Gun Control vs Firearm Owners

[Wiseone]

How much more serious do you want me to be?
And do what against you? You find what I said "threatening".
I guess it was pretty threatening to the timid as them boys in Boston were kicking tea barrells into the river that day to.
I bet the timid ran and hid when Paul Revere rode through town.
And your types will hide in the future when or if our rights are ever fought for again.
And I think you are getting the words terrorist and patriot mixed up.

Like Reagan said, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Also I'm literally in Afghanistan right now, in a combat zone, being called timid by someone sitting comfy back in the states. You want to talk about fighting for rights? Buddy I live that every day.

Don't get off topic, you're saying you'll kill people if forced to protect your 2A rights correct? I'm saying if that's true why haven't you killed people yet for all the 2A violations that exist in both federal and florida law? Because it's all hot air that's why and you don't really mean it.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Like Reagan said, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Also I'm literally in Afghanistan right now, in a combat zone, being called timid by someone sitting comfy back in the states. You want to talk about fighting for rights? Buddy I live that every day.

Don't get off topic, you're saying you'll kill people if forced to protect your 2A rights correct? I'm saying if that's true why haven't you killed people yet for all the 2A violations that exist in both federal and florida law? Because it's all hot air that's why and you don't really mean it.

There we go, now we have it.
Another "Iam in the service so my opinoin on ANY subject is all that matters"
Get home, and PM me.
Oh, and just what the hell does your being in Afghanistan have to do with our 2A rights in the US?
Hate to say it, but I read alot of posts from current and former mililtary that makes them out to seem like they want to be in a separate class from everyone else.
A higher class of some sort due to your service. Is that why you joined up?

 

[LaMidRighter]

I never you wanted to kill anyone, I said you were "serious" about it. Are you not serious about it? That post you quoted was directed at CRUE CAB where he asked me if I wanted to "find out for real" so I said if he wanted to do it against me, as in if he wanted to "demonstrate what was for real" to me he was welcome to it.

Anyway, no none of you despite all your talk is going to become a terrorist over your idea of 2A rights nor are you going to sacrifice your life for the inanimate object on your hip. Talk is easy, action is not. I don't see any of you killing anyone for any of the gun laws that exist now, nor for not being able to own fully automatic weapons, so do I think you'll die for your 9mm glock? No.

How is saying we're "Serious about it" any different from saying we "want to"? I am serious about defending myself and my country, that doesn't mean I'm looking to kill anyone, but if D.C. pushed hard enough most citizens would fight back.

 

[Wiseone]

There we go, now we have it.
Another "Iam in the service so my opinoin on ANY subject is all that matters"
Get home, and PM me.

No being in the service doesn't make my opinion on everything automatically correct nor does it make it the only one that matters, not by a long shot. BUT I think most people would agree that's a little backwards for someone sitting nice and comfy back in the states to tell a Soldier in Afghanistan, in a combat zone, that they are timid and afraid to fight for people's rights.

I mean how can you say you're not afraid to fight but I am when I'm the one fighting and you aren't. :/

 

[Wiseone]

How is saying we're "Serious about it" any different from saying we "want to"? I am serious about defending myself and my country, that doesn't mean I'm looking to kill anyone, but if D.C. pushed hard enough most citizens would fight back.

You answered you're own question. As you said, you're serious about defending yourself and country, but you don't want to be compelled to fight nor do you want to fight for the sheer "sport" of it.

But my point is, you aren't that serious about fighting and no most citizens won't fight back. If you were serious about fighting for your guns why haven't you fought for all the guns and firearms you can't have right now? Because you know that's stupid and you dont want to die for nothing.

 

[CRUE CAB]

No being in the service doesn't make my opinion on everything automatically correct nor does it make it the only one that matters, not by a long shot. BUT I think most people would agree that's a little backwards for someone sitting nice and comfy back in the states to tell a Soldier in Afghanistan, in a combat zone, that they are timid and afraid to fight for people's rights.

I mean how can you say you're not afraid to fight but I am when I'm the one fighting and you aren't. :/

Not afraid of you or anyone else, pal.
But pretty stupid to get into the conversation THEN spring it on us that you are in the service.
I called YOUR TYPE timid. Based on your posts, based on YOU dont think any one would fight for their rights.
But I guess because anyone not in the service is not allowed to fight, or say they would. You got something to say about it.
Oh, and I can say I am anything, doing anything, from anywhere.

 

[CRUE CAB]

You answered you're own question. As you said, you're serious about defending yourself and country, but you don't want to be compelled to fight nor do you want to fight for the sheer "sport" of it.

But my point is, you aren't that serious about fighting and no most citizens won't fight back. If you were serious about fighting for your guns why haven't you fought for all the guns and firearms you can't have right now? Because you know that's stupid and you dont want to die for nothing.

Because in this country we are not at the shooting stage yet, and may never get there.
But you get out, come kick some doors in here in the US. Let me know how it works out and what you find on the other side.

 

[BMCM]

Not afraid of you or anyone else, pal.
But pretty stupid to get into the conversation THEN spring it on us that you are in the service.
I called YOUR TYPE timid. Based on your posts, based on YOU dont think any one would fight for their rights.
But I guess because anyone not in the service is not allowed to fight, or say they would. You got something to say about it.
Oh, and I can say I am anything, doing anything, from anywhere.

Of course you can. This is the internet where people can be anything they can't be in real life.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Of course you can. This is the internet where people can be anything they can't be in real life.

Seems like many people on here and other boards, as soon as they are not getting their way, start throwing around there real or imagined military service.
Like I care or that is going to make other people just buckled and bow.

 

[ChezC3]

"...from my cold, dead, HANDS!"

Isn't just a slogan. They're words to live by...

 

[ChezC3]

I'm not comfortable with people being armed who say they'll kill other people if they don't get their way, of course I know most of it is all hot air because 99% of gun owners even the most hardcore like yourself aren't that stupid to actually commit acts of terrorism and politically motivated murder. And lets be clear, killing people for politics is a good starting definition of terrorism, Ronald Reagan had it right when he said one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter but regardless of how you view yourself you'd still be killing people over politics. And even the threat of doing so doesn't make you sound like a "reasonable gun owner," because once you're open to the idea of killing people to keep your guns than why not kill people over other political issues?

Anyway, yes I believe in some gun control, I've never denied that, but I don't believe in total gun control and I don't support 99% of the more recent changes to gun laws in this country like magazine laws about capacity, waiting periods, "assault weapons" and all the bizzaro laws that go along with them. I do however support taking a much closer look at laws regarding pistols and I'm open to the idea of making pistols harder to get because unlike assault rifles, which are often used in the more public and especially horrifying gun crimes like Sandy Hook, pistols are used in the vast majority of murders as well as other crimes where a gun is involved although not always used, for example armed robbery is done with pistols the vast majority of the time although they are often never fired during the crime itself.

So yes from your perspective I'm a gun control freak, but really if you look at the larger picture and see where I stand in comparison to many others I've got more in common with you than many other gun control advocates, except of course unlike you I'm not going to kill anyone over my opinion but then again neither are you because all that talk is just a load of bs.

I've always held to the idea that if you attack, purposefully and with intent civilians or people otherwise not engaged in opposition to that which is your cause, you are a terrorist. When you target military, political, or any other individual who is intentionally, with purpose obstructing, denying, or combating your cause, you are a freedom fighter, so long as it is actually freedom you are fighting for.

War is an extension of politics. Nothing more. Those gains you seek not remedied by dialogue and diplomacy; once those routes are exhausted, must be garnered by force.

Taking away, or restricting handguns isn't going to end robbery or crime. They'll just use long guns in their stead. Or, they'll just continue to use the handguns they've always used since their procuring the firearm is usually illegal. Thus, all you're doing is preventing honest law abiding citizens their right to personal protection, ending CC.

Well, I'm glad you admit you're a gun control freak. I'm not going to kill anyone over my opinion either. However it is impossible to say what people will do when the government halts its subtle, incremental approach at firearm restrictions and finds it simpler to engage in a door to door confiscation.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I'm not comfortable with people being armed.

Says it all right there.

 

[LaMidRighter]

You answered you're own question. As you said, you're serious about defending yourself and country, but you don't want to be compelled to fight nor do you want to fight for the sheer "sport" of it.

But my point is, you aren't that serious about fighting and no most citizens won't fight back. If you were serious about fighting for your guns why haven't you fought for all the guns and firearms you can't have right now? Because you know that's stupid and you dont want to die for nothing.

I'm done with you on this one. It hasn't gotten to the point of no return, but I do see you like to support those who want to control every aspect of others lives so.............whatever.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Seems like many people on here and other boards, as soon as they are not getting their way, start throwing around there real or imagined military service.
Like I care or that is going to make other people just buckled and bow.

I wasn't in the military but have lots of friends and family that were. There are plenty of administrative jobs and other non combat personnel positions. And, those combat friends/family say they are usually the biggest loud mouths about their service, they see no real combat but puff their chests, or if losing a debate go right to "I was military, you don't know what you're talking about".

 

[Bob Blaylock]

…no you aren't going to throw your life away to keep your gun…

Are we to believe you'll throw your life away to try to take our guns?

Of course not. You haven't nearly the guts. You'll happily get Big Brother to send agents to do it for you.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Are we to believe you'll throw your life away to try to take our guns?

Of course not. You haven't nearly the guts. You'll happily get Big Brother to send agents to do it for you.

Watch it, he has claimed to be an agent of the G. Hahahaha

 

[Goshin]

[h=2]Gun Control vs Firearm Owners[/h][h=2]Common ground.[/h]I know many realise that to succeed in this fight one must find the common ground between opposing sides so that real discussion can take place.

Many think that common ground is acceptance of some gun control so that gun control is appeased and will leave us alone. Appeasement is exactly what gun control wants and it means firearm owners will now accept gun control and promote that accepted gun control.

It is a huge psychological victory for gun control and government that literally spells the end of firearm ownership when all opposition accepts gun control. That end is ensured when any opposition is only interested in cooperation and collaboration rather than objection.

It has taken me many years of careful thought and listening to firearm owners to see that cooperation in ones downfall is a fatal mistake.

The all to pervasive argument of it is impossible, accept, we can still own guns is entrenched by thinking those who do manage are somehow better than others. That only responsible people can own guns, others do not deserve to.

Quite obviously appeasement is not common ground and is a fatal mistake. The true common ground is far more subtle and requires a quantum leap in thinking which we are all capable of. Our personal safety is very very important to us which is why we wish to own firearms for our own protection. Yet we face an opposition that is equally concerned about their own safety which they believe can be obtained by disarming everyone.

Our common ground is personal safety, not guns, not appeasement, not common sense and not trying to force one to accept the other by waging a war of words over guns and firearm ownership. It literally puts firearm owners strategy on its head as counter productive at worst and ineffective at best.

It is not a war over guns it is a question of presenting the truth in the least offensive way so each side can unite in the pursuit of our safety.

Gun control vs Firearm Owners | News24

We've already compromised too much. Give them another inch and they scream for a mile. Screw 'em.


MOLON LABE!

 

[Jerry]

What if the victim is shot first?

Are you asking for a medical discription of a bullet striking the body? What are you asking?

 

[Jerry]

Are you going to threaten to start killing people too? ****ing do it then, go to prison or get shot yourself or shut the hell up. All this **** about using violence for your rights is bull**** unless you're going to back it up and no one here is.

I'll say this much: who owns a gun isn't the only list of people being made.

 

[cpgrad08]

Are you going to threaten to start killing people too? ****ing do it then, go to prison or get shot yourself or shut the hell up. All this **** about using violence for your rights is bull**** unless you're going to back it up and no one here is.

Its a good thing the Founding Fathers, the Continental Army, the Militias and Sons of Liberty didn't share your view point on protecting freedom.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Ya I do want to find out for real, that's what I've been saying. I want one of you all who keep beating the drum of violence or revolution to actually do something, don't talk but actually ****ing do something. If you want to do it against me, fine, by all means come all the way to Afghanistan and try to kill one of these "people with guns that back it up" because I'm one of them and try and kill me for what I've said on an internet message board.

Seriously its all talk talk talk.

So far I've got Turtle, Jerry, CRUE CAB, and Laright all talking about how they're serious about killing people over their guns, yet I've not seen a single action taken to such an affect, so I have to conclude that its all hot air.

You need to lay off the opiate.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Like Reagan said, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Also I'm literally in Afghanistan right now, in a combat zone, being called timid by someone sitting comfy back in the states. You want to talk about fighting for rights? Buddy I live that every day.

Don't get off topic, you're saying you'll kill people if forced to protect your 2A rights correct? I'm saying if that's true why haven't you killed people yet for all the 2A violations that exist in both federal and florida law? Because it's all hot air that's why and you don't really mean it.

So you've been projecting all along, you're the real killer. I typically support the American military but when I see your posts in this thread I wonder why you make such vile comments about those who would fight for the American way to keep those rights, and kill if necessary just like you are doing.

You put on the uniform and kill if ordered, yet disparage those who would do it back home to keep our freedoms, protect rights of Americans and the American way? Or do you just do it for a paycheck?

You seem really bitter about those who would fight for the American way yet live the conundrum of doing just that yourself. I haven't seen anyone in this thread disparage you for doing what you disparage them for doing.

 

[TurtleDude]

There are two types of people who are for gun control. The first is the kind that lacks the mental ability to take care of themselves and would prefer someone else take care of them. Their view is so narrow that they assume everyone else feels the same way, or should. They project their ineptitude on the rest of us and want us disarmed because they lack the ability to be a responsible gun owner.

The second kind are the control hounds who would like to see everyone disarmed (except for themselves of course) in order to make the population easier to control. The second type uses the first type to forward their agenda.

Thing is in order to do any of this, changes have to be made, which of course takes time, effort and resources. So there has to be a reason to expend that kind of energy. But nothing that has been proposed would actually reduce gun crime. Nothing. Expending that kind of energy for something that will not achieve the stated goal (especially when gun crime has been dropping anyway) means only one thing: the stated goal is not really the goal. And since I won't do business with people who I know are lying to me, the only answer for gun control is NO. I'm not wasting any time verbally sparring with a liar. We are not the ones who need to wake up, it is the helpless idiots who side with the control seekers who need to assess their environment. They are being used for their lack of information and confidence.

well you explained two of the major forces behind the Democratic party The first group are the perpetual children who want big brother or the nanny state to take care of them. The second group are the power hungry parasites who want to run the lives of others.

 

[jimbo]

What if the victim is shot first? That's a big assumption to make that the victim will always kill the felon.

Just a thought, but victims are far more likely to get shot first if they are unarmed,

 

[TurtleDude]

Just a thought, but victims are far more likely to get shot first if they are unarmed,

every study I have seen (more than I can count) demonstrates that victims who fight back are less likely to be seriously harmed than those who submit and those who fight back with firepower are the most likely to survive unscathed