Firearms rally scheduled for Chambers...

Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square

There are 10983 comments on the Chambersburg Public Opinion story from Mar 29, 2013, titled Firearms rally scheduled for Chambersburg's square. In it, Chambersburg Public Opinion reports that:

Two local organizations are hosting a Second Amendment Freedom Rally on from noone to 2 p.m. April 6 on Courthouse Plaza in downtown Chambersburg.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chambersburg Public Opinion.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6796 Sep 13, 2013
Worthington wrote:
A site of interest to all racist pieces of shit. Updated hourly.
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanWhiteHistory...
Fixed that for you.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6797 Sep 13, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Population of the US: approx. 315 million
Divided by 3: 105 million gun owners
How many of those 105 MILLION gun owners kill their own family with their own legally obtained firearm, Dan. You claim it is done "all the time". Back that up with some hard evidence.
You have bought into the libtard hype that is broadcast every night on the TV. They take incidents such as Columbine, Sandy Hook, Aurora, etc. and sensationalize them to the point that they have the ignorant public, such as yourself, into BELIEVING that there is some sort of pandemic of legal gun owners going around murdering at random.
Here is some good hard FACTS for you Dan. You know what, forget that. I have gone over the FBI uniform crime stats with you ad nauseum,and I don't care to keep beating that dead horse. It is you CHOOSING to remain willfully ignorant. Revel in it.
I'm not talking about mass killings. I'm talking about a guy shooting his 16 year old daughter and the dog. I'm talking about a guy shooting his ex-girlfriend in the parking lot of her job. I'm talking about the guy who got into an argument with his 25 year old daughter and shot her. I'm talking about a guy shooting his wife during an argument and then himself. I'm talking about a man shooting the woman he was staying with when she startled him. I'm talking about a guy who shot the fireman who was responding to an alarm at his house because he mistook him for an intruder.

Know when these happened? WEDNESDAY!

Want more? Because I can give them to you.

Know why?

Because they happen ALL THE TIME.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6798 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, there's no difference between the people crossing the line and the people who think they're enforcing the line.
Countless gunners just like you have made threats about "2nd Amendment remedies" or "watering the tree of liberty" and so on in the past couple of years. To most of America these are people who are crossing the line and who the rest of us need protection from. To you, they are patriots resisting tyranny.
The distinction is all in your mind. Just like everyone, you will believe you're on the justice side of the line.
The bottom line is that some people are armed and some are not, and the armed people can do a whole lot of damage very quickly once they've decided they're justified.
"Again, there's no difference between the people crossing the line and the people who think they're enforcing the line."
Interesting. I am wondering why you are so against what I say then.

"Just like everyone, you will believe you're on the justice side of the line."
Justice?
This is not about justice Mr. Chambersburg. It is about freedom.

"The bottom line is that some people are armed and some are not, and the armed people can do a whole lot of damage very quickly once they've decided they're justified."
You seem to think that an armed conflict contains one side that is unarmed and one side that is armed. You naively think that when the populace is unarmed it will be just fine for only one group to remain armed. You seem to think that the criminal element will also be unarmed once the law respecting are disarmed.
You are simply misjudgeing reality Mr. Chambersburg.

If you truly do respect our founding documents and love the constitution, you would embrace their ideals and principles, and live a life that has good neighborly relationships with your fellow citizens. It seems to me that it is far wiser to rely on one's self and one's neighbors for mutual protection and avoid intentionally creating a situation where your theoretical personal "protection" comes from armed adversaries, who will always treat you as a possible suspect from the outset of calling them.
The police do not exist to protect the citizens, they exist to protect the interests of the state. When the police are called into court, they generally are called to testify for the state, not the presumed innocent defendant.
You would force your fellow citizens to rely on protection from a group that will tell you, the citizen, up front, that anything you say CAN AND WILL be used AGAINST you in a court of law.

Yeah, I know, this is where you will restate your "If you do not break the law, you have nothing to fear from the police." nonsense.
Like I said, you get treated like a suspect until they determine you may not be one. Ask John and Patsy Ramsey.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6799 Sep 13, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Population of the US: approx. 315 million
Divided by 3: 105 million gun owners
How many of those 105 MILLION gun owners kill their own family with their own legally obtained firearm, Dan. You claim it is done "all the time". Back that up with some hard evidence.
You have bought into the libtard hype that is broadcast every night on the TV. They take incidents such as Columbine, Sandy Hook, Aurora, etc. and sensationalize them to the point that they have the ignorant public, such as yourself, into BELIEVING that there is some sort of pandemic of legal gun owners going around murdering at random.
Here is some good hard FACTS for you Dan. You know what, forget that. I have gone over the FBI uniform crime stats with you ad nauseum,and I don't care to keep beating that dead horse. It is you CHOOSING to remain willfully ignorant. Revel in it.
Actually it's closer to 110,000,000 if you use the 35% figure that Danny Boy posted. Either way, the VAST majority of lawful gun owners are never involved in shooting crimes and those who do cross the line are a miniscule minority.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6800 Sep 13, 2013
Squach wrote:
<quoted text>No Danny Boy, no one has made a threat of violence here. Your paranoia is getting the better of you. In simple language that even someone of your limited intelligence is able to understand, what is being said is......."Don't start any trouble and there won't be any trouble." YOU and your ilk are the AGRESSORS here and you are ATTACKING the INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES of law abiding citizens. Those law abiding citizens are within their rights as AMERICANS to defend those INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES by whatever means necessary. YOU and your ilk will be the ones who dictate what means are necessary by the nature of your assault. You also need to read up on INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY. Each and every citizen of this nation is individually responsible for their own actions. If an otherwise law abiding citizen makes a poor decision and commits a crime with a firearm, that citizen is individually responsible for that crime and not the entire population of law abiding citizens. It's a pretty simple concept; even you should be able to understand it. Try removing your leftist liberal blinders.
"We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions."
~ Ronald Reagan ~
EXCELLENT !!!
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6801 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
My argument is that every criminal was a law abiding citizen before they made a decision not to be. For a large majority of them, there was no way to tell before they did the act.
When you have a tool that can maim and kill in an instant, and you have a personality that tends toward threats of violence to get your way, that's a very, very dangerous tool.
Since we can't change your impulsive, violent personality, we are left with regulating access to the tools you can do the most damage with.
"Since we can't change your impulsive, violent personality, we are left with regulating access to the tools you can do the most damage with."
Sounds good, except for one thing. It is impossible to enforce and control that "access".
There is an old saying in the military ranks Mr. Chambersburg.
"A good soldier never comes up short."

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6802 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Fixed that for you.
How un-American of you Danny Boy. Isn't that individual entitled to his opinion just as you are with your government mandated racism? Personally I believe both philosophies suck and opt for true equality instead.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6803 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! Still using this bullshit argument?
Everybody is law abiding ... right up until they aren't. How do you not comprehend that fact?
<quoted text>
I have the freedom of choice to live in the nation of my birth and do everything I can to make it safer.
<quoted text>
This is the exact justification people use in the violent overthrow of the government. I've heard exactly the same thing from countless gunners who believe that we're approaching the time when they'll have to take up arms against the Obama "regime." They already believe they're close to being justified in violently overthrowing a democratically elected government.
You are demonstrating a dangerous mindset. The fact that you and people like you are stockpiling arms and ammo for a coming time when you'll need them to "take back America" is very, very dangerous to the rest of us law-abiding, patriotic American citizens.
Let me know where you got that crystal ball that tells you who is and who isn't going to commit a crime. In a free society, You CANNOT restrict the law-abiding based on the acts the extreme minority of the population. What is amazing to me is how you don't see the constant encroachment of our civil liberties by our own govt all in the name of "You don't know what's best for you. You need the govt to take care of you." Which is COMPLETE HORSESHIT! We are quite a ways away from any type of armed rebellion. There are 4 boxes in this country when it comes to dealing with our elected officials: the soapbox, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box. We are still using the first three as shown in the recent elections in Colorado and the SCOTUS decisions in Heller and McDonald. The naive people in this country are those who believe we could never get to box number four. It happened once in this country. Why do you believe it could never happen again?

"No country is guaranteed perpetual existence, and that includes this one." - Mark Levin (I think).

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6804 Sep 13, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
"Again, there's no difference between the people crossing the line and the people who think they're enforcing the line."
Interesting. I am wondering why you are so against what I say then.
"Just like everyone, you will believe you're on the justice side of the line."
Justice?
This is not about justice Mr. Chambersburg. It is about freedom.
"The bottom line is that some people are armed and some are not, and the armed people can do a whole lot of damage very quickly once they've decided they're justified."
You seem to think that an armed conflict contains one side that is unarmed and one side that is armed. You naively think that when the populace is unarmed it will be just fine for only one group to remain armed. You seem to think that the criminal element will also be unarmed once the law respecting are disarmed.
You are simply misjudgeing reality Mr. Chambersburg.
If you truly do respect our founding documents and love the constitution, you would embrace their ideals and principles, and live a life that has good neighborly relationships with your fellow citizens. It seems to me that it is far wiser to rely on one's self and one's neighbors for mutual protection and avoid intentionally creating a situation where your theoretical personal "protection" comes from armed adversaries, who will always treat you as a possible suspect from the outset of calling them.
The police do not exist to protect the citizens, they exist to protect the interests of the state. When the police are called into court, they generally are called to testify for the state, not the presumed innocent defendant.
You would force your fellow citizens to rely on protection from a group that will tell you, the citizen, up front, that anything you say CAN AND WILL be used AGAINST you in a court of law.
Yeah, I know, this is where you will restate your "If you do not break the law, you have nothing to fear from the police." nonsense.
Like I said, you get treated like a suspect until they determine you may not be one. Ask John and Patsy Ramsey.
1. You're going to have to be more specific.
2. Freedom. Justice. Whichever high-minded term you most prefer to justify your potential use of firearms against your self-defined enemy. Doesn't change my point.
3. Every one of "you seem to think" statements is false. I do not think any of those things.
4. I do live in good, neighborly relationships with my fellow citizens. And I acknowledge that corruption and misconduct exists within the police. But the vast majority of police officers are honest, fair-minded, courageous folks who spend every shift trying to protect and serve the citizenry. Your paranoid mistrust of them says a lot about your relationship with the law.
5. I have never in my life said, "If you do not break the law, you have nothing to fear from the police," so I can't very well restate it.

Your assumptions about me are completely off base and are obviously related more to whatever's going on in your fertile imagination more than anything I've actually said.

Since: May 12

Chambersburg, PA

#6805 Sep 13, 2013
AnswersRus wrote:
<quoted text>
"Since we can't change your impulsive, violent personality, we are left with regulating access to the tools you can do the most damage with."
Sounds good, except for one thing. It is impossible to enforce and control that "access".
We've never seriously tried.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6806 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not talking about mass killings. I'm talking about a guy shooting his 16 year old daughter and the dog. I'm talking about a guy shooting his ex-girlfriend in the parking lot of her job. I'm talking about the guy who got into an argument with his 25 year old daughter and shot her. I'm talking about a guy shooting his wife during an argument and then himself. I'm talking about a man shooting the woman he was staying with when she startled him. I'm talking about a guy who shot the fireman who was responding to an alarm at his house because he mistook him for an intruder.
Know when these happened? WEDNESDAY!
Want more? Because I can give them to you.
Know why?
Because they happen ALL THE TIME.
And what of the other 104,999,994 gun owners who didn't kill anyone Wednesday??

Total firearm murders in 2011: 12,664

That means there were 104,987,336 gun owners who did NOT murder anyone in 2011. I rest my case.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6807 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Everybody is law abiding ... right up until they aren't. How do you not comprehend that fact?
...
Everybody is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law and by a jury of their peers. How is it that you continually fail to embrace what that means?

Your way is to write law in such a manner as to assume a future crime will eventually be committed by all citizens simply because they possess an inanimate object.

The principle of freedom, the American principle of freedom, states that a citizen is always presumed innocent, and that they have committed NO crime, up until the time that they are proven to have actually committed a crime by due process and a conviction of that crime is assured by a guilty verdict from a jury of their peers.

Your way says "NO! You can not possess an inanimate object because I am afraid. I am afraid of what you might possibly do."

The American way says, "Yes! You can possess an inanimate object. Just make sure that you are responsible with it. If you fail to do so, you forfiet your right to possess, and perhaps your freedom, and possibly even your own life."

Your way breeds contempt and hatred.
The American way encourages proper behavior.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6808 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
You did and you admitted it. Simply minimizing it by calling it a "joke" doesn't change a thing except in your own simple mind.
I never admitted to any such thing, you lying POS! I even gave my reason for the comment.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6809 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>...
Because the only difference between a law abiding citizen and a criminal is finding the justification to start shooting.
...
Incorrect.
The difference, Mr. Chambersburg, is knowing when it is justified and legal to start shooting ... ie ... self defense.

Try again.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6810 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! Still using this bullshit argument?
Everybody is law abiding ... right up until they aren't. How do you not comprehend that fact?
<quoted text>
I have the freedom of choice to live in the nation of my birth and do everything I can to make it safer.
<quoted text>
This is the exact justification people use in the violent overthrow of the government. I've heard exactly the same thing from countless gunners who believe that we're approaching the time when they'll have to take up arms against the Obama "regime." They already believe they're close to being justified in violently overthrowing a democratically elected government.
You are demonstrating a dangerous mindset. The fact that you and people like you are stockpiling arms and ammo for a coming time when you'll need them to "take back America" is very, very dangerous to the rest of us law-abiding, patriotic American citizens.
When that "democratically elected government" stops representing the will of the people, if they cannot be removed from office by recall elections, or if that govt decides to rule by force, then the people are left with NO CHOICE but to take up arms to defend themself from their own govt. Happens everyday all over this globe. But like I said....we are a long way off from that (albeit slowly getting closer).

And when have I EVER said that I was "stockpiling ammo". The only ammo I buy is to replenish my ammo box after a round of target shooting (which I haven't been able to do much of because of the shortge in this area). You truly have been watching WAAAAAAAY too much TV.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6811 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
"completely out of the norm" is who we need to address, because it sure as hell isn't just "a handful."
And the only difference between being in the norm and out of the norm is someone finally having enough and justifying to themselves their right to shoot someone. Hell, you're already part way there with your bullshit belief that you're sworn to protect America from the enemies of your own choosing.
In that sworn duty, it is the constitution which determines the enemies from which the sworn citizens are charged with defending themselves and their fellow citizens, Mr. Chambersburg.
You call the oath that our military citizens take ... bullshit?

Just as well hang a target on your own back Mr. Chambersburg. Your strawman statement is that stupid.

“Si vis pacem, para bellum !!”

Since: Dec 07

Southeast Virginia

#6812 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
Hell, you're already part way there with your bullshit belief that you're sworn to protect America from the enemies of your own choosing.
Oh, and it is no "bullshit belief" that I sworn an oath. I swore the oath on March 3rd, 1986, to defend this country from all enemies foreigh and domestic. And thoise enemies are not of my choosing, Dan. You are the one who chooses to be in the side against freedom and liberty. That oath does NOT have an expiration date, Danny Boy. The fact that you are truly squimming like the measely little worm that you are tells me exactly which side of the argument you stand on.
AnswersRus

Riverton, WY

#6813 Sep 13, 2013
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<quoted text>
We've never seriously tried.
"We've never tried."?

"WE"?

"WE", are the people of the United States of America.
"WE" the people, are charged with, and have been charged from the very beginning, with the solemn duty as citizens of this nation, in making sure it is never tried in this country, Mr. Chambersburg.

You are outside the lines of proper and acceptable proposal, as a citizen of this nation.

“HUNTING RIGHTS ADVOCATE”

Since: Oct 08

Boggy Creek

#6814 Sep 13, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and it is no "bullshit belief" that I sworn an oath. I swore the oath on March 3rd, 1986, to defend this country from all enemies foreigh and domestic. And thoise enemies are not of my choosing, Dan. You are the one who chooses to be in the side against freedom and liberty. That oath does NOT have an expiration date, Danny Boy. The fact that you are truly squimming like the measely little worm that you are tells me exactly which side of the argument you stand on.
I took the same oath on 20 August 1971.
Nerd Rage

Chambersburg, PA

#6815 Sep 13, 2013
I thought I’d pop in to see what was going on here and I see “Dan the Sham” is up to his usual shameless narcissistic behavior and nonsensical arguments that go in circles and let us not forget his anti-Americanisms. Oh, also FIY...Dan once said he owned a gun, which is odd to me…
Dan the Man Chambersburg wrote:
<Quoted text>
Because the only difference between a law abiding citizen and a criminal is finding the justification to start shooting.
Oh, and Dan is not Black but I am (he just pretends to be) and because I am a conservative and he just cannot fathom that because he believes that people like me don’t exist. In his utopia we are harder to find than a Leprechaun riding a unicorn.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Cities and states take the lead on banning bump... 3 hr Watchdog 314
News Another School Shooting-But Who's Counting? 4 hr Simplejim 7
News Lots of talk, little action in Congress after s... 4 hr Sandra 90
News Jimmy Kimmel Blames Trump, GOP After School Sho... 5 hr mary 2
News Dead Not Counted Before Liberals Started Lying ... Feb 16 Shelly Bl 1
News Remington seeks to restructure debt so it can o... Feb 12 sick of winning 1
News After Las Vegas massacre, Congress has failed t... Feb 12 Watchdog 1
More from around the web