a 'sport' or 'service'.
Click to expand...
yet you live in a house, in a town or a city, and the land it sits on used to be the home of animals that fulfilled that very cycle. so we can blame you for WBs hunting and conservation efforts. congrats.
 
apple0154 said:
I've been trying to make restitution ever since. Last summer I saw a tiny bird on the lawn. After rescuing it I checked out it's nest. There was a hole in the bottom so I stuffed some rags in the hole so it wouldn't fall out again. The next day it was out and the rags had fallen. I set the bird on a branch. The bird was shivering/scared. Cats come in my back yard so I knew the bird wouldn't survive on the ground. A few days later I was in my office on the phone with my wife looking out the window and noticed the baby bird was in the fish pond and drowning. I ran out and saved it, again. I held it upside down so the water would drain from its lungs. HA! Anyway, by now the bird knew me so it opened it's mouth so I would feed it. A few days after that I never saw it again. I like to think it moved on. :)
Click to expand...
nice move, dipshit. all you did was prolong this little animals agony. but you delude yourself in to thinking that it 'moved on'. by interfering with nature, you probably led this poor little bird to starve to death. good job.
 
leaningright said:
I was told not to respond and I have respected those wishes and let Winterborn hash this out so far (he does a good job of it) but this sounds so much like a parent giving his child an "I know better than you do" talk that I couldn't resist. It also sounds like what some want the government to step in and do as well. No thanks. It is freedom and with freedom comes responsibility.

I also live in a rural area and am 30 minutes from any law enforcement or emergency response. We that live out here have created our own fire department. We can't do everything the larger, city departments can do but in the 20+ years that I have been involved I can count over 15 houses that we still have in the area because of our efforts. Some of us volunteer fire fighters are also first responders to help in the event of a medical emergency plus we know all of the nurses in the area and can call them in to help until an ambulance arrives.

We don't even think about the critters that's may come upon our places and harass our livestock or pets...we have weapons to dispatch them if needed. And yes, heaven forbid that someone should want to do us harm, we will also use those weapons to deter and/or detain, if possible, ... and dispatch them if necessary.

The nearest shooting range that is equipped with lockers or safes is 150 miles from here.

And so now we are back at that point where everyone looks at the issue as if everyone's situation were their own and throws their own ideas for solutions out there. No room for compromise, no room for looking at it through another's eyes....it's my way or the highway. That hasn't ever worked to well, has it?
Click to expand...

When people buy a property they have certain criteria. If they wish to live where there are no services then it is their decision. It does not mean they can break any law. At the moment you are permitted to have as many guns as you like, if the law changes you will not be permitted and must, naturally live accordingly. If, as seems likely, there are some American half brains who consider years in prison preferable to giving up their guns it is their choice.
The people who are against armed idiots will fight to have the law changed, I guess. I would further guess, from reading several american sources, that they outnumber the gun lovers. Civilisation will catch up with you, one day, because you are a potential danger to the greater society. Until then you can play bang bang you're dead and hosing down forest fires to your hearts content, just as long as it makes you feel like macho man.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that is not 'courage' on your part, that's ignorance.
Click to expand...

No its not. It's being civilised and living where my taxes are used correctly, to provide the services I require, police, fire, hospitals, libraries, transport, etc etc etc. You choose to live in perpetual fear. THAT is ignorance, dear boy.
 
Lowaicue said:
When people buy a property they have certain criteria. If they wish to live where there are no services then it is their decision. It does not mean they can break any law. At the moment you are permitted to have as many guns as you like, if the law changes you will not be permitted and must, naturally live accordingly. If, as seems likely, there are some American half brains who consider years in prison preferable to giving up their guns it is their choice.
The people who are against armed idiots will fight to have the law changed, I guess. I would further guess, from reading several american sources, that they outnumber the gun lovers. Civilisation will catch up with you, one day, because you are a potential danger to the greater society. Until then you can play bang bang you're dead and hosing down forest fires to your hearts content, just as long as it makes you feel like macho man.
Click to expand...
what always makes me laugh about idiots with the ideas you just espoused, is that you live in this bubble that leads you to believe that you won't be affected by aftermath of gun confiscation. See, there may be way more of you non gun owners who push for the government to take our guns, but that doesn't mean you won't be targeted as well. THEN what will you do?
 
Lowaicue said:
No its not. It's being civilised and living where my taxes are used correctly, to provide the services I require, police, fire, hospitals, libraries, transport, etc etc etc. You choose to live in perpetual fear. THAT is ignorance, dear boy.
Click to expand...
I'm quite impressed that you've lived this long with as ignorant as you are. my congratulations.
 
Lowaicue said:
When people buy a property they have certain criteria. If they wish to live where there are no services then it is their decision. It does not mean they can break any law. At the moment you are permitted to have as many guns as you like, if the law changes you will not be permitted and must, naturally live accordingly. If, as seems likely, there are some American half brains who consider years in prison preferable to giving up their guns it is their choice.
The people who are against armed idiots will fight to have the law changed, I guess. I would further guess, from reading several american sources, that they outnumber the gun lovers. Civilisation will catch up with you, one day, because you are a potential danger to the greater society. Until then you can play bang bang you're dead and hosing down forest fires to your hearts content, just as long as it makes you feel like macho man.
Click to expand...

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

This is what you are going to need to change, and it's in the Constitution, so you will need a Constitutional Amendment. The process of amending the Constitution is long and arduous, we've only done it 17 times (aside from the Bill of Rights) in our history. We've only ever repealed one amendment, and it wasn't part of the Bill of Rights. So needless to say, you have a major task ahead of you. It will take 2/3 of Congress to agree on it, then it will take 3/4 of the States to ratify it. There are currently, MAYBE, two or three states where this would seriously be considered, in most places such a measure would be defeated resoundingly and overwhelmingly. Again, you have your work cut out for you, to change a whole lot of minds.

Now if you were some big shot political leader with huge popularity among the masses, I might be concerned. But seeing how you are an insignificant nobody from the UK, and have essentially NO political voice in my country, I am not too worried about what you think or want. You can fantasize, and you can hurl your insults at Americans, and be as belligerent and rude as a Brit is allowed to be (do you all have a limit on that?), but it means absolutely nothing in terms of what is going to happen. Oh, and don't let the "sources" you read fool you, we have a tendency to allow people freedom of speech here, so the people who are opposed to things, generally make the loudest noise. There are a LOT of people who share your sentiments, but the people who strongly believe in our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, FAR outnumber you.

But.... Good luck with that!
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Can I tell you something? The only way that you guys won the War of Independence was because Brits were distracted fighting the Frogs, Dutch and Spanish. If you really think that the Brits were such terrible oppressors then why are Canada, India, Australia, South Africa, Ireland and many former colonies in Africa democracies? Contrast that with the way the French, Dutch, Germans, Spanish and Portuguese presided over their colonies.
Click to expand...

Well anybody??
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Well anybody??
Click to expand...

What do you want to argue? Why you lost a war over 200 years ago... and another one, just 200 years ago? Do you want to explain how you couldn't win either of two World Wars in your own back yard, without help from us? You want to argue about our 'nation building' as opposed to the many years your country tried and failed to colonize and control large swaths of the world? What exactly were you hoping to argue here? The way I see it, if it's not about "crumpets" or whether English muffins are actually English, you don't have much to argue about. It's not like we can discuss proper dental hygiene, is it?
 
Dixie said:
What do you want to argue? Why you lost a war over 200 years ago... and another one, just 200 years ago? Do you want to explain how you couldn't win either of two World Wars in your own back yard, without help from us? You want to argue about our 'nation building' as opposed to the many years your country tried and failed to colonize and control large swaths of the world? What exactly were you hoping to argue here? The way I see it, if it's not about "crumpets" or whether English muffins are actually English, you don't have much to argue about. It's not like we can discuss proper dental hygiene, is it?
Click to expand...

Let's start with WW2, it was the Wall Street bankers that were instrumental in causing Hitler to gain power. Should we thank you for that? It was Wall Street bankers that caused this financial crisis as well, should we thank you for that as well?

I also posted something the other day about the British in India, I doubt that you read it so I will give you the link.

http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/hitlergainspower.htm#.UBPLPfKYPVg

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?42652-Ice-T&p=1045995#post1045995
 
Last edited:
Aoxomoxoa said:
Let's start with WW2, it was the Wall Street bankers that were instrumental in causing Hitler to gain power. Should we thank you for that? It was Wall Street bankers that caused this financial crisis as well, should we thank you for that as well?

I also posted something the other day about the British in India, I doubt that you read it so I will give you the link.

http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/hitlergainspower.htm#.UBPLPfKYPVg

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?42652-Ice-T&p=1045995#post1045995
Click to expand...

If you want to believe Wall Street was responsible for Hitler's rise, you are more of an idiot than I had previously imagined, and Tom, that's saying something!

Hitler was a populist who rose to power with the support of the German people. Wall Street didn't write Mein Kampf or make it a best-seller.

And the current European financial crisis is also not the fault of Wall Street. It's because of massive debt, from trying to fund Socialism.
 
Dixie said:
If you want to believe Wall Street was responsible for Hitler's rise, you are more of an idiot than I had previously imagined, and Tom, that's saying something!

Hitler was a populist who rose to power with the support of the German people. Wall Street didn't write Mein Kampf or make it a best-seller.

And the current European financial crisis is also not the fault of Wall Street. It's because of massive debt, from trying to fund Socialism.
Click to expand...

Your knowledge of German history is predicated on your belief that the USA can do no wrong rather than the reality. Hitler's Nazi party had only around 3% of the vote in 1928, it was the Wall St. Crash and the subsequent foreclosing on US loans in 1931 that gave Hitler the votes he needed to gain power. You need to read about how Wall St. funded the rise of the German Cartels in the inter war years. I doubt that you will read it though given your previous track record. It must be a trait that's common to some Americans, both on the right and the left, as Bijou suffers from the same syndrome.

http://www.reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/chapter_01.htm
 
Last edited:
Aoxomoxoa said:
Your knowledge of German history is predicated on your belief that the USA can do no wrong rather than the reality. Hitler's Nazi party had only around 3% of the vote in 1928, it was the Wall St. Crash and the subsequent foreclosing on US loans in 1931 that gave Hitler the votes he needs to gain power.
Click to expand...

You are totally bonkers man. Germany had their OWN financial collapse, Wall Street had nothing to do with that. Yes, Germans were pissed off about having to repay debt incurred from WWI, which was crushing them economically, but again... not something that was the fault of Wall Street. Now they may have contributed to the mounting problems in Germany, no doubt, but they were FAR FROM the cause, and they certainly didn't elect Adolf Hitler.
 
Dixie said:
You are totally bonkers man. Germany had their OWN financial collapse, Wall Street had nothing to do with that. Yes, Germans were pissed off about having to repay debt incurred from WWI, which was crushing them economically, but again... not something that was the fault of Wall Street. Now they may have contributed to the mounting problems in Germany, no doubt, but they were FAR FROM the cause, and they certainly didn't elect Adolf Hitler.
Click to expand...

Did you read the stuff I linked to, of course not?
 
Dixie said:
You are totally bonkers man. Germany had their OWN financial collapse, Wall Street had nothing to do with that. Yes, Germans were pissed off about having to repay debt incurred from WWI, which was crushing them economically, but again... not something that was the fault of Wall Street. Now they may have contributed to the mounting problems in Germany, no doubt, but they were FAR FROM the cause, and they certainly didn't elect Adolf Hitler.
Click to expand...

Extract from the article I sent you.
This build-up for European war both before and after 1933 was in great part due to Wall Street financial assistance in the 1920s to create the German cartel system, and to technical assistance from well-known American firms which will be identified later, to build the German Wehrmacht. Whereas this financial and technical assistance is referred to as "accidental" or due to the "short-sightedness" of American businessmen, the evidence presented below strongly suggests some degree of premeditation on the part of these American financiers. Similar and unacceptable pleas of "accident" were made on behalf of American financiers and industrialists in the parallel example of building the military power of the Soviet Union from 1917 onwards. Yet these American capitalists were willing to finance and subsidize the Soviet Union while the Vietnam war was underway, knowing that the Soviets were supplying the other side.

The contribution made by American capitalism to German war preparations before 1940 can only be described as phenomenal. It was certainly crucial to German military capabilities. For instance, in 1934 Germany produced domestically only 300,000 tons of natural petroleum products and less than 800,000 tons of synthetic gasoline; the balance was imported. Yet, ten years later in World War II, after transfer of the Standard Oil of New Jersey hydrogenation patents and technology to I. G. Farben (used to produce synthetic gasoline from coal), Germany produced about 6 1/2 million tons of oil — of which 85 percent (5 1/2 million tons) was synthetic oil using the Standard Oil hydrogenation process. Moreover, the control of synthetic oil output in Germany was held by the I. G. Farben subsidiary, Braunkohle-Benzin A. G., and this Farben cartel itself was created in 1926 with Wall Street financial assistance.

Click to expand...
 
apple0154 said:
I always find it amusing when the people who talk about the Founding Fathers and their mentioning inalienable rights, almost to the point of worship, are the same folks who disparage government. The Founding Father, for all intents and purposes, were government. It was a bunch of government employees/workers/operatives who crafted the Constitution. It was government who gave you the very things you profess to be the pinnacle of mankind's evolution. The exceptionalism which some tout every day was conceived and imlemented by government. Now, as society progresses, the very people who stand in admiration of those who fought against an established government (the Crown) to form a better way of life stand in the way of the evolution of government.
Click to expand...
WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!
 
leaningright said:
I was told not to respond and I have respected those wishes and let Winterborn hash this out so far (he does a good job of it) but this sounds so much like a parent giving his child an "I know better than you do" talk that I couldn't resist. It also sounds like what some want the government to step in and do as well. No thanks. It is freedom and with freedom comes responsibility.

I also live in a rural area and am 30 minutes from any law enforcement or emergency response. We that live out here have created our own fire department. We can't do everything the larger, city departments can do but in the 20+ years that I have been involved I can count over 15 houses that we still have in the area because of our efforts. Some of us volunteer fire fighters are also first responders to help in the event of a medical emergency plus we know all of the nurses in the area and can call them in to help until an ambulance arrives.

We don't even think about the critters that's may come upon our places and harass our livestock or pets...we have weapons to dispatch them if needed. And yes, heaven forbid that someone should want to do us harm, we will also use those weapons to deter and/or detain, if possible, ... and dispatch them if necessary.

The nearest shooting range that is equipped with lockers or safes is 150 miles from here.

And so now we are back at that point where everyone looks at the issue as if everyone's situation were their own and throws their own ideas for solutions out there. No room for compromise, no room for looking at it through another's eyes....it's my way or the highway. That hasn't ever worked to well, has it?
Click to expand...

Who told you not to respond? Is it part of the "lets not respond to them but just talk about guns" idea that someone PM'd me too?

Respond as you wish, leaning. That is what this place is all about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top