A New Jersey man gets seven years for being a responsible gun owner!

[vz71]

Hi vz,
Again I ask you: please defend your statement that you have “personal first hand experience” of the vast majority of gun owners.
Until you do that adequately, I cannot take seriously anything you say.
God Bless,
Colmcille.

Fortunately I do not really care if you take my responses seriously.
Your credibility is waning.

You wish to call into question my own experience, yet you cannot (or will not) explain inconsistancies within your own statements.

Are we dealing with a troll here?

 

[JRKH]

Another reason I carry a gun because carrying a cop is too heavy. :yup:

:clapping::clapping:

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

To depict criminals as savages is fine until one looks at case histories of those who meticulously plan and execute shootings. There are evil minds are work but ones with fixed “goals” nonetheless. They see guns as the bridge between distorted thoughts and feelings and the sought-after “solutions”.
God Bless,
Colmcille.

Actually if you want to consider getting rid of guns as a measure to reduce crime, it would be the “savages” rather than the “planners” who would be effected. Those who “who meticulously plan and execute”, a deadly crime would be less effected. They would simply plan and execute differently.

Peace
James

 

[colmcille1]

Fortunately I do not really care if you take my responses seriously.
Your credibility is waning.

You wish to call into question my own experience, yet you cannot (or will not) explain inconsistancies within your own statements.

Are we dealing with a troll here?

Hi vz,
You say that my statements contain inconsistencies yet you continue to avoid answering the biggest inconsistency: your personal knowledge about the vast majority of gun owners.
You are darn right I am calling into question your own experience. You are actually trying to tell us that you **personally ** have knowledge about the vast majority of gun owners. This is utter garbage and I will continue to call you on it. Defend it please and put an end to your evasion once and for all!
God Bless you sir, I am praying for true guidance for you.
Colmcille.
P.S. I am not a troll. Using this tactic is more evasion.

 

[vz71]

I never worked on a ““Deliverance” set”

About twenty years back, I was involved in the acting business. On set we were filming a send-up of the infamous mountain men scene in the movie ‘Deliverance’. I was playing the yokel with the gun.

So which is the lie?

 

[colmcille1]

PRAYER-POEM FOR VZ71

Lord, let me tell me about a man called vz.
He likes his world and all that is his.
We disagreed in a forum debate
But it is not something that could trouble our faith.
You alone can understand
What we find puzzling, great or bland.
Help us to make our hearts a little bigger
And keep us away from the argumentative trigger!

We were following then and we’re following still;
I remain your servant,
Colmcille.

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Apologies to you, stanmaxkolbe. This will be my last response away from OP.
Peace, Graubo

Hi Graubo3 and thank you,

No apology necessary I didn’t point out forum rules about hi-jacking a thread because I just get so amazed on how some people are so clueless and don’t know the stats about every State that has allowed the right to carry violent crime has went down.

I will now add this directed at everyone on this thread:

As a Citizen of the Great State of Texas I have the right to keep and bear arms.

The Texas Constitution
Article 1 – Section 23

Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the legislature shall have the power by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

I am a CHL [Concealed Handgun License] holder in fact I usually carry a .357 magnum revolver to Mass.

NON_CHL holders do the majority of the misuse of firearms in the United States.

As a Texas CHL Holder I must:
Ø HAVE NO FELONY CONVICTIONS—LIFE TIME
Ø NO CLASS A OR B MISDEMEANORS WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS
Ø PASS BOTH STATE AND FEDERAL FINGERPRINT AND BACKGROUND CHECKS
Ø NO DELINQUENT CONDUCT WITHIN THE PAST 10 YEARS
Ø NOT DELINQUENT IN CHILD SUPPORT OR STUDENT LOANS, OR STATE/LOCAL TAXES. [we really don’t care about the feds—Stan]

10 to 15 hours of training done by a qualified instructor certified by the Texas Department of Public Safety [State Police] and must pass 70% firing at the pistol range. We are taught the same instruction that DPS law enforcement officers are taught on the use of deadly force.

I carry a firearm everywhere I can legally carry; how is that endangering anyone’s safely?

Some people live in some fantasy world about peace and love I wish we had it here on our world but we don’t. What the gun grabbers forget is that the devil is alive and well on this earth! There are evil people out there that will soon as kill you as a fly—they don’t care a rats butt about human life.

The Apostles carried weapons for protection our Lord Jesus said, “Sell your cloak and buy a sword.” If my Lord and Savior did not have a problem with weapons for self-defense and His Church doesn’t have a problem with it—I don’t have a problem with it either.

As a Catholic I have a GRAVE DUTY to defend myself and anyone that is in danger from a life threatening situation. Check the Catechism I would give you the Para # but people need to read it more anyway.

Hello it’s the 21st century to defend yourself you need a firearm that’s just a fact of life man—wake up!

 

[vz71]

PRAYER-POEM FOR VZ71…

Yep. A troll.

 

[colmcille1]

stanmaxkolbe:
Hello it’s the 21st century to defend yourself you need a firearm that’s just a fact of life man—wake up!

Hi stan.
Here’s a question for you: do you really believe I and millions like me ought to have the same mindset as your good self?
God Bless you in your innocence,
Colmcille.

 

[colmcille1]

Yep. A troll.

Hi vz,
Keep trying, my friend. God loves a trier.
God Bless you in your innocence,
Colmcille.

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Hi stan.
Here’s a question for you: do you really believe I and millions like me ought to have the same mindset as your good self?
God Bless you in your innocence,
Colmcille.

Yes everyone in the world is mind numbed robots and should think exactly like me!

Man flashback to high school.

Do you mind if I ask where you’re from so I can understand your position better?

Not unless you’re ashamed where you’re from?

 

[wabrams]

So which is the lie?

Neither; “Send-up” is one of those acting terms for “spoof.”

Outside of that, I agree 100% with you.

 

[vz71]

Not unless you’re ashamed where you’re from?

Trolls don’t answer questions.

I offer up the resident one in this thread as evidence.

 

[BobCatholic]

Yet Judge Morley wouldn’t allow Aitken to claim the exemption for transporting guns between residences. He wouldn’t even let the jury know about it. During deliberations, the jurors asked three times about exceptions to the law, which suggests they weren’t comfortable convicting Aitken. Morley refused to answer them all three times. Gilbert and Nappen, Aitken’s lawyers, say he also should have been protected by a federal law that forbids states from prosecuting gun owners who are transporting guns between residences. Morley would not let Aitken cite that provision either.

This judge was way out of line. He was negligent in instructing the jury big time.

This conviction should be appealed.

 

[colmcille1]

Yes everyone in the world is mind numbed robots and should think exactly like me!

Man flashback to high school.

Do you mind if I ask where you’re from so I can understand your position better?

Not unless you’re ashamed where you’re from?

Hi stan,
I have mentioned it before in this thread. Forgive me if I make this observation: you have not read the thread fully if you have to ask where I am from. But I do not mind saying it again for your benefit: I am from Ireland. Ireland has had more than it’s fair share of guns. We have managed to achieve peace in Northern Ireland by a painstaking decommissioning process. This involved the location and destruction of several illegal arms dumps held by subversive groups. Parliamentary democracy, for all it’s procedural flaws, works.
I am trying to debate here honestly. I find it very frustrating when we cannot have a debate which requires seriously hard contemplation of the nature of evil. Instead I am accused of being a troll. And some folks here hide behind the accusation instead of maturely offering their thoughts on a society which could live without guns. They fall back upon the same old tired thought processes that ensure NOTHING gets thought about, much less acted upon.
So, you or anyone else here can call me a dreamer, a troll, a fool or any other epithet you wish. I am not offended. I find it frustrating for sure but I do not take offence. Why? Because I firmly see that there is a terrible innocence in such reactions. It is an innocence which states: “I have a gun therefore I’m ok.” It is the perpetuating of a gun “culture” which is life-denying.
If we agree that there are sick disturbed and evil people with guns walking this earth then surely we can, as the responsible, mature and civilised ones, agree that it is incumbent on us to use our minds to find a way to change this situation. I do not believe for one minute that buying a gun solves it. It only adds to the malaise.
God Bless,
Colmcille.

P.S. vz, this post applies to you as well. You have no dignity, sir.

 

[vz71]

I am from Ireland. Ireland has had more than it’s fair share of guns. We have managed to achieve peace in Northern Ireland by a painstaking decommissioning process. This involved the location and destruction of several illegal arms dumps held by subversive groups. Parliamentary democracy, for all it’s procedural flaws, works.

What exactly are you meaning when you say it ‘works’?

I am trying to debate here honestly. I find it very frustrating when we cannot have a debate which requires seriously hard contemplation of the nature of evil. Instead I am accused of being a troll.

May I suggest you stop acting like one.
Perhaps you do not understand the term. Here it is, as precisely as I have found it defined:
“a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”
Thus far you have contributed little.
But you have made up a few poems to attack other posters.
This is both off-topic and fairly provocative. And is the textbook definition of trolling.
I have taken a night to sleep on it and decided I would not place you on the ignore list, mainly because there could be some productive debate.
Of course, this depends upon honesty.

And some folks here hide behind the accusation instead of maturely offering their thoughts on a society which could live without guns. They fall back upon the same old tired thought processes that ensure NOTHING gets thought about, much less acted upon.
So, you or anyone else here can call me a dreamer, a troll, a fool or any other epithet you wish. I am not offended. I find it frustrating for sure but I do not take offence. Why? Because I firmly see that there is a terrible innocence in such reactions. It is an innocence which states: “I have a gun therefore I’m ok.” It is the perpetuating of a gun “culture” which is life-denying.

Great, perhaps we can examine the meat of the issue and see if there is merit at all to it.

If we agree that there are sick disturbed and evil people with guns walking this earth then surely we can, as the responsible, mature and civilised ones, agree that it is incumbent on us to use our minds to find a way to change this situation. I do not believe for one minute that buying a gun solves it. It only adds to the malaise.

OK, so how exactly does disarming the innocent bystanders help them defend against the ‘sick disturbed and evil’ people?
By virtue of the fact that they are sick and disturbed, we know that law is not going to govern their actions. So any law restricting gun ownership will not effect them, just their prospective victims.
And there is historic evidence backing this.

P.S. vz, this post applies to you as well. You have no dignity, sir.

You do not know me well enough to make the determination.
But since you are making this wild leap into conclusions based on insufficient evidence, what am I to conclude of the rest of your arguments?
Did you draw these as well with insufficient evidence?

 

[colmcille1]

What exactly are you meaning when you say it ‘works’?

Hi vz,
Parliamentary democracy works because the state of Northern Ireland functions as a state should. Bye-laws are observed, jobs are created, people live in peace.]

May I suggest you stop acting like one.
Perhaps you do not understand the term. Here it is, as precisely as I have found it defined:
“a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”
Thus far you have contributed little.

Again, I state: I am not a troll.
I would say that I have contributed quite a bit. Just because it does not tally with your tired “truths” does not mean that it’s contribution is negligible. Besides, you have not defended your statement with regard to your personal knowledge of the majority of gun owners; therefore I seriously call into question your efficacy as a judge of content.

But you have made up a few poems to attack other posters.

Untrue. I made up one poem. You failed to see the humour in it. Or indeed the olive branch. This reflects badly upon you.

This is both off-topic and fairly provocative. And is the textbook definition of trolling.
I have taken a night to sleep on it and decided I would not place you on the ignore list, mainly because there could be some productive debate.
Of course, this depends upon honesty.

Well good, can you therefore honestly defend your statement about your personal knowledge of the majority of gun owners.

Great, perhaps we can examine the meat of the issue and see if there is merit at all to it.OK, so how exactly does disarming the innocent bystanders help them defend against the ‘sick disturbed and evil’ people?
By virtue of the fact that they are sick and disturbed, we know that law is not going to govern their actions. So any law restricting gun ownership will not effect them, just their prospective victims.
And there is historic evidence backing this.

Lobby your government to break off diplomatic relations with the countries that produce the guns that are imported illegally into the USA. Your government knows who they are.
Tighten the state laws governing the issuing of ALL classes of firearms.
Increase mandatory prison sentences for gun crime.
Extend the powers of law enforcement agencies.
Increase the laws governing interstate jurisdiction of said agencies.
Lobby all media owners to initiate campaigns of educating the youth to the dangers of guns.
Lobby school boards to do likewise.
Lobby the entertainment industry owners in Hollywood to stop peddling the myth of gun “culture”.

You do not know me well enough to make the determination.
But since you are making this wild leap into conclusions based on insufficient evidence, what am I to conclude of the rest of your arguments?
Did you draw these as well with insufficient evidence?

I’m sorry but you have amply demonstrated, and continue to demonstrate, that you are in no position to lecture me about “insufficient evidence”. I have lost count of the number of times I have asked you to defend your statement about your personal knowledge of the majority of gun owners.
What are you afraid of?
God Bless you in your innocence,
Colmcille.

 

[vz71]

Hi vz,
Parliamentary democracy works because the state of Northern Ireland functions as a state should. Bye-laws are observed, jobs are created, people live in peace.

You make a fairly compelling case that you believe your system of government works well. But what has that to do with restrictions on guns?

Again, I state: I am not a troll.

I tend to trust actions over words.
If you wish me not to see you as one, then make certain there are no actions that fit the criteria.

I made up one poem. You failed to see the humour in it. Or indeed the olive branch. This reflects badly upon you.

Were it really the olive branch you claim it to be, then what exactly is the barb at the end of your statement here?
Olive branches do not have barbs.

Well good, can you therefore honestly defend your statement about your personal knowledge of the majority of gun owners.

I am still waiting for answers to the questions posed to you long before that post.

Lobby your government to break off diplomatic relations with the countries that produce the guns that are imported illegally into the USA. Your government knows who they are.
Tighten the state laws governing the issuing of ALL classes of firearms.
Increase mandatory prison sentences for gun crime.
Extend the powers of law enforcement agencies.
Increase the laws governing interstate jurisdiction of said agencies.
Lobby all media owners to initiate campaigns of educating the youth to the dangers of guns.
Lobby school boards to do likewise.
Lobby the entertainment industry owners in Hollywood to stop peddling the myth of gun “culture”.

But what exactly will any of this do to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?
I can see that these measures may well cut down on the prevelance of gun ownership among the law abiding citizens, but unless criminals have no guns, all you have done is leave the victims unarmed.

I’m sorry but you have amply demonstrated, and continue to demonstrate, that you are in no position to lecture me about “insufficient evidence”. I have lost count of the number of times I have asked you to defend your statement about your personal knowledge of the majority of gun owners.

Fortunately, I have not lost count.
I have asked 4 different times for clarification from you.
None of which you have bothered to answer.
given that record, what incentive do I have to bother responding at all to these queries?

What are you afraid of?

I generally find idiots in positions of power to be scary.
but that has little to do with this thread.

 

[stanmaxkolbe]

Hi stan,
I have mentioned it before in this thread. Forgive me if I make this observation: you have not read the thread fully if you have to ask where I am from. But I do not mind saying it again for your benefit: I am from Ireland.

Ok I missed where your from sue me usually people put their location in the header.

I guess you need to read this thread also I have never called you anything you on the other hand will start off a sentence, “God Bless” then insult someone or go on a rant then end it with God Bless so yes you may have ruffled a few people here.

We understand what you’re saying but as I pointed out there is evil in this world.

Taking away someone’s right to defend themselves and their family is morally wrong. Someone breaks down my front door has a gun I have a knife guess what I lose.

You need to check out Church teachings on self defense.

Catechism Of The Catholic Church

**Legitimate defense **
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. “The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not.”

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one’s own life than of another’s.

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

I hold authority as head of my household as a Catholic it is my duty to protect my family and any innocent life.

 

[colmcille1]

You make a fairly compelling case that you believe your system of government works well. But what has that to do with restrictions on guns?

Hi vz,
With regard to Northern Ireland, it has everything to do with restrictions on guns. Here in the Republic of Ireland one has to go back further to see how parliamentary democracy won out over violence. Of course, Sinn Fein to this day do not think we should have this system of government. They still insist that it’s ok to maintain a private army. They see guns as necessary.
(The stuff you posted here I have deleted. It’s getting far too tedious.)

But what exactly will any of this do to keep guns out of the hands of criminals?
I can see that these measures may well cut down on the prevelance of gun ownership among the law abiding citizens, but unless criminals have no guns, all you have done is leave the victims unarmed.

**If your government was really interested in stopping illegal arms importation (which aids the criminal underworld) they would be actively doing that.
If your government was not afraid of so-called civil liberties groups they would impose draconian laws on criminals. **

It seems that there is more than a whiff of double standards going on in the USA. On the one hand you bemoan the fact that criminals run riot with powerful weaponry. And on the other you are proud of a national history founded upon the gun: you would get a different take on that history from the descendants of native Americans. So there is an ambivalence at work here, an uneasiness with one’s personal and societal position. This is very worrying. We can argue here 'til we’re blue in the face but the fact remains that your society is not getting any better as long as you solely believe in guns.
God Bless,
Colmcille.