Since gun addicts like to present anecdotal "evidences". . . here is another one!

I didn't realize that that was actually the goal....who knew?

 

Exactly.

American Leftninnies do not trust their countrymen with 11 bullets, but they have no problem trusting the muslim brotherhood with a squadron of F-16s...der....

 

So the govt needs "some defense" but other people don't? I prefer equality in peoples' liberty to defend themselves.

Then that should include Barack Obama. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander...

Ah, I see. Well, why would you trust the elected government more than the individuals...when that elected government is elected by those individuals?

 

How do you regard your neighbor who is an elected representative or *gasp* a government officer? Because - and I realize you guys have forgotten this, or just plain disregard it - that's what America's all about.

 

I don't live in the Hamptons so my neighbor isn't an elected representative. The idea that the people in DC are the salt of the Earth, the common man, is largely a fairy tale. Furthermore, if my neighbor did somehow manage to win a Senate seat then I would trust him much less and rightfully so. Your argument is a non-starter. For instance, I trust my neighbor but I don't trust the KKK. If my neighbor joins the KKK then I cease trusting him. That isn't too hard of a concept to understand, is it?

Would you care to address the rest of my post now? Why should I be expected to trust a body that has put Americans into concentration camps based on ethnicity, imprisons people without a trial, gave LSD to the unsuspecting and let black men suffer with syphilis? Furthermore, why in the world do you trust them?

 

Because, simply, we have the power to vote out members of that body if they are doing what we don't like. The government in place today is not putting Americans in concentration camps, nor are they experimenting on people with LSD. And the citizens who were around when that was going on were largely complicit in their representatives' actions - at least the ones they knew about.

By contrast, you cannot vote your neighbor out of your neighborhood if he joins the KKK or participates in some other activity you disapprove of. You actually have more say in who your government reps are than in who your neighbor is, unless you live in an exclusive, psuedo-fascist homeowners association where you get to vote on who's allowed in.

It doesn't make sense that you would fear the risk of a slowly moving, majority-rule, democratic government's potential to break your trust more than that of a single-minded neighbor who can, at any moment, take action without any mind to how you will be impacted or what your opinion is. I agree that the government can do more damage when they take improper action (case in point, Japanese-American concentration camps). But the likelihood is far lower than it is for your neighbor to screw over.

 

My neighbor doesn't have the power wielded by the gov't which means that it is safer to trust him. Also, how do you know that the gov't isn't doing those things? Nobody knew that the gov't was drugging people with LSD while they were doing it. And, the government IS imprisoning people without a trial. That is happening today.

 

But "IF" the person outside had been a drug crazed manic the old man would have been beaten to death.

Where did you see the pro gun thread that you described??? I haven't even see a thread opposing background checks. I have never sold a gun to an individual because I don't want to put one of my guns into the hands of a criminal or a nut.

 

I never said anything about opposition to background checks, but here are four quotes from four different running threads full of people saying we need to keep our guns in order to resist the "tyranny" of our government and attempting, in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook tragedy, to suggest that gun ownership is somehow making America a safer place.

That last one is comical, but too many people take seriously the notion that we need to arm ourselves so we can overthrow our own government if necessary.

 

um excuse me, could you please quote where i said anything about overthrowing our government??? if you cant then dont include me in your jibberish.

 

What is a "gun addict"? And what exactly about it compelled you to post it?

 

If you woke and heard someone breaking in downstairs possibly looking for you to rape you you would brandish a light flashlight and go down and confront them?

 

Nope! I would lock myself in the bathroom and call the police!

No need to kill anyone! Even my body isn't worth someone's life! I know. . .you're going to say (as some of your best friends) that it's because I am an "elderly woman," and no one would want to rape me anyway!

Well, I haven't always been "elderly," but I have ALWAYS been determined to never kill someone!

 

If there were no cars, then 10,000 children wouldn't have died in car accidents during the time span that this single girl died from a gun.

 

This myth has been thoroughly and completely debunked.

Which is why I am not surprised in the least to see you still promoting this lie Sadomy.

- - - Updated - - -

You are a worthless human being....That's what your post says to everyone reading it.

 

Well that's awesome for you. I won't be offering up any of the female members of my family. I'd shoot someone square between the eyes first. If you are true to your convictions you would send me some of your business cards so if I ever found myself in that position instead of opening fire I could just give the would be rapist your card and he could do his deed over at your place with your younger relatives.

 

Well you are saying that is what this person should have done.

And when they break down the bathroom door and pull out that knife they are carrying?

How about your life when they go to cut your throat after they have raped you? You know, no witnesses.

Never read or saw The Boston Strangler I guess.

And if they were about to kill your child and you had a gun sitting there you could use to stop them? You wouldn't? Please explain the morality of that choice.

 

Oops! Bad things happen....for every accident like this there are scores of uses that are prper and the home invasion is real.

 

Disagree on positions all you want but that's a total dick thing to post.

 

I give a (*)(*)(*)(*). When someone is advocating that women just allow their bodies to be used by a rapist rather than harming said rapist then I really don't care if your sensibilities are offended. Just be (*)(*)(*)(*)ing offended.

 

What a clever and sensitive comment!
You must be so proud!

- - - Updated - - -

Is that what you got out of my post? That I "advocate for women to just allow their body to be used by rapists?

Yep. .. that is a dick of a comment! And it demonstrates such intelligence and sensitivity!

 

Perhaps I misunderstood your position. If so, I will apologize. Are you saying that it is reasonable for a woman to use deadly force to keep from being raped or not?

 

loads of anti-gunners are shouting "what if..."
He'll pay for his stupidity, either through the law and/or his own conscience. Which is more terrible? He is obviously not a mass murderer, just a simple man whose outlook now is to suffer the rest of his life. How much more justice do you need? Still want the whole of society to pay his price? Or is the originator good enough to feed to the system? Need more blood?
He'll pay for it, rest assured.

 

And the greatest majority of home invasion do not have to result in someone dying. . .unless there is a gun involved!

I prefer to lose a TV and a lap top than to take a life.

And I don't really care what other think about this. This has been my philosophy for as long as I've been old enough to think, and it was my parents' philosophy before me, and it is that of all my brothers and sisters, and it will not change because of the general paranoia and the fear to lose a "precious" material possession that is rampant in the US.

"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."

How many life would have been spared if guns had not been part of the equation?

How many "home invasions" have been triggered because a home was targeted, NOT because of the "Flat screen TV," or the "diamond ring," but because it was known that that house had GUNS to be stolen!

One of my friend was very proud to tell me he was burglarized when he was away on vacation and his 20+ collection of firearm was stolen. Nothing else! And now he has that collection almost entirely rebuilt!. . .and he spreads that story all around!

What do you think will happen to his new collection of firearms?

And what do you think happened to the last one?

 

Tired old rhetoric. People buy guns to protect themselves, not their television.