Page: 1 2 3 Next > Jump to:  Bottom  Last Post
 horror102
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 89 Posts
|
Monday, February 11, 2013 9:09:03 AM
what an ass |
|
 collegebound
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
3471 Posts
|
Sunday, February 10, 2013 2:37:45 PM
keith2: c'mon man the kids are battle hardened too. what do you think CoD is for? |
|
 RobSwindol
Male, 30-39, Southern US
2031 Posts
|
Sunday, February 10, 2013 3:47:58 AM
Wow. This is an old ass story. |
|
 sbeelz
Male, 30-39, Western US
2860 Posts
|
Sunday, February 10, 2013 12:51:53 AM
@keith2- While I agree that armed civilians wouldn't stand a chance against the military, an armed populace still works as a counterbalance against armed government power. Over the last 12 years, we've seen a significant erosion of our civil rights via the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Act, the NDAA, the Obama Administration's unilateral declaration that the President of the US has the right to order the assassination of American Citizens with no judicial or legislative oversight, etc. Were the US population ever fully disarmed (despite what many gun owners fear, I don't envision that happening any time soon), I can guarantee that law enforcement agencies, from the FBI all the way down to city PDs, would suddenly become far bolder in their willingness to trample our rights- in the name of national security, of course. And no, I don't own a gun myself. |
|
 Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 10:40:29 PM
@Keith2: Yeah, I've got to agree with you there. Not too long ago I read a piece by an Army Ranger who was discussing what chance these backyard wannabe warriors would have against the U.S. military. He made several great points, the first being that the moment a group of citizens take up arms and start attacking our government, they become "enemy combatants" and most trained U.S. military would not have a problem mobilizing against them. All of his other points were contrasts between those who train, day after day, 40 hours a week, as a team, to kill in combat versus overweight guys with paunches who spend the occasional weekend on a paintball course. Not much of a contest, really. |
|
 keith2
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
2316 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 10:32:17 PM
I don't care if every man woman and child has an AK-47.. the population still would not stand a chance against our battle-trained military. Keep and bear arms to protect against our government? Come on now, you're tripping. |
|
 Zeegrr60
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
1514 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 9:31:22 PM
Here's the deal- your taxes are going up. "They" are taking away your guns. One actually happened. But no ones talking about the taxes. Perfect plan really. Now don't think about elephants and we're good. |
|
 SpermNinja81
Male, 30-39, Australia
458 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 7:38:41 PM
I keep asking and asking, yet no-one has been able to give me a clear answer, exactly WHO is this guy intending to kill if these changes come about? HE can't even be specific, "I'm gonna start killing people" I just can't begin to understand who these people think they're going to be fighting. I'm assuming that the ATF would probably be responsible for confiscating an individuals firearms if ordered to do so? So are ATF agents going to be the ones targeted?
He claims that Obama's proposed safety measures are going to start another civil war, Others are threatening revolution. I ask AGAIN, against who? The pro-control side are just going to decide to pick up weapons to enforce an initiative that intends to prevent gun violence? That makes no sense. Or is it this other fantasy of the police and military turning mindlessly on their own citizens and destroying their own families, friends and communities as soon as they're ordered to by the 'government' |
|
 turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1779 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 6:29:34 PM
Open carry does not require a permit. I don't think it's allowed in some states though. I do know in Washington state one can openly carry a pistol or even rifle with no permit. |
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 6:23:59 PM
@Gerry: Great point re: a driver's license and rants. A few thoughts, related and otherwise:
1. It's pretty clear to me that the only reason gun ownership isn't regarded as a privilege and doesn't require a permit is because of the 2nd Amendment. (Bear with me, people: I'm thinking a lot of this through for the first time.)
2. Considering that it's the right to "bear" mentioned in the amendment, and not the right to "own" them, it's a little surprising that the government has been able to classify carrying arms a privilege with a revocable permit. (Is the permit required only for concealed carrying? What about open carrying? Someone help me out here, please.)
3. In terms of your example, Gerry, I suppose the difference is largely due to the fact that guns are designed to kill, while cars aren't. |
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 6:13:11 PM
@Turdburglar: No issues; I thought you were making fun in a good way and it made me laugh. I totally got the "The More You Know" allusion from your first post, with the ASCII shooting star. |
|
turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1779 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 4:11:54 PM
Squrilz - here is an example to jog your memory.
The More You Know |
|
turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1779 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 4:10:13 PM
I wasn't making fun. Besides, I'm half liberal.
Don't you remember those commercials from back in the day? They would have a celebrity briefly speak about drugs or something, then at the end it would say "the more you know" with a star moving across the screen and a little jingle. |
|
 Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
25558 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 3:23:54 PM
Let's change the weapon of choice.
If he had been cut off by bicycle road hogs {we all hate them!} what if he said, "I swear if one more damn bicycle cuts me off I'm just gonna hit the gas and run him down."
Would you take away his driving permit?
No? Why not? Is it obvious he just ranting and doesn't mean it or is the threat just too vague?
|
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 3:07:29 PM
@Issame: I never meant to imply that driving *isn't* a privilege. I was just contrasting driving privileges with the right to bear arms and coming to an understanding of why we have driver's licenses but not gun owner licenses. |
|
 Issame
Female, 30-39, Eastern US
54 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 2:51:11 PM
Technically speaking, driving *is* a privilege. That's one of the first things you LEARN when going through Driver's Ed.
The scary State doesn't threaten to take away your license unless you're, you know, *breaking the law*. |
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 2:40:30 PM
@Turdburglar: LOL. Yeah, yeah, yeah: make fun of the liberal. =^.^= |
|
turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1779 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 2:20:48 PM
The more you know! ---------* |
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 2:12:25 PM
@Turdburglar: Good to know. So I guess driving is considered a "privilege," which is why you have to have a driver's license, and the state can threaten to take away your "driving privileges"--whereas gun ownership is considered a right because it's in the 2nd Amendment. Carrying a weapon, however, is considered a privilege, I guess. Interesting stuff. |
|
turdburglar
Male, 30-39, Western US
1779 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 1:56:56 PM
Squrilz - Gun ownership in America is not a privilege, it's a right. There is no permit required to simply own a rifle or pistol. There are permits required for concealed carry of a pistol and to own certain weapons, like full auto for example. |
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 1:24:01 PM
@FoolsPrussia: Thanks. Good info. |
|
 FoolsPrussia
Male, 18-29, Western US
2854 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 1:13:40 PM
"My point is some gov'ment clerk or even a cop should not be able to take away anyones rights just 'cause they can."
His permit was taken away by the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security, but he's allowed to have the decision reviewed in court.
link |
|
Squrlz4Sale
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
3307 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:23:26 PM
@Gerry: Again, interesting points. And I'm about to agree with you that a judge should make the call on whether a citizen should have his gun rights revoked in such a case. But I wonder if it's because a permit to have guns is considered a privilege by the authorities and the granting of the permission is contingent on responsible behavior? Ergo, you do something stupid, you've given up the right, ipso facto? I really don't know; I'm just wondering what the legal issues are here.
Do you even have to have a permit to own a gun? Or is it just to carry? Help me out, people.
Also, I'm assuming this guy's guns were taken, not just that his permits were rescinded. Does anyone know? (Sorry; I'm feeling too lazy to Google this at the moment... no coffee or tea yet.) |
|
Gerry1of1
Male, 50-59, Western US
25558 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:16:32 PM
Okay, the guys a jerk.
My point is some gov'ment clerk or even a cop should not be able to take away anyones rights just 'cause they can.
Rights should not be taken away unless you are convicted of a crime. Not justs because you were a rude jerk.
If he did make "terroristic threats" then let a judge decide. Not a gov'ment clerk |
|
 PTPete
Female, 30-39, Western US
1199 Posts
|
Saturday, February 09, 2013 12:06:03 PM
Macho poser. |
|
Page: 1 2 3 Next >
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}