|
And you wonder why 2A supporters stockpile guns and ammo.....
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 8:45 AM
And you wonder why 2A supporters stockpile guns and ammo.....
Hey - I thought gun owners were supposed to be the wack jobs? http://twitchy.com/2012/12/18/...hould-be-armed/ |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:00 AM
Re: And you wonder why 2A supporters stockpile guns and
Maybe I'm being a bit obtuse, but I'm not sure how/why this story supports your header?
How does a guy who strongly opposes the concept of arming teachers as a response to the slaughter of children lead you to write in your header...
"And you wonder why 2a supporters stockpile guns and ammo"
I don't get the connection from one to the other....
Explain. Thanks.
MF
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:04 AM
Because guys like this
Guys like this want to
# 1 - Confiscate all guns in the US
# 2 - Execute people who disagree with them
The guns and ammo crowd is strictly live and let live; the anti gun crowd is interventionist.
Last edited 12/19/2012 9:06 AM by navy9t1
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:16 AM
Re: Because guys like this
navy9t1 wrote:Guys like this want to
# 1 - Confiscate all guns in the US
# 2 - Execute people who disagree with them
The guns and ammo crowd is strictly live and let live; the anti gun crowd is interventionist. For what it's worth.... The person -- and it's the same guy in all two dozen tweets -- did not once call for confiscating all guns in the U.S. Didn't even hint it in any way. And he didn't call for executing people who disagree with them, or suggest it, or even imply it. His "head on a stick" comment, was, as he said, a metaphor, and when pressed said he wants LaPierre in jail for the rest of his life. Finally... to your last thoughts... I find your comments to be incredibly broad, sweeping generalizations. So, we agree to disagree on that... but I do appreciate the response, even if I don't agree with it. MF
Last edited 12/19/2012 9:17 AM by RMOTKING
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:23 AM
I guess all these guys were speaking metaphorically as well
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:35 AM
Re: I guess all these guys were speaking metaphorically as well
Navy.... (sorry, this might get a little long)
We've got more than 300 million people in this country. Why would it be surprising that after one of the worst acts of violence in American history (not talking about the number, but of who was killed) that people would respond in an irresponsible way.
I think it would be surprising if people didn't respond this way. I'm not endorsing this, just understanding it.
Emotions are running at boiling point. People have snapped.
And the website that posted the comments had an interesting one of it's own....
Basically saying "it's just like Liberals to want to hurt someone who hasn't hurt them"
You think most every American isn't hurt? You think most every American isn't somehow suffering? You think most every American doesn't feel that the country they live in isn't somehow diminished, at least a little?
People don't want to get over this and go back to their same lives with a business as usual mentality. They want change. They want to feel that tiny innocent defenseless children should be able to go to school and not get slaughtered.
Anyway.... this post feels long enough... I've tried to stay out of all these conversations because emotions are running way Way too hot. I'm not smart and skilled enough to change hearts and minds.
Michael Forrest
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:47 AM
I am not trying to change anyone's heart and mind
Me and mine don't want to change anyone else's opinion. We just want to be left alone to exercise our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
That's why we stockpile guns and ammo.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:55 AM
One has nothing to do with the other
You are arguing a strawman. Nobody is disputing that there is actual pain and suffering out there. But the pain and suffering of the Newtown massacre is not in the least bit connected to the 2A rights of law abiding citizens. The gun control advocates cited in the article are intent on taking guns away from law abiding citizens who had nothing to do with the massacre - unless, of course, you believe they were all speaking metaphorically, like the guy in the original link who wanted NRA leadership head on a stake. Point being - I didn't have anything to do with the massacre; me and mine are responsible gun owners who know the law inside and out and go as far as we legally can in order to maximize our 2A rights under the law - but we don't sell off the books, we don't deal off the books, we aren't the problem. We didn't hurt anyone; but the gun control advocates cited in the article are more than willing to restrict my right to keep and bear arms in order to address their collective pain and suffering. Me and mine own and stockpile guns and ammo. We aren't hurting anyone else. We are not intervening in anyone else's lives. Don't intervene in ours. RMOTKING wrote:
And the website that posted the comments had an interesting one of it's own....
Basically saying "it's just like Liberals to want to hurt someone who hasn't hurt them"
You think most every American isn't hurt? You think most every American isn't somehow suffering? You think most every American doesn't feel that the country they live in isn't somehow diminished, at least a little?
People don't want to get over this and go back to their same lives with a business as usual mentality. They want change. They want to feel that tiny innocent defenseless children should be able to go to school and not get slaughtered.
Anyway.... this post feels long enough... I've tried to stay out of all these conversations because emotions are running way Way too hot. I'm not smart and skilled enough to change hearts and minds.
Michael Forrest |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 9:58 AM
Re: I am not trying to change anyone's heart and mind
navy9t1 wrote:Me and mine don't want to change anyone else's opinion. We just want to be left alone to exercise our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
That's why we stockpile guns and ammo.
OK..... But, from a non-gun person (me) it seems that if you already have X number of guns, and you feel the winds of change that are calling for gun reform, and you run out and buy MORE guns... I wonder why? How are you more safe? What do you need more guns for? My worry is.... if someone from the government knocks on your door and says.... "Our records show that you have X number of guns. You can keep the vast majority of them, but Z number of guns have now been ruled to be illegal for anyone who is not police or military and we have to confiscate them..." My worry is that people will start firing weapons and killing over that. That doesn't strike me as "live and let live..." Am I wrong? MF |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 10:03 AM
gun owners aren't wack
but stockpilers are.
as are the people to whom you (navy9t1) have alluded, who live in the Mountain West, have their own gun and ammunition manufactories, and live in a deliberately dispersed but nonetheless coordinated manner (via comms), for purposes of mutual support and protection. you call them 'law-abiding citizens', who practice 'live and let live'. I say they are wack jobs, lawless (insofar as they wish for an absence of laws, with the vacuum filled by their own version of 'common' sense), and (because they live apart, not among) fall short of the requirements of true citizenship in the classical sense.
they live in fear of the government. and in response stockpile weapons in number and power far greater than needed to a) hunt, b) target-shoot, c) protect themselves and their property, d) collect for investment/entertainment purposes. that is wack.
I'm not 'up' on the formal legalities of private gun and ammunition manufacture; I do not know what regulations apply, what licenses must be held. from your self-report, it appears 'you and yours' don't put much stock in securing such licenses. but I could be wrong. but if private, unlicensed manufacture of guns and ammunition is, at present, legal, it's still nuts, driven by unreasonable anxiety.
here is a truth: people such as 'you and yours' will never reconcile with people like my director friend Paul in Hollywood, father of a six-year-old, friend to a pastor in Newtown, CT, and pretty much over the top right now in terms of his emotion. 'righteousness' and 'crusade' begin to describe his feelings. both sides are right, insofar as they have the right to those thoughts and behaviors. but, both sides are wrong, in terms of how an open and free society must reconcile, pragmatically, the 1st and 2nd Amendments, while reducing gun violence.
my opinions/predictions are these: the Federal govt will re-institute bans on assault weapons and clips with more than N rounds, N being between 5 and 10 (cf. the President's statement this morning); certain states (think, blue) will enact more restrictions, and attempt to do so within the context of the USSC's clear instructions in DC v Heller; these states will not enact open-carry or concealed-carry laws, and will definitely not put armed guards on every school campus; certain other states (think, red) will remove restrictions; these states will enact open-carry and concealed-carry laws, and will definitely put armed guards on every school campus, and allow teachers to carry; finally, the NRA will continue to seek expanded gun rights, beyond the precepts of DC v Heller.
I also think the NRA will offer to provide armed guards for all schools around the country. an offer which will be embraced in some communities, and derided in others.
more than race, more than gender, this issue will divide the country. over the next decades, IMO we will see self-movement, self-segregation, with this issue being a prime motive force. I do not see any true reconciliation. some people will always fear the government's intrusion on their 2A rights. and other people will always fear guns in every way, shape, and form.
Last edited 12/19/2012 10:21 AM by mendicant98
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 10:51 AM
You are correct - that is not live and let live
MF
If you are asking me on a personal basis why I want more guns, or ammo, or if I feel more safe, or why I need more guns, or worrying about what will happen if the gummint knocks on my door - as a friend, I will tell you why.
But if you are asking as the background for a change in law that leads to the government knocking on my door looking to confiscate them, then that is the very antithesis of live and let live. Personally, I won't start a firefight over that - but I know lots of people who will. Randy Weaver did, and legally, he was completely justified in doing so.
I have 2A rights. I exercise them. How and why I exercise them is none of your business. Me and mine own guns and ammo. We haven't killed anyone. We don't deal weapons off the books. We aren't the problem. You cut through all our rhetoric, and the message is pretty simple. Leave us alone. Live and let live.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 11:01 AM
If you don't know the law, don't call us lawless
Mendi You display an appalling degree of ignorance in your use of the word lawless to describe people whose opinions you disagree with. Unlike you, and your self confessed lack of knowledge of federal and state firearms laws, we know the law inside and out. The law is what it is. Me and mine know federal and state gun laws inside and out, and we abide by them scrupulously. We are not lawless. To the contrary, we follow every point of the law. As far as accusing us of a lack of citizenship - wow. We are all educated, employed, law abiding citizens who live in smaller cities and towns. We are all engaged socially, culturally, and politically. We are exactly the type of citizens the founding fathers had in mind - self sufficient, educated, employed, law abiding, who mind our own business. Live and let live. mendicant98 wrote: but stockpilers are.
as are the people to whom you (navy9t1) have alluded, who live in the Mountain West, have their own gun and ammunition manufactories, and live in a deliberately dispersed but nonetheless coordinated manner (via comms), for purposes of mutual support and protection. you call them 'law-abiding citizens', who practice 'live and let live'. I say they are wack jobs, lawless (insofar as they wish for an absence of laws, with the vacuum filled by their own version of 'common' sense), and (because they live apart, not among) fall short of the requirements of true citizenship in the classical sense.
they live in fear of the government. and in response stockpile weapons in number and power far greater than needed to a) hunt, b) target-shoot, c) protect themselves and their property, d) collect for investment/entertainment purposes. that is wack.
I'm not 'up' on the formal legalities of private gun and ammunition manufacture; I do not know what regulations apply, what licenses must be held. from your self-report, it appears 'you and yours' don't put much stock in securing such licenses. but I could be wrong. but if private, unlicensed manufacture of guns and ammunition is, at present, legal, it's still nuts, driven by unreasonable anxiety.
here is a truth: people such as 'you and yours' will never reconcile with people like my director friend Paul in Hollywood, father of a six-year-old, friend to a pastor in Newtown, CT, and pretty much over the top right now in terms of his emotion. 'righteousness' and 'crusade' begin to describe his feelings. both sides are right, insofar as they have the right to those thoughts and behaviors. but, both sides are wrong, in terms of how an open and free society must reconcile, pragmatically, the 1st and 2nd Amendments, while reducing gun violence.
my opinions/predictions are these: the Federal govt will re-institute bans on assault weapons and clips with more than N rounds, N being between 5 and 10 (cf. the President's statement this morning); certain states (think, blue) will enact more restrictions, and attempt to do so within the context of the USSC's clear instructions in DC v Heller; these states will not enact open-carry or concealed-carry laws, and will definitely not put armed guards on every school campus; certain other states (think, red) will remove restrictions; these states will enact open-carry and concealed-carry laws, and will definitely put armed guards on every school campus, and allow teachers to carry; finally, the NRA will continue to seek expanded gun rights, beyond the precepts of DC v Heller.
I also think the NRA will offer to provide armed guards for all schools around the country. an offer which will be embraced in some communities, and derided in others.
more than race, more than gender, this issue will divide the country. over the next decades, IMO we will see self-movement, self-segregation, with this issue being a prime motive force. I do not see any true reconciliation. some people will always fear the government's intrusion on their 2A rights. and other people will always fear guns in every way, shape, and form. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 11:04 AM
Righteous and crusade are accurate words
Righteous and crusade are accurate words to describe your friends emotion. They are also very dangerous words - especially when wielded by a director in Hollywood who has no understanding of what kind of people are on the receiving end of what he considers a righteous crusade. mendicant98 wrote: but stockpilers are.
as are the people to whom you (navy9t1) have alluded, who live in the Mountain West, have their own gun and ammunition manufactories, and live in a deliberately dispersed but nonetheless coordinated manner (via comms), for purposes of mutual support and protection. you call them 'law-abiding citizens', who practice 'live and let live'. I say they are wack jobs, lawless (insofar as they wish for an absence of laws, with the vacuum filled by their own version of 'common' sense), and (because they live apart, not among) fall short of the requirements of true citizenship in the classical sense.
they live in fear of the government. and in response stockpile weapons in number and power far greater than needed to a) hunt, b) target-shoot, c) protect themselves and their property, d) collect for investment/entertainment purposes. that is wack.
I'm not 'up' on the formal legalities of private gun and ammunition manufacture; I do not know what regulations apply, what licenses must be held. from your self-report, it appears 'you and yours' don't put much stock in securing such licenses. but I could be wrong. but if private, unlicensed manufacture of guns and ammunition is, at present, legal, it's still nuts, driven by unreasonable anxiety.
here is a truth: people such as 'you and yours' will never reconcile with people like my director friend Paul in Hollywood, father of a six-year-old, friend to a pastor in Newtown, CT, and pretty much over the top right now in terms of his emotion. 'righteousness' and 'crusade' begin to describe his feelings. both sides are right, insofar as they have the right to those thoughts and behaviors. but, both sides are wrong, in terms of how an open and free society must reconcile, pragmatically, the 1st and 2nd Amendments, while reducing gun violence.
my opinions/predictions are these: the Federal govt will re-institute bans on assault weapons and clips with more than N rounds, N being between 5 and 10 (cf. the President's statement this morning); certain states (think, blue) will enact more restrictions, and attempt to do so within the context of the USSC's clear instructions in DC v Heller; these states will not enact open-carry or concealed-carry laws, and will definitely not put armed guards on every school campus; certain other states (think, red) will remove restrictions; these states will enact open-carry and concealed-carry laws, and will definitely put armed guards on every school campus, and allow teachers to carry; finally, the NRA will continue to seek expanded gun rights, beyond the precepts of DC v Heller.
I also think the NRA will offer to provide armed guards for all schools around the country. an offer which will be embraced in some communities, and derided in others.
more than race, more than gender, this issue will divide the country. over the next decades, IMO we will see self-movement, self-segregation, with this issue being a prime motive force. I do not see any true reconciliation. some people will always fear the government's intrusion on their 2A rights. and other people will always fear guns in every way, shape, and form. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 12:04 PM
glad I appall you
'you and yours', the ones with the off-the-books gun and ammunition manufactories at least, are still wack. and you are the one who brought them up; don't try and sugar-coat that behavior as something to be admired. and if those fear-driven wacks are part of the scrupulously law-abiding, self-contained communities which you hold up as the ideal of the FFs (big of you to let us know the intent of the FFs, BTW), then I disagree with your portrayal of those communities as the ideal to which we should all aspire. cite the law(s) which state that private, unregulated manufacture of unlicensed guns and ammunition is legal. go ahead, Mr. You-Don't-Know-The-Law-But-I-Assure-You-I-Do. Assure me. (PS: I've just scanned through some of the relevant laws at the Federal level, and understand a bit about the Gun Control Act of 1968, and the various levels of FFLs and FELs.) I don't fear or distrust the government. I see my obligation and role as a citizen as to participate, not just in local government/community governance, but in state and national government. I work. I pay my taxes, at all levels. I'm deeply concerned about deficits and debt, and don't see that as the problem of somebody else, outside my isolated community: it's my, and our, problem. I don't engage in barter or cash economies. I don't need guns for any purpose, be it hunting, protection, sport/play/entertainment, or investment. Like you, I seek to live among like-minded *citizens* (but not *too* alike). You and I will never see eye-to-eye on this matter. It is why I conclude this issue, more than any other, will divide the country, politically and corporately/individually: people will move and join communities of people of like mind over the next few decades, driven in large part by this issue. But where there are wack-jobs stockpiling weapons off-the-books: It's lawlessness driven by irrational fear and distrust. And communities of law-abiding citizens which harbor/wink at this behavior, need to take a hard look at themselves. PS: According to CDC, firearms mortality will exceed motor vehicle mortality before 2015. Link. FWLIW. PPS: Another point: your ideal communities in the Mountain West are isolated and self-sufficient. They are still part of the national problem of gun violence. Whether they accept their responsibility, or not. We are all responsible; there is no viable rationale for saying, I'm not part of the problem, I bear no responsibility. PPPS: I don't have a problem with the vast majority of gun-owners. None. Zero. They have and hold their weapons for hunting, reasonable protection, investment, or sport/entertainment. They understand fully the threat to others which those weapons represent, and act accordingly and responsibly. You brought up the folks, at the margin (at least, I believe they are at the margin), who distrust and/or fear government, to the extent they manufacture guns and ammunition off the books, unregulated and unlicensed. You think that extreme/marginal behavior is OK. I do not. I call it wack.
Last edited 12/19/2012 12:21 PM by mendicant98
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 12:07 PM
Re: Righteous and crusade are accurate words
That sounds like a threat. Care to verify?
To be clear (since apparently I was not): I find my friend Paul's position to be borderline extremist. I find the position of 'you and yours', who have off-the-books manufactories, to be extremist. I find neither position helpful.
Last edited 12/19/2012 2:09 PM by mendicant98
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 12:48 PM
Re: You are correct - that is not live and let live
How do you differentiate how you and yours deal with guns and ammo versus those who have committed murder and crimes using guns? I understand your live and let live, but I fail to see how society can make choices which protect innocent lives, particularly those of our children.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 1:10 PM
Re: I am not trying to change anyone's heart and mind
RMOTKING wrote:
But, from a non-gun person (me) it seems that if you already have X number of guns, and you feel the winds of change that are calling for gun reform, and you run out and buy MORE guns... I wonder why? How are you more safe? What do you need more guns for?
Is the answer to hoarding before any threat of prohibition simply "because it will be banned?" Seriously, if a ban on bottled wine were upcoming, don't you think we would see a run on bottled wine? It's simple economics. The price of a good is known (or at leased assessed on a risk adjusted basis) to be on the way to infinity; so why not buy a few now before it gets there. I don't think anyone needs to claim safety to respond to the threat of a ban by buying more guns. I also don't think they need to claim "need." Isn't "what if my existing gun breaks" enough of a reason to buy a spare when spares won't be readily available in the future? It's ironic that gun legislation does more to put guns in the hands of people than the NRA does.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 2:14 PM
I am not the one using the words righteous and crusade
Having an overly emotional man use the words righteous and crusade is dangerous. Since I am not the one using those words, and I am not the one threatening to take action that amounts to a righteous crusade, I don't believe I have anything to verify.
I don't have a problem with you calling me an extremist; your opinion, although based on gun sales the last few days, I suspect there are a lot more Americans on my side of the issue than yours. Neither here nor there. Difference of opinion.
I do have a problem with you referring to my behavior as illegal. It is not. Like I said, I know the federal and state laws inside and out on this.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 2:17 PM
How I differentiate me and mine
GHC I differentiate me and mine by our behavior. We use our guns responsibly, in accordance with the law. No different than you differentiating between yourself, as a casual / social / responsible drinker and an alcoholic who gets in a car and kills someone. Not every social drinker is responsible for the 10,000 dead by DUI last year; not every law abiding gun owner is responsible for the 10,000 dead by firearms. You can't blame me for what the killer in Connecticut did anymore than I can blame casual social drinkers for the 35 people who were killed yesterday by drunk drivers. GrayhairedCard wrote: How do you differentiate how you and yours deal with guns and ammo versus those who have committed murder and crimes using guns? I understand your live and let live, but I fail to see how society can make choices which protect innocent lives, particularly those of our children. |
|
Reply |
Quote |
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2012 2:25 PM
Re: I am not the one using the words righteous and crusade
So, you confirm you are manufacturing guns and ammunition without a FFL Type 10 license? Because that's what you have asserted 'you and yours' do.
The vast majority of gun owners are not extremists, and are responsible, lawful, etc etc. But the descriptions you have made of 'you and yours', are descriptions, not of patriots, but of extremists, fearful and distrustful of government, and living deliberately outside it as much as possible. (Talk about 'righteous' and 'crusade'.)
And to point to upticks in gun sales as evidence of having 'more Americans on (your) side than (mine)' is specious. WTH, it could be exactly as PL says, a market response to a possible decrease in a commodity (assault weapons), and nothing more.
|
|
Reply |
Quote |
