Only cowards need guns

[Naughtyrobot]

milwaukee69 wrote:

<quoted text>
So you walk around town with your AR strapped to your back?
Where do you live? Beruit?

Rochester, NY. High robbery and murder rate. Pistol capacity is limited to 10 rd mags unless you have pre-ban. Open carry is generally an invitaion to problems.
Around town, I would prefer discrete concealed carry with a full 15rd mag for a compact Glock, 2 extra mags. At home, I would like a rifle/carbine with 30rd mags, 12ga shotgun 8rd mag 00 buckshot, both stowed securely yet readily accessible to me, to back up a .45acp pistol I may have on my person.
When I go out, no one knows I am carrying, I believe that is how it should be. It is not something I do lightly, it is a huge responsiblity and I have received training and I practice.

[milwaukee69]

Denny Crain wrote:

<quoted text>Just a few fighters can have great power. How many politicians would have to be shot to get the idea it isn't safe to be a tyrant . In the revolution about a third were for a new government and about a third wanted to stay with the crown and a third didn't care.

I think you terribly underestimate the firepower of the National Guard, US Army, US Marines, US Air Force and the US Navy - none of those would give a ratsass who or what you stood for - they represent the government. I also highly doubt you'd even stand a chance against the local police, S.W.A.T. team and Sheriff's department.

[Fisherman 808]

EraserX wrote:

Someone here will point out the whole Germany/Hitler thing. We can play that game, too. Do you imagine that no one stood up to Hitler? LOL So, assume that someone did. What do you imagine happened to that person?
Even 70 years ago, a gun was not enough to protect yourself from the tyranny of a government. It really is a fool's argument.

When I said guns in the hands of citizens was a check and balance, I was referring to longer than 70 years ago, when they wrote the constitution.
I do think that the government would have to take into consideration the fact that there are MILLIONS of armed citizens (Democrats and Republicans) if it was to go in an extremely radical direction.

[EraserX]

Denny Crain wrote:

<quoted text>Look to Iran. They had the largest modern army in the area yet the government was overthrown by the people. Right now the middle east has tyrants being overthrown. The government doesn't know who has guns. One thing you see at gun shows are water proof tubes sold to bury weapons. The mass shooting have been terrible tragedy but so was a government gone mad at Waco.

And who won at Waco? This is NOT Iran.

[milwaukee69]

Denny Crain wrote:

<quoted text>Look to Iran. They had the largest modern army in the area yet the government was overthrown by the people. Right now the middle east has tyrants being overthrown. The government doesn't know who has guns. One thing you see at gun shows are water proof tubes sold to bury weapons. The mass shooting have been terrible tragedy but so was a government gone mad at Waco.

Right now, most of those rebel forces are being armed by the Russians or the United States.

Poland had guns too - unfortunately, Hitler ran all their horses over with a crapload of Panzers.

[Deer Whisperer]

EraserX wrote:

Someone here will point out the whole Germany/Hitler thing. We can play that game, too. Do you imagine that no one stood up to Hitler? LOL So, assume that someone did. What do you imagine happened to that person?
Even 70 years ago, a gun was not enough to protect yourself from the tyranny of a government. It really is a fool's argument.

"We can't go back to the 1990s when there WAS a ban." not quoting anyone specifically, just rhetorical.

hmmmm... it was legal and constitutional then, if I recall.

oh, that game is played... knives, hammers, cars, rocks!!

And wait still the folk come back out with links about the bush fire arsons in Australia !!!

[Hoosier Hillbilly]

M69 what do you think of this pic?

http://img3.joyreactor.com/pics/post/funny-pi...

[milwaukee69]

Naughtyrobot wrote:

<quoted text>Rochester, NY. High robbery and murder rate. Pistol capacity is limited to 10 rd mags unless you have pre-ban. Open carry is generally an invitaion to problems.
Around town, I would prefer discrete concealed carry with a full 15rd mag for a compact Glock, 2 extra mags. At home, I would like a rifle/carbine with 30rd mags, 12ga shotgun 8rd mag 00 buckshot, both stowed securely yet readily accessible to me, to back up a .45acp pistol I may have on my person.
When I go out, no one knows I am carrying, I believe that is how it should be. It is not something I do lightly, it is a huge responsiblity and I have received training and I practice.

Your chances of being murdered are twice as high in Rochester, NY than the US average. That being said however, New York City doesn't even rank in the top ten of most dangerous cities in the US. I choose not to live in a town that I have to alway look behind me or carry a gun to feel safe.

[Ferrerman]

Denny Crain wrote:

<quoted text>The point is it is our right. The guns they are talking about are all semi auto not full auto. The government knows if you have full auto because it requires a type 3 license. There is no license needed for a gun unless you carry. In Texas 20 million people have 51 million guns. It doesn't take everyone fighting back. Just a few fighters can have great power. How many politicians would have to be shot to get the idea it isn't safe to be a tyrant . In the revolution about a third were for a new government and about a third wanted to stay with the crown and a third didn't care.

You're forgetting that all members of the military take an oath to "defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic". They won't be impressed by bands of rebels upset at higher taxes on rich people imposed by a half black president. They can remake "Red Dawn" a hundred times- you'll never star.

[b33rhunt]

If only cowards need guns, then put a sign in front of your house that reads:

NO ONE in this house is armed. This house is a gun free zone.

[tallyho]

REDNECK HIPPIE wrote:

<quoted text>
Still deflecting I see. Come on judge, ask the supreme court for your opinion, so that you can dazzle all of us with your brilliance, or just continue to baffle us with your bullsh@t.

the supreme court , are you for real , hell no ... can see you aren't a TIMEX

[tallyho]

EraserX wrote:

<quoted text>
I've been thinking a lot about the tyrannical government canard. The last time the government did something, in masses, to majorly restrict freedoms (we're not talking about seatbelt laws or being frisked at the airport) was likely during WW2 - the internment of US citizens with Japanese heritage.
So, suppose that happened again and you were in that minority. And suppose you were also a rabid NRA, rwnj and had always insisted, vocally, that 'they' could have your guns when they pried them out of your cold, dead hands. Then one day they show and say "hand them over." If you resist, with force, they will shoot you, no question. You're dead, and they have your guns. If they are there to round you up and send you to a camp, and you resist, same outcome.
Or suppose that Obama, by Executive Order, outlaws ALL guns and comes for Denny Crain's first. If Denny refuses they will insist. If he tried to defend himself with his AK47 they will surely kill him. Game over.
Where it all falls down is assuming that the majority of folks will be behind an anti government movement. There's a large percentage of folks who don't like guns. There's a large percentage of folks who prefer the status quo and wouldn't want their world upended in another Civil War over something as stupid as 100 round mags to protect yourself from tyranny. It's a non starter.
So, really, there IS NO POINT in keeping high capacity mags or automatic weapons. Frankly, it's just a phenomenal waste of money.

wrong ... that was a poor re-action to Pearl Harbor , as we perceived as a back stabbing.... we did the similar in the 911 event as well , but not to the same degree

[tallyho]

Naughtyrobot wrote:

<quoted text>Rochester, NY. High robbery and murder rate. Pistol capacity is limited to 10 rd mags unless you have pre-ban. Open carry is generally an invitaion to problems.
Around town, I would prefer discrete concealed carry with a full 15rd mag for a compact Glock, 2 extra mags. At home, I would like a rifle/carbine with 30rd mags, 12ga shotgun 8rd mag 00 buckshot, both stowed securely yet readily accessible to me, to back up a .45acp pistol I may have on my person.
When I go out, no one knows I am carrying, I believe that is how it should be. It is not something I do lightly, it is a huge responsiblity and I have received training and I practice.

sure hope you live in Greece you are a nut... too much noise and attention me I use poison darts and a blow gun

[tallyho]

EraserX wrote:

<quoted text>
And who won at Waco? This is NOT Iran.

it wasn't David

[tallyho]

milwaukee69 wrote:

<quoted text>
Your chances of being murdered are twice as high in Rochester, NY than the US average. That being said however, New York City doesn't even rank in the top ten of most dangerous cities in the US. I choose not to live in a town that I have to alway look behind me or carry a gun to feel safe.

no sir it isn't ....

[Guess]

EraserX wrote:

Someone here will point out the whole Germany/Hitler thing. We can play that game, too. Do you imagine that no one stood up to Hitler? LOL So, assume that someone did. What do you imagine happened to that person?
Even 70 years ago, a gun was not enough to protect yourself from the tyranny of a government. It really is a fool's argument.

So what you are saying is that resistance is futile and we should have just got with the program and help push more Jews in ovens.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[milwaukee69]

tallyho wrote:

<quoted text>
no sir it isn't ....

According to my sources it is Tally:

http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/ne...

http://www.clrsearch.com/Rochester-Demographi...

[EraserX]

Guess wrote:

<quoted text>
So what you are saying is that resistance is futile and we should have just got with the program and help push more Jews in ovens.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I'm saying if you're relying on your gun(s) to protect you from the big bad government then your battle plan blows.

[EraserX]

tallyho wrote:

<quoted text>
wrong ... that was a poor re-action to Pearl Harbor , as we perceived as a back stabbing.... we did the similar in the 911 event as well , but not to the same degree

The cause was moot. Just trying to come up with something on a semi large scale where the rights of US citizens were trampled - for whatever reason.

[tallyho]

milwaukee69 wrote:

<quoted text>
According to my sources it is Tally:
http://www.cityrating.com/crime-statistics/ne...
http://www.clrsearch.com/Rochester-Demographi...

2010 .... but now is now , understand the confusion , but the sad thing about the net is lack of update ....

here is another fact:

Hilter had more horses than vehicles , but what he did have at the time was more than others had [vehicles] and relatively high tech .... the US beat Hilter at production , the Russians the same later