Our Gun Rights

leaningright said:
No, it was Low when he responded to my post on how many guns I currently own.
Click to expand...

Well, you have my permission, mo my request, to post whenever you have something to say. Some people claim to know more than they do, and think their own ideals should be the only ones. Anyone who doesn't think as they do is crazy or wrong. That is simply not the way the world works.
 
Dixie said:
But you can't objectively evaluate history from the perspective that people realized what they didn't. The endowed rights didn't apply to what wasn't understood to be 'people' just as rights don't apply to horses and cattle today. That may seem harsh to you from today's perspective, but that's the point, in 1776, they didn't have today's perspective, theirs was much different, and it took many years to overcome and for perspectives to change.

The rest of the trash you wrote is not worth the time for me to respond. The nation was founded on the principle that all men are created equal and endowed rights by their Creator, and it is what sets us apart from any other nation on the planet. We went from being an insignificant new start-up country in 1776, to the world's greatest superpower ever known to man, in just over 200 years, far exceeding much older and better-established dynasties. Idiots? HARDLY!
Click to expand...

You're the moron who's incapable of evaluating history objectively. It's why you have to twist and finagle everything to explain the idiocy of 'the Creator's' intentions. Doesn't matter if you read and respond to my posts; you're too stupid to grasp their meaning anyway and my purpose for posting to you was to expose the gaping flaw in your reasoning. Mission accomplished.
 
Howey said:
Who, praytell, is Low?

And why is he/she telling other posters what to post?
Click to expand...

From what I can tell in the years of being on this site, Lowaicue is a Brithish ex-pat living on Hong Kong. I think he is an older gentleman (at least older than I am) and has a very low opinion of America in general. After I posted about my gun ownership he, as is his norm, said something degrading and asked me not to respond. I was logging to comply until he used the came up with the "I'm the parent, your the kid" type of response to someone else here. Basically that's it. No one gave me an official 'do not reply' message but I was just going to respect the fellow's wishes and respond to others.
 
apple0154 said:
I have re-forested most of my suburban back yard. Trees include pine, maple, birch, magnolia, weeping mulberry, spruce, apple, pear and plum and a huge grape vine. There are raspberry and blackberry bushes along the foundation. It's nice to hear the birds in the morning for whom we leave the fruit. And there's the fish pond with a fountain which the birds use and which is the summer home for my gold fish.

The yard is still a work in progress. I plan to build a waterfall and replace the fountain. Then lay some pavers to make a patio at one side of the pond.

I'm on a corner lot with two huge blue spruce in front. While they are great I could still see the street so I planted a few more trees. HA! Now when I sit in the living room I'm completely obscured. One retired neighbor commented they love the way I "decorated" as it reminds them of the country.

The back yard is also surrounded by a 10 foot cedar hedge and we have bunnies visit. Wild rabbits, all sizes, from big adults to babies.

I'm sure some neighbors are not pleased. The neighbors diagonal to me have their trees cut and shaped and the other neighbor has a lawn so neat my place must look like a jungle. One the other hand the neighbor to my left is not all that particular. He's a lawyer and she's a teacher and she told me they don't have time to garden. When I asked if I could go on their property to trim the other side of my hedge she said to do whatever I want. HA! They appreciated me doing it.

And that's my slice of life. A country boy in suburbia. A lover of nature; animals, trees and women. Not necessarily in that order. :)
Click to expand...

Your place sounds like paradise to me. I look forward to having my own wild-heaven sanctuary after we retire as well. Unfortunately, I live in the middle of the urban sprawl, but we do enjoy the birds and squirrels. Good for you for creating a save haven for the wild critters. :)
 
WinterBorn said:
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.
Click to expand...

Ah... that explains a lot, actually. Seems I am the subject of a pinhead boycott! I wondered, because normally whenever my threads go without response, it's because I have nailed some brilliant altruistic point that simply can't be argued rationally. With all the anti-gun talk lately, it seemed unlikely to be the case with this thread.

Hey it's okay pinheads, go ahead and TRY to ignore my threads and not respond... greater pinheads than you have tried and failed. It's futile, really.

Oh, and whoever is sending out the boycott messages, can you please instruct Howey and Bijou to stop responding to every post I make, it is annoying to have to scroll past the ignored user tables when I am trying to read responses. Thanks!
 
Dixie said:
Ah... that explains a lot, actually. Seems I am the subject of a pinhead boycott! I wondered, because normally whenever my threads go without response, it's because I have nailed some brilliant altruistic point that simply can't be argued rationally. With all the anti-gun talk lately, it seemed unlikely to be the case with this thread.

Hey it's okay pinheads, go ahead and TRY to ignore my threads and not respond... greater pinheads than you have tried and failed. It's futile, really.

Oh, and whoever is sending out the boycott messages, can you please instruct Howey and Bijou to stop responding to every post I make, it is annoying to have to scroll past the ignored user tables when I am trying to read responses. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I hate to spoil your paranoia, but you were not the subject of the Pm I received. The suggestion was to stop arguing with the liberals.
 
Dixie said:
Ah... that explains a lot, actually. Seems I am the subject of a pinhead boycott! I wondered, because normally whenever my threads go without response, it's because I have nailed some brilliant altruistic point that simply can't be argued rationally. With all the anti-gun talk lately, it seemed unlikely to be the case with this thread.

Hey it's okay pinheads, go ahead and TRY to ignore my threads and not respond... greater pinheads than you have tried and failed. It's futile, really.

Oh, and whoever is sending out the boycott messages, can you please instruct Howey and Bijou to stop responding to every post I make, it is annoying to have to scroll past the ignored user tables when I am trying to read responses. Thanks!
Click to expand...

Use your 'ignore' function, rube. ;)
 
leaningright said:
From what I can tell in the years of being on this site, Lowaicue is a Brithish ex-pat living on Hong Kong. I think he is an older gentleman (at least older than I am) and has a very low opinion of America in general. After I posted about my gun ownership he, as is his norm, said something degrading and asked me not to respond. I was logging to comply until he used the came up with the "I'm the parent, your the kid" type of response to someone else here. Basically that's it. No one gave me an official 'do not reply' message but I was just going to respect the fellow's wishes and respond to others.
Click to expand...

WinterBorn said:
He is referring to Lowaicue.
Click to expand...

Gotcha. I understand now. I don't think the guy's bad, just passionate.



You're the one I thought of. I understand you've been known to do things such as this.

Dixie said:
I'm not paranoid, I just read what was written and apparently misunderstood. Apologies pinheads, but if you ever do get the brainstorm to boycott me, please DO!
Click to expand...

Yes, you are paranoid. And dumb as dirt. May I make a suggestion to resolve your problem?

 
Dixie said:
Second Amendment:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.​

Every so often, a tragedy happens of some kind, involving a gun. When it does, we see the usual parade of anti-gun activists emerge yet again, calling for more restrictive gun laws, or outright bans on certain guns. It's as predictable as the sunrise. I can't help but think each time this happens, there are a certain number of people who were supportive of the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, who change their minds to some degree. We see this manifest today, when a supposed 'gun-rights' person says they can "see the point in getting rid of automatic assault rifles, etc." To me, this illustrates why radical lefties should never be "agreed" with. It leads to further Leftism. Anti-gun people are not going to be satisfied until every American is disarmed. We need to always remember that, when they are making their emotive pleas to "stop the madness" or whatever. It's all about incrementally divorcing us from our 2nd Amendment rights.

Our founding fathers made this our second most fundamental right as free people. This right, as our others, is inalienable... means you can't take it away because it is endowed as a birthright. It is NO ONES to take. Still, that doesn't dissuade those who want to take this right away. At some point, people who thought they knew and understood the 2nd Amendment, said... meh... okay, maybe we can have some "regulation" of guns and ownership, because they DID use the word "regulated" in there... and that means we can "regulate" guns and gun ownership, but that is not what is meant at all. "A well regulated militia" essentially means "A well-outfitted militia." A militia in which regular maintaining of effectiveness and efficiency is kept diligently. We must remember, in 1776, the states had enemies all around them, the Spanish and Indians in Florida, the French lurking around in the Louisiana territory, the Indians over the Appalachian Mountains... America was not a secure and safe place. We also couldn't respond with military jets out of Washington in a matter of minutes or hours, it took months to move armies into place or send help to people under siege, so it was vital that states maintained a well-regulated armed force, to defend themselves.

Even more than this, there was a deeper sentiment involved. Remember, in 1776 we were severing ties with a King who repressed our rights and rendered us helpless against his armies. Our people had come from tyrannic rule to a country where they could realize freedom and independence. In establishing the new government, the founders were compelled to add some component by which the people would ALWAYS have the ability to rise up and take control of the government, if the government ever became tyrannical. They wanted to ensure this never happened again, so they incorporated the individual right to bear arms, in order that we might defend our other inalienable rights from tyranny. So we have a double purpose for the second amendment, and it was established as the most important right behind freedom to speak, worship, and assemble.

Enter the 20th Century Moderates, and their willingness to entertain the Leftist notions. Nowhere in the 2nd Amendment, do we find the governments right to decide what weapons are appropriate, and which can not be allowed. It says our right to bear arms can not be infringed. A "properly regulated militia" should be able to have whatever current weaponry is available, without governmental restriction. In fact, not only that, but it's frankly not any of the government's business, they have no right to KNOW what weaponry we have. Again, something that simply isn't in the 2nd Amendment, the right for government to keep track of who has what weapons. In matters of military strategy, this knowledge is paramount to victory and success, so why would we assume the people are to sacrifice this information to the government? The 2nd doesn't say you have the right to bear arms so long as everyone knows what arms you bear. It says nothing about government registration of firearms, yet we somehow managed to let anti-gun people talk us into that. Were they satisfied? OF COURSE NOT! They want to eliminate all guns for everyone! Incrementalism!

Moderates will holler... "You don't need an AK-47 to hunt deer!" ...But the 2nd Amendment was not created so hunters could hunt. Both hunting and target range shooting, are nice benefits to having the 2nd Amendment, they are not the reason for it. Of course, in 1776, a lot of people DID hunt, they supported themselves by hunting. The gun was seen as a most essential tool in pioneer days, and one would think it's almost something the founding fathers might have simply overlooked, when establishing our inalienable rights. We don't have the specified right to keep and bear hammers, axes and saws. But our 2nd most important right, is to keep and bear arms. That is because the purpose for this right was far more reaching than simply sportsmanship or recreational use. Moderates entertaining the Leftist notions, has somehow shifted the argument to a place it was never intended to be.

Our right to bear arms is inalienable. It is not even permitted by the 2nd amendment for government to know what kind or how many we have.

It's blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Click to expand...

right on dixie!

It doesn't matter if I want to own a bazooka or a tank or f-15 jet fighter I have a gotdammed right to do so and no socalist progresive can tell me other wise! These LIEbruls are so stupid!!!
 
SmarterthanYou said:
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?
Click to expand...


Oh DO pay attention at the back. You know I do not live in your dangerous country.
 
j-mac said:
All the better for us...We already have our fill of ignorant boobs.
Click to expand...

That looks like a win win then. Not sure how that particular part of a lady's anatomy could be described as ignorant, but ... whatever floats your boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top