Another Obama Attack on the Second Amendment!

Post Reply New Topic

If we had decent police forces very few of us would need guns.

Operative words here are used to meaning it takes a criminal hand and mind to do the actual deed. Forks and spoons do no create obesity.

Then the would-be victim would have the capability to shoot back and you wouldn’t even have very many attempts to victimize them. It's the hard target as opposed to soft target reality.
For all practical purposes an armed society is a polite society.

Yes, I have a good assortment of them myself.

It aint ever gonna happen. More cops and fewer guns in private hands sounds like symptoms of a police state, regardless of how they do things in other countries.
Better to have fewer but competent cops to maintain general order and a society of people that can take care of themselves.
When seconds count the police are only minutes away.

The idea that widespread gun ownership will make everything nicer is naive. It didnt work in the inner city where criminals with guns kill other criminals with guns with impunity and not much fear.

And look at South Africa. The white population is quite well armed but armed criminals are still coming after them. One of the first things they ask for in a home invasion? Where are your guns? THey often go expecting to find them. And they go anyway. The truth is that most ordinary people can't deal with a calculated ambush, gun or not. The initiative is with the attacker.

Operative words here are used to meaning it takes a criminal hand and mind to do the actual deed. Forks and spoons do no create obesity.


Then the would-be victim would have the capability to shoot back and you wouldn’t even have very many attempts to victimize them. It's the hard target as opposed to soft target reality.
For all practical purposes an armed society is a polite society.


Yes, I have a good assortment of them myself.


It aint ever gonna happen. More cops and fewer guns in private hands sounds like symptoms of a police state, regardless of how they do things in other countries.
Better to have fewer but competent cops to maintain general order and a society of people that can take care of themselves.
When seconds count the police are only minutes away.

**No one*** is saying that people with AS must not speak to each other!! It's not what the lawsuit appears to be about!! !! The reason they're suiing wrongplanet.net appears to be because they think the moderators should have been able to predict what he was going to do and notify the police, or something. And as they did try to call his parents, hopefully that part of the lawsuit will be thrown out.

Why are some people on here seeing this as a threat to people with AS talking to each other, or as some kind of NT thing to keep AS people away from each other?

It can be a threat to the idea of **any** kind of support board if moderators of said boards are going to be held liable if someone who had been posting commits a crime. But I don't see where **anyone** in the lawsuit is saying that "people with AS must not speak to each other" or must only speak to each other with NT supervision, or anything so silly. IMHO, this isn't about AS **at all**, but more about support boards in general and what moderators should be expected to do or not do if someone on the board is making threats. Again, I think that part of the suit should be thrown out and hopefully will be.

The parents are bereaved, they're grieving. (Sorry, I don't see them as selfish. Their familly members were deprived of their *lives*.) Because the person who did the killings is dead, there will be no trial. So they're doing a civil suit, which often happens in these cases where there is no conviction (whether because the murderer is dead, or because they were acquitted). O.J. Simpson is an example; he was acquitted, but Nicole Brown Simpson's family sued him for wrongful death.

As far as the gun thing: I don't think the lawsuit said that anyone with AS shouldn't have a gun; someone in that Trenchcoat Chronicles forum that someone linked to was saying that, probably because they think AS is a "disorder" and they don't really know what they're talking about. But if someone is threatening suicide or murder and under psychiatric care, if there is any way for that to be logged somewhere so that it would come up in a database, than that person should not be able to buy a gun, whether they are AS or NT.

I agree that hopefully people won't think this is about AS and that William Freund killed because he was an Aspie or that Aspies are killers. What really bothers me too is "was he really an Aspie?" Just because he thought he was, and was on an AS forum, doesn't make it so. He could have been a paranoid schizophrenic who thought everyone was against him and that he never had friends. There are probably a number of mental disorders that can cause people to think they have no friends and everyone hates them, and also these disorders can make the person seem weird to others and make it hard for the person to have friends once the disorder becomes worse. And even if he had AS, it wasn't the AS that caused him to kill, but his mental illess. So yeah, it is really disturbing that the AS angle is even being brought up at all.

The idea that widespread gun ownership will make everything nicer is naive. It didnt work in the inner city where criminals with guns kill other criminals with guns with impunity and not much fear.

And look at South Africa. The white population is quite well armed but armed criminals are still coming after them. One of the first things they ask for in a home invasion? Where are your guns? THey often go expecting to find them. And they go anyway. The truth is that most ordinary people can't deal with a calculated ambush, gun or not. The initiative is with the attacker.

The idea that widespread gun ownership will make everything nicer is naive.

It didnt work in the inner city where criminals with guns kill other criminals with guns with impunity and not much fear.

And look at South Africa.

The white population is quite well armed but armed criminals are still coming after them.

One of the first things they ask for in a home invasion? Where are your guns?

THey often go expecting to find them. And they go anyway.

The truth is that most ordinary people can't deal with a calculated ambush, gun or not. The initiative is with the attacker.

Yes, of course! Wouldn't it it wonderfull if only criminals and the goverment had guns? Then all of our problems would be solved!

Criminals killing other criminals is a solution within the problem. But it seems that in your mind you'd rather save them and not worry too much about the innocent law abiding.....

This isn't SA we're talking about.

The "white population"? So you're saying all the white people are having to be armed because all the black people are criminals? Sure looks like that's what you're saying.....

The invadee let his guard down if it got that far.

And, no, I do not and will not feel responsible for what anyone does with guns stolen from me. If they are in my locked home or vehicle then it takes a criminal act to obtain them, let alone what they do with them next.

They have a better chance being armed than not. There are some car accidents where seatbelts won't do you a damn bit of good but they give you a better chance in most cases. Many times ambushes can be completely avoided by being alert. The pistol and the knowhow to use it is for when being alert in itself isn't good enough.

Bad as you claim things to be in South Africa with an armed populace, how bad would it be when only the crimials are armed?
Well, it sure as hell couldn't be any better....
You seem to think that laying down and being a victim is preferable to fighting back. I couldn't even come close to embracing that mindset. Hell, I'd rathter be dead.

This is you having your truth issues again. Were you raised to lie? Is that what your parents were like? Nurture comes down to luck of the draw.



You missed the point. Not my problem.



It's what I'm talking about. It's an example to illustrate a point. If you can't understand it I'm sure someone can draw you some pictures with crayons.



Some white farmers do believe they are being targeted because of historical problems in SA. But black on black crime is also bad. The reason I mentioned white is that they historically owned the guns and still have that legacy despite increasing controls. The criminals assume they are armed. I realize the subject likely confused you and you felt compelled to make some kind of racist comment. You go to what you know.



The reality of violent action is different from your fantasies.



I would never consider you to be responsible for anything. That you don't wear a helmet as you amble about is admirable.



So you say. You have to account for the gun being used against them, suicide, accidents, etc. I think most people are just gaining false confidence from it as the attacker does have an advantage. But I think it's also true that it may be an advantage to be a gun owner, in some situations, in a society where gun ownership is not universal. Once universal, or assumed to be, criminals will adapt and it will have less utility. People are smart.



My examples were meant to illustrate that "an armed society is a polite society" hasnt worked elsewhere. If a society is predisposed to high crime, you'll get high crime. But you seem predisposed to fail to understand anything. The Why will remain a mystery.

As for your belief that I'd lay down. lol. You obviously don't know me.

Why does anyone care about the Constitution? It's just words. They don't mean anything. Obviously, we have shown this again and again and again throughout history. I wish the Constitution would be burned.

I'm not trying to start a fight, this is just what I truly believe.