Gun ownership in this day and age

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sftyvlv1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
When it’s not satire, but mockingly demeaning a large group of people.
 
I like to put in “Midlothian Scot”.

You can get in trouble doing that on census forms, though.
 
which is, likely, charming.

My wife’s is.

Mine, born in Florida, polished in SC, is more cosmopolitan.
 
I salute you. The Scofflaw Brigade is likely on your trail.

My sister is a fan of Gullah and the Sea Island cultures in general. White and Black.

Poirot was more likely to say the little grey cells, I think.
 
neophyte said:
Might, but the vast majority of the time they don’t, and you can’t infringe on people’s rights merely because someone might abuse them.
Click to expand...
Exactly. This notion that anyone who owns or especially carries a gun is easily angered and prone to overreact with violence is nonsense.
 
One of my major book collecting hobbies is Golden Age mysteries.

I own all Dame Agatha’s mystery work, specifically excluding the Mary Westmacott books.

And yet, I speak with a charming drawl.
 
And since I am famously irenic, to the point I can make your teeth ache, one can readily tell if I am a gun nut, or not. From that fact alone.
 
Last edited:
I’ve had people act rudely, even belligerently toward me when I’m carrying. I’m not going to take big offense and retaliate in kind.
 
po18guy said:
Statistics are meaningless. Columns of numbers serve mainly to cloud and obfuscate.
Click to expand...
I have to vigorously disagree with you on that one. I use them all the time, and they are an invaluable method by which one can arrive at the truth. Anyone who says “you can prove anything with statistics” doesn’t know what he’s talking about - statistics always tell the truth, and if you’re using numbers to pass off a lie as the truth then you’re not really doing statistics.
 
Point is, carrying is a big responsibility and part of that responsibility is keeping a cool head. This “Wild West mentality” accusation that gets tossed about is complete nonsense.
 
Last edited:
That said, there were some mighty good things about the so called wild west days too. No abortion clinics, no same sex “marriage” or “transgender” social contagion, and people didn’t expect the government to give them everything for free. Also, being a homemaker was a respectable occupation and children showed respect for their elders and weren’t “medicated.”
And no man purses or man buns.
Just for starters.
 
Last edited:
I’ve looked at those, lol! Wound up buying a “lumbar pack” (not a fanny pack, mind you) that’ll just hold my 4-5/8 Runnin’ Iron. Easy to swivel around and comes with a carry strap.
I avoided anything camo. Not that cops don’t know what all these bags are but concealed is concealed!
 
Good for you! How has that worked out?

In the realm of gun control, those who favor freedom must attempt to reason with those who are driven by pure emotion. There is almost zero critical thinking on the left. They, being ideologues, need not reason or focus on facts. They have their emotion-driven beliefs and are only rarely swayed by reason. This often occurs only after they have been a crime victim.

It is, IMO, far better to use logic, reason and principle than numbers. The forces of anti-freedom have their own numbers and will simply make them up if they cannot find any.

Relying on numbers and playing defense has done nothing but allowed the erosion of freedom. Time to attack the first amendment. Licensing, registration and permits for those who wish to speak publicly. Detailed vetting of the psychological background and metal stability of those who demand to speak out. Why, this is only “common sense speech control” is it not?

Take the battle to them, if only to show that you don’t shred freedom because you have a rotten culture. You address the problems of a rotten culture. while preserving freedom.
 
The fact that secular culture is rotten, and a culture where life is cheap (evidence the acceptance of infanticide) is all the more reason to preserve the means to defend one’s self.
 
Last edited:
po18guy said:
It is, IMO, far better to use logic, reason and principle than numbers.
Click to expand...
It is reasonable and logical to use statistical analyses, and critical thought demands that we do so. The problem is that, as you say, gun control arguments are based in unreason and illogic, which means that (among other things) they rely on invalid statistical analyses.

Regardless of the fact that correcting their invalid statistics rarely works, it still must be done.

I use the term statistoids to describe what they use: something that merely appears to be statistics, but that is based on fundamentally and obviously flawed methodology so that it arrives at a result opposite from the truth.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top