L
LongingSoul
Guest
I’m just trying to figure out why you were so delighted that I didn’t think a gun was ‘intrinsically evil’? Do you think heroin should be legal or not? (without the hoo haa please)
- Status
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
It is monitored. These rights as I have told you can be taken. Your LIFE can be taken by the government-thus your right to Life. Your back to a repetitive circular argument addressed on the last thread.
They are “inalienable” rights
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
You getting insulting again. Start another thread about heroin.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Heroin is not intrinsically evil. As we agree. And heroin IS legal in various countries for the correct reason which isn’t to promote the seven deadly sins. Medical use.
Do you think water should be criminalized because someone can be drowned?
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Are anti gun advocates also anti-water? 
I guess it depends on the fear driven by the media and this wayward party clamor in regards to those being drowned to which they shout BAN THE WATER!
I guess it depends on the fear driven by the media and this wayward party clamor in regards to those being drowned to which they shout BAN THE WATER!
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
Good morning Annie: A lot of things on this thread astound me, including the logic behind the idea that the answer to people with guns is more people with guns. What happened after Katrina was a weak Federal response from an ultra right wing administration that believed in the same things you believe in - every man for himself, little centralized government involvement in domestic affairs, and social programs run by charities and churches instead of the collective power of an advanced civilization with a well thought and organized central government response working with local authorities. And this is exactly what happened after Katrina. Basically, you got every man for himself, a half hearted government response, and ten years later you are still promoting such an approach while being appalled at the outcome last time. Even a cat won’t jump on a hot stove twice, yet conservatives want the rest of us to keep walking head first into the same wall with them over and over again. Every man for himself doesn’t work, and it would be interesting to see the outcome if every person in such a situation as Katrina had had a gun. I think the outcome is pretty predictable.
Thank you
Gary
P
pnewton
Guest
There are other balances that we must consider. For example, if one is not suicidal 99.9999% of the time, and keeps a gun, it only takes once to end his life. If one does not lose his temper 99.9999% of the time, it only takes two or three times in his life where he loses self-control to use a gun to harm another.
I am not saying that anyone here struggles with depression or anger, only that some do. When one considers whether to own a gun, he must also weigh the danger against the possible benefit. Also, he should consider whether he has family members with any of these issues, or children who would have access to a gun.
Another factor, is that while one may only need a gun once or twice, the level of readiness is not to be assumed. Unless one lives at a heightened sense of preparedness, it is a good possibility that when that time comes that a gun would be useful, that the gun owner will not be holding the gun, or have access, in time to be of use. This is the limitation of guns. The criminal knows when he needs it. The victim does not.
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
Voting, I think, is much dangerous than guns. And it is also a right. Although it is regulated in order to be exercised. Should guns not be exercised in like manner? I mean where is the “happy” medium? If there is such a thing.
I’m all for guns, but I’m also all for proper training of guns.
Where is the middle ground?
I’m all for guns, but I’m also all for proper training of guns.
Where is the middle ground?
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
That is an issue being exploited. The preponderance of people in the blue states seem to think one way though not collectively but the majority, this varies and state to state, mostly Red to Blue.
In fact I’m not even sold on the self defense as imposed in CT. There is no such thing as going home after any shooting involving a death. The thinking here is really as I see it, you are getting arrested, making bond or not and going to court. So innocent or not you must be subjected to the system and in many cases of poverty for 1-2 years. More likely to be found guilty with public defense attorneys and so forth. So its far by me to fault what other states see as a fault in self-defense and create civil war.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Quick question, I am not a legal expert just an observer, it seems to me in the Blue States the order is confused as we have been saying with mental heath issues. Here too the criminal or mental heath individual is empowered while the victim-innocent-therapist is restricted further. This doesn’t appear to be the case in many southern or red states. That consistency also exists here it appears? More dependency by the government? To what avail, help they obviously can’t supply?
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Seems to me we are helping the government kill the innocent while supporting their agenda which isn’t helping anyone but those who with fervor are promoting exactly what?
We are now to “expect” terrorism on US soil? Yes we indeed are, and your government appears to have the need to further place you at a disadvantage, and contends to have you totally dependent on them, for no good reason that I see. Then again plans seem to be absent from those dedicated to the party. Just sayin.
A
Annie39
Guest
Gary I don’t think that you live in the real world, I really don’t. IMHO you live in a fantasy world.
I don’t know how your mind can go there. But you seem to believe that Bush and his administration are somehow my ideal. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I believe in subsidiarity. I won’t get into the citizens themselves who were overwhelmed by the flood. But how about Mayor at the time Ray Nagin? Do you know what his political mindset is? How about Governor at that time Kathleen Blanco what was/is her political world view do you know?
You: “every man for himself, little centralized government involvement in domestic affairs, and social programs run by charities and churches instead of the collective power of an advanced civilization with a well thought and organized central government response working with local authorities.”
My reply: Well, at the time ward 9 of New Orleans had lots and lots of collective power taking care of the population. In a time of a nearly unimaginable crisis how did that work out for the average citizen? And you miss it again when you think that I think that it should be charities and churches that should set up social programs. I don’t believe in social programs at all. I’m Catholic, I believe Matthew 25, wherein we read that we are judged individually about how we treat the poor. Certainly many individuals can and have gotten together in providing help for those poor but we are all individually to do our part.
You: “And this is exactly what happened after Katrina. Basically, you got every man for himself, a half hearted government response,”
Me: Yep there’s your big government at work. When crisis hits its every man for himself.
Below are some real life occurrences. Notice the differences between the two trucker incidents BTW.
First 2: My husband’s father was a truck driver. There was a strike by his union one year. If a truck driver crossed the picket line union thugs would attack the driver. His dad was one of those who crossed the picket line. One or more of the union fellas jumped on his truck to take him down but he was armed. All he had to do was point the gun in his (their?) direction and he was unharmed and so were the thugs.
Next one: There was a riot in Los Angeles, CA in 1992 you may remember it. The riot was occasioned by the acquittal of Police Officers in the beating of Rodney King. During that riot a truck driver Reginald Denney was pulled from his truck and beaten nearly to death. Mayhem had broken out; Police were quickly outnumbered by rioters and retreated. As the uprising spread to the city’s Koreatown area, shop owners armed themselves and engaged in running gun battles with looters.
“I think we did the right thing,” says attorney David Kim, who had gone on Korean-language radio to encourage people to take up arms because the police weren’t protecting them.” Huffington Post June 3, 2014
Number 4: I was living in L.A. County during the Watts riots. I was told by a black man with whom I worked and had a very friendly relationship that if the riot began in the very nearby city where we worked which had been expected that I should run from him because he would have to “get me” or “they” would get him. I didn’t return to work until the riot was over. I don’t think I ever spoke to that guy again; I don’t have to be pals with a coward.
5: Do you happen to remember the North Hollywood shootout in 1997? There was a bank robbery. Police responded and there was a shootout. The police were outgunned. Nearby gun shop owners came to their rescue and provided them better weapons while the shootout was going on.
6: Are you familiar with Detroit Michigan’s crime rate? Did you know that as recently as January of this year Detroit Police Chief James Craig recommended that citizens arm themselves? “
“Detroiters are fed up; they’e fed up with violence. I’m not encouraging violence, and in fact, I’m about the business of identifying those violent perpetrators that carry illegal guns.”
Craig said he will “stand by” the right of Detroit residents to defend themselves.
mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2014/04/detroit_police_chief_defends_r.html
Annie
I don’t know how your mind can go there. But you seem to believe that Bush and his administration are somehow my ideal. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I believe in subsidiarity. I won’t get into the citizens themselves who were overwhelmed by the flood. But how about Mayor at the time Ray Nagin? Do you know what his political mindset is? How about Governor at that time Kathleen Blanco what was/is her political world view do you know?
You: “every man for himself, little centralized government involvement in domestic affairs, and social programs run by charities and churches instead of the collective power of an advanced civilization with a well thought and organized central government response working with local authorities.”
My reply: Well, at the time ward 9 of New Orleans had lots and lots of collective power taking care of the population. In a time of a nearly unimaginable crisis how did that work out for the average citizen? And you miss it again when you think that I think that it should be charities and churches that should set up social programs. I don’t believe in social programs at all. I’m Catholic, I believe Matthew 25, wherein we read that we are judged individually about how we treat the poor. Certainly many individuals can and have gotten together in providing help for those poor but we are all individually to do our part.
You: “And this is exactly what happened after Katrina. Basically, you got every man for himself, a half hearted government response,”
Me: Yep there’s your big government at work. When crisis hits its every man for himself.
Below are some real life occurrences. Notice the differences between the two trucker incidents BTW.
First 2: My husband’s father was a truck driver. There was a strike by his union one year. If a truck driver crossed the picket line union thugs would attack the driver. His dad was one of those who crossed the picket line. One or more of the union fellas jumped on his truck to take him down but he was armed. All he had to do was point the gun in his (their?) direction and he was unharmed and so were the thugs.
Next one: There was a riot in Los Angeles, CA in 1992 you may remember it. The riot was occasioned by the acquittal of Police Officers in the beating of Rodney King. During that riot a truck driver Reginald Denney was pulled from his truck and beaten nearly to death. Mayhem had broken out; Police were quickly outnumbered by rioters and retreated. As the uprising spread to the city’s Koreatown area, shop owners armed themselves and engaged in running gun battles with looters.
“I think we did the right thing,” says attorney David Kim, who had gone on Korean-language radio to encourage people to take up arms because the police weren’t protecting them.” Huffington Post June 3, 2014
Number 4: I was living in L.A. County during the Watts riots. I was told by a black man with whom I worked and had a very friendly relationship that if the riot began in the very nearby city where we worked which had been expected that I should run from him because he would have to “get me” or “they” would get him. I didn’t return to work until the riot was over. I don’t think I ever spoke to that guy again; I don’t have to be pals with a coward.
5: Do you happen to remember the North Hollywood shootout in 1997? There was a bank robbery. Police responded and there was a shootout. The police were outgunned. Nearby gun shop owners came to their rescue and provided them better weapons while the shootout was going on.
6: Are you familiar with Detroit Michigan’s crime rate? Did you know that as recently as January of this year Detroit Police Chief James Craig recommended that citizens arm themselves? “
“Detroiters are fed up; they’e fed up with violence. I’m not encouraging violence, and in fact, I’m about the business of identifying those violent perpetrators that carry illegal guns.”
Craig said he will “stand by” the right of Detroit residents to defend themselves.
mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2014/04/detroit_police_chief_defends_r.html
Annie
G
Gary_Sheldrake
Guest
Good Evening Annie: This is really all a matter of common sense. To suggest that more guns are some sort of remedy for gun violence is like addressing the issue of having an incontinent dog by buying a yellow rug.
Thank you,
Gary
A
Annie39
Guest
Oh Gary. That is so funny. L.S. and her flack jacket and you and your yellow carpeting.
D
dogen
Guest
Criminals always have easy access to guns, whether they buy them or make them, and it’s not hard at all to make them.
D
dogen
Guest
You’d have to confiscate them to make any effect. Guns don’t just stop working, they can last hundreds of years if taken care of, and there are millions of them here. While they’re at it, they’d better take all the ones used by gangs and organized crime.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
The way it is generally done is through a rolling scheme. There might be a buy back, no questions asked, followed by another, no questions asked. Then the laws are implemented gradually. Significant penalties and criminal records for anyone in posession of illegally owned guns. It becomes much easier to police when licenses are issued for all weapons.
But it is more than just about getting the volume of guns out of the community. It is about changing attitudes towards guns in general. Earlier in the thread I gave an example of some atheletes from here who were severely penalised regarding competition in the Olympic games for posting selfies posing with guns in a US gun shop. It’s that attitude that esteems guns as a symbol of power that makes people unreasonable about the effect of their presence in society. The right to have something has to be weighed against its negative affect on the common good of the community.
D
dogen
Guest
Which I think is completely immoral and was nobody’s damn business.
Ridiculous something like that can even happen.
What a damn joke.
Wow, so it’s impossible to legitimately disagree with you?
No, the overall effect is what needs to be considered. You can’t ignore the positive and emphasize the negative.
And I believe, as George Washington said, “The very atmosphere of firearms
everywhere restrains evil interference.”
edit-
Well, maybe that’s not a real quote, but I still like it.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
It’s a valid perspective and accepted by a lot of the population of the western world. Special interest groups,especially those that are financially robust, have a lot of influence on a culture. That you could call such an action as I described ‘immoral’ gives some insight into how the population is being manipulated by one of the worlds biggest special interest groups with a sense of a ‘divine’ mandate.
That sounds like a perfectly reasonable thing to say in an 18th century wartime environment but did he mean it to be applied as a tenet of civil life across the board for all history? Many find that statement a peace time oxymoron and I don’t mean daisy chain wearing hippies… I mean legitimate conservative leaning governments.
- Status