Guns

[b_dubb]

Good point: So why are some against them? Why is it assumed that a gun user knows how to use one? Why is it assumed they'll know when not to use one? Why is it assumed they're of sound mind and aptitude to have one?

Why do you hate 'Murica?

[Yorkshire pud]

Why do you hate 'Murica?

I've got to give credit there..I couldn't carry off that outfit in the same style he has.

[Mgs1986]

Listen, point is this, without them we couldn't defend ourselves, and let me see, do you see the fighting in the middle east, gee those people didn't have much but assault weapons "full autos none the less" and some rpgs and other things here and their, we've been at war with them since 2003...hmmm. Point is again...gun control and taking away our constitutional rights to be on PAR with the military should never be molested, and the backround check thing is understandable. Point is, it is heritage in this country, I wouldn't expect a new ager or some european fool who has lived as "Subject" we're not "subjects" we're the people, and we have more power than our government. Just seems like most american's don't give a damn anymore or just fear a power hungry socialist government.

[Mgs1986]

And another thing, you're one sorry smug son of a bitch Pud, I don't give a damn if people kiss your ass out of some distorted relevance for you pseudo intelligence. To me you sound like part of the problem, and being healthy and educated is a common sense thing, meanwhile...you're "stone age" comment is pretty dumb considering we whipped the shit out of you're ancestors and kicked them hell out of our country, Sad part is that they could have defeated us, but their hubris and pride and superiority complex,which sadly most of your kind are endowed with by default for some reason, cost them...so in my eyes, which doesn't mean much, you can pose no valid points to me. All due respect given...and both my middle fingers pointed at you.

[Yorkshire pud]

And another thing, you're one sorry smug son of a bitch Pud, I don't give a damn if people kiss your ass out of some distorted relevance for you pseudo intelligence. To me you sound like part of the problem, and being healthy and educated is a common sense thing, meanwhile...you're "stone age" comment is pretty dumb considering we whipped the shit out of you're ancestors and kicked them hell out of our country, Sad part is that they could have defeated us, but their hubris and pride and superiority complex,which sadly most of your kind are endowed with by default for some reason, cost them...so in my eyes, which doesn't mean much, you can pose no valid points to me. All due respect given...and both my middle fingers pointed at you.

...Therein lies the problem...you're still living in the 18th century. When men ruled the roost, when blacks still had no rights, when things were pretty primitive compared with today...But hey, you want to live like it's Little house on the Prairie, bless you.

[Yorkshire pud]

Listen, point is this, without them we couldn't defend ourselves, and let me see, do you see the fighting in the middle east, gee those people didn't have much but assault weapons "full autos none the less" and some rpgs and other things here and their, we've been at war with them since 2003...hmmm. Point is again...gun control and taking away our constitutional rights to be on PAR with the military should never be molested, and the backround check thing is understandable. Point is, it is heritage in this country, I wouldn't expect a new ager or some european fool who has lived as "Subject" we're not "subjects" we're the people, and we have more power than our government. Just seems like most american's don't give a damn anymore or just fear a power hungry socialist government.

Go on then, exactly who are you going to defend yourself against if and when the time comes?  What's it like being in a permanent state of paranoia, the sort that Alex Jones generates? You talk about heritage? That's funny...if it wasn't for Europe and the UK in particular you'd still be having the horse drawn cart as your means of transport, with most of the population dying from incurable diseases. But I forgot, it's all aggression and pushing your chest out isn't it? 

[onan]

Like it or not, a lot of people are concerned about gun deaths. Whatever their motivation, however limited their intelligence may be, they are concerned.

To dismiss the continuing conversation because there seems to be a threat (which there really isn't) that losing your guns in the near future is not going to help the debate/discussion.

Until gun rights people present themselves as rational and reasonable there will continue to be a counter to gun ownership. That bumper sticker about cold dead hands may seem cool to you but it costs much more than it benefits.

Because someone says something another doesn't like doesn't make them stupid. And Pud is as far from stupid as you can get... well he does seem to think he can change minds on this forum... I digress.

I own more guns than your average gun owner. I shoot more than a 1000 rounds a month. Yet I don't fear losing my guns. I don't think Obama is going to take my guns. I do think I owe my fellow citizens a great deal of responsibility regarding my weapons and I uphold that responsibility.

[PB the Deplorable]

... Until gun rights people present themselves as rational and reasonable there will continue to be a counter to gun ownership...

I can't think of a more responsible group than NRA members.

The Left* wants us disarmed, period.  No amount of discussion, proof of responsibility, or persuasion will change that.  They know they need to seize the US before their ultimate goal of a one-world government with them running it can be achieved, and they know that won't happen with private gun ownership.

We don't need to convince them of anything, we need to defeat them at the voting booth.




*When I mention 'The Left' here or any post, I'm referring to the decision makers, not the followers.

[onan]

I can't think of a more responsible group than NRA members.

The NRA does some things very well. They also pander to excess.

Do your own research.

[NowhereInTime]

And another thing, you're one sorry smug son of a bitch Pud, I don't give a damn if people kiss your ass out of some distorted relevance for you pseudo intelligence. To me you sound like part of the problem, and being healthy and educated is a common sense thing, meanwhile...you're "stone age" comment is pretty dumb considering we whipped the shit out of you're ancestors and kicked them hell out of our country, Sad part is that they could have defeated us, but their hubris and pride and superiority complex,which sadly most of your kind are endowed with by default for some reason, cost them...so in my eyes, which doesn't mean much, you can pose no valid points to me. All due respect given...and both my middle fingers pointed at you.

No, seriously, is this a prank?  Is this one of the Gabcast guys having a laugh?

[Ben Shockley]

Listen, point is  this, without them we couldn't defend ourselves, and let me see, do you see the fighting in the middle east, gee those people didn't have much but assault weapons "full autos none the less" and some rpgs and other things here and their, we've been at war with them since 2003

Point is:  Who's "we" and who's the "them" that "we've" been at war with?  And "defend ourselves?"  Who is "ourselves?"  And against whom?

Point is again... our constitutional rights to be on PAR with the military should never be molested,

Do you honest-to-god think that your "founding fathers" built an instant destruct button into this country?  Such that any crackpot like you who got miffed over a mulecart-parking ticket could destroy the country?  Check up a little into history pre-January 1981 and find out exactly how and why the MILITIA (which your Sacred 2nd Amendment was passed to institutionalize) was first called into duty.  Hint: it was to PUT DOWN AN ANTI-GOVERNMENT REBELLION,  NOT TO SUPPORT A REBELLION!

...Point is, it is heritage in this country, I wouldn't expect a new ager or some european fool who has lived as "Subject" we're not "subjects" we're the people, and we have more power than our government. Just seems like most american's don't give a damn anymore or just fear a power hungry socialist government.

What the hell does that even mean?
And you're "not a subject?"
Tell that to the next cop who stops you.   And if you survive that encounter, tell it to the judge who sentences you.

And another thing, you're one sorry smug son of a bitch Pud, I don't give a damn if people kiss your ass out of some distorted relevance for you pseudo intelligence.

And you are one pathetic dumb-ass, "Mgs."  And I don't give a damn how many slobbering accolades you get from the right-wing peanut gallery in here for your know-nothing anti-intellectual, ahistorical rants.

... considering we whipped  the shit out of you're ancestors and kicked them hell out of our country, Sad part is that they could have defeated us, but their hubris and pride and superiority complex,which sadly most of your kind are endowed with by default for some reason, cost them...so in my eyes, which doesn't mean much, you can pose no valid points to me. All due respect given...and both my middle fingers pointed at you.

I take it that you're a (no irony intended) New Englander or Mid-Atlantic-er, because that's who "whipped" the English Army.  I mean, you're not one of those Tory Plantation Southerners, nor some Central-European- or Slavic Great-Laker or someone with a Latinate name or some other type whose ancestors weren't even in North America prior to 1783, are you?  Funny: we don't usually see this kind of Nativist crap-talking from Anglo-Saxon New Englanders or those pragmatic urban Mid-Atlantics, yet you are one, right?
And what "kind" do you assert that Pud is, oh Seer Of All?

Middle-fingers... wow.  Way to make a point, Mgs.

Point is...

[wr250]

Listen, point is this, without them we couldn't defend ourselves,

go ahead and point your .45 cal pistol (or whatever) at any US cop. you probably will not survive the encounter.

and let me see, do you see the fighting in the middle east, gee those people didn't have much but assault weapons "full autos none the less" and some rpgs and other things here and their, we've been at war with them since 2003...hmmm.

thats because our troops are handicapped by politicians with no real will to win a war. to win a war you overrun and utterly destroy/demoralize  the enemy until they surrender, or are wiped out.

Point is again...gun control and taking away our constitutional rights to be on PAR with the military should never be molested, and the backround check thing is understandable. Point is, it is heritage in this country, I wouldn't expect a new ager or some european fool who has lived as "Subject" we're not "subjects" we're the people, and we have more power than our government. Just seems like most american's don't give a damn anymore or just fear a power hungry socialist government.

well we do not have "constitutional rights". what we have is a constitution that guarantees certain human rights "granted by our creator" (words of a founding father Jefferson i think).  these are only as good as long as the govt abides by that constitution.
oh and btw , that "european fool" lives in the country that wrote a document. this document served as a basis for the US constitution. you figure out which document that is.

[wr250]

No, seriously, is this a prank?  Is this one of the Gabcast guys having a laugh?

obviously they have no grasp on history

[Ben Shockley]

wr250, you're a mixed bag.  For now, I just take logical exception to this:

...our troops are handicapped by politicians with no real will to win a war. to win a war you overrun and utterly destroy/demoralize  the enemy until they surrender, or are wiped out.

I assume that you mean Afghanistan.  That country is already militarily "overrun" by the U.S., to the extent that there is no "Afghanistan" as a practical polity separate from the United States.  I mean, it is already essentially a 51st state or at least a "territory" with it's own laws and civil power only to the extent that the U.S. okays it.
Purely militarily, I hope you realize, wr, that you are advocating the "Catch 22" that the only way that Afghanistan can see U.S. troops leave is for every Afghan to act as if they want U.S. troops to stay.  Any resistance by Afghans to the presence of U.S. troops will "force" Americans to stay until those "bad guy" resisters are destroyed.  Right?  Thus, logically, Americans can only leave when every Afghan wants them to stay.
Yet more insanity of war, or it's facsimile.

How much cheaper would it have been to just pay every "Afghan" (who don't exist, by the way) to just move out to a neighboring country?  Leaving the real estate for the mineral seekers to plunder at will.  But then, the military contractors wouldn't have gotten filthy rich, and THAT, neighbors, is the real purpose of modern U.S. "wars."  They fire $70,000 Hellfire missiles at poor slobs in Toyota trucks; guys whose whole provinces, in those guys' whole lives and unto their great-grandchildrens' lives, would never make enough money to pay for the U.S. helicopter or drone that fired that Cold-War-relic tank-busting missile-- that was fired to kill a few poor slobs in a pickup, and probably the wrong slobs, at that.
That, neighbors, is the real nature of modern U.S. "wars."

[FightTheFuture]

.

thats because our troops are handicapped by politicians with no real will to win a war. to win a war you overrun and utterly destroy/demoralize  the enemy until they surrender, or are wiped out.

You are correct, sir/ma`am! We lack the will to do what is necessary, and thus, end up with the quagmire of Iraq and Afghanistan. I assure you, the implications of that sad dynamic are not lost on our brave warriors. They fully understand what should have been done.

[Yorkshire pud]

thats because our troops are handicapped by politicians with no real will to win a war. to win a war you overrun and utterly destroy/demoralize  the enemy until they surrender, or are wiped out.

The 'enemy' was/is a philosophy. Afghanistan and especially Iraq were convenient places to drop ordnance on civilians...100000 in Iraq-so far. Babies are being born with defects from depleted uranium rounds. Not to mention the ongoing poverty that many find themselves in.

Afghanistan was host to a Saudia civil engineer turned politician/terrorist leader. However, as we now know, he was finally found and killed in Pakistan, meanwhile the ordnance is still raining down on civilians, and our troops who have suffered huge casualties. As Ben said; It has nothing to do with anything other than money and commercial power. In Iraq, ONLY American companies were permitted to bid for contracts, not Iraqi. A (then) Whitehouse suit held a seminar around about 2004-5, and told the gathering that there was 'A great deal of money to be made in Iraq'. This is while troops, and civilians were dying dozens a  day..

Anyone who still thinks that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was to 'spread frdm, and Dmocry, and fight trrism'(Thanks to George Walker Bush) hasn't read the sub text. I know an ex soldier who was in Afghanistan; He came back and told me horrific stories that will never reach the evening news. He was also under no illusion that he was doing a thankless job, with no winners other than those with their nose in the trough.

[Threaten the Hoover]

I recall one Afghan veteran (former US Army) relating a story to me about being sent out to survey a remote area, really out in the middle of nowhere, for use as a possible "children's play area..."  They were to collect soil and rock samples, and bring them back.  I asked him what that was all about, he just remarked on the amount of valuable minerals in that part of the world and suggested I follow the money.

[FightTheFuture]

The 'enemy' was/is a philosophy. Afghanistan and especially Iraq were convenient places to drop ordnance on civilians...100000 in Iraq-so far. Babies are being born with defects from depleted uranium rounds. Not to mention the ongoing poverty that many find themselves in.

Afghanistan was host to a Saudia civil engineer turned politician/terrorist leader. However, as we now know, he was finally found and killed in Pakistan, meanwhile the ordnance is still raining down on civilians, and our troops who have suffered huge casualties. As Ben said; It has nothing to do with anything other than money and commercial power. In Iraq, ONLY American companies were permitted to bid for contracts, not Iraqi. A (then) Whitehouse suit held a seminar around about 2004-5, and told the gathering that there was 'A great deal of money to be made in Iraq'. This is while troops, and civilians were dying dozens a  day..

Anyone who still thinks that the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was to 'spread frdm, and Dmocry, and fight trrism'(Thanks to George Walker Bush) hasn't read the sub text. I know an ex soldier who was in Afghanistan; He came back and told me horrific stories that will never reach the evening news. He was also under no illusion that he was doing a thankless job, with no winners other than those with their nose in the trough.

You really have no clue what you`re talking about. The war(s) had nothing to do with acquiring Iraq`s natural resources, nor Afghanistan`s. just to drive the point home, I thought I would dumb it down a level with MTV guy, Jon Stewart. He seems to be the millennial`s  primary source of information. Enjoy:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stewart-can%E2%80%99t-believe-china-got-iraq-oil-we-bombed-and-invaded-them-and-this-is-how-they-repay-us/

[Ben Shockley]

...our brave warriors [who] fully understand what should have been done.

I.e., --I guess-- you claim that "the brave warriors" (in toto? --'cause I know you like Latin) think like you?  Damn, I'm glad I wasn't in "your" kind of Army.  I probably wasn't brave enough.
Frankly though-- to whatever extent ol' FTF might be right, this is what you get from having an all-volunteer force involved in protracted war and especially in pointless occupations: a ground force full of (according to how I read FTF's account) stone psychopaths, who join to get all the freebie murders they want, and will assent to, or promote, whatever geopolitical policy that lets them do more killing.
In the case of combat-indifferent career officers: assent to, or promote, whatever geopolitical policy lets them get their career ticket punched faster.

... he just remarked on the amount of valuable minerals in that part of the world and suggested I follow the money.

That someone would send him out for such a transparent lie of a mission, then (undoubtedly) turn around and send him back to take and hold that valuable ground at whatever cost to lives, speaks something particularly horrific about the morality of the people at the operational command level: they know what it's "really about," BUT ALSO have to give the orders to the guys doing the bleeding.
ThreatHoov, I'm glad that you said that the guy is "former" Army.

[Ben Shockley]

You really have no clue what you`re talking about. The war(s) had nothing to do with acquiring Iraq`s natural resources, nor Afghanistan`s. just to drive the point home, I thought I would dumb it down a level with MTV guy, Jon Stewart. He seems to be the millennial`s  primary source of information.

Not only do you shill for some horrible, murderous policies to an embarrassing degree, but you're really insulting at it, too.  You're big on equating "disagreement" with "personal flaws" or "deficiencies" in your opponent, huh?  Like, I was a "coward" for suggesting that certain Tea Partiers were racists.  In this case, Pud must be a witless naif --that "millennials" bit-- probably still living with mommy, to disagree with you; any male with descended testicles MUST of natural course think like you, right?

By the way, Jon Stewart hasn't been on MTV for about 20 years.

[b_dubb]

You're big on equating "disagreement" with "personal flaws" or "deficiencies" in your opponent

+1 this.  Much trooth here.

[FightTheFuture]

I.e., --I guess-- you claim that "the brave warriors" (in toto? --'cause I know you like Latin) think like you?  Damn, I'm glad I wasn't in "your" kind of Army.  I probably wasn't brave enough.
Frankly though-- to whatever extent ol' FTF might be right, this is what you get from having an all-volunteer force involved in protracted war and especially in pointless occupations: a ground force full of (according to how I read FTF's account) stone psychopaths, who join to get all the freebie murders they want, and will assent to, or promote, whatever geopolitical policy that lets them do more killing.
In the case of combat-indifferent career officers: assent to, or promote, whatever geopolitical policy lets them get their career ticket punched faster.

First of all, while I do have a penchant for Latin, I typically speak Italian when I feel the need to add a certain emphasis (Mi fa cagare!). I would have thought such a, self-professed, bright boy like you could tell the difference. Apparently, I extended you far too much credit.

Oh, I`m curious; could you tell me where you pulled that quote of mine?

Now, the rest of your ....blather, is, frankly, borderline offensive. Typical nonsense of the ideologically constipated left. They (you) must feel somehow obliged to fall in line with every talking point promulgated by the brain trust (Harry "WE`VE LOST THE WAR" Reid, NY Times, Cynthia Sheehan, et al).

If you ever care to discuss -- in a rational tone -- the Middle East and our involvement therein, please feel free to inquire. However, starting with your insane premise that our troops were/are there for the sole purpose of murdering and pillaging, will only get you the ridicule you deserve. Enjoy. 

[Yorkshire pud]

You really have no clue what you`re talking about. The war(s) had nothing to do with acquiring Iraq`s natural resources, nor Afghanistan`s.

I didn't say it was....I said it was about money. How much do you think has been spent in both theatres? How many US companies do you think have been gifted investments in Iraq?

[Yorkshire pud]

However, starting with your insane premise that our troops were/are there for the sole purpose of murdering and pillaging, will only get you the ridicule you deserve. Enjoy.

Nope; Ben didn't say that either...

[FightTheFuture]

Not only do you shill for some horrible, murderous policies to an embarrassing degree, but you're really insulting at it, too.  You're big on equating "disagreement" with "personal flaws" or "deficiencies" in your opponent, huh?  Like, I was a "coward" for suggesting that certain Tea Partiers were racists.  In this case, Pud must be a witless naif --that "millennials" bit-- probably still living with mommy, to disagree with you; any male with descended testicles MUST of natural course think like you, right?

Negatory there, Big Ben. I just call `em like I see `em.

I called you a coward because..well.. you are a coward. You resort to the most base, Ad hominem rhetoric without the slightest notion of what you`re saying. it`s just a natural instinct with you. In fact, you barely take note of it, thereby, alleviating any biased cognition ("Oh, I never said that" "that`s not what i do/say"). And by the way -- once again, I remind you -- you didn`t say "some" TEA partiers, you said "TEA partiers" in general. Which, is still ridiculous, since you have zero proof that bigotry is in any way prevalent in the vaious TEA party organizations. Go back and read what you said in the quote with which I took umbrage. I`m a reasonable man. I never wade into the swamp... unless given a rousing invitation.

[FightTheFuture]

Nope; Ben didn't say that either...

BS said:

who join to get all the freebie murders they want,...


Now, go home and get your shine box.

[onan]

Fuck, Bush was even a bigger failure than I thought.

[FightTheFuture]

Fuck, Bush was even a bigger failure than I thought.

Could not possibly agree more!

[Yorkshire pud]

BS said:

who join to get all the freebie murders they want,...


Now, go home and get your shine box.

Ahh I see what you did there; Context..

(according to how I read FTF's account) stone psychopaths, who join to get all the freebie murders they want, and will assent to, or promote, whatever geopolitical policy that lets them do more killing.

[Ben Shockley]

Oh, I`m curious; could you tell me where you pulled that quote of mine?

The only quote of yours within the quote of me you offered was the words "brave warriors" which occurs in this post
http://bellgab.com/index.php?topic=5489.msg239624#msg239624
Beyond that, if you can't remember where you wrote what, don't blame me, Methuselah.

Knowing that you find me offensive and deserving of ridicule from you and anyone who thinks like you is the most gratifying thing that I've read in many a day.

Try to remember this: despite the fact that you consider me and people who think more-or-less like me to be criminals, deserving of punishment, and full of shame and conscious of our "guilt," we don't see ourselves as bad!  Surprise!  We think of ourselves as good, and as real Americans!  Really!  Nor do I want to be the kind of mindless hate-filled authoritarian that would garner your praise or approval.  Instead, the words you use as attempted deep insults --like comparing me to Al Sharpton and Janeane Garofalo-- and in hopes of invoking shame and humiliation may in fact be great praise for certain of us!
--although, regarding Janeane: either you're a better (if closeted) Lefty than me, or it's another example of you being behind the times.  I truly have no idea where to see or hear her these days, nor for the last 8 years or so.  I also don't read the NY Times, nor do I remember the last time I heard anything about Cindy Sheehan, and I have no particular reason to follow the actions of Harry Reid (he, of whatever epithets you think really sting).  Blows your caricature-filled mind, don't it?

No, I don't care to "discuss" anything with you, any more than you cared, upon first appearing on my forum radar, to try factually refuting an observation I had made before going directly to attempted personal attacks.  I am not here to "discuss" anything with anyone who professes or defends the thoughts and beliefs that you profess and defend.  As the opportunities present themselves and as the mood strikes me, I will use logic and your words and those of any similar poster to illustrate and document what hate-filled, mindless, demon-haunted, murderous, planet-killing ghouls that those who I classify as "right-wingers" and "capitalists" and enablers of the capitalists all collectively are.  To whatever extent that I offend you and get under your sagging skin and invoke some measure of rage and resentment in you --Mister, I'll enjoy every second of it.  Thanks for the wish in that direction.

For any effort you may someday expend in trying your part of "discussion" with anyone who thinks and posts at all like me, let me clue you: get off of your "they are 100% wrong and beneath me" position.  Pronouncing another party to potential discussion, before dialogue begins, as worthy only of ridicule is not likely to get you anywhere even with someone a lot better-disposed than I am to making nice.  Your "disagreement = character flaw / deficiency" axiom needs some reconsideration too.  Believe it or not, plenty of people who will disagree strongly with you have a lot of history behind their positions, and a lot of character that, if and when presented, you will have no way of impeaching.  That is: assuming that your proffer of "discussion" means for you something other than the other parties' immediate moral and factual surrender.