View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently December 20th, 2014, 12:27 am



Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 What? No gun control thread? 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9984
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
wjb21ndtown wrote:

I agree M2...

Liberals have forgotten the power of education, and see power only in legislation. Perhaps that's because they prefer an uneducated electorate?


DING! DING! DING!

We have a winner.....

_________________
I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.


April 2nd, 2013, 12:15 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12247
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Wags, I don't disagree that people in positions of power and notoriety should do something useful with that spot light, but removing personal freedom from the equation shouldn't even be in the discussion. It goes back to control! This isn't just liberals who ar doing this, Bush had his own agendas that were put in place for the good of the American Public, and it's probably subject to interpretation, and perspective, but the last 5 years have been a blatant power grab by Washington. We will have this healthcare, even though just about anyone with 1st grade math can tell you that it will destroy us economically. Rates for healthcare premiums are going up 20% to 100% on an already expensive healthcare system. That's not exactly sustainable.

Having said that, Bloomberg is a buffoon, but he is getting away with all kinds of crap in a predominantly Liberal City, that he probably wouldn't get away with in a town like mine. He has the backing and he's making the call for you and I, which is only a precursor and warning sign for things to come....
Apparently this part is a respounding No, eh?
Quote:
In the future would it be possible for you to provide links / reference of what you talk about? Many times to state something with no reference and it makes it rather difficult to see what you're trying to say. Also, it might help if you would 'quote' peeps when responding. Just think it might help is all... 8)
You're now blocked WarEr4Christ. If you can't take a couple minutes to articulate your position and ensure your response is clear with whom you're responding to, there's no need to discuss anything else. Yet another example of how you refuse to do for us what you ask / preach for us to do for you (i.e. reading passage, educate, etc) Peace brother.
m2karateman wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Sadly, Bloomberg is only representing what we see coming out of Washington.
While I disagree with Bloomberg's method, I do applaud the effort of trying to raise awareness of a healthier lifestyle. As an aside - Has anyone else noticed how a 'small' pop these days was a large or extra large ~ 20 years ago?
WarEr4Christ wrote:
Michelle is telling us what to eat
Yep, its absolutely horrible that a first lady, or anyone for that matter, would advocate for a healthier lifestyle for anyone, let along children.


Oh, what a load of crap Wags. Bringing awareness to a situation, or advocating for something is a far cry from legislating and controlling. What I give my children for lunch is my business. The only standards to be met should be mine, not hers, not his, not theirs. This is yet ANOTHER step where our lawmakers feel that they know better for everyone else, and they will create laws to justify their control. They shouldn't be telling parents how to feed their kids, raise their kids, punish their kids, etc. How far does it go? Do they eventually decide for us what sports our kids will play? Will they decide which ones become doctors, which ones become athletes? Sound familiar? It should...that's pretty much Communist Russia in a nutshell. And please, don't tell me it could 'never happen', because five years ago I guarantee you nobody would believe a mayor in a city like New York could get away with banning the serving size of a soda.
Did everyone just skip over the bolded part of my response? :? In case something was lost in translation by the reader, I disagree with his methods i.e. legislating the size of the drink.
Now, can WarEr4Christ, m2karateman & wjb21ndtown understand that? Or do I need to actually spell out every little thing??? ](*,)

Truth be told, this is yet another distraction.

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 2nd, 2013, 12:23 pm
Profile
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
It's all well and good to agree with someone's philosophy, and disagree with their approach, but that doesn't preclude our ability to criticize their approach.


April 2nd, 2013, 2:13 pm
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12247
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
It's all well and good to agree with someone's philosophy, and disagree with their approach, but that doesn't preclude our ability to criticize their approach.
Agreed; which is what I was saying.

After thinking on this for a bit, I overreacted in my response above and apologize.
Peace friends.

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 3rd, 2013, 9:15 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9984
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
OK, then back to the original subject matter. If Bloomberg's act of banning large soda's was about bringing awareness to child obesity, and you don't agree with that act, can we then say that Feinstein's act of banning certain guns and ammo magazine sizes is something else you don't agree with? It's basically the same thing, right? Using legislation to "bring awareness" to a societal issue? And that method is wrong, correct?

_________________
I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.


April 3rd, 2013, 8:29 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12247
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
m2karateman wrote:
OK, then back to the original subject matter. If Bloomberg's act of banning large soda's was about bringing awareness to child obesity, and you don't agree with that act, can we then say that Feinstein's act of banning certain guns and ammo magazine sizes is something else you don't agree with? It's basically the same thing, right? Using legislation to "bring awareness" to a societal issue? And that method is wrong, correct?
Correct, I don't agree with Feinstein's 'assault' weapon ban and IMO it didn't even need to be brought up as there has been plenty of discussion lately about weapons in light of the recent mass shootings. As I'm sure I've stated before, I don't know what the solution is, but I am in favor of fixing the background check system as well as expanding it to all purchases / transfer with the possibility of exemptions for transaction between family members (father passing down son, etc). I am not in favor of any sort of national weapon registry tho, that has too much potential to be abused.

Perhaps if some sort of system similar to credit checks could be used / implemented, that might work. For example, just because someone has their credit run, doesn't necessarily mean they're going to buy something. Likewise someone having a weapons background check doesn't necessarily mean they're going to buy a weapon. It could also allow for the blocking of these background check report, as we do with credit score / history / reports. Just thinking out loud here, not even sure if it would be feasible.

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 4th, 2013, 9:54 am
Profile
ST Coordinator – John Bonamego

Joined: February 11th, 2005, 3:01 pm
Posts: 3874
Location: WSU
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
slybri19 wrote:
I go away for a few months and you people are incapable of discussing the main topics of the day? Allow me to break this down for the low information voters who primarily get their news from the corrupt, socialist agenda driven, mainstream media.

First of all, gun bans will only affect law-abiding citizens and not the criminals who are largely responsible for the gun violence today. It's kinda like drugs. They're banned, but those who refuse to obey the law can certainly get them.The same thing will happen with guns, as it did with the alcohol prohibition in the 1930's. Those willing to break the law will get them, while law abiding citizens will not. How is this fair?

More importantly, it will disarm law-abiding citizens and render them incapable of defending their homes and families. Every day I read stories (on conservative sites) about how gun owners defeated potential murderers, rapists, robbers, etc, by drawing their gun. Unfortunately, many of you will hear nothing of these heroic acts since the corrupt lamestream media refuses to report on them. Guns save lives.

For the low information, brain dead, clueless masses out there, the 2nd Amendment wasn't adopted to save you from the scenarios I outlined above. It was adopted so that the citizens could defend themselves against a tyranical government. While we are not to the point of King George yet, it is getting close. Speaking of King George, I would be surprised if 50% of the brain dead population knew who he was and what he represented due to the incompetence of today's public schools, but that's a subject for another day.

What say you about gun control? I say, registration leads to confiscation, which leads to extermination. Just look at Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro as examples of this. A people not willing to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.


While I do agree with your politics I think there is a major problem with your delivery. As Pablo wrote - he thought your post was propaganda-ist and so do I. You are going to have a hard time swaying people that disagree with your politics by being angry with them or by failing to even consider their point of view ie how the election was lost


April 4th, 2013, 9:15 pm
Profile
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
TheRealWags wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
OK, then back to the original subject matter. If Bloomberg's act of banning large soda's was about bringing awareness to child obesity, and you don't agree with that act, can we then say that Feinstein's act of banning certain guns and ammo magazine sizes is something else you don't agree with? It's basically the same thing, right? Using legislation to "bring awareness" to a societal issue? And that method is wrong, correct?
Correct, I don't agree with Feinstein's 'assault' weapon ban and IMO it didn't even need to be brought up as there has been plenty of discussion lately about weapons in light of the recent mass shootings. As I'm sure I've stated before, I don't know what the solution is, but I am in favor of fixing the background check system as well as expanding it to all purchases / transfer with the possibility of exemptions for transaction between family members (father passing down son, etc). I am not in favor of any sort of national weapon registry tho, that has too much potential to be abused.

Perhaps if some sort of system similar to credit checks could be used / implemented, that might work. For example, just because someone has their credit run, doesn't necessarily mean they're going to buy something. Likewise someone having a weapons background check doesn't necessarily mean they're going to buy a weapon. It could also allow for the blocking of these background check report, as we do with credit score / history / reports. Just thinking out loud here, not even sure if it would be feasible.


I don't disagree that the current "background checks" are lacking. Medical information about the mental health of an individual seems obviously lacking in many areas, and there doesn't seem to be a good central data base for checking said information. They take too long, and don't provide enough information.

Kinda funny that a background check done by a private industry is literally 10Xs better than one done by the govt....

Just sayin'...


April 5th, 2013, 7:57 am
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9984
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
The problem with the national background check system is the many mistakes made time and time again by it. People being refused by mistake. And if people are being refused by mistake, you can rest assured people are being approved by mistake. And that is not the fault of law abiding citizens who choose to arm themselves. That is the fault of the politicians who create systems like that, systems that have too much red tape and not enough information. And to further the problems, you have each state wanting to do things their way, deciding which medical information is relevant and which is not. Deciding which information could hurt someone's feelings, and which could potentially cause a lawsuit. I am in favor of background checks to weed out former felons, dangerous people and the mentally unfit. Unfortunately, like anything the government touches, it goes to hell very quickly.

In regards to registration, I am and always have been completely against it. There is no reason for gun registration to exist other than to allow a database to be created for that information to be used against lawful gun owners. None. It doesn't help solve crimes, it doesn't prevent crimes and it doesn't make the world a safer place. It has already been proven that in the hands of the wrong people it is used to to violate the rights of gun owners. Whether that's to post the locations of their homes, or for the government or others to start confiscation procedures, national registration is a huge threat to the freedoms of gun owners. Ask any Australian, British or any other gun owner from a different country that had their guns taken away by their respective UNLAWFUL governments about how they feel regarding gun registration. To a man (or woman) they will state matter-of-factly that it was the instrument that their government used to threaten them to force the turning in of their firearms or face unlawful prosecution and imprisonment.

Gun registration has nothing but bad intentions. I abhor it, and feel it should be done away with.

_________________
I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.


April 7th, 2013, 11:41 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12247
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
m2karateman wrote:
The problem with the national background check system is the many mistakes made time and time again by it. People being refused by mistake. And if people are being refused by mistake, you can rest assured people are being approved by mistake. And that is not the fault of law abiding citizens who choose to arm themselves. That is the fault of the politicians who create systems like that, systems that have too much red tape and not enough information. And to further the problems, you have each state wanting to do things their way, deciding which medical information is relevant and which is not. Deciding which information could hurt someone's feelings, and which could potentially cause a lawsuit. I am in favor of background checks to weed out former felons, dangerous people and the mentally unfit. Unfortunately, like anything the government touches, it goes to hell very quickly.
Can you name one, single law, policy, statute, rule, etc that is 100% perfect and infallible? Aren't most of them subject to interpretation? Point being, mistakes happen all the time; it's part of being human, but that IMO is not a reason to not do something. When mistakes happen, that is an opportunity to fix that part of the system.
Quote:
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 8th, 2013, 9:57 am
Profile
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
TheRealWags wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
The problem with the national background check system is the many mistakes made time and time again by it. People being refused by mistake. And if people are being refused by mistake, you can rest assured people are being approved by mistake. And that is not the fault of law abiding citizens who choose to arm themselves. That is the fault of the politicians who create systems like that, systems that have too much red tape and not enough information. And to further the problems, you have each state wanting to do things their way, deciding which medical information is relevant and which is not. Deciding which information could hurt someone's feelings, and which could potentially cause a lawsuit. I am in favor of background checks to weed out former felons, dangerous people and the mentally unfit. Unfortunately, like anything the government touches, it goes to hell very quickly.
Can you name one, single law, policy, statute, rule, etc that is 100% perfect and infallible? Aren't most of them subject to interpretation? Point being, mistakes happen all the time; it's part of being human, but that IMO is not a reason to not do something. When mistakes happen, that is an opportunity to fix that part of the system.
Quote:
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


Wags, the issue is, there is a HUGE disconnect in the quality of service with public policy and its government implementation, vs private industry.

The government spends 10X's more and does 1/2 as much as the private industry when they get their hands on something.

The government should develop policy, turn it over to private industry, and "audit" that industry from time to time. That would be a huge improvement, but "pork," spending, "bringing home money to various districts," etc. all get in the way of that. Our political system is broken, and it's broken because it's too huge... Who wants it huge? Liberals.


April 8th, 2013, 10:06 am
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
1. Excuse me for taking a vacation and being away from my computer! Next time I'll send a special request chit in triplicate, seeking your permission to be away from the boards for any period of time longer than what you deem appropriate.

2. Smite me all mighty smiter! Ban me if you wish. If you want the proof YOU dig for it. I only quoted a WELL KNOWN event, so well known that you were able to find it, and re-post it without issue, so do what you got to do.

3. You are quick to bring in some of my bad habits, in order to air them as dirty laundry in order to reinforce your "superiority" as a fact digger, checker, and debater. Consider me in awe of your abilities to do all these things =D> =D> =D>

4. The funny thing about the truth, is that it can be obscured by "facts."

5. I understand beyond any shadow of a doubt that we don't see the world through the same kind of glasses. No worries, I get it! From your perspective I'm "constantly (insert your own adjective here)" and that's fine. My life does not revolve around your approval of disapproval, and so what you think, or believe, or think you believe does NOT matter.

Many of my "friends" here continue to live in the matrix, and are firmly cemented into their perceived facts of life. Will I be able to change that? No. So I am not trying to change that! In fact, I even stopped debating because it was doing more to drive people, such as yourself, away, than it was doing to draw them near. So I instead approached this from another angle. I began and have continued to carry you before the one who CAN do something about it, and will leave the results up to Him. If I've learned anything in my 43 years, I've learned that there is a complete difference between head knowledge and heart knowledge. One is filled with facts and knowledge the other is filled with experience, and therefore has an affect on the life. That is why we have terms like, "I've had a change of HEART."

So, I'm not going to argue with you, or anyone else. Believe what you wish, state what you will, ban me if you need to, and do what ever. I'll just do like others have done before and change my name and come back as someone else. And if I'm blocked for eternity, it is a fans site, and only about football, I think I could live without it. But wouldn't that be construed as an abuse of power?

So again, no worries, enjoy your position of authority and fact check superiority, and I'll relegate myself back to subserviant status, if that is okay with you, um master!

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


April 8th, 2013, 11:12 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9984
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
TheRealWags wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
The problem with the national background check system is the many mistakes made time and time again by it. People being refused by mistake. And if people are being refused by mistake, you can rest assured people are being approved by mistake. And that is not the fault of law abiding citizens who choose to arm themselves. That is the fault of the politicians who create systems like that, systems that have too much red tape and not enough information. And to further the problems, you have each state wanting to do things their way, deciding which medical information is relevant and which is not. Deciding which information could hurt someone's feelings, and which could potentially cause a lawsuit. I am in favor of background checks to weed out former felons, dangerous people and the mentally unfit. Unfortunately, like anything the government touches, it goes to hell very quickly.
Can you name one, single law, policy, statute, rule, etc that is 100% perfect and infallible? Aren't most of them subject to interpretation? Point being, mistakes happen all the time; it's part of being human, but that IMO is not a reason to not do something. When mistakes happen, that is an opportunity to fix that part of the system.
Quote:
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


Being perfect is one thing, but being broken to the point of ridiculousness is quite another. When it comes to something as important as this background check system, the politics MUST be removed. There should be no interpretation, no politicizing of issues. Here is a list of standards that need to be passed, nationwide, and if you don't meet them, then no right to a firearm. Anybody who is considered unstable in NYC should be considered equally as unstable in Washington, California and all other parts of the country. Information should be updated on a timely basis, and needs to be as accurate as possible. Sadly, that is not even close to being the case. The Aurora shooter is testimony to that fact, as was the VTU shooter. Both had been evaluated by mental health professionals and both were considered dangerous. Neither was denied access to firearms based on those evaluations, despite the fact that the evidence was there. Whether that information is gathered in an office, at a school or as part of a job requirement, it is information that should be used to further evaluate that person and determine if the assessment is accurate and if their state of mind is such that they pose an imminent threat to society. It is a better way of reducing mass shootings than this typical knee jerk, liberal reaction of attempting to ban some arbitrary firearms/magazines/clips/ammunition...whatever, that has never worked in the past and won't work in the future. Two or three people snap their cap over the course of a year, and 80 million are made to suffer for it because they happen to own a gun. Ridiculous. And anyone who wants to say that this isn't an attempt at stepping up to eventually following lock step with the United Nations disarmament treaty is just crazy enough in my book to be denied their rights to firearms. That is EXACTLY what this latest gun ban effort is all about.

_________________
I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.


April 8th, 2013, 12:33 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12247
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
The government should develop policy, turn it over to private industry, and "audit" that industry from time to time.
Agreed. In fact, this sounds like an opportunity for someone (private) to create this new system.
wjb21ndtown wrote:
That would be a huge improvement, but "pork," spending, "bringing home money to various districts," etc. all get in the way of that.
Yup, a sad but true side effect of the current campaign finance & lobbying laws. But again, that is another topic as I don't see a way to fix everything at once, do you?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Our political system is broken, and it's broken because it's too huge... Who wants it huge? Liberals.
I guess it depends on what you want 'bigger'. If its defense, then 'Conservatives' like big govt; if it's social programs not named social security, then its 'Liberals'.

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 8th, 2013, 12:47 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: What? No gun control thread?
M2K: Here is a question to your response.

Quote:
Here is a list of standards that need to be passed, nationwide, and if you don't meet them, then no right to a firearm. Anybody who is considered unstable in NYC should be considered equally as unstable in Washington, California and all other parts of the country.


Wouldn't this fall under the same standards as the process that law enforcement uses to blanket certain criminal elements. Forgive me, but I can't think of the legal term, but an example was used under the Patriot Act, that allowed monitoring of Middle Eastern groups via phone taps, and other methods in order to gleen out those who were of that ethnicity and were conducting criminal behavior. Yes it is unfortunate that everyone needs to be watched, but because they actions of the few warrant this kind of action, it has to be done in order to ensure the safety of the whole.

THIS IS MY OPINION, but I believe what we are seeing are the results of YEARS worth of indoctrination in the value of human life. I'm not just talking about the legality of abortion, which I find interesting that the destruction of Eagle eggs (as I've recently seen posted from a friend of mine) carries a $2500.00 fine, and possible imprisonment, but the destruction of a fetus is actually being publicly funded. The devaluation of human life, is the culprit here, and we've done this as a society through many areas. Movies, games, abortion, television, and so on. We no longer see life as precious, and something to be cherished, and because of this, our society cheapens it. It takes 9 months to grow and develop in the womb, and then a lifetime after to develop socially. But taking away the value means that those who can not fend for themselves: women (generally, not as a rule), children, babies, and fetus, become objects of our lusts or of no value, and can be desposed of.

In the terms of women: (slave trafficking and sex slaves) young girls are kidnapped world wide in order that they become recepticals of our physical lusts. She is worth anything, she's just a vehicle I use to satiate my physical desires, and because she is said vehicle I can treat as I wish.

Children become the same as the above, because it's a matter of control, and it's a debase, sick way of thinking, much like the previous Roman Empire you and I discussed some years back.

I think that's the core issue is our perspective on life. All else is a matter of control, food, drink, travel, gun, violence, sport safety, it's all about control.

Kids are kicked out from school for playing guns. Really? How many of us did the same? How many of us worshipped our Grandfathers, because they killed the "Japs." Or our fathers, who killed the "Viet Cong"? or insert your own American enemy here. Now we want to degender our kids and make them safer, more gentile, and uneducated so that they can be controlled easier, and if that doesn't work, let's medicate the SNOT out of them.

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


April 8th, 2013, 12:59 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.