APP - great sadness

SmarterthanYou said:
completely biased website. gunfacts.info is non biased and presents information from all sources.
Click to expand...

Really? Guy Smith's gunfacts.info? A novel of observations financed by the NRA is non-biased? A guy who speaks before separatist, racist, and militia organizations is non-biased? A guy who called hispanics "Dirty, stinking Mexicans" is non-biased?

Harvey Specter said:
Howie is on record as saying that having your gun stolen makes you an irresponsible gun owner.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! You think it doesn't?

Yurt said:
what law do you propose that would curb the illegal gun purchases and use?
Click to expand...

I've already said what changes are needed.

SmarterthanYou said:
we regular citizens are the power in this country and should be better armed than police or military.
Click to expand...

Ohhhh...I'd love to see the reference to that in your precious Constitution! But, thank you. You just made the Dishonor Roll on my forum!
 
WinterBorn said:
I see you were spouting this rididculous idea before I saw it on the other thread.

There are over 60 million gun owners in the US. You claim to know whether every single one of them is responsible?

I guarantee That I am a responsible gun owner. I guarantee I can take you to the homes of at least 25 more that I know personally are responsible gun owners. Your agenda based rhetoric is pitiful. You want to make this tragedy about removal of gun rights, give it a try. But at least stick to actual facts and not this drivel that doesn't even pass for trolling.
Click to expand...

WinterBorn said:
And how factual is your "There are no responsible gun owners. Period." remark?
Click to expand...

Any responsible gun owner has the potential of being an irresponsible gun owner if an accident occurs in their home. Even those who state uncategorically "I guarantee That I am a responsible gun owner." Do you really think the parents of the little boy who blew his little sister's brains out with a gun thought they were anything but responsible gun owners?

That is the point I'm trying to make.
 
Howey said:
Any responsible gun owner has the potential of being an irresponsible gun owner if an accident occurs in their home. Even those who state uncategorically "I guarantee That I am a responsible gun owner." Do you really think the parents of the little boy who blew his little sister's brains out with a gun thought they were anything but responsible gun owners?

That is the point I'm trying to make.
Click to expand...

The potential for disaster exists in every home possessing a gun; no exceptions.

That's the reality that comes with the gun 'rights' practiced today.

That potential is acceptable to the gun nuts. That's why they're considered 'nuts'.
 
Howey said:
Any responsible gun owner has the potential of being an irresponsible gun owner if an accident occurs in their home. Even those who state uncategorically "I guarantee That I am a responsible gun owner." Do you really think the parents of the little boy who blew his little sister's brains out with a gun thought they were anything but responsible gun owners?

That is the point I'm trying to make.
Click to expand...

And it is a fine point. But don't make the statement that every gun owner is irresponsible. We are not. There is not a moment that any of my firearms are left accessible to any child or unqualified adult. Period. I can make that statement because I am serious about gun safety, as are most shooters I know.

There is a huge difference between having the potential to be irresponsible and being irresponsible. Every person in this country has the potential to be a murderous maniac, including you and me. There is a vast difference between that and actually being a murderous maniac.
 
Bijou said:
The potential for disaster exists in every home possessing a gun; no exceptions.

That's the reality that comes with the gun 'rights' practiced today.

That potential is acceptable to the gun nuts. That's why they're considered 'nuts'.
Click to expand...

And those of us who keep our firearms locked unless actually using them are not being irresponsible. In fact, the shooters I associate with have all spent considerable sums of money to make sure our guns are not going to harm anyone accidently.
 
WinterBorn said:
Be that as it may, it does not mean that all gun owners are irresponsible, which is what Howey said in two different threads.
Click to expand...

Your inability to depersonalize the issue now colours your objectivity in this discussion.

You can be as responsible as you want and lock up every gun, all ammo, etc., and the potential is still there, WB. Were your house to be burlgarlized and all that shit stolen and used to commit other crimes, your guns and ammo have now contributed to the problem. And that happens frequently.
 
Bijou said:
Your inability to depersonalize the issue now colours your objectivity in this discussion.

You can be as responsible as you want and lock up every gun, all ammo, etc., and the potential is still there, WB. Were your house to be burlgarlized and all that shit stolen and used to commit other crimes, your guns and ammo have now contributed to the problem. And that happens frequently.
Click to expand...

And that is why I have a gun safe. Unless they have a forklift and someone who can crack a safe, my guns would not be part of any crime.

And every one of the dozen or more guns I own are in the safe, except for two. And one of those is in a pistol safe unless it is being carried. And the other is .22 rifle in a locked vehicle, with a trigger lock on it.

I have gone to great expense and trouble to secure my firearms. I AM a responsible gun owner, as are the people I shoot with.

Yes, I admit I take this personally. I consider an irresponsible gun owner to be a dangerous thing. I, and my friends, have chastised strangers at the range for unsafe gun handling. I have spent hours teaching people how to be responsible gun owners. So when someone makes uneducated accusations about me (and the statement clearly said ALL gun owners) I take it personally.

So, when I see things like this, and those people who make inaccurate accusations at gays, blacks, women, ect, I take it upon myself to challenge them over and over until they either retract what they said, provide evidence to backup what they said, or put me on ignore (that doesn't always work). Most of those issues you agree with me on, so you don't see a problem with my relentlessness. On this issue I am just as passionate.
 
Haiku said:
You have no right to unregulated firearms, none. Guns are designed to kill. Military style weapons with oversized clips should be regulated out of the hands of the regular citizen. Our police are outgunned and not happy with this state of affairs. This is just insane and needs to be regulated. We don't allow drivers who don't submit to regular testing to keep the roads safe, we regularly prosecute those who don't comply. This crazy notion that we need to have a wild west gun toting public is irrational and has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.
Click to expand...
The Second doesn't state "shall not be denied; it states "shall not be infringed."
 
Haiku said:
Which means what to you? Are you saying that regulation is infringing?
Click to expand...

I am not a historian, but wasn't the second amendment created because the new born USA did not have a standing army and the militia was all there was to defend our union?

Do you really think the Fathers would have worded the way they did, if they knew in the future, that young adults could buy a semi automatic weapons and six thousand rounds of ammunition, storm a theater and kill and wound numerous people?
 
Rana said:
I am not a historian, but wasn't the second amendment created because the new born USA did not have a standing army and the militia was all there was to defend our union?

Do you really think the Fathers would have worded the way they did, if they knew in the future, that young adults could buy a semi automatic weapons and six thousand rounds of ammunition, storm a theater and kill and wound numerous people?
Click to expand...
I agree. At the time America was a very different place. I think the NRA has used a thirty plus year fear campaign to promote their agenda. Many buy it but I think most don't. We have firearms but our farm isn't an armory and I'm not preparing for armageddon. I don't read the 'Left Behind' books or believe America is damned due to gay marriage. We have a lot of crazy in this country and we need to have an adult discussion about the direction we're going.
 
Haiku said:
I agree. At the time America was a very different place. I think the NRA has used a thirty plus year fear campaign to promote their agenda. Many buy it but I think most don't. We have firearms but our farm isn't an armory and I'm not preparing for armageddon. I don't read the 'Left Behind' books or believe America is damned due to gay marriage. We have a lot of crazy in this country and we need to have an adult discussion about the direction we're going.
Click to expand...

I so agree!
 
Rana said:
I am not a historian, but wasn't the second amendment created because the new born USA did not have a standing army and the militia was all there was to defend our union?

Do you really think the Fathers would have worded the way they did, if they knew in the future, that young adults could buy a semi automatic weapons and six thousand rounds of ammunition, storm a theater and kill and wound numerous people?
Click to expand...

There was a thing called the Continental Army used during the war. Yes, we had a standing army back then. And don't be fooled by post-revolution mythmaking. Washington and others looked down their noses at the militia and viewed it as weak and undisciplined. Nevertheless, they viewed an armed citizenry as essential to liberty, and saw it occasionally work wonders at Lexington, Bunker Hill, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top