Judge says that citizens should be armed. by Wulfenstar

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
I get it, got it, and do it.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

In a situation even more rare than finding myself in agreement with Au or Finn, I find myself in complete agreement with the 'Cat on this one.

Quote:
From the article:

Judge Moon told Danielle Walker, "I know many fine police officers. But we can't depend on the police to protect us any more."

Two words. No. Kidding.

When COULD we depend on the police to protect us? As far as I've ever seen, they're only useful after the fact, and only in a clean-up capacity. If you're relying on the police to save your ass, the next mess they'll be cleaning up might be YOU!

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 10:06 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

So, if this is self-evident, why do so many people argue against it?

I mean, is it that they are so spoiled that they have never seen violence (except on T.V., and in the movies and vid-games?)

I mean, I have friends from 3rd world countries, and they take it as a matter of course that they be armed. Laws be damned.

So, since its even written in our Constitution...where are they coming from?

I mean, what is the psychology of folks who want everyone disarmed?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 10:24 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Also, as someone else pointed out, this little gem made it thru the NYT...

Like it was said, "The Editors at the Times must have been asleep that day.."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/16/opinion/16reynolds.html?_r=3&oref=sl
ogin

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 10:34 AM

Break into MY house & you'll lose something, and I don't mean keys.
*glances at his Samurai sword*

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 10:40 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Does a Bat'leth count ?

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 10:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Does a Bat'leth count ?

If it's sharp & you've practiced with it, sure.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 10:54 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

So, really.

From someone who is FOR gun-control, and FOR being a disarmed society. What is your reasoning?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 11:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
So, really.

From someone who is FOR gun-control, and FOR being a disarmed society. What is your reasoning?

Are you talkin' to me? I don't see anyone else in the room...

I may come off pretty left at times, but I believe in the right to bear arms, AND, correctly interpreted, the Constitution even demands it.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 11:06 AM

I'll take this double post as the chance to say: Gun control means keeping guns out of the hands of children, the mentally unbalanced, and (hopefully) crooks.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 11:22 AM

AGENTROUKA

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
So, really.

From someone who is FOR gun-control, and FOR being a disarmed society. What is your reasoning?

I'm not going to enter into a huge argument about this as I am not actually anti-gun. Just to say up front, since you seem to be champing at the bit to have a go at someone about this subject. Don't make it me.

I would think that the main thing making people leery of an armed society is the potential for abuse. The language thrown around ("You do XYZ and you'll lose something, and I don't mean your keys!") can seem very aggressive and trigger-happy to someone who is not mentally predisposed to accepting guns as positive. It invokves the image of someone paranoid and possibly prejudiced shooting before they ask, causing unnecessary death that is then justified on the basis of the shooters fear or anger.

When people throw around violent language about what they would like to do to others who have crossed some kind of line, this also makes people leery of trusting just anyone with a gun.

And yes, I think not being exposed to violence in their regular life probably plays a role, as well. It may seem bizarre to someone who is surrounded by violence and feels its threat constantly, but from the opposite view point it is just as bizarre. If you don't know what it feels like, you have a harder time understanding those who live it, be it a sense of safety or a sense of danger.

That's what I can come up with. I don't claim that any of the above reasons are entirely rational, but I think no one will win over anti-gun people by getting angry or condescending.

What helped me make up my mind about the issue were always people who very calmly emphasized how responsibly they handle their own guns (e.g., child safety, training), were willng to admit limits to how much guns can protect you, and the argument that criminals would have illegal guns, anyway.

Basically, what I find convincing are people who actually try to address the concerns of gun-sceptics. Anything that sounds like aggression is only going to reinforce their distrust of pro-gun people's judgment.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 11:28 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Not chomping at the bit to go after anyone. Really. Just curious.

I'm just trying to get an understanding. Thats all.

I mean, your response was reasonable.

Your personal opinion on this issue does have alot to do with backround, and current situation.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 11:37 AM

AGENTROUKA

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Not chomping at the bit to go after anyone. Really. Just curious.

I'm just trying to get an understanding. Thats all.

I mean, your response was reasonable.

Your personal opinionon this issue does have alot to do with backround, and current situation.

I'm glad I misunderstood, then.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 11:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
The language thrown around ("You do XYZ and you'll lose something, and I don't mean your keys!") can seem very aggressive and trigger-happy to someone who is not mentally predisposed to accepting guns as positive.

I was referring to the devastation I could wreak with my sword, not a gun. I would typically send someone to the hospital, not a morgue anyway, so where's the agressiveness in that?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 12:07 PM

AGENTROUKA

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
The language thrown around ("You do XYZ and you'll lose something, and I don't mean your keys!") can seem very aggressive and trigger-happy to someone who is not mentally predisposed to accepting guns as positive.
I was referring to the devastation I could wreak with my sword, not a gun. I would typically send someone to the hospital, not a morgue anyway, so where's the agressiveness in that?

Are you trying to inspire an anti-sword movement?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 12:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:

Are you trying to inspire an anti-sword movement?

Like the one in the UK?
They'll pry my sword out of my cold dead hand! Or pay me $200 for it...

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 1:51 PM

DREAMTROVE

There's an anti-sword movement?
1. Where was I?
2. Where were they?
Isn't this like a few hundred years too late?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 1:51 PM

DREAMTROVE

Double post

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 2:20 PM

ERIC

"Sam-yoo-rye" style swords are banned in the UK, I believe. Unless you have a reason for owning that the government deems legitimate. Sucky.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 4:17 PM

FREMDFIRMA

My stance on it by this time is well known.

The act of resistance is more important than the tools you use, but the proper tool in well trained hands can level the playing field right quick like.

And criminals HATE even-odds.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, February 9, 2009 5:39 PM

DREAMTROVE

FREM: Cops too. Apparently, the US govt. as well: This is why we take on countries that are tiny or have no military.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 12:01 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
There's an anti-sword movement?
1. Where was I?
2. Where were they?
Isn't this like a few hundred years too late?

Anti-Knife, other bladed weapons count on that.

I have a sword. They're not illegal, unless you wander around on the street with it.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:43 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Agent, with that said...

Yes, history and current situation does play a key role. But it has been my experience, that "current situation" can change in the blink of an eye.

Remember, the dregs of society do not just stay in their little self-made hell holes. They do wash up on the shores of "nice" communities.

Luckily, most are so far removed from intelligence that they announce their presence as a threat from far off. Clothing, hair, speech, are all dead giveaways. (Before you get on me about this one, I mean it to apply to all races, creeds, colors, religions, and sexuality. And anything/anyone else I missed.)

That being said, I have yet to hear a valid reason as to why everyone (ESPECIALLY women) in our nation should NOT be armed at all times.

I mean, you want to make everyone equal? Cut down crime, make people feel and be more safe? Then everyone should be armed.

It should be as natural as taking your wallet and keys with you.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 4:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:

It should be as natural as taking your wallet and keys with you.

Curious here. What age do you think you need to be to start packing?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:03 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

The age of reason. Whenever that is.

Maybe the same age as they can drive a car, or when they turn 18?

I don't know. But before they ever have one, you HAVE to make sure they know what they are doing with it. How to use it, how to be safe, what its for.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
before they ever have one, you HAVE to make sure they know what they are doing with it. How to use it, how to be safe, what its for.

Why make it different than having a car?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:10 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Ha! Its the exact same thing.

A car is a deadly weapon. WITH the ability to cause HEAVY damage...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:14 AM

Ya know, it's weird... I grew up in a fairly large town (or small city), around 75,000 people when I was growing up, and as kids of 11 or 12, we would take our .22 rifles and go walking out past the city limits, where we'd hunt for rabbits, rats, and birds to take home and feed to our snakes.

What's *weird* about that, in retrospect, is that never - not once - were we stopped and questioned by police. Never even looked at like anything was odd in what we were doing.

Also, when I went to high school in that same town (a school with a graduating class of over 1100 seniors per year, so NOT a one-room schoolhouse by any means!), it was not uncommon to see a gun rack in a pickup, and a deer rifle in that rack. And those were the students' pickups. And yet somehow, with so many guns around, we managed to have not one single shooting in school, nor any incidents of people bringing their guns INTO the school.

I simply can't imaging walking down the street with a rifle now. I'd be surrounded by SWAT in about 3 minutes, I'd bet.

So what changed? At what point did my home town change from a rural mindset, where carrying a gun meant you were trying to gather food, to an urban mindset, where it meant you MUST be trying to kill somebody?

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Ha! Its the exact same thing.

A car is a deadly weapon. WITH the ability to cause HEAVY damage...

So many lives lost each year. We must ban cars. They kill.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

So what changed? At what point did my home town change from a rural mindset, where carrying a gun meant you were trying to gather food, to an urban mindset, where it meant you MUST be trying to kill somebody?

Statistics clearly show that one out of every 50 million in the US will shoot somebody out of sheer anger. Just think of how many you personally know that went all Columbine on the general public. It's just too common.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:33 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

1 in 50 million.... Cites please.

And if there are 300 million of us....that means what? MAYBE 6 will go gonzo?

I KNOW there HAS to be more than 6 bullets in America able to deal with this "threat"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:36 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
So many lives lost each year. We must ban cars. They kill.

Of course to drive a car, you have to have a licence, earned by proving competency and safety behind the wheel. If you have to prove you're able to safely and expertly use a firearm before you can buy and take one home, and lose that licence if you are found using the weapon dangerously, or with it on your person while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, then that's fine with me.

Bar staff could say "give me your car keys and your gun, son, you've had enough".

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:39 AM

I have no fear of guns at all... Just the lunatics brandishing them around.

Sort the loons out from the sensible gun handlers and then I say: "Go with your weapon and make merry."

Of course, you remove the 'loon's you have no need for guns... Or do you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
MAYBE 6 will go gonzo?

So the answer to Mike's question is that practically nothing has changed, except the ADVERTISING of certain rare events to create this drama over some perceived need to stop people from going nuts & Rambo-ing all over the place.

What's life without causes, eh?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

Of course to drive a car, you have to have a licence, earned by proving competency and safety behind the wheel.

LOL, maybe that's how it's done over there guys, but here it's a driver's Ed class in High School taught by the Gym teacher, a "test" where you show you can put the car in reverse, then off you go to cut peeps off, "forget" to signal, and crash during your first rain or snow storm.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
I have no fear of guns at all... Just the lunatics brandishing them around.

I like smackin' 'em.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 5:51 AM

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:
LOL, maybe that's how it's done over there guys, but here it's a driver's Ed class in High School taught by the Gym teacher, a "test" where you show you can put the car in reverse, then off you go to cut peeps off, "forget" to signal, and crash during your first rain or snow storm.

So what you're saying is there is no skill involved in learning to drive over there then Chris?

Hmmm, would explain why you boys don't got a Formula 1 Champion :P (just ribbing you bud)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:

So what you're saying is there is no skill involved in learning to drive over there then Chris?

None whatsoever, generally. Some states require testing as you get on in years, but most don't even do that. What I'm on about is that any fool can drive a car, and any fool can get a gun. Consider the death of that 8 year old at a gun show in Massachusetts supposedly run by professional gun enthusiasts. Look at all the auto deaths in my country. No one here can even walk on pavement with a little bit of ice without falling & nearly killing themselves.
We train nobody to do anything well.
I had a cop friend tell me that they were trained how to fight & shoot by going to infrequent classes where stuff got "demonstrated" for them. He said he learned to shoot his gun & fight hand to hand on his own time & money.

Quote:

Hmmm, would explain why you boys don't got a Formula 1 Champion :P (just ribbing you bud)

All our best drivers work in Hollywood, dontcha know.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:13 AM

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:
We train nobody to do anything well.

Have that feeling about things here sometimes I must admit.

Quote:
All our best drivers work in Hollywood, dontcha know.

Ohhh. Good comeback

Ha,ha.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
So many lives lost each year. We must ban cars. They kill.

Of course to drive a car, you have to have a licence, earned by proving competency and safety behind the wheel. If you have to prove you're able to safely and expertly use a firearm before you can buy and take one home, and lose that licence if you are found using the weapon dangerously, or with it on your person while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, then that's fine with me.

Bar staff could say "give me your car keys and your gun, son, you've had enough".

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

Cit, I appreciate the effort, I really do - but when have you seen any requirement that you be an "expert" at handling a car to get a license to operate one? (and don't get too bent - I'm just snarkin' on ya!)

You want a licensing test, I'm game. Except for the legal contortions you're going to have to go through to implement such a thing. Driving, after all, is a privilege, not a constitutionally protected right.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Driving, after all, is a privilege, not a constitutionally protected right.

Where's the "Driver Control" bills????

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:36 AM

Quote:

Hmmm, would explain why you boys don't got a Formula 1 Champion :P (just ribbing you bud)

No freaking kidding. Breaks my heart that there's never an American F1 driver with anything close to a realistic chance to do anything in the sport.

Breaks my heart even more that there's not even an American F1 race most years. :( Here I am, stuck with NASCAR or the IRL (aka "Idiots Running Left")... and even that's going away now, merging back with IndyCar, or whatever they're calling that misbegotten series this year.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Driving, after all, is a privilege, not a constitutionally protected right.

Where's the "Driver Control" bills????

The laughing Chrisisall

Right? I mean, seriously!

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 6:42 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Cit, I appreciate the effort, I really do - but when have you seen any requirement that you be an "expert" at handling a car to get a license to operate one?

Well, in theory we have a test over here, which you fail if you're not up to scratch, and then no licence for you.

Quote:
You want a licensing test, I'm game. Except for the legal contortions you're going to have to go through to implement such a thing. Driving, after all, is a privilege, not a constitutionally protected right.

I thought in a lot of places in the US you already needed a licence?

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:

I thought in a lot of places in the US you already needed a licence?

They require a license for everything but parenthood in the States. It's just a $ thing.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:21 AM

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

No freaking kidding. Breaks my heart that there's never an American F1 driver with anything close to a realistic chance to do anything in the sport.

Yeah not really since Eddie Cheever. Scott Speed was just a bit of a knob. Although I think he was unfairly punted from Toro Rosso. He didn't look to have much talent though...

Quote:
Breaks my heart even more that there's not even an American F1 race most years. :( Here I am, stuck with NASCAR or the IRL (aka "Idiots Running Left")

Ha, ha.

Yeah. It's weird but it just doesn't go over to well over with you guys. So Kwicko d'you watch F1 when you can?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:34 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Still waiting for a reasonable argument for being disarmed....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Still waiting for a reasonable argument for being disarmed....

It makes martial law easier to set up.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, February 10, 2009 7:44 AM