Comments
6,401 - 6,420 of 7,967 Comments Last updated Feb 21, 2009
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6738
Nov 30, 2007
 
Achron wrote:
<quoted text>
Envornment changes. You have no choice. Human nature is just that human nature, the only species on this planet to hunt its own for sport. The only species on this planet with an inate desire to control its own. So, what control would you naturally like to invoke? Fact:
The right to bear arms. Fact: It did not state the right to bear arms if EVERYONE behaves. Fact: The People are sovern. Fact: To legislate down to micromanagement of ones life becuase you feel you need to save them: God Complex.
so in other words there should be very minimal control on guns in order to keep them from repeat offenders and unstable people?

ya know they say "guns don't kill people, people kill people." right?

well technically speaking in this case, "guns don't kill people, bullets that fire out of the gun, which is 'supposedly' controlled by another, kill them."

this whole debate, i think has, ran its course.

one side just loves their guns too much. like achron here.

achron.... what would you personally care about gun owners having to register and get permits or titles for their guns?

now you have some vintage and historic firearms but would it annoy you? would it anger you? would it REALLY be that much of a inconveniance?

would it REALLY be THAT bad for the gun owner that has a sidearm in his or her glove compartment to get a permit for it in order to buy new or more ammo?
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6739
Nov 30, 2007
 
Achron wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet again, is it voluntary?
of course. depend if you want the ammo to shot it with or not.
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6740
Nov 30, 2007
 
Achron wrote:
<quoted text>
"If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom."
-- Dwight Eisenhower
nope. "total security" is not what people are asking for.

they are asking and HAVE been asking for the same thing for over thirty years:

find some way of keeping the guns out of the repeat offenders hands. find a way of taking away the power to kill effectively from the ones we no longer trust without drastically and universally changing our constitution and or bill of rights or GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6741
Nov 30, 2007
 
Achron wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok let's look at it on that level. It is only a little infringement, it's for the greater good. Fine, I'll agree; As soon as you send a petition out to the rest of the world as to how they think we should be acting, and follow it. Talk of the greater good is funny, as the US is a small part of the greater Human Populace. Thus the Majority, or greater good involves all human beings. So, where in your pulpit do you have room to be told what to do from 'the greater good'? Most dictators will push this because as far as their concerned They Dictate the Greater Good, When in fact, the very notion eliminates that possiblity. So, we come down to:
The people of the USA are Soverign
or
We buy into the Greater Good realisticly and acknowledge a New World Order.
Which do you suppose will occur?
Given your common mentality, we will submit to the New World Order; How? We'll be dictating it....Once we have mastered control of our populace through 'Democracy' we will extend that 'protection' to every human being, everywhere, After all, It Is Human Nature....
well now the majority of people tend to think we either need better gun control and the rest of them think we don't. one side says "i don't like owning a gun but will if need be." the other says "i love my gun. and will give it up after you pry it from my cold dead fingers!"

so. does the later of the two find a "need" to own and carry the gun. if so??? why is that?

"new world order"???? no one is losing any rights! no one is losing their guns! minus of course the ones that shouldn't have them in the first place!!!!

ya know.. the ones that caused the mistrust and societal downfall in the first place?

sheez!!!! new world order... is that slang for "afraid of change"?
RonPaulForPresid ent2008

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6742
Nov 30, 2007
 
NO AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS!!! Ron Paul for President 2008!

Visit ronpaul2008 dot com

Search YouTube for Ron Paul

Join a MeetUp group- if there is not one in your area, START ONE!

Get out and vote in the primaries- Ron Paul is our ONLY hope! It's time to take our country back!

Hope for AMERICA - join the r3VOLution!
John Holliday

Henrietta, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6743
Nov 30, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
good 'ol supply and demand there ya hoo. demand being target shooters, hunters, and the NEED or want to self protection. no threat = no need = less demand = price reduction.
Well comrade, if there is a price reduction, sales will increase. I know I will buy more. BTW, I do not know any one (civilian) that shoots thousands of rounds a month practicing with their "defense" gun. I doubt that the criminal element practices at all.
I bet that industry officials will tell you that most ammo sold to civilian shooters is used for plinking, sport shooting ie: target, trap, skeet and hunting with the .22 rim fire round leading the charge and surplus ammo being shot up because it is cheaper in bulk.
Personally, I would not pick a .22 lr to be my first "defense" round choice but, it would be better than nothing. Surplus 9mm or other pistol cal. ammo is ok as long as it is not corrosive.
And, it has nothing to do with "need". I don't "need" you or any other person to decide what I "need". I can decide that for myself, thank you very much. You sound very much like a socialist to me.
So, what chapter are you on in Marx's Communist Manifesto?
Achron

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6744
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
so in other words there should be very minimal control on guns in order to keep them from repeat offenders and unstable people?
ya know they say "guns don't kill people, people kill people." right?
well technically speaking in this case, "guns don't kill people, bullets that fire out of the gun, which is 'supposedly' controlled by another, kill them."
this whole debate, i think has, ran its course.
one side just loves their guns too much. like achron here.
achron.... what would you personally care about gun owners having to register and get permits or titles for their guns?
now you have some vintage and historic firearms but would it annoy you? would it anger you? would it REALLY be that much of a inconveniance?
would it REALLY be THAT bad for the gun owner that has a sidearm in his or her glove compartment to get a permit for it in order to buy new or more ammo?
So in other words (you like this statement) you care so little for the freedom of the majority and so much for the criminal that you would prefer to impose on the law abiding to feel good and leave the criminal alone?
Achron

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6745
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
of course. depend if you want the ammo to shot it with or not.
spoken like a true marxist. Yes, you can have liberty, if you can prove you need it.
Achron

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6746
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
nope. "total security" is not what people are asking for.
they are asking and HAVE been asking for the same thing for over thirty years:
find some way of keeping the guns out of the repeat offenders hands. find a way of taking away the power to kill effectively from the ones we no longer trust without drastically and universally changing our constitution and or bill of rights or GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
So, since we want to excise control on the criminal, we make laws for the law abiding...again...interesting theory, I have a head ache, think I'll massage my feet....
Achron

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6747
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
well now the majority of people tend to think we either need better gun control and the rest of them think we don't. one side says "i don't like owning a gun but will if need be." the other says "i love my gun. and will give it up after you pry it from my cold dead fingers!"
so. does the later of the two find a "need" to own and carry the gun. if so??? why is that?
"new world order"???? no one is losing any rights! no one is losing their guns! minus of course the ones that shouldn't have them in the first place!!!!
ya know.. the ones that caused the mistrust and societal downfall in the first place?
sheez!!!! new world order... is that slang for "afraid of change"?
NWO, it happens when someone says that well it's for the greater good to guide decisions when they really dont beleive it them selves. The USA makes only a small portion of Humans. Thus the greater good would be served by finding out what the entire population thinks...else it is just more verbal masterbation. Afraid of change? Only when it starts down the same path as all of the other major cluster f**ks in history. Register weapons, locate weapons, remove weapons. All had their good reasons, matter of fact, the same reasons you continually try to site,'what if','they want','safty'. Cannot occur, you cant even or wont even put your personal guarantee on it, why? You know better...

Since: Dec 07

Delton MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6748
Dec 3, 2007
 
Funny thing is, its not really the people who own guns legally that are the problem, I have two guns I use for hunting,(depending on location and hunting laws). My guns help feed my family, supplimenting our food bill with about 100-300 lbs of meat per year helping ALOT. I don't use my guns to mug people, I don't use my guns to rob banks etc, so why should I be deprived of helping to feed my family because some jerk in another state with a stolen gun commits a crime?
Achron

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6749
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
nope. "total security" is not what people are asking for.
they are asking and HAVE been asking for the same thing for over thirty years:
find some way of keeping the guns out of the repeat offenders hands. find a way of taking away the power to kill effectively from the ones we no longer trust without drastically and universally changing our constitution and or bill of rights or GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
Which translates to, well a small percentage of people did not listen, so now everyone has to carry the cost. Kinda like school, treatment of children, Class, we will be staying after because (insert name), you may all thank him.
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6750
Dec 3, 2007
 
Achron wrote:
<quoted text>
NWO, it happens when someone says that well it's for the greater good to guide decisions when they really dont beleive it them selves. The USA makes only a small portion of Humans. Thus the greater good would be served by finding out what the entire population thinks...else it is just more verbal masterbation. Afraid of change? Only when it starts down the same path as all of the other major cluster f**ks in history. Register weapons, locate weapons, remove weapons. All had their good reasons, matter of fact, the same reasons you continually try to site,'what if','they want','safty'. Cannot occur, you cant even or wont even put your personal guarantee on it, why? You know better...
the polls WERE only americans boner!

register weapons, locate weapons recently used in killings, arrest people that shouldn't have weapons, people that have been arrested can not legally buy ammo anymore.

question for ya...

how often do you sell off your guns and buy new ones?

if my own experience is any accurate reflection then that would be never. i did have to help destroy a .22 cal of my uncles when i was younger.

'back in the day and all.

oops. one can "what if" an idea or solution to death. hence the stink paint. and nothing will work absolutely flawlessly in every situation.
but until someone has a "better" more "flawless" solution that works in every situation imaginable then they should at least assist in the "development" of the idea on the table.

right?

so. what do we need to work on?

anyone got any new ideas they want to present?

how about this fellow cheesehead? anything?
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6751
Dec 3, 2007
 
would registering a gun like a car title be that much of a pain in the arse?

the only time one would need to do anything is when they bought it (brand new), sold it, had it stolen, or lost the permit.

i was going to say "lost" their gun... but how many people actually "lose" their firearms?

that would be a loop hole though.

if 'fellow cheesehead' comes back i'll give him the run down.

so achron doesn't hunt,, how did holiday do?
John Holliday

Clyde, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6752
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
would registering a gun like a car title be that much of a pain in the arse?
the only time one would need to do anything is when they bought it (brand new), sold it, had it stolen, or lost the permit.
i was going to say "lost" their gun... but how many people actually "lose" their firearms?
that would be a loop hole though.
if 'fellow cheesehead' comes back i'll give him the run down.
so achron doesn't hunt,, how did holiday do?
Yes, it is a pain in the ass.
Driving a car is a "privilege". The 2nd Amendment is a right.
If you have a gun stolen, it is the duty of responsible citizens to report it ASAP.
Yes, I hunt. I was going to get my deer with a "exploding stink paint" devise but decided against it so I used a LAWS rocket instead. Cooked it on the spot.

“Allow me to introduce myself”

Since: Sep 07

666 East Brimstone

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6753
Dec 3, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
the polls WERE only americans boner!
register weapons, locate weapons recently used in killings, arrest people that shouldn't have weapons, people that have been arrested can not legally buy ammo anymore.
question for ya...
how often do you sell off your guns and buy new ones?
if my own experience is any accurate reflection then that would be never. i did have to help destroy a .22 cal of my uncles when i was younger.
'back in the day and all.
oops. one can "what if" an idea or solution to death. hence the stink paint. and nothing will work absolutely flawlessly in every situation.
but until someone has a "better" more "flawless" solution that works in every situation imaginable then they should at least assist in the "development" of the idea on the table.
right?
so. what do we need to work on?
anyone got any new ideas they want to present?
how about this fellow cheesehead? anything?
What I find interesting is that you utilize the argument of the 'greater good' in order to push further 'registration'. The interesting point is that you are trying to combat something where, now listen carefully, as it is the point you continually miss, registration has apparently failed. So, from a purely factual bases, why if registration failed, do you think further registration would succeede? Given that the same circumvention methods exist. You would enevetibly end up at a position of total control as you tighten the noose thinking all along you could control the human factor. Taking everyone along for the ride. Need? Want? desire? choice? All irrelevant, quite frankly the whole point of free will is just that, the choice. So, in an effort to constrain/control that which cannot control (good/evil there cannot be one with out the other) you will restrict down to the point where you gain the desired affect. Now mind you, dead people are quite complacient, but they must be dead. So where do you draw the line? You speak of it but you dont apply it, how far are you willing to go before your ego shatters in the fact you cannot control the mind?

“Allow me to introduce myself”

Since: Sep 07

666 East Brimstone

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6754
Dec 3, 2007
 
John Holliday wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is a pain in the ass.
Driving a car is a "privilege". The 2nd Amendment is a right.
If you have a gun stolen, it is the duty of responsible citizens to report it ASAP.
Yes, I hunt. I was going to get my deer with a "exploding stink paint" devise but decided against it so I used a LAWS rocket instead. Cooked it on the spot.
LOL, now that is efficient!

On another point, you have the right of free travel, given that the roads are either obstruction or for public use, cars have already been included into that by default (anyone want to move them so they dont block citizens?). Reference: Constitutional Licence, a State License is a privilage, as it is nothing more than an agreement between you and the state.....
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6756
Dec 4, 2007
 
DevilsSon wrote:
<quoted text>
What I find interesting is that you utilize the argument of the 'greater good' in order to push further 'registration'. The interesting point is that you are trying to combat something where, now listen carefully, as it is the point you continually miss, registration has apparently failed. So, from a purely factual bases, why if registration failed, do you think further registration would succeede? Given that the same circumvention methods exist. You would enevetibly end up at a position of total control as you tighten the noose thinking all along you could control the human factor. Taking everyone along for the ride. Need? Want? desire? choice? All irrelevant, quite frankly the whole point of free will is just that, the choice. So, in an effort to constrain/control that which cannot control (good/evil there cannot be one with out the other) you will restrict down to the point where you gain the desired affect. Now mind you, dead people are quite complacient, but they must be dead. So where do you draw the line? You speak of it but you dont apply it, how far are you willing to go before your ego shatters in the fact you cannot control the mind?
ya know.... if your not going to pay attention or go back and rewind the debate then just keep a lid on it until you do.

we've been through it over and over again. minus you of course.

does "free will" mean we have the choice to let repeat offenders and "unstable" people buy guns and ammo? does "free will" mean we can lobby against airport screening process because 'we don't mind getting blown up by other crazys'!!!!

does it mean we don't have to be warned that certain cereals that taste o' so good, loaded w/sugar, could POSSIBLYYYYYYY, be bad for us? the label is a little distrubing ya know.

we have all this "control" and/or "advice" on what to do with our "free will" yet we still give "free will" to someone that WE KNOW is likely to abuse it yet AGAIN!!!

by the way.... the registration thing was covered already too.

came down to ballistics or physical characteristics between weapon and bullet,, not making it nation-wide, and not incorporating the ammo.

go ahead. read back a few dozen pages or so.
ya-hey

Rice Lake, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6757
Dec 4, 2007
 
John Holliday wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, it is a pain in the ass.
Driving a car is a "privilege". The 2nd Amendment is a right.
If you have a gun stolen, it is the duty of responsible citizens to report it ASAP.
Yes, I hunt. I was going to get my deer with a "exploding stink paint" devise but decided against it so I used a LAWS rocket instead. Cooked it on the spot.
now would a LAW be considered a "arm"? i wonder?
hmmmm

how about smoke and barbecue flavor/scented stink paint that also works as lighter fluid?
John Holliday

Henrietta, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6758
Dec 4, 2007
 
ya-hey wrote:
<quoted text>
ya know.... if your not going to pay attention or go back and rewind the debate then just keep a lid on it until you do.
we've been through it over and over again. minus you of course.
does "free will" mean we have the choice to let repeat offenders and "unstable" people buy guns and ammo? does "free will" mean we can lobby against airport screening process because 'we don't mind getting blown up by other crazys'!!!!
does it mean we don't have to be warned that certain cereals that taste o' so good, loaded w/sugar, could POSSIBLYYYYYYY, be bad for us? the label is a little distrubing ya know.
we have all this "control" and/or "advice" on what to do with our "free will" yet we still give "free will" to someone that WE KNOW is likely to abuse it yet AGAIN!!!
by the way.... the registration thing was covered already too.
came down to ballistics or physical characteristics between weapon and bullet,, not making it nation-wide, and not incorporating the ammo.
go ahead. read back a few dozen pages or so.
You are a fool. You don't want a new person like DevilsSon to put his 2 cents in? Why? Afraid? Keep dreaming of more ways to socialize the country, comrade. With the bad weather here, I am sure you will reread the Communist Manifesto by Marx or "perfect" your exploding stink paint perp apprehending device.
You are a amusing little fellow but I am pretty much done with you. You have predictably become a rather boring read.
Later.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••