myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Gun Nuts
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 23, 24, 25 ... 160, 161, 162  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14313

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rigitrite wrote:
1. Not an over reaction. The 2nd ammendment clearly is not functioning as intended and requires changes.

2. Your bizarre and meaningless logic about trying to equate smoking, obesity, and automobiles to intenionally taking someones life at the push of a button is beyond the pale.

1. You're obviously completely unaware of the millions of words of data and dialogue that's been presented for many decades on this issue.

2. As you know but choose to ignore in a transparent attempt to sidestep the issue YOU brought up -- public safety -- I'm referring to the number of innocent deaths contributed to by the various sources/causes. Guns in the hands of armed law abiding citizens are proven to save lives; police encourage it. How many lives, however, are saved by smoking, obesity, automobile crashes (or insomnia, apnea, alcohol, etc.)?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5351

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm still shaking my head about Alex Jones. We got about ten minutes of what popular culture once defined as "bull goose loony." But it was interesting to see what passes for argument in the talk radio circuit--and what is clearly a model for mad Mike. (or should we call him Dirty Harry Fick?)

I had to go back a ways in this thread to find where Mike posted this bit of nonsense, which was also repeated by Alex Jones:

Quote:
Translating to:
US rate of 403.6 per 100,000.
UK (England & Wales only) of 4079.7 per 100,000.
i.e., 10 times more aggravated assaults!


Given a much lower rate of use of guns in Great Britain, our logic-challenged righties take a different statistic and throw that at the wall and see if it sticks. It actually proves the opposite of the point they are trying to make. There appear to be a lot of aggravated assaults in Great Britain--but they don't escalate to murder by gun. Now it is impossible for me to tell if they are both just too stupid to know how to reason, or too dishonest to use statistical information honestly. But clearly paranoia doesn't help the thinking process.

Now for the dirty Harry part. Bard made a sensible comment when he realized that he was glad he was stopped from using his rifle on the bank robber. But Mike Fick's comment was not only astonishingly rash, it advocated felony vigilantism. You are perfectly within your rights protecting yourself from what a reasonable person would consider a threat to your life. Someone pulling a gun on you, in any circumstances, qualifies. But once the threat has passed--they've put the gun away, they are leaving the scene, etc., the use of deadly force is not to protect yourself, but for revenge, or under the illusion that you are authorized to enforce the law. That is called vigilante justice, and if Iso or Bard killed someone under those circumstances they could be tried and convicted for murder.

The interesting thing is that Bard showed some awareness of the spiritual consequences of taking a life--something that too many soldiers have learned the hard way. Chicken Hawk Mike, on the other hand, showed wonton disregard for both the legal and spiritual issues.

If it is any consolation, neither Mike Fick nor Alex Jones could pass a robust mental stability test if such was required to keep their guns. Just saying...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1960

PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am not up to date on this thread. So, apologies if this has been brought up.

Mac mentioned a mental status exam to keep a firearm. This might effectively prevent most folks from obtaining or keeping their weapon if this exam was required as part of the registration process. I know a couple of shrinks. The potential liability would be onerous. No pun intended...A professional would be crazy to do this!

I might be a paranoid "gun nut" in feeling this requirement might be a way to lose my right to own a gun and effectively take away guns from law abiding citizens.

I am not against gun registration. Quite the contrary. However, the methods and rules for registering a gun should be such that Second Amendment rights are maintained.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3449

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

in theory they already follow Macs suggestion about wacko potential gun buyers, but the system appears to have many failures.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5351

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alex Jones wacko? Whatever makes you think that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GURGLETROUSERS



Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 1363

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As an outsider (and stepping in where I shouldn't), I'm at a loss to understand the necessity or reasoning for any sane person in a civilised Western society to wish to go about their normal daily lives while 'packing' the means to kill a fellow human being!

I assume that nobody on this forum, despite many living to an old age, has ever actually killed anyone? I simply can't believe that the carrying of a gun, in normal daily life, has anything to do with self defence. There are very strict laws about killing people in so called self defence, as many have found to their cost. Is carrying a gun really just posturing?

Can any sane thinking person who's reached a state of maturity imagine they could kill a person, without consequence to their conscience?

I certainly know of nobody who's ever felt they are walking about in fear of their lives; but then I don't know anybody who's paranoid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FarLeft



Joined: 20 Dec 2012
Posts: 30

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:

CA's first four are the same as ours, and Ca's #5 is sound, but CA's #6 is asinine, rendering a self-defense firearm useless.

CA #5 Know how to properly operate your gun ...

CA #6: Store your gun safely and securely to prevent unauthorized use. Guns and ammunition should be stored separately. When the gun is not in your hands, you must still think of safety. Use a California-approved firearms safety device on the gun, such as a trigger lock or cable lock, so it cannot be fired. Store it unloaded in a locked container, such as a California-approved lock box or a gun safe. Store your gun in a different location than the ammunition. For maximum safety you should use both a locking device and a storage container.


Isobars,
Even given all the additional crap in "rule #6", I'd say pretty much every grit-eating AMERICAN citizen would agree to the first and third sentence as basic, common sense. It's not asinine at all. I'll wager a majority of the NRA would agree with my statement (after all, they wrote it). And if the poor, poor loving mother that was shot point blank in the face in Connecticut, had followed rule #6, we wouldn't be discussing an urgent need for getting rid of the Second Amendment today, would we?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14313

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FarLeft wrote:
Even given all the additional crap in "rule #6", I'd say pretty much every grit-eating AMERICAN citizen would agree to the first and third sentence as basic, common sense. It's not asinine at all. I'll wager a majority of the NRA would agree with my statement (after all, they wrote it). And if the poor, poor loving mother that was shot point blank in the face in Connecticut, had followed rule #6, we wouldn't be discussing an urgent need for getting rid of the Second Amendment today, would we?

That entire argument has been beaten to death at the very least 100,000 times over the years. It's just as asinine now as it was the first time some irrational bleeding heart brought it up on Dec 15, 1791, and rehashing it for the 100,001st time isn't going to change anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1960

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GURGLETROUSERS wrote:
As an outsider (and stepping in where I shouldn't), I'm at a loss to understand the necessity or reasoning for any sane person in a civilised Western society to wish to go about their normal daily lives while 'packing' the means to kill a fellow human being!

I assume that nobody on this forum, despite many living to an old age, has ever actually killed anyone? I simply can't believe that the carrying of a gun, in normal daily life, has anything to do with self defence. There are very strict laws about killing people in so called self defence, as many have found to their cost. Is carrying a gun really just posturing?

Can any sane thinking person who's reached a state of maturity imagine they could kill a person, without consequence to their conscience?

I certainly know of nobody who's ever felt they are walking about in fear of their lives; but then I don't know anybody who's paranoid.


GT

I am close to someone who was threatened by a very dangerous individual through her work. The threat was enough that the local police were escorting her back and forth to work. The police suggested she take a course in gun self defense and carry a concealed weapon. Which she did for quite some time. They also suggested that those close to her do the same.

I took the course also, but decided I may not react properly if confronted by this individual. So, I never carried. But, I also stood a much better chance of fighting this guy off.

I own guns. Mostly for hunting and target shooting. I occasionally carry one in my car when we travel long distances at night. Notebly South Texas. Most of the time, I do not feel I need or desire the protection. But, I do understand that others may not live in as safe an environment as I and respect their right to defend themselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3449

PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree completely.it is the NRAs insistence that I really need heavy military hardware, ever escalating into huge clips for your AR15 that you bought ten at a time at a gun show without any background check, to live that life.
You might need to mail order the full auto conversions to convert all ten of them, but maybe not. The guy at the show can hook you up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 23, 24, 25 ... 160, 161, 162  Next
Page 24 of 162

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group