Sarah Palin's Affair with Husbands Business Partner

Solitary said:
Yeah, but not a lot of liberals have gun collections. lol

Whether I am called a liberal or conservative doesn't really matter to me. If you want to adopt me as a liberal in training, thats great. I'm not much of one for classification. I hate to fit anyone's mold.

I've never been a joiner. I don't like groups that would me for a member. :)
Click to expand...

Yep pretty much the same. I have a fair gun collection, and dixie is convinced I am a Liberal.
 
uscitizen said:
Yep pretty much the same. I have a fair gun collection, and dixie is convinced I am a Liberal.
Click to expand...

Yeah, people always want to see those who disagree as an enemy.

So when you argue with a rabid conservative they call you a liberal, and the liberals call you a conservative.

I think of it as having fun pissing both groups off.
 
There is a new respect for the 2nd amendment after this admin amoung Liberals.

Those guns are needed to protect us from our government.
 
Desh said:
There is a new respect for the 2nd amendment after this admin amoung Liberals.

Those guns are needed to protect us from our government.
Click to expand...

I just like to shoot em. Not really into killing things, but have and will as needed.
 
Desh said:
There is a new respect for the 2nd amendment after this admin amoung Liberals.

Those guns are needed to protect us from our government.
Click to expand...

Excellent Desh!! Now who is training who? :pke:
 
I have always been a liberal who saw guns as something Americans would always have.

If 50% of Americans have a shot gun then a dictator doesnt have a chance.

I still stand that we need reasonable gun laws for the country.
 
Desh said:
I have always been a liberal who saw guns as something Americans would always have.

If 50% of Americans have a shot gun then a dictator doesnt have a chance.

I still stand that we need reasonable gun laws for the country.
Click to expand...

we need .50 cal barret. A shot gun will not cut thru standard wehicle armor.
 
Desh said:
I have always been a liberal who saw guns as something Americans would always have.

If 50% of Americans have a shot gun then a dictator doesnt have a chance.

I still stand that we need reasonable gun laws for the country.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly. I think people underestimate the fear leaders have of an armed population.
 
uscitizen said:
we need .50 cal barret. A shot gun will not cut thru standard wehicle armor.
Click to expand...

But the average deer rifle is good out to 400 or 500 yards, and they have to stick their head out of the vehicle sometime.

The sniper is still a very effective weapon. May not be a high body count, but you can get the ones that count and ruin the morale of the enemy.
 
Why one needs an assortment of weapons.

I actually have a couple of Japanese swords hanging on my bedroom wall. And have a bit of training on using them. quicker to get to than my guns in the middle of the night.
 
LadyT said:
Yes. He essentially said that people that own have better morals than people that rent. And then he gave some skewed one sided microscopic example and applied it to everything related to renters. Exactly like he did in this thread. Dano in his purest form.
Click to expand...
That's not true at all. If you recall the argument, I even mentioned how UNICEF backed me up on morality with owning.
The premise is actually quite simple, people care more about what effects that which they own as opposed to what others own (like government or a rental company).

UNICEF pressed a government in Africa to do a pilot program where they gave ownership (deeds) of some slum buildings to the people squatting there. The result was a decrease in crime.
Why? Because people cared more about property damage, about things that affected their property like crime, prostitution, etc... when it became their own property and what they own. They had value to lose.

I am NOT saying that people who own are explictly more moral than renters, I am saying that they are implictly given reason to be more moral because they have financial incentive to be so.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but in general.
 
So by dixie logic if the govt gives more of itself to the masses we will have a better country ?
I want half of BOA. I promise to be a good uscitizen.

Or a few thousand acres of national forest land would be fine.
 
KingCondanomation said:
That's not true at all. If you recall the argument, I even mentioned how UNICEF backed me up on morality with owning.
The premise is actually quite simple, people care more about what effects that which they own as opposed to what others own (like government or a rental company).

UNICEF pressed a government in Africa to do a pilot program where they gave ownership (deeds) of some slum buildings to the people squatting there. The result was a decrease in crime.
Why? Because people cared more about property damage, about things that affected their property like crime, prostitution, etc... when it became their own property and what they own. They had value to lose.

I am NOT saying that people who own are explictly more moral than renters, I am saying that they are implictly given reason to be more moral because they have financial incentive to be so.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but in general.
Click to expand...

That has less to do with renters v/s owners than it does with having a finacial stake in where you live.

If you are renting and do not expect to get your deposit back, you have no real incentive to take care of the place. And you certainly have no incentive to upgrade the property, like a homeowner does.
 
Solitary said:
That has less to do with renters v/s owners than it does with having a finacial stake in where you live.

If you are renting and do not expect to get your deposit back, you have no real incentive to take care of the place. And you certainly have no incentive to upgrade the property, like a homeowner does.
Click to expand...
You have a stake in making sure your apartment or what you are renting and actually living in is in good shape, BUT do you care about the neighborhood as much when crime will not devalue your property?

And of course owning something does give you more pride, it makes you care more beyond financial incentive as well, though that is harder to prove.
 
uscitizen said:
So by dixie logic if the govt gives more of itself to the masses we will have a better country ?
I want half of BOA. I promise to be a good uscitizen.

Or a few thousand acres of national forest land would be fine.
Click to expand...
You make good criticism actually, I kind of don't like the government handing out property ownership like that but on the other hand they are in slums and have nowhere to go. What do you really have to lose?

Mugabe bulldozed and cleared out the slums in Zimbabwe, did that help?

As a side point, government should give up and sell more of its land. To the east of the Mississippi, government only owns 2% of land but to the west they own close to a third.
89% of Utah land is non-private, that's crazy.
And the money could be used to pay off our giant debt.
 
KingCondanomation said:
You make good criticism actually, I kind of don't like the government handing out property ownership like that but on the other hand they are in slums and have nowhere to go. What do you really have to lose?

Mugabe bulldozed and cleared out the slums in Zimbabwe, did that help?

As a side point, government should give up and sell more of its land. To the east of the Mississippi, government only owns 2% of land but to the west they own close to a third.
89% of Utah land is non-private, that's crazy.
And the money could be used to pay off our giant debt.
Click to expand...

Sell it to China Dano.

the grand canyon is just a big erosion ditch anyway.
 
uscitizen said:
Sell it to China Dano.

the grand canyon is just a big erosion ditch anyway.
Click to expand...
There is a LOT of land besides having to be outrageous and offer up the most prized landmarks.

Americans own land abroad, is that wrong? Why are you against seeing Chinese people own land here?

You sound like incredulous Ed from Dilbert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top