Gun Control

[Hartsock]

And that's the point, obviously. That "one shot heard around the world" could never have been fired against the grandest and most powerful army and navy in the world in 1776.

One thing about the British Lords and royalty. . . . they never really forget. . . . and never really give up.

It's not about the safety of our kids, or our rights to self-governance. It's about the safety of their kids and their right to rule the rest of mankind. And their convenience in doing so. . . .

Oh, and it's not just Brits with elite ruling classes. . . it's the Chinese, the Japanese, the Russians, and every other country with no effective representative governance on the ground. . . . and even in the US it has been more a dream than a reality from the outset. . .

and it will never be a reality any more than an informed and non-compliant populace can manage to impose on the arrogance of "experts" who spend their entire lives trying to manage opinion. . . .by jumping all over our natural sympathies for the innocent kids, or whatever. . . .


hooting and hollering like cowboys driving a herd of cattle. . . . into the pens.

What about the Jews?

[Qman]

What about the Jews?

They have gone for an armed society in Israel.

[One Brow]

You have a lot of speculation too, so it goes both ways. You're pretty much assuming that since he stole those guns from his mom, he could/would not have stolen them from any other place.

.
Any bans that would have applied to his mother would have applied to anyone else.
.

And you're also assuming that since the weapons fit his needs, he could/would not have been capable of modifying them to fit his needs.

.
I don't see where that assumption is offered, either, nor why it is relevant.
.

If you make this stuff illegal, all you'll be doing is taking them away from the law abiding citizens, and creating a black market for people to get really good at making them.

Sure. I have not argued otherwise.

[One Brow]

Holy cow, you'd be dead by the time you went through all of this malarkey.

If the bullets are already in the gun, and you keep the gun pre-set so all you need to is change one number to discharge, how is that different from switching a safety on/off? It only slows you down when you run out of bullets from that first magazine.

[One Brow]

Maybe about the twentieth time OB has ignored whatever anyone said and repeated himself with the same mumbo jumbo straight from the gun confiscation talking points

I have not advocated for any sort of confiscation.

[One Brow]

Holy cow, you'd be dead by the time you went through all of this malarkey.

And that's the point, obviously. That "one shot heard around the world" could never have been fired against the grandest and most powerful army and navy in the world in 1776.

IIRC, that "one shot heard round the world" was fired from a front-loading muzzle that even an expert had trouble discharging more than ten times per minute. Was your irony intentional?

[babe]

I have not advocated for any sort of confiscation.

yet there is hardly any law defining new restrictions on law-abiding citizens that doesn't seem useful to you.

I think I said you favor gradualistic methods which progressively work in this direction. Today we have literally millions of laws. Probably if you roll out of bed the wrong way, it's against the law somehow, and the only reason you are not convicted of one felony or another is just that there aren't enough police to catch you when, in all probability, you will unknowingly commit one.

felons are routinely deprived of the "right" to own a gun even if their crime had nothing to do with using a gun. Even more so if your infraction was gun-related. The sting operatives who sold the dupe a sawed-off shotgun that was 1/4" too short to be legal knew exactly what they were doing.

Your suggestions will all add ammo to the jackboots who spend their lives trying to cook up new ways to throw some stupid citizen in jail.

[babe]

IIRC, that "one shot heard round the world" was fired from a front-loading muzzle that even an expert had trouble discharging more than ten times per minute. Was your irony intentional?

I'm always seeing irony in our discussions, but missed that one. Thanks for pointing it out.

[One Brow]

yet there is hardly any law defining new restrictions on law-abiding citizens that doesn't seem useful to you.

Different restrictions may or may not be useful. I would disagree with saying that all restrictions are beneficial.

[babe]

What about the Jews?

Israel's government today has moved hard against segments of their population that pose real threats to the general peace, and in doing so have become more influenced over the years by what I call "fascists" or militarist sorts. . . , not to say they haven't always had a strong component of marxists in the mix. And yes, they have some "elites" with inordinate influence in their government. . .

I guess you're sorta trying to make this a racist issue or something. No, it's about the common things governments do. . . . . almost everywhere. . . . unless you take special efforts to keep it from being done in the good old-fashioned warlord/merchantmonopolist way.

When I was in Israel I was appreciative of the soldiers in their stations with their weapons on display, ready for use in an instant. I'm sure it kept me alive where my throat would have been slit just as quickly if they had not been there.

I've said it before, but Obama and the media moguls all know how to protect their kids, they just don't want our kids to have the same protection. But the good news is that the kids going back to school now will have armed police very visible around them. . . .

[babe]

Different restrictions may or may not be useful. I would disagree with saying that all restrictions are beneficial.

Gameface is trying to offer an olive branch. I have to defer to him on knowledge of guns. I've never had a gun, and don't want one, I don't even like to hunt. I hope you and gameface can share info enough to figure out which restrictions could make sense. . . . for me, after reading a lot of books on holocaust victims and Solzhenitsyn's Gulag tales, I just figure there is no good reason the government authorities will ever respect. It's all about how to render you and the rest of the commoners politically impotent. So I say just don't give them any pretext to stand on.

that was the considered opinion after the fact of those who had to put their lives on the line for independence in America in 1776.

[Brown Notes]

Israel's government today has moved hard against segments of their population that pose real threats to the general peace, and in doing so have become more influenced over the years by what I call "fascists" or militarist sorts. . . , not to say they haven't always had a strong component of marxists in the mix. And yes, they have some "elites" with inordinate influence in their government. . .

I guess you're sorta trying to make this a racist issue or something. No, it's about the common things governments do. . . . . almost everywhere. . . . unless you take special efforts to keep it from being done in the good old-fashioned warlord/merchantmonopolist way.

When I was in Israel I was appreciative of the soldiers in their stations with their weapons on display, ready for use in an instant. I'm sure it kept me alive where my throat would have been slit just as quickly if they had not been there.

I've said it before, but Obama and the media moguls all know how to protect their kids, they just don't want our kids to have the same protection. But the good news is that the kids going back to school now will have armed police very visible around them. . . .

I waited a couple of days. I thought that if I did I would come to a different conclusion as far as JF goes. Sadly, no. I will try to be a reasonable person. But I will also stand up for my own self. Anyways, cheers.

[Scat]

The British disarmed India without a whimper, and it took a Gandhi to remove the actual presence of British troops. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to be a Gandhi in some small way. India still hasn't shaken itself free of British neocolonialism under the false flag of the UN, and we still have British Lords wishing they could die and come back as a plague capable of decimating the human population on Planet Earth. . . . so there could be bigger forests to run the dogs after the foxes where gallant nobility could ride their fine steeds unimpeded by human rabble. . . .

See my current signature...

[babe]

I waited a couple of days. I thought that if I did I would come to a different conclusion as far as JF goes. Sadly, no. I will try to be a reasonable person. But I will also stand up for my own self. Anyways, cheers.

I hardly think I represent JF in general.

And don't get me wrong, I think standing up for your own self is what it is all about.

I might try to shake you up if I consider you're standing inside some comfy insulated bubble all rosy with happiness at the way things are, and I think there's reason to move along. . . . but probably in the current time very few would call me "progressive" or "reasonable". . . . unless you can catch my drift. . . . that I think "progressive" is something that accumulates in the power of individuals their inherent, natural, or some would say "God-given" liberties and human dignity. And not things that accumulate in the hands of government or special folks their prerogatives to lord it over the rest.

but being able to stand apart from a discussion after having said a piece, or leave others to muddle in their angst.. . .does in my view lend a little credence to your stature as "reasonable". At some point along the way, even amongst folks who are on the same bandwagon. . . . we all have to both leave others as they choose to be, and live in our own way. . . .

well, unless we just can't get through with the idea that "there oughta be a law" to fix other people our way. . . .

cheers.

[One Brow]

See my current signature...

You do realize that Gandhi was referring to military membership and military arms, not personal arms, right?