Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: In an effort to find some common ground.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: In an effort to find some common ground. Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/2/2013 5:42:15 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

But the *real* victims, like the 28 at Newport? Be lucky to find even a peripheral mention of them.... Maybe in conjunction with putting armed guards in schools etc (ie, more guns), but that'd be it.



They are the *real* victims, left to the criminal element people like you made a safe environment for.

And yes, if "every single American (who was physically able) carried a loaded gun strapped to their belt" you'd find a safer and more polite society in short order, the criminal element having been dispatched quite readily. As to the annualized gun deaths, the dispatching of the criminal element would definitely have an impact.


A "more polite society"....?

Conjures up images of "walking around on eggshells" and avoiding eye contact with strangers etc, just in case.... But if that's your idea of "freedom" and of feeling safe, good luck with that.

And I'm not convinced average Jo Public will be doing the despatching in a confrontation with the criminally inclined, either. Looks like Desi isn't, either - what are you basing that on?

Focus.


D C where it is still almost impossible to jump through all the hopes to get a gun is already like that while in Alabama with no registration and must issue ccp laws is one of the freindlest places I have ever lived, and yes I was based in the D C area.

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/2/2013 5:44:12 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
How?

Dead easy!
The same way they did that in Oz and the UK and many other places...
Just surround the area and march in with a SWAT team and the local police.
Arrest every one of them unless they can justify a damned good reason not to.
Confiscate every piece of narcotics and any firearms (and any other offensive weapon) they find.

And don't say it can't be done because it can, and has been, in other countries.
Unless of course your police are too lilly-livered to confront them.

Edit to add: they still do that at random intervals in the UK where rumours start rumbling that the gangs are getting restless again.


Darn pesky 4th admendment says we can't do that

Oz isn't that reliant on big brother (such as video surveillance), but yes, known trouble spots for anti-social behaviour soon attract them.

But re what the 4th amendment doesn't allow, there's ways around anything.

The Police here can't search anyone just because, not even with a strong hunch. That said, when they conduct blitzes on night-spots or public transport etc, there's nothing preventing them taking their drug sniffer dogs along with them. And yes, they can and do use a lot of discretion on circumstances.

Not saying your 4th amendment isn't ironclad; it's more that you are inclined to talk in absolutes....

Focus.


If it isn't absolute it goes away completly.

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/2/2013 9:40:43 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
It's strange, at least to me, that the 4th (and the 2nd) is an amendment that cannot be amended or even abolished!!
If something can be amended, rewritten or revoked, those amendments in themselves can be subject to the same proceedure. Nothing is ever set in stone.


It can be amended and/or repealed, but it takes an amendment to do so. Case in point: the 18th Amendment. The 18th Amendment brought to the US Prohibition. The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment. So, it would take 34 States to ratify an Amendment that amends or repeals an Amendment.



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/2/2013 9:56:45 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline
Surround the area? And what 'area' would that be? A primarily black area? Primarily Muslim? Primarily poor? Asian? Just go in with no evidence of a crime, and make the residents give a 'good reason' as to why they should have the same rights as other folk?

And unless the police are are willing to be bigoted criminals themselves, they are 'lilly livered'?

Tough talk from behind a keyboard.


quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
How?

Dead easy!
The same way they did that in Oz and the UK and many other places...
Just surround the area and march in with a SWAT team and the local police.
Arrest every one of them unless they can justify a damned good reason not to.
Confiscate every piece of narcotics and any firearms (and any other offensive weapon) they find.

And don't say it can't be done because it can, and has been, in other countries.
Unless of course your police are too lilly-livered to confront them.

Edit to add: they still do that at random intervals in the UK where rumours start rumbling that the gangs are getting restless again.




< Message edited by Powergamz1 -- 2/2/2013 9:57:02 PM >


_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/2/2013 10:45:44 PM   
Real0ne


Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
Typical pro-gun rhetoric.

When did you last see the general public go round to their local gang nutters and shoot the fuckers??
I have never seen that on the news - ever!

They are always saying its the legal and responsible owners being vilified and the criminals are left free to ransack their neighbourhood. But they fail to see that these gang nutters would also have their guns taken away from them too!!





all you need is a piece of pipe a fire cracker and marble to put a hole in someone.

people had more rights in england prior to the revolution than we do here today.




http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/blackstone_bk1ch1.asp

The RIGHTS OF PERSONS.

BOOK I.

Ch. 1.

magna carta u, that no freeman fhall be outlawed, that is, put out of the protection and benefit of the laws, but according to the law of the land. By 2 Edw. III. c. 8. and 11 Ric. II. c. 10. it is enacted, that no commands or letters fhall be fent under the great feal, or the little feal, the fignet, or privy feal, in difturbance of the law ; or to difturb or delay common right : and, though fuch commandments fhould come, the judges fhall not ceafe to do right. And by 1 W. & M. ft. 2 : c. 2. it is declared, that the pretended power of fufpending, or difpenfing with laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority without confent of parliament, is illegal.

NOT only the fubftantial part, or judicial decifions, of the law, but alfo the formal part, or method of proceeding, cannot be altered but by parliament ; for if once thofe outworks were demolifhed, there would be no inlet to all manner of innovation in the body of the law itfelf. The king, it is true, may erect new courts of juftice ; but then they muft proceed according to the old eftablifhed forms of the common law. For which reafon it is declared in the ftatute 16 Car. I. c. 10. upon the diffolution of the court of ftarchamber, that neither his majefty, nor his privy council, have any jurifdiction, power, or authority by Englifh bill, petition, articles, libel (which were the courfe of proceeding in the ftarchamber, borrowed from the civil law) or by any other arbitrary way whatfoever, to examine, or draw into queftion, determine or difpofe of the lands or goods of any fubjects of this kingdom ; but that the fame ought to be tried and determined in the ordinary courts of juftice, and by courfe of law.

4. IF there fhould happen any uncommon injury, or infringement of the rights beforementioned, which the ordinary courfe of law is too defective to reach, there ftill remains a fourth fubordinate right appertaining to every individual, namely, the right of petitioning the king, or either houfe of parliament, for the

.{FS}

u c. 29.

.{FE}

redrefs

.P 139

The RIGHTS OF PERSONS.

BOOK I.

Ch. 1.

redrefs of grievances. In Russia we are told w that the czar Peter eftablifhed a law, that no fubject might petition the throne, till he had firft petitioned two different minifters of ftate. (<--wow just like the way it is in the US today! small world!)In café he obtained juftice from neither, he might then prefent a third petition to the prince ; but upon pain of death, if found to be in the wrong. The confequence of which was, that no one dared to offer fuch third petition ; and grievances feldom falling under the notice of the fovereign, he had little opportunity to redrefs them. The reftrictions, for fome there are, which are laid upon petitioning in England, are of a nature extremely different ; and while they promote the fpirit of peace, they are no check upon that of liberty. Care only muft be taken, left, under the pretence of petitioning, the fubject be guilty of any riot or tumult ; as happened in the opening of the memorable parliament in 1640 : and, to prevent this, it is provided by the ftatute 13 Car. II. ft. 1. c. 5. that no petition to the king, or either houfe of parliament, for any alterations in church or ftate, fhall be figned by above twenty perfons, unlefs the matter thereof be approved by three juftices of the peace or the major part of the grand jury, in the country ; and in London by the lord mayor, aldermen, and common council ; nor fhall any petition be prefented by more than two perfons at a time. But under thefe regulations , it is declared by the ftatute 1 W. & M. ft. 2. c. 2. that the fubject hath a right to petition ; and that all commitments and profecutions for fuch petitioning are illegal.

5. THE fifth and laft auxiliary right of the fubject, that I fhall at prefent mention, is that of having arms for their defence, fuitable to their condition and degree, and fuch as are allowed by law. Which is alfo declared by the fame ftatute 1 W. & M. ft. 2. c. 2. and is indeed a public allowance, under due reftrictions, of the natural right of refiftance and felf-prefervation, when the fanctions of fociety and laws are found infufficient to reftrain the violence of oppreffion. (good luck defending your "natural" rights in the US, they simply do not acknowledge in our commercial legal system)
.{FS}

w Montefq. Sp. L. 12. 26.

.{FE}

S 2

IN

.P 140

The RIGHTS OF PERSONS.

BOOK I.

Ch. 1.

IN thefe feveral articles confift the rights, or, as they are frequently termed, the liberties of Englifhmen : liberties more generally talked of, than thoroughly underftood ; and yet highly neceffary to be perfectly known and confidered by every man of rank or property, left his ignorance of the points whereon it is founded fhould hurry him into faction and licentioufnefs on the one hand, or a pufillanimous indifference and criminal fubmiffion on the other. And we have feen that thefe rights confift, primarily, in the free enjoyment of perfonal fecurity, of perfonal liberty, and of private property. So long as thefe remain inviolate, the fubject is perfectly free ; for every fpecies of compulfive tyranny and oppreffion muft act in oppofition to one or other of thefe rights, having no other object upon which it can poffibly be employed. To preferve thefe from violation, it is neceffary that the conftitution of parliaments be fupported in it's full vigor ; and limits certainly known, be fet to the royal prerogative. And, laftly, to vindicate thefe rights, when actually violated or attacked, the fubjects of England are entitled, in the firft place, to the regular adminiftration and free courfe of juftice in the courts of law ; next to the right of petitioning the king and parliament for redrefs of grievances ; and laftly to the right of having and ufing arms for felf-prefervation and defence. And all thefe rights and liberties it is our birthright to enjoy entire ; unlefs where the laws of our country have laid them under neceffary reftraints. Reftraints in themfelves fo gentle and moderate, 23 will appear upon farther enquiry, that no man of fenfe or probity would wifh to fee them flackened. For all of us have it in our choice to do every thing that a good man would defire to do ; and are reftrained from nothing, but what would be pernicious either to ourfelves or our fellow citizens. So that this review of our fituation may fully juftify the obfervation of a learned French author, who indeed generally both thought and wrote in the fpirit of genuine freedom x; and who hath not fcrupled to profefs, even

.{FS}

z Montefq. Sp. L. 11. 5.

.{FE}

in

.P 141

The RIGHTS OF PERSONS.

BOOK I.

Ch. 1.

in the very bofom of his native coglifh is the only nation in the world, where political or civil liberty is the direct end of it's conftitution. Recommending therefore to the ftudent in our laws a farther and more accurate feach into this extenfive and important title, I fhall clofe my remarks upon it with the expiring wifh of the famous father Paul to his country,

“ESTO PERPETUA !”






this shit was not invented out of thin air, it was the agreements made dating as far back and prior to the feudal system.

its a natural right, like it or not.

and the purpose of arms are for self defense and self preservation like it or not.

now if you brits or aussies decided you dont want them well that is your business as much as it is our business to keep them

Just make sure to scream really loud for the queen to save you when you are getting your ass beaten to a pulp and laying there dying. I am sure a police officer will be right there to prevent that right? right!







< Message edited by Real0ne -- 2/2/2013 10:52:21 PM >


_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 2:06:27 AM   
Focus50


Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

Oz isn't that reliant on big brother (such as video surveillance), but yes, known trouble spots for anti-social behaviour soon attract them.

But re what the 4th amendment doesn't allow, there's ways around anything.

The Police here can't search anyone just because, not even with a strong hunch. That said, when they conduct blitzes on night-spots or public transport etc, there's nothing preventing them taking their drug sniffer dogs along with them. And yes, they can and do use a lot of discretion on circumstances.

Not saying your 4th amendment isn't ironclad; it's more that you are inclined to talk in absolutes....


If it isn't absolute it goes away completly.


I..... don't know what that means....

Focus.


_____________________________

Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>

Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 3:28:56 AM   
Nosathro


Posts: 3319
Joined: 9/25/2005
From: Orange County, California
Status: offline




quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
It's strange, at least to me, that the 4th (and the 2nd) is an amendment that cannot be amended or even abolished!!
If something can be amended, rewritten or revoked, those amendments in themselves can be subject to the same proceedure. Nothing is ever set in stone.


It can be amended and/or repealed, but it takes an amendment to do so. Case in point: the 18th Amendment. The 18th Amendment brought to the US Prohibition. The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment. So, it would take 34 States to ratify an Amendment that amends or repeals an Amendment.




Yes and it does not happen overnight, it takes long time. If you recall the women equal right amendment, it was first introduce in Congress in 1972...it was not past due to not making the ratification dead line of June 1982.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 11:42:41 AM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50

Oz isn't that reliant on big brother (such as video surveillance), but yes, known trouble spots for anti-social behaviour soon attract them.

But re what the 4th amendment doesn't allow, there's ways around anything.

The Police here can't search anyone just because, not even with a strong hunch. That said, when they conduct blitzes on night-spots or public transport etc, there's nothing preventing them taking their drug sniffer dogs along with them. And yes, they can and do use a lot of discretion on circumstances.

Not saying your 4th amendment isn't ironclad; it's more that you are inclined to talk in absolutes....


If it isn't absolute it goes away completly.


I..... don't know what that means....

Focus.


It means that once you start making excuses to work around a limitation pretty soon any excuse will do, repealing the 4th would be more honest.

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 12:44:27 PM   
Focus50


Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

It means that once you start making excuses to work around a limitation pretty soon any excuse will do, repealing the 4th would be more honest.


Ahhhh, you do only believe in the two extremes of something and nothing in between. That anything is either black or white with zero "shades of grey"....

As I said, you talk in absolutes - I'm one of those stuck living in the real world....

Focus.


_____________________________

Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>

Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 3:22:51 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

NOT only the fubftantial part, or judicial decifions, of the law, but alfo the formal part [etc] . . . .


RO, though they frequently used what looks like an 'f' in pre-18th Century script, it was really an 's'.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 3:37:15 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

It means that once you start making excuses to work around a limitation pretty soon any excuse will do, repealing the 4th would be more honest.


Ahhhh, you do only believe in the two extremes of something and nothing in between. That anything is either black or white with zero "shades of grey"....

As I said, you talk in absolutes - I'm one of those stuck living in the real world....

Focus.




Actually, since 9/11 all a detective has to tell the judge is he suspects a terrorist link.

Defense attorneys have tried to appeal on the grounds that there were no terrorist links and no proof of terrorist links, but that has not been all too successful.

Probable cause is easier to prove in searching a vehicle after a traffic stop.

When I was a deputy, the investigators tried for sic months to get a warrant for a suspected meth lab. Their hunch was proven when the building blew up, killing everyone inside.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 5:16:44 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

It means that once you start making excuses to work around a limitation pretty soon any excuse will do, repealing the 4th would be more honest.


Ahhhh, you do only believe in the two extremes of something and nothing in between. That anything is either black or white with zero "shades of grey"....

As I said, you talk in absolutes - I'm one of those stuck living in the real world....

Focus.


To see my point you need only to look at what has happened with the interstate commerce clause.

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/3/2013 5:18:42 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
My point exactly once you start eroding a right prtty soon there is nothing left of it. And that is the real world.

< Message edited by BamaD -- 2/3/2013 5:19:20 PM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/4/2013 11:48:54 AM   
Focus50


Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Actually, since 9/11 all a detective has to tell the judge is he suspects a terrorist link.

Defense attorneys have tried to appeal on the grounds that there were no terrorist links and no proof of terrorist links, but that has not been all too successful.


I don't doubt that at all....

The "... and justice for all" part of your pledge has taken quite a bruising since 9/11, and not just by circumventing the rights of foreign nationals with Guantonamo and wherever else the CIA was spiriting alleged terrorists to be tort..., errrr, interrogated. That's not to say I have a lot of sympathy for those sent there but, you know, this is how the "land of the free" operates?

But more to the point and as you've suggested yourself, one mention of the 'T' word by any of your bewildering array of law enforcement or security agencies and the rights of your own citizens evaporate as well. Like I said, guns aside, we've probably got more rights and freedoms here in Oz than you have in the US....

Focus.


_____________________________

Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>

Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/4/2013 12:10:05 PM   
Focus50


Posts: 3962
Joined: 12/28/2004
From: Newcastle, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

My point exactly once you start eroding a right prtty soon there is nothing left of it. And that is the real world.


So you don't believe in moving with the times; evolution etc? To change anything only amounts to "erosion"? Cos my "real world" is about evolving (including the law), even when it's not always for the individual best. Learning from mistakes of the past etc.

In 1902, there was a statute here requiring anyone wishing to drive a "horseless carriage" in a town's main street to have an adult walk 25ft in front carrying a red lantern (presumably to avoid startling horses). I know this because it's one of many long since redundant laws recently repealed and made for an amusing story in the newspaper.

To me, you just continue to make the same flawed argument that you don't fix anything when it's broken. That's living in denial - some "real world"....

Focus.


_____________________________

Never underestimate the persuasive power of stupid people in large groups. <unknown>

Your food is for eating, not torturing. <my mum> (Errm, when I was a kid)

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/4/2013 12:37:12 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

My point exactly once you start eroding a right prtty soon there is nothing left of it. And that is the real world.


So you don't believe in moving with the times; evolution etc? To change anything only amounts to "erosion"? Cos my "real world" is about evolving (including the law), even when it's not always for the individual best. Learning from mistakes of the past etc.

In 1902, there was a statute here requiring anyone wishing to drive a "horseless carriage" in a town's main street to have an adult walk 25ft in front carrying a red lantern (presumably to avoid startling horses). I know this because it's one of many long since redundant laws recently repealed and made for an amusing story in the newspaper.

To me, you just continue to make the same flawed argument that you don't fix anything when it's broken. That's living in denial - some "real world"....

Focus.


Nope I just don't believe in change for the sake of change;
we have a sying " If it ain't broke don't fix it" the Constitution isn't broke.
Until 2001 interacial marrage was againt the Alabama Constitution and thus (although unenforced) illegal, I voted for the repeal of that clause, it was broke so we fixed it.

< Message edited by BamaD -- 2/4/2013 12:43:09 PM >

(in reply to Focus50)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/5/2013 1:28:20 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
What strikes me is how little the gun lobby cares about the victims of gun violence. Their "rights" are always more important than anything else.


How can you say this? The gun lobby cares more about the victims than the anti-gunners, as the gun lobby wishes them armed and capable of their own defense instead of the emotional feel good rhetoric of disarmament in the face of criminal activity. It's the anti-gunners who desire Big Brother defense and think hiding, cowering and grabbing the scissors is laudable. The more victims there are the more the anti-gunners cry tears of love as it plays into their safety above all else utopian rhetoric.






Yachtie,

You are right about one thing, the gun lobby wants to sell more guns. Its the Somalia plan of public safety. 300+ Million guns in the USA already, and its just not enough......

And as you've noted, the Gun Lobby doesn't feel any responsibility for the victims of its business.

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/5/2013 2:32:01 PM   
igor2003


Posts: 1718
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Igor2003
Anyway, I sincerely doubt that my fear of having a gun turned on me is any greater than your own fear of the same. However, if such a situation should ever occur I hope that I don't end up with an epitaph that reads, "I turned in my gun like the government said. The other guy didn't, and now I'm dead."


There wouldn't be any 'however' for me - I don't even have to consider the eventuality that a gun will be turned on me. I doubt that, really, you'd have as little fear as I have about being faced with a gun-attacker, no matter how small the chance of that happening in your particular neck of the woods. If you had no fear at all, you'd not feel the need for a gun. It would make no sense to you have one, just as it doesn't me. On the other hand if you *did* have a gun, it'd be useless to you unless there was some minimum of fear - enough to motivate your thinking about it and keep you just alert enough to be ready to use it.

By way of comparison: many moons ago, when I was an avid karate-practitioner, I'd stand in bars imagining this attack or that so that I'd be ready for such an attack. Useless knowing the moves if I was caught off guard, I thought. But my only achievement, really, was to make myself unnecessarily anxious and edgy. Nobody ever did make that sudden move on me. My martial arts 'weapons' were a burden, not an asset. Quite paradoxical.


There is always a possibility (notice I said possibility, not probability) that a "however" may occur. It may not be from a person with a gun. It could be from being confronted by more than one assailant. It could be from one (or more) assailant(s) with a knife or club. Every day, in every country, people are assaulted, beaten, robbed, and murdered. And many of those people...maybe even most of those people...like you, thought they had, and would have, no "need" to defend themselves, and so were not prepared. I learned long ago that it is much better to have something and not need it, rather than to need it and not have it.

Unlike you, many...maybe even most...people don't let an item like a firearm, or in your case a knowledge of karate, create paranoia. To me, that sounds like a personal problem. Yours.

_____________________________

If the women don't find you handsome they should at least find you handy. - Red Green

At my age erections are like cops...there's never one around when you need it!

Never miss a good chance to shut up. - Will Rogers


(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/5/2013 3:07:28 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

There is always a possibility (notice I said possibility, not probability) that a "however" may occur. It may not be from a person with a gun. It could be from being confronted by more than one assailant. It could be from one (or more) assailant(s) with a knife or club. Every day, in every country, people are assaulted, beaten, robbed, and murdered. And many of those people...maybe even most of those people...like you, thought they had, and would have, no "need" to defend themselves, and so were not prepared. I learned long ago that it is much better to have something and not need it, rather than to need it and not have it.


There is always that possibility - but, here, it's too small to matter. At least, that's true in the case of being attacked by a gun-user. For me to carry a gun in case of attack by another gun-user would make even less sense than wearing protective armour in case I get hit by a car when crossing the road.


quote:


Unlike you, many...maybe even most...people don't let an item like a firearm, or in your case a knowledge of karate, create paranoia. To me, that sounds like a personal problem. Yours.


As I was at great pains to explain, Igor, it isn't about paranoia. It's about the necessary state of mind to be able to use your skills and/or weapon.

< Message edited by PeonForHer -- 2/5/2013 3:50:21 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to igor2003)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: In an effort to find some common ground. - 2/5/2013 3:38:14 PM   
deathtothepixies


Posts: 683
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Focus50


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

My point exactly once you start eroding a right prtty soon there is nothing left of it. And that is the real world.


So you don't believe in moving with the times; evolution etc? To change anything only amounts to "erosion"? Cos my "real world" is about evolving (including the law), even when it's not always for the individual best. Learning from mistakes of the past etc.

In 1902, there was a statute here requiring anyone wishing to drive a "horseless carriage" in a town's main street to have an adult walk 25ft in front carrying a red lantern (presumably to avoid startling horses). I know this because it's one of many long since redundant laws recently repealed and made for an amusing story in the newspaper.

To me, you just continue to make the same flawed argument that you don't fix anything when it's broken. That's living in denial - some "real world"....

Focus.


Nope I just don't believe in change for the sake of change;
we have a sying " If it ain't broke don't fix it" the Constitution isn't broke.
Until 2001 interacial marrage was againt the Alabama Constitution and thus (although unenforced) illegal, I voted for the repeal of that clause, it was broke so we fixed it.


maybe the constitution isn't broken, but maybe it needs ammending? It is quite old after all......

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: In an effort to find some common ground. Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.125