Jump to content

"Out of the mouth of babes," everyone needs to watch this:


noonereal

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dbcaptiron said:

The right to bear arms was written into the constitution as a means to prevent citizens from being repressed by their own government.  A tenant of our country, and however you want to define it, this basic concept should never be abandoned.

I think there has been too much destruction to say how things are now should never be abandoned. We need to do some tweaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LiberalDonaldTrump said:

That amendments don’t make sense ... how are we gonna defend our selves against this shit 

 

LOL... get with the times....

Fight a lazer gun with a lazer gun silly...

 

If the technology exists you can be certain that people will attain them (or build them themselves).....prohibition or not....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, maxchoboian said:

I think there has been too much destruction to say how things are now should never be abandoned. We need to do some tweaking.

You may think that, but in fact history has proven to be even more brutal with less technologically advanced weapons...

'how things are now' is definitely in need of tweaking and possibly even more....

But the right of self protection and freedom from oppression at the point of a gun, are not something I will ever abandon. If it ever were, you could be certain that even more atrocities than 'How things are now' would have a fertile playground to take root...  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

You may think that, but in fact history has proven to be even more brutal with less technologically advanced weapons...

'how things are now' is definitely in need of tweaking and possibly even more....

But the right of self protection and freedom from oppression at the point of a gun, are not something I will ever abandon. If it ever were, you could be certain that even more atrocities than 'How things are now' would have a fertile playground to take root...  

damn, you are on a roll today.... I knew you had it in you:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

You may think that, but in fact history has proven to be even more brutal with less technologically advanced weapons...

'how things are now' is definitely in need of tweaking and possibly even more....

But the right of self protection and freedom from oppression at the point of a gun, are not something I will ever abandon. If it ever were, you could be certain that even more atrocities than 'How things are now' would have a fertile playground to take root...  

And I believe there is historical evidence of less brutality as well. 

We have a great country, but we don't have everything figured out, and certainly not allowing the citizenry to acquire the latest and greatest weapons.I think the proof is in the killing of large numbers of innocent people. Something needs to be changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, maxchoboian said:

And I believe there is historical evidence of less brutality as well. 

We have a great country, but we don't have everything figured out, and certainly not allowing the citizenry to acquire the latest and greatest weapons.I think the proof is in the killing of large numbers of innocent people. Something needs to be changed.

I do agree here...

But think 'prohibition' would have about as much success as the last time America tried 'prohibition'...

You are right tho, better solutions can be figured out and adopted....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

I do agree here...

But think 'prohibition' would have about as much success as the last time America tried 'prohibition'...

You are right tho, better solutions can be figured out and adopted....

Having discussions about what can be improved upon regarding availability and types of weapons doesn't need to mean prohibition. Alcohol prohibition was all alcohol. Gun control can easily mean controlling what and to whom, not prohibiting altogether.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, noonereal said:

I was actually referring to your less venomous style. 

and please do not point out that I agreed with a template set by you. @DBP66 is already suspicious of me!

Sure thing....but funny....I think I called you (well not you, but your posts actually) 'intellectually dishonest' at least 3 or 4 times today 9_9...

As that is what you have taken the most affront to, it is very telling indeed that you gloss over that when I say something you like ...

Truth be told...all you have to do is talk 'issue' or stance and not 'person' or peeve, and you would find the responses to be of the same consistancy...:D  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dbcaptiron said:

As that is what you have taken the most affront to, it is very telling indeed that you gloss over that when I say something you like ...

Oh no, it's the venom that is absent. 

You can call me any kind of name, I just don't care. When the post is all about attacking the individual, it's a waste of time to talk so I move on. 

When anyone speaks with venom, they cannot be dealt with so only a fool replies. 

You value me to little to think I am that simplistic like this, I do understand most are. 

No joke, you do tend to use stereotypes to much. I would submit this is another occasion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, maxchoboian said:

Having discussions about what can be improved upon regarding availability and types of weapons doesn't need to mean prohibition. Alcohol prohibition was all alcohol. Gun control can easily mean controlling what and to whom, not prohibiting altogether.

agreed. Availability and types tend to be fair game to me...

But then again I see a gun as protection and a tool, not something I need to start a war with... 

I think there are even better approaches tho, as limiting a tool does very little to eliminate all the underlying issues.  In fact it would probably even lead to less addressing of those issues if people are led to believe this will 'solve everything'.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, noonereal said:

You can call me any kind of name, I just don't care. When the post is all about attacking the individual, it's a waste of time to talk so I move on. 

Damn. You just wiped out 80% of your own posts as useless :$...

You know all those ones attacking that orange little big man 'individual' ...........

So people should just move on and not waste the time when you post those.... thanks, good to know:D 

 

You do know I have been saying talk policy not person since day one right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dbcaptiron said:

This makes perfect sense at first glance, but is actually a looong way from abandonment of those principles.

There is not nearly enough military to 'occupy' a couple states, never mind the whole country, and the military power/hardware you speak of is NOT the type of hardware that is controlled by any single man.  That is why (my personal beliefs) set the bar at the local or civilian level, as that is where any real 'oppression' could come into play, with some civilians allowed to carry for their 'job', and an outright ban for everyone else....

Think of it this way.....If a cop tells me something, I had better listen or risk being shot...If someone in a military uniform gave me an order (while not operating as disaster 'police')  I'm well within my rights to tell him to fuck off...

The military has no authority to police the civilian population under normal circumstances...  

 

 

You said the second amendment was intended for me to protect myself from an oppressive government. An oppressive government. 

If I'm an oppressive government, I'm implementing martial law, calling up the guard and oppressing the shit out of you with whatever I have if necessary. 

Now we're back peddling on oppressive government and saying local police forces and or the silly mayor. 

 

An oppressive government is not normal circumstances, so, I'm gonna steal a line from the young lady on the video and call BS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, dbcaptiron said:

agreed. Availability and types tend to be fair game to me...

But then again I see a gun as protection and a tool, not something I need to start a war with... 

I think there are even better approaches tho, as limiting a tool does very little to eliminate all the underlying issues.  In fact it would probably even lead to less addressing of those issues if people are led to believe this will 'solve everything'.

 

It would be very naive to think we are going to solve everything. But we can makes strides in the right direction, as opposed to sitting back and watching the individual event death toll record continue to be broken.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maxchoboian said:

I see too much anger to a degree I've not seen before, from both sides, to say we are trucking along just fine.

Most/all of the anger I see is from the people who were convinced their candidate was going to win the election, but didn’t. 

People are going to work, making a living,  caring for their families and generally living their lives just as they were before November 2016. The economy is doing as well or better than it’s done since 2006. 

In my opinion, that qualifies as “humming along just fine.”

YMMV, of course. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said:

You said the second amendment was intended for me to protect myself from an oppressive government. An oppressive government. 

If I'm an oppressive government, I'm implementing martial law, calling up the guard and oppressing the shit out of you with whatever I have if necessary. 

Now we're back peddling on oppressive government and saying local police forces and or the silly mayor. 

 

An oppressive government is not normal circumstances. 

No need for me to backpeddle anything.

I do know where you are headed and I get your point (which is a decent one) , but somewhere along the line 'theory' must touch base with 'reality'....

Yes the government could still try to 'oppress us', but as we have a representative form (not a dictatorship or totalitarian) it would take conspiracies, not whims (but your local cop on the corner could rape your daughter and get away with it in an unarmed population). You cannot argue that if we were unarmed this would be cake.  My stance is that you can call up whatever national guard you want and declare whatever law you want.  But it will not be sustainable if the population is armed...in order for them to succed in this they must disarm the population, either as you say by force or by law...

Either way is not much of a difference....once you relinquish all protections

  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zulu1128 said:

Most/all of the anger I see is from the people who were convinced their candidate was going to win the election, but didn’t. 

People are going to work, making a living,  caring for their families and generally living their lives just as they were before November 2016. The economy is doing as well or better than it’s done since 2006. 

In my opinion, that qualifies as “humming along just fine.”

YMMV, of course. 

And because of this hollywood Trump will be re-elected 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zulu1128 said:

Most/all of the anger I see is from the people who were convinced their candidate was going to win the election, but didn’t. 

People are going to work, making a living,  caring for their families and generally living their lives just as they were before November 2016. The economy is doing as well or better than it’s done since 2006. 

In my opinion, that qualifies as “humming along just fine.”

YMMV, of course. 

So you think most/all of the anger is coming from the Left. I don't. Certainly not all.

There are a lot of Drummers and thc6795s out there answering anger from those with whom they disagree with anger of their own. I see it not only on message boards, but with neighbors and co-workers and barbers and the tax guy, etc. More than I've ever seen before, from both sides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maxchoboian said:

So you think most/all of the anger is coming from the Left. I don't. Certainly not all.

There are a lot of Drummers and thc6795s out there answering anger from those with whom they disagree with anger of their own. I see it not only on message boards, but with neighbors and co-workers and barbers and the tax guy, etc. More than I've ever seen before, from both sides.

gee it must suck when that 'silent majority' finally opens their mouth, and you finally realize that your side is not the only side.....and is in fact the minority :oxD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, noonereal said:

good points but i feel overall he came up with a fair compromise through reason

keep in mind, the police could roll back it's military style weaponry thereby, according to trill's plan, make these weapons also inaccessible to civilians

what is upsetting is seeing Trump come out in support of bumped up background checks! 

that ship has sailed, we all know that is a big ball of doing nothing

we need gun reform, no more bs  

Maybe you should do some ride alongs with some  police departments. Police need stronger weapon base arsenal than the public. It’s not all roses and red wine in the streets. 

America has a lot of shit bags with zero regard for others, especially law enforcement living in it compared to other countries people like to compare our situation with. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...