Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Guns as the great equalizer

Page 8 of 18 [ 281 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 18  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

13 Jun 2015, 1:19 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I don't have anything against guns, ranges, etc. I don't feel a visceral disgust at guns.

And I understand why gun rights advocates see the potential for over-involvement on the part if governments in the lives of private citizens via regulation.

Calling me names and questioning my strength of character will not persuade me toward any cause.

I prefer the honey approach to the vinegar approach any day.

"Make my day" by being an amiable sort, rather than somebody who believes that acidic words will bring me around to potentially acidic viewpoints.

I believe that most firearm owners are pretty accommodating and friendly, kraftiekortie. I am sorry if I went too far in my statements. It isn't like we win a toaster with every conversion. :lol:


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Jun 2015, 1:23 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
Raptor wrote:
...In my case whenever I've done the "take a friend to the range" thing I'm looking for a strong and stable platform to build on. Someone that when I stack some information and experience on said platform that it won't fall through any holes, if you know what I mean......

I understand. But, back in 2002 when I started a local LGBT firearm-advocacy group with monthly range meetings, I instructed firearm basics to several LGBT people who had never before touched a gun, and a few who had hated firearms until the moment that they fired their first shot. There is something in that instant when they fire that wipes away years of prejudice and misinformation. Their usual reaction was "that's it?!?" THAT'S what I have been scared of all this time? This is cool!" They never regretted what they had learned, even if they didn't pursue the sport or buy a firearm.


It's not that they won't enjoy it, they will. My point is that if you don't have a stable person to start with any wind will blow them back to the anti-gun side. That's why I won't bother with anyone whose values appear squirrely and not well grounded.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Jun 2015, 1:49 pm

kraftiekortie wrote:
I don't have anything against guns, ranges, etc. I don't feel a visceral disgust at guns.

No, but you've voiced a blatantly misinformed statement about those icky semi-autos a page back. It's too late now.

Quote:
And I understand why gun rights advocates see the potential for over-involvement on the part if governments in the lives of private citizens via regulation.

Yes, and.....?

Quote:
Calling me names and questioning my strength of character will not persuade me toward any cause.

Show me where someone called you names? Be specific, please. YOU elected to post your views on semi-autos here and were called out on it by people who know far more on the subject than you. Don't scream FIRE when you're the arsonist.

Quote:
I prefer the honey approach to the vinegar approach any day.
This old adage is about attracting flies.
I prefer to kill them with a fly swatter.

Quote:
"Make my day" by being an amiable sort, rather than somebody who believes that acidic words will bring me around to potentially acidic viewpoints.

The thing is I doubt you can be brought around which was the point of my reply to AspieUtah. I saw just enough in your post that can be tidily summed up as semiautos-r-bad because someone told me so to triage you away to the unsalvageable category. This is all experienced based, btw.....

If you think I'm naughty now you should have been here 3-4 years ago. :twisted:


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

13 Jun 2015, 1:59 pm

If I feel persuaded in something, I will follow that something.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,931

13 Jun 2015, 6:53 pm

I for one feel blessed to walk tall enough without the need for a gun.

But yes, when severely ill before, I do understand what totally weak
and defenseless means. In that case, even I might consider a gun.

But nah, I have no fear on my streets and I am enough as equalizer
without gun or even clothes, HA..ha.. and truly that is freedom and

what it even means to be a human animal walking tall on the Savannah..
as the Lion I am now again, fearless and strong, and sure that is possible
for others too, without equalizers bigger than fists and feet, and guns that
are feet, quadriceps and hips, that are stronger than any arms flesh or steel,
or dirty hairy, haha.. that truly is me in flesh and blood fearless life, for now..;)

Anyway, 'men' with big online guns
do not impress me at all; guns are no
religion for me..';)

And I do think others should be allowed
to create whatever religion they want to,
whether it is guns or popcorn,
it matters not to me..:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

13 Jun 2015, 9:41 pm

Y'all listen to the hog for the hog can leg press 95,000 lbs (or whatever) and by that virtue alone cannot be refuted.
If the hog believes that he is bullet proof then it must be so, for the hog can leg press 95,000 lbs (or whatever).
If the hog says that those of us whom go armed are weak and sickly, then it must be so, for the hog can leg press 95,000 lbs (or whatever).

Lets all pray that the hog is never proven wrong, for we would miss his witty, even if trollish, poetry........
Image


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,931

13 Jun 2015, 10:02 pm

I'm more impressed

with the gun 'you'

are holding up there..

that's a really big one...

yes.. impressive..;)

It's even 'transparent'..;)

To be clear; 'dirty hairy' is me
and not you; just a joke dude..;)

Settle down.. now fella..:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

13 Jun 2015, 10:16 pm

AspieUtah wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
...I think most people - people who don't work in transport, or operate a retail business, or work in security, or a few other lines of work that are specifically targeted for violence - and people who don't live or work in a high crime area - generally don't have a rational reason to own or carry a firearm for "protection".

I'm not saying they don't deserve to own them for any other reason....

Your beliefs are yours, and they are interesting. But, the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America makes no condition of "reason" to keep (buy and own) and bear (possess and carry) arms (not only firearms). No less an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court determined in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that "[t]he Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home...." It also determined in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), that "[t]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment...."

I guess we will have to see the Constitution amended before the amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" is restricted to those with "reason" beyond merely "traditionally lawful purposes" such as "self-defense within the home" and "self defense in one's home."



Did you completely fail to comprehend my post?

You can have your guns. I just think you're a nut.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

14 Jun 2015, 1:39 am

blauSamstag wrote:
AspieUtah wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
...I think most people - people who don't work in transport, or operate a retail business, or work in security, or a few other lines of work that are specifically targeted for violence - and people who don't live or work in a high crime area - generally don't have a rational reason to own or carry a firearm for "protection".

I'm not saying they don't deserve to own them for any other reason....

Your beliefs are yours, and they are interesting. But, the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America makes no condition of "reason" to keep (buy and own) and bear (possess and carry) arms (not only firearms). No less an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court determined in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that "[t]he Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home...." It also determined in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), that "[t]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment...."

I guess we will have to see the Constitution amended before the amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" is restricted to those with "reason" beyond merely "traditionally lawful purposes" such as "self-defense within the home" and "self defense in one's home."



Did you completely fail to comprehend my post?

You can have your guns. I just think you're a nut.


so anyone who thinks different than you is a nut?
yep the left is the more compassionate and understanding side.

maybe you're the nut as you say it.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

14 Jun 2015, 1:53 am

sly279 wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
AspieUtah wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
...I think most people - people who don't work in transport, or operate a retail business, or work in security, or a few other lines of work that are specifically targeted for violence - and people who don't live or work in a high crime area - generally don't have a rational reason to own or carry a firearm for "protection".

I'm not saying they don't deserve to own them for any other reason....

Your beliefs are yours, and they are interesting. But, the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America makes no condition of "reason" to keep (buy and own) and bear (possess and carry) arms (not only firearms). No less an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court determined in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that "[t]he Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home...." It also determined in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), that "[t]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment...."

I guess we will have to see the Constitution amended before the amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" is restricted to those with "reason" beyond merely "traditionally lawful purposes" such as "self-defense within the home" and "self defense in one's home."



Did you completely fail to comprehend my post?

You can have your guns. I just think you're a nut.


so anyone who thinks different than you is a nut?
yep the left is the more compassionate and understanding side.

maybe you're the nut as you say it.


I think people who obsess about protecting themselves from threats that are very unlikely to be realized are nuts.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,931

14 Jun 2015, 8:22 am

I still, at times, have problems with 'normal' 'regular' human metaphors of small talk.

Thanks; now I 'think' I understand what Gun Nut, and Wing Nut means.

Perhaps a Wing Nut is a Gun Nut that is just wound up too tight.

And yeah, while I never have been much for guns;

I do know what it DID feel like to be

wound up too tight.

Loose is

MUCH MORE
FUN; Trust me
or NOT..:)

'Tight' is just another
word for chronic human stress,
anxiety, and tension; 'awe', bliss is
where it's at; no tools required;
but human relative free will..:)

A place where 'Flower Children'
'rain, rein, and reign petals', instead
of 'bullets'; a reAlly cool 'internal place' to be..:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Booyakasha
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Oct 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,898

14 Jun 2015, 8:38 am

blauSamstag wrote:
sly279 wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
AspieUtah wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
...I think most people - people who don't work in transport, or operate a retail business, or work in security, or a few other lines of work that are specifically targeted for violence - and people who don't live or work in a high crime area - generally don't have a rational reason to own or carry a firearm for "protection".

I'm not saying they don't deserve to own them for any other reason....

Your beliefs are yours, and they are interesting. But, the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America makes no condition of "reason" to keep (buy and own) and bear (possess and carry) arms (not only firearms). No less an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court determined in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that "[t]he Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home...." It also determined in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), that "[t]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment...."

I guess we will have to see the Constitution amended before the amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" is restricted to those with "reason" beyond merely "traditionally lawful purposes" such as "self-defense within the home" and "self defense in one's home."



Did you completely fail to comprehend my post?

You can have your guns. I just think you're a nut.


so anyone who thinks different than you is a nut?
yep the left is the more compassionate and understanding side.

maybe you're the nut as you say it.


I think people who obsess about protecting themselves from threats that are very unlikely to be realized are nuts.


Lets please not call each other nuts. Personal attacks are against the rules.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

14 Jun 2015, 10:15 am

blauSamstag wrote:
sly279 wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
AspieUtah wrote:
blauSamstag wrote:
...I think most people - people who don't work in transport, or operate a retail business, or work in security, or a few other lines of work that are specifically targeted for violence - and people who don't live or work in a high crime area - generally don't have a rational reason to own or carry a firearm for "protection".

I'm not saying they don't deserve to own them for any other reason....

Your beliefs are yours, and they are interesting. But, the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America makes no condition of "reason" to keep (buy and own) and bear (possess and carry) arms (not only firearms). No less an authority than the U.S. Supreme Court determined in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that "[t]he Second Amendment guarantees an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home...." It also determined in McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), that "[t]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment...."

I guess we will have to see the Constitution amended before the amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" is restricted to those with "reason" beyond merely "traditionally lawful purposes" such as "self-defense within the home" and "self defense in one's home."



Did you completely fail to comprehend my post?

You can have your guns. I just think you're a nut.


so anyone who thinks different than you is a nut?
yep the left is the more compassionate and understanding side.

maybe you're the nut as you say it.


I think people who obsess about protecting themselves from threats that are very unlikely to be realized are nuts.


suppose you feel the same about locking doors, fire extinguishers, surge protectors, back up generators, smoke detectors, et. all are about rare happenings. how often has your house caught on fire? I'm 26 and only had one, a small fire inside my dryer when I was 8. yet everyone has a smoke detector and most people keep a few fire extinguishers.

also never had my house struck by lighting, willing to bet most people don't. for that matter why do people have insurance for all kinds of things. maybe its because even if the odds are low of something happening people want to feel protected and safe if it does happen. all people take precautions of some type for something.



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

14 Jun 2015, 10:25 am

are people who like sports nuts? fasion nuts? celebrity nuts, couch nuts.?

no. gun nut is just a hate term people use because they hate gun owners for being different.

gun ownership is just a hobby. like many hobbies people get into it. but we don't call other people nuts for liking their hobbies. don't see you going to a craft store and calling them nuts, or a sports bar and calling them nuts?

its really annoying. guy owns one gun "hes a gun nut"

there's no connection with gun ownership and people being wound up or stressed. why dont' you just leave us alone. I sure you have hobbies I wouldn't understand or like but I wouldn't call you nuts or stressed or uptight or whatever you antis want to come up with. I just say well thats his/her interest and he/she enjoys it.

do you like sex? lots of aspies don't and think its horrible and weird that others do. but most don't' call people who like sex crazy. I really don't get sports. I don't get why people spend 50% of their life or more watching them, talking about them, playing fantasy version of them, playing video games about them, cover their house in symbols of them, wear all matching clothes about them. its really bizarre to me. But as odd as it is to me I respect people like sports. I don't call them crazy.

also been called crazy for liking wet shaving. simply because most people shave with goop and a disposable. so different than you = crazy. or perhaps it just = different and there's nothing wrong with people being different. really you would prefer if everyone looked the same, acted the same, talked the same?



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

14 Jun 2015, 12:00 pm

blauSamstag wrote:
Quote:
I think people who obsess about protecting themselves from threats......

Obsess? Who here is obsessed? It seems like you type obsess over over this topic more than anything.

Quote:
.........that are very unlikely to be realized are nuts.

Statistically I'd be safe making a cross-country road trip without my seatbelt and the airbag disabled and be safe, but I won't.

My house was built in the 1960's and hasn't burned down in all those years so statistically I can remove my smoke alarms and toss the fire extinguisher, but I won't.

What's with you people's obsession with controlling other peoples lives?


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

14 Jun 2015, 12:15 pm

Raptor wrote:
...What's with [...] people's obsession with controlling other peoples lives?

I believe that this is the crux of the matter. There have always been certain individuals who want to control others (royals, wealthy, political leaders, bankers, police officers). Clearly, we know where that got us in history. The trouble is that, today, authoritarianism which even Hitler, Stalin and Mao couldn't imagine has been re-popularized allowing individuals with the slightest obsessive-compulsion, narcissism and anxiety to fear the possibility of all individuals having complete authority of their own lives and being prohibited from coercing others. Say hello to every neurotic authoritarian or second-rate nudge in world history.

The solution? Non-compliance. Stop feeding the trolls. Have back-up. Done.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)