moreluck
golden ticket member
Does anybody give a rat's ass ??
guns
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
moreluck
golden ticket member
I'm pretty sure the sky marshalls have weapons and the cruise ships have weaponry against the Somalian pirates and I doubt if it's bowling balls or lawn darts. To murder on a cruise ship, we just push them overboard !!
I say cut out ALL the alcohol. That'll fix it for you!
cachsux
Wah
What if? What if? What if?
What if you go get a job? Google some more uninterseting facts about your country? Find some woman and pay her to like you and move along with your life?
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
I only mentioned his body armor to point out that, at the very least, the possibility that he mightencounter an armed civilian may have had an effect on his decision- making. Had he been in Chicago or Los Angeles, he may not have felt the need to invest in armor.
Maybe you should read the entire dialogue before opeening your ill informed blow-hole.
A suggestion he makes based on personal feeling about the "nanny state" that is quantifiably refuted by the empirical data.
moreluck
golden ticket member
If his armor was damaged.....I wouldn't care!!
If it was pierced 22 times......I wouldn't care!!
I was gone for a few days, but saw all this news on TV. It's gone from people who want to outlaw all guns to people who want to outlaw dark movies, to people who want to close all theaters, to people who want matinees only, to people who want to psychoanalyze all honor students.....it's ridiculous. The guys a nut and will have a home for the rest of his life!!! Sometimes you just can't explain 'crazy'.
So, if someone had tried to shoot him I'd have been all right with that. I'm not reading7 or 8 pages of Kleinisms and I can give my opinion the way I see it.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
If you want empirical data, compare the violent crime rate in Chicago vs that in Vermont. In Chicago, carry permits are unavailable and handgun ownership has only recently become legal again thanks to the NRA. In Vermont, you dont even need a permit to carry a concealed handgun, yet for some strange reason Vermont has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the nation. You could also compare the crime rates in California (strict gun regulations, carry permits denied in most urban areas) versus neighboring Arizona which, like Vermont, has far fewer gun laws and allows concealed carry without a license.
OOH, someone was listening to right wing radio on friday.
Lets talk about comparing vermont to any other state. PER CAPITA..
Its like comparing apples to oranges.
Whats the violence like in somalia where everyone has a gun sober?
Peace
TOS
Sober you make an excellent case for states rights as it pertains to gun control. You are really comparing rates in Chicago to Vermont? Don't you think that's apples to oranges? And I thought your argument was based on the decrease in violent crime since the implementation of lax gun regulation. Factually the decrease has been nationwide and not attributed to gun regulation one way orr another. The idea that criminals are somehow afraid of the armed populace is pure bunk.
all doesn't mean your opinions are of any value to the conversation, not that it has ever stopped you before.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
Vermont, outside of the largest city (Burlington), is one of the safest states in the country.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
"States rights" was formerly used as a method in certain states to deny civilrights to an entire class of people. Fortunately, we have a Constitution that is now the supreme law of the land. The same Constitution that now gurantees civil rights for all people also gurantees the right to keep and bear arms to all people.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
Ok, to a degree it is. You are correct that there are any number of socioeconomic factors apart from gun ownership and the availability of carry permits that will cause the crime rate in Chicago to be higher than Vermont.
However...the argument against "shall issue" carry permits that is always being made by anti-gun mayors such as Daly in Chicago and Bloomberg in New York is that "the streets will run red with blood" and "it will be like the Wild West with shootouts on every corner". This argument is patently false, as proven by states such as Vermont and Arizona that allow concealed carry with no permit at all, or the 33 "shall issue" states where any law-abiding person who completes the required training and background check shall be issued a permit rather than having their application arbitrarily denied.
The reality....is that mayors like Daly and Bloomberg, as well as senators like Feinstien ( who herself has a carry permit that is impossible for the average person to obtain in CA) Boxer, Pelosi and Schumer all regard their constituents as subjects rather than citizens... subjects who are unworthy of deciding for themselves whether or not to own a gun for self defense or, in Bloombergs case, whether or not to purchase a fountain drink larger than 16 ounces. This is precisely the sort of hypocritical, nanny- state mentality that I oppose.
Self sefense is a fundamental human right that should not be denied to certain people just because they live in a particular city or state.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
That's because they did not give up their guns or enough kept them that the criminals are unsure.
I'm pretty sure none of the criminals gave up theirs.
You keep saying this, but the consitution does not say such a thing. You keep EXTRAPOLATING a few words out of a bigger sentence that has a different meaning.
May I suggest you read up on the militia act of 1791??
Gun were mandated by the founders in congress to "ABELED BODY WHITE MEN" and not ALL MEN.
Peace
TOS
moreluck
golden ticket member
Joliet?
Catatonic
Nine Lives
Just in case you didnt know...
The militia act of 1792...( later repealed)
The Militia Act of 1792, Passed May 8, 1792, providing federal standards for the organization of the Militia.
An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.
I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS ACT that allows guns for PERSONAL PROTECTION.
STOP SAYING SUCH.
PEACE
TOS
The militia act of 1792...( later repealed)
The Militia Act of 1792, Passed May 8, 1792, providing federal standards for the organization of the Militia.
An ACT more effectually to provide for the National Defence, by establishing an Uniform Militia throughout the United States.
I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS ACT that allows guns for PERSONAL PROTECTION.
STOP SAYING SUCH.
PEACE
TOS
Similar threads
