Town of Oconomowoc reverses course, OKs Internet gun business

July 7, 2009 12:04 p.m. Town of Oconomowoc a ' A town planner has reversed herself and cast the decisive vote giving the go-ahead for a new Internet firearms sales business here.

[lisa]

what are you guys thinking!!!!!! I am not liking the fact that you all ok the fact that sales of guns over the internet! This town is quiet, obviously too quiet for most. We need more violence in oconomowoc yet alone over the state... lets just hand out guns at the grocery stores, wouldnt that be easier.???

[Wolverine]

lisa wrote:

what are you guys thinking!!!!!! I am not liking the fact that you all ok the fact that sales of guns over the internet! This town is quiet, obviously too quiet for most. We need more violence in oconomowoc yet alone over the state... lets just hand out guns at the grocery stores, wouldnt that be easier.???

More hysterical puke from an anti-freedom fascist. The guns would still have to be transferred through a dealer with a FFL. What a maroon! This country is drowning in ignorance.

[Jack Burton]

lisa wrote:

what are you guys thinking!!!!!! I am not liking the fact that you all ok the fact that sales of guns over the internet! This town is quiet, obviously too quiet for most. We need more violence in oconomowoc yet alone over the state... lets just hand out guns at the grocery stores, wouldnt that be easier.???

This is the type of person who writes letters to the editor complaining about the way unicorns are mistreated down at the local circus.

Good heart... but absolute total ignorance about the way guns are bought and sold.

[Wolverine]

To the anti-freedom fascists here: Patriots could give a damn less about what you think or feel on the subject of our gun rights. Our rights are inviolate & not up for a vote. So take your hysterically emotional head full of fear and go home and then STFU! We do not care what you think.

[Chadwick]

I can't understand anything Lisa's trying to say there. Completely incoherent, though I gather she doesn't like this idea.

Well as a resident of the Town of Oconomowoc, I don't actually have a problem with this place. If people want to buy their guns this way, so long as the regulations are met, I don't care. It's not as if this place is going to magically make it simple for everyone to just get any guns they want, no questions asked.

And on another note: Wolverine, you're a big part of what's wrong right now. She's a fascist because she's scared of guns? While you accuse her of ignorance, you display your own. Perhaps you should think before you write your own hysterical posts.

[Wolverine]

Chadwick wrote:

I can't understand anything Lisa's trying to say there. Completely incoherent, though I gather she doesn't like this idea.
Well as a resident of the Town of Oconomowoc, I don't actually have a problem with this place. If people want to buy their guns this way, so long as the regulations are met, I don't care. It's not as if this place is going to magically make it simple for everyone to just get any guns they want, no questions asked.
And on another note: Wolverine, you're a big part of what's wrong right now. She's a fascist because she's scared of guns? While you accuse her of ignorance, you display your own. Perhaps you should think before you write your own hysterical posts.

Sorry. But blaming me for our current situation is wrong! I gave 12 years of my life to the service of this country. I will speak as I please. Don't like it? Don't read my posts. Simple. I will no longer be civil, nor will I compromise with anti-freedom fascists. The only thing that happens is that we citizens keep on losing our rights, one slice at a time. I will also not be polite to the abusive, arrogant, condescending, patronizing, abrasive, holier-than-thou progressives. And just for your info I am far from hysterical. I have passed numerous mental/stress tests for security clearances up to and including Top Secret & Nato Entac. Get a clue yourself. We patriots are tired of the mealy mouthed give away our rights crowd from our side.

[Chadwick]

Passing mental and stress tests doesn't actually make you not hysterical.

I came in here, read Lisa's post, and thought to myself, "Wow, she's kinda crazy. And she's wrong." But then I scroll down, and I read your posts, and they're so angry and hateful that I want to automatically disagree with you, because you come across as a truly bad person, whereas she's just wrong. So you can go ahead and make your arguments. But they're not going to ever convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you. And they might drive away some who otherwise would (such as myself).

So yeah, you are part of the problem. Not the guns one, but the one where we can't have a civil conversation in this country, because everyone seems to just default to hate of the other side. When your very first sentence calls the other person a fascist, you're not part of a conversation anymore; you're just screaming at people.

[lisa]

ok, let me set the record straight, maybe i came off as sounding ignorant, stupid, whatever u all might want to think, I guess these violent responces were just a little bit over the line, I dont disagree with guns for hunting, police, and people in the service........ atleast selling them in the stores you need to give the id, and see it what makes it so safe to sell them over the internet??? does that mean anyone can get one??? oh and when i say stores, i dont mean grocery??? ok? gosh, it was a innocent response to something i disagree with, does not mean i hate guns or anyone who uses them properly...sorry that i upset so many people by one innocent response....

[Chadwick]

Oh, Lisa, not really upset with you. Just couldn't make much heads or tails of your original post, aside from some strong feelings against it. No hard feelings, I hope.

I understand your concerns, but I have to assume that these weapons will be checked as well as they are when sold in any other fashion, as this business is to be licensed by the ATF, and they have requirements. So unless some info comes out that this place is actually doing things differently somehow, I'm not concerned about it.

[Highlander]

lisa wrote:

what are you guys thinking!!!!!! I am not liking the fact that you all ok the fact that sales of guns over the internet! This town is quiet, obviously too quiet for most. We need more violence in oconomowoc yet alone over the state... lets just hand out guns at the grocery stores, wouldnt that be easier.???

Do tell: Precisely how would it be that firearms are the cause of any kind of violence?
.
Do you pretend to say the before there were firearms, that there wasn't ~any~ kind of violence at all?
.
And anyway: Who —that news story— said anything about passing out anything at the local grocery store?
.
When you get around to rethinking your remarks, do you think that you were a bit overstating the matter?
.
What would you have said were the U.S. Government to build a munitions plant there?
.
Would you still but 'up in arms'?

[Tory II]

If you're not angry then you're not informed.

No person has to be civil when it comes defending our natural right of self defense. We have a right to our lives, and if we do then we have a right to protect our lives, and to do that we need weapons.

An armed society is a safe society. An armed society deters slavery, genocide, tyranny and oppression, and other tragedies. An armed society keeps the peace. If you don't like it then move to Nazi England.

Regulating gun sales has no positive effect on crime. Gun control laws don't reduce crime, they increase it. Criminals get their gun thru the blackmarket (created by gun control laws). Prohibiting gun sales thru the internet increases the lucrativeness of the blackmarket. Gun sales regulations have never stopped people from buying guns. Criminals ignore gun control laws.

Don't like it that people have guns ? At least 80 million Americans own guns.

[Tory II]

Chadwick wrote:

...So yeah, you are part of the problem. Not the guns one, but the one where we can't have a civil conversation in this country, because everyone seems to just default to hate of the other side. When your very first sentence calls the other person a fascist, you're not part of a conversation anymore; you're just screaming at people.

Calling people names (especially names that acccurately describe them) does not destroy the argument Mr. High Society. You need to look beyond the name-calling and into the substance of the matter, buttbreath. We're talking about our rights, and you're worried about sticks and stones and names will harm me; grow up and toss the protocol.

Omama is not "my president"; he's a szhithead socialist. A dark one too. A dark chimp.

Free speech is free only when the worst speech is protected, not just the speech you approve of.

[Chadwick]

Tory II wrote:

No person has to be civil when it comes defending our natural right of self defense. We have a right to our lives, and if we do then we have a right to protect our lives, and to do that we need weapons.

An armed society is a safe society. An armed society deters slavery, genocide, tyranny and oppression, and other tragedies. An armed society keeps the peace. If you don't like it then move to Nazi England.

Regulating gun sales has no positive effect on crime. Gun control laws don't reduce crime, they increase it. Criminals get their gun thru the blackmarket (created by gun control laws). Prohibiting gun sales thru the internet increases the lucrativeness of the blackmarket. Gun sales regulations have never stopped people from buying guns. Criminals ignore gun control laws.

Don't like it that people have guns ? At least 80 million Americans own guns.

And just who in this particular forum are you defending those rights against? Lisa says she supports your right to firearms. She's just worried that they're going to just be handed out to anyone. I'm NRA. So when you go on your mini-rant about how important gun rights are, just who is that directed at?'Cause that seemed like a speech with a target.

[QUOTE who= Tory II]Calling people names (especially names that acccurately describe them) does not destroy the argument Mr. High Society. You need to look beyond the name-calling and into the substance of the matter, buttbreath. We're talking about our rights, and you're worried about sticks and stones and names will harm me; grow up and toss the protocol.[/QUOTE]

Grow up and toss the protocol? What, are children known for their cogent arguments where you're from, and they then grow up and start slinging insults instead of making and defending a point?

The name-calling doesn't destroy an argument; it means that no one is going to listen to you anymore, except (some of) the people who already agree with you. Historically, the communists were the ones who started the trend of calling everyone who wasn't one of them a fascist, so that they wouldn't have to argue anything on the merits. Fascists are just bad, and my opponent is a fascist, so I'm right. It doesn't further the discourse — it ends it.

I couldn't care less whether the words hurt you, especially after reading your two posts here, which seem to be intentionally designed to insult rather than make a point. I just don't feel the need to insult you to make a point. In fact, it rather gets in the way, as who you are is not relevant to any points you want to make. You say that we're "talking about our rights" here, but we're not. YOU are. I happen to agree with you, but you're just doing a terrible job of making your point.

[QUOTE who= Tory II]Free speech is free only when the worst speech is protected, not just the speech you approve of.[/QUOTE]

That's exactly right. That's why I'll always defend your right to say whatever you want. If you got some other impression, I think you decided to misread my statements. You've got the right to be a dick all you want, and I'm not about to stop you. It makes me seem like a reasonable person when we disagree on something. Or when we agree on something.

[Wolverine]

Chadwick wrote:

Passing mental and stress tests doesn't actually make you not hysterical.
I came in here, read Lisa's post, and thought to myself, "Wow, she's kinda crazy. And she's wrong." But then I scroll down, and I read your posts, and they're so angry and hateful that I want to automatically disagree with you, because you come across as a truly bad person, whereas she's just wrong. So you can go ahead and make your arguments. But they're not going to ever convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you. And they might drive away some who otherwise would (such as myself).
So yeah, you are part of the problem. Not the guns one, but the one where we can't have a civil conversation in this country, because everyone seems to just default to hate of the other side. When your very first sentence calls the other person a fascist, you're not part of a conversation anymore; you're just screaming at people.

I call'em as I see'em. Yes I am drawing a line in the sand, MY RIGHTS are not up for a vote after a compromise session. I have a right to return the hatred of the controlling left, should I so choose. That is what makes the USA great. I a conservative & I have taken all I am going to take from the socialistic, fascist, control freak Progressives. I will no longer post to a compromiser like you, only to the board as a whole. You are the reason that we are in the shape we are, by talking to, & compromising with the lunatics who are taking our liberties a slice at a time.

[Wolverine]

lisa wrote:

ok, let me set the record straight, maybe i came off as sounding ignorant, stupid, whatever u all might want to think, I guess these violent responces were just a little bit over the line, I dont disagree with guns for hunting, police, and people in the service........ atleast selling them in the stores you need to give the id, and see it what makes it so safe to sell them over the internet??? does that mean anyone can get one??? oh and when i say stores, i dont mean grocery??? ok? gosh, it was a innocent response to something i disagree with, does not mean i hate guns or anyone who uses them properly...sorry that i upset so many people by one innocent response....

Your responses were not innocent, there were hysterically ignorant.

[Wolverine]

Tory II wrote:

If you're not angry then you're not informed.
No person has to be civil when it comes defending our natural right of self defense. We have a right to our lives, and if we do then we have a right to protect our lives, and to do that we need weapons.
An armed society is a safe society. An armed society deters slavery, genocide, tyranny and oppression, and other tragedies. An armed society keeps the peace. If you don't like it then move to Nazi England.
Regulating gun sales has no positive effect on crime. Gun control laws don't reduce crime, they increase it. Criminals get their gun thru the blackmarket (created by gun control laws). Prohibiting gun sales thru the internet increases the lucrativeness of the blackmarket. Gun sales regulations have never stopped people from buying guns. Criminals ignore gun control laws.
Don't like it that people have guns ? At least 80 million Americans own guns.

Thank you Brother. I am done being nice to either the controllers, or their ignorant followers, BOTH who are responsible for the continued destruction of our rights. And as for the compromisers (ie. The let's be nice crowd) F'em, they do our cause more harm than the other side. The other side must fight to take some of our rights, while the compromisers give it to them.

[Armed Veteran]

lisa wrote:

ok, let me set the record straight, maybe i came off as sounding ignorant, stupid, whatever u all might want to think, I guess these violent responces were just a little bit over the line, I dont disagree with guns for hunting, police, and people in the service........ atleast selling them in the stores you need to give the id, and see it what makes it so safe to sell them over the internet??? does that mean anyone can get one??? oh and when i say stores, i dont mean grocery??? ok? gosh, it was a innocent response to something i disagree with, does not mean i hate guns or anyone who uses them properly...sorry that i upset so many people by one innocent response....

Lisa, guns have been for sale over the internet for a long time now. What you fail to realize is that it is a lot like going down to the local gun shop, sporting goods store, etc. The internet sale MUST go through a federally licensed firearms dealer where all the appropriate background checks are performed on the buyer. The internet isn't used like back alley black market for firearms (at least nowhere that I have found). The BATFE watches it VERY closely (I know people personally in the BATFE).

And firearms are not just for hunting, the police, or the military. The main reason behind the 2nd-A is so common people can protect themselves from those who would do them harm, whether it be a criminal or a tyrannical government.

[Armed Veteran]

Wolverine wrote:

<quoted text>Thank you Brother. I am done being nice to either the controllers, or their ignorant followers, BOTH who are responsible for the continued destruction of our rights. And as for the compromisers (ie. The let's be nice crowd) F'em, they do our cause more harm than the other side. The other side must fight to take some of our rights, while the compromisers give it to them.

I can kind of see what Chadwick is saying here, Wolverine.(Don't worry, I agree with everything you have stated.) But when you come straight out of the gate with both barrels blazing (pun intended), you shut down the discourse. There is a time to get mad, but there is a time also to be more civil and try to educate the ignorant. Sometimes people need to be fed from a baby bottle at first before you give them a drink from a firehose, so to speak. If they refuse to see the logic after they are given the facts, that is the time to light them up, but not right off the bat. You can win more people to the side of freedom with calm discourse than anger, trust me.

[Chadwick]

Wolverine, don't pretend that only liberals want to take your rights away. Both major political parties want to take away your rights, it's just a question of which party wants to take which rights from you. Together, they're doing their damnedest to give us an authoritarian government. You and Tory II can masturbate each other all you want, but when you stop talking to anyone who says anything mildly different from yourself, you've removed yourself from the political process.

Armed Veteran, thanks for saying what needed to be said here from the start.

[Tory II]

Chadwick likes you Armed Veteran.

Refer to me when it was that even one of these gun hating, freedom hating NAZIS finally admitted publicly (here at Topix) that the proponents of gun possession were right. Tell me who or when was "won over". I've yet to see it.

They don't want to be called what they are (NAZIS) because they want to continue to try and win US over. If we could prove they're a bunch of Nazis, they couldn't win anyone over, and they know it. They try to control the debate by issuing rules rather than issuing convincing arguments. We're supposed to allow the antigun Nazis a voice. As if we have something to gain by doing so. In the end, it's not who is right or wrong that will win, it's who has the most power.

A Nazi believes the individual must surrender his freedom for the benefit of the common good. An antigun socialist (a politically correct name for 'liberal') is a Nazi. Omama and Bush (especially Omama) are antigun socialists.

According to them, if we call them Nazis they will refuse to consider the argument (debate). So, according to them, if I refer to them as Nazis, they will continue to choose the worst course of action (not the best course).

Imagine if Thomas Jefferson referred to the King as the 'chimp' in the Declaration of Independence. What would Amerika be like today?

BTW, Jefferson would hang people like Chadwick and Lisa (people who claim to be freedom loving gun owners.)

Amerika is becoming a nation of Nazis (and they'll do anything to keep me from saying it, 1st amendment or not).

Our gun rights are not negotiable, especially with the Nazis.