Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Just take away the guns, do it now Options · View
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:41:28 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
I suggest, all people owing a weapon have to apply be screened and records updated. "

And that would solve exactly nothing..... Sandy Hook shooting,,, facts, the owner of the gun was murdered, the guns were then stolen, the background check would never have been run on the murdering son of a bitch that killed those 28 post fetus people.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:50:18 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
all my points CRUSHED" Sprite

Might I point out that I am neither wanting to or even trying to "crush" your point of view. See dear in this land of the current US Constitution you have every right to say what you want, in fact I have put my life on the line thru my service to this Nation by my military time. I want only that you express your opinion, freely. Do you want the president to be defended by people with guns, is it your point that only the US Govt should own arms?
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 12:56:58 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
mowed down by another lunatic with a gun like what happened in Newtown. :)" sprite

Those in Newtown have pushed the city fathers to fund armed guards at all middle schools.
Monocle
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 3:23:31 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 301
Buc, your paranoid bloviations are fact-free and un-entertaining. I appreciate and thank you for your service, but our country is now safer, or at least our military is on average smarter, now that you are no longer serving.
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 3:34:53 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,813
Buc wrote:



Why would I a Veteran of the US Army and a Strong defender of the US Constitution be concerned about the current US President who is hell bent on taking away my rights as a freedom loving Libertarian would be concerned about his open violation of US Federal Gun laws,, darn, got me (sarcasm off).


Oh I get why your shorts are in a big wad LOL. The fact that Obama's even in office has reduced you and many others to an angry sputter, with the same five or six talking points on repeat. The whole hateful obsession towards Obama is kind of funny on its own.

But what I was wondering about was your observation that, somehow, liberals couldn't accept a 'fact' (whether it is or isn't that, is sort of beside the point) regarding the president not being able to lawfully own a weapon. And so, I'm wondering who these people are, because I haven't met or heard of any. The only person mentioning this is you, in addition to whichever right-wing talking heads are squawking about it as well. If you told most liberals that the facts are that the president may not now, or in the future, be eligible to own a gun, here's the most likely and common response you'll get. -----> (shrug)
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 5:31:43 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
meh
LadyX
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 5:38:09 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,813
Highwayman wrote:


Gotta love the NRA:

"It must be the video games!"

"It must be our lack of mental health awareness!"

"Its an invasion of privacy to make us register!"

"Its annoying to make us do anything."

"It must be...(sound of hands grasping for any available straws)
oldhound
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 6:53:40 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/7/2013
Posts: 203
Location: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Ok, one point. Noone who has not worn the uniform, trained , studied fought or bled for their country has one bit of right to insult the intelligence of the ones that do. I can almost guarantee that safely earned college education would fall short of what a service, past or present has to learn and use everyday. That being addressed, as a member of the armed forces, but serving as an MP, I whole heartedly agree that all weapons shpuld be registered and all owners should undergo a background check. The class of weapon used is irrelevant, but if the owner has issues, the weapons should be taken until they are cleared. Before anyone raises their voice, that is the way its done on a military post. You can own weapons, no problem. The will be registered and the owners checked. Any instance comes up that warrants it, the weapons are held till its safe.
Monocle
Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 8:20:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/19/2007
Posts: 301
oldhound wrote:
Ok, one point. Noone who has not worn the uniform, trained , studied fought or bled for their country has one bit of right to insult the intelligence of the ones that do. I can almost guarantee that safely earned college education would fall short of what a service, past or present has to learn and use everyday. That being addressed, as a member of the armed forces, but serving as an MP, I whole heartedly agree that all weapons shpuld be registered and all owners should undergo a background check. The class of weapon used is irrelevant, but if the owner has issues, the weapons should be taken until they are cleared. Before anyone raises their voice, that is the way its done on a military post. You can own weapons, no problem. The will be registered and the owners checked. Any instance comes up that warrants it, the weapons are held till its safe.


I have every right to insult someone when they act asinine or spout stupidity, no matter who they are or what they've done for me or my country. Just as much a right as they have to malign their own commander-in-chief with their idiocy.

That said, I am in rather strong agreement with you on general gun policy. And thank you for your service.
sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 1:33:08 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
oldhound wrote:
Ok, one point. Noone who has not worn the uniform, trained , studied fought or bled for their country has one bit of right to insult the intelligence of the ones that do. I can almost guarantee that safely earned college education would fall short of what a service, past or present has to learn and use everyday. That being addressed, as a member of the armed forces, but serving as an MP, I whole heartedly agree that all weapons shpuld be registered and all owners should undergo a background check. The class of weapon used is irrelevant, but if the owner has issues, the weapons should be taken until they are cleared. Before anyone raises their voice, that is the way its done on a military post. You can own weapons, no problem. The will be registered and the owners checked. Any instance comes up that warrants it, the weapons are held till its safe.


first off, yes we do. last i checked, the first amendment gives us the freedom of speech. in fact, i'm pretty sure that the military fights to defend that right, among other things.

secondly, if i don't have the right to insult the intelligence of someone who has worn the uniform, they shouldn't have the right to insult mine. i've given in many other ways - yes, i respect those who've served, but that doesn't give them the right to be disrespectful towards others and not expect the same in return. for the record, up until lately, i haven't been legally allowed to serve, being an openly gay woman, so it's thru no fault of my own that i haven't studied, fought, or bled for my country.



Live, love, laugh.
oldhound
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 8:06:10 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/7/2013
Posts: 203
Location: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Ever see starship troopers? Campy movie, but the book was good. One aspect I liked, if you didnt serve, you didnt get to vote, you had all other rights, but the fate of the nation was left to those who risked all for it. Anyway, being gay is a cop out in my book. I served with a score of openly gay men and women. Well openly is the wrong word, all knew but we didnt care because they did their job, stood the line. And by ”right” I should have used another word...like you havent earned it. He is a one percenter, and the other 99% need to respect that. I did a paper for a homeland security class, on how I would increase our security. Easy, more guns. Every service member, appropriately trained and checked, always has their carbine, rifle or sidearm (unless were prohibited). Every eligible CITIZEN, once a fee is paid for background check, training and certification, can carry. Brings in revenue annually, and turns the US into a very hard target. Think if the Colorado shooting had occured like that. Hed get one or two rounds offf and then be staring at 30 barrels.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 8:09:08 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
You'll Have To Take My Guns From My Cold, Dead Hands
Sandy Hook father, Bill Stevens delivers an epic speech to politicians everywhere



Newtown resident, Bill Stevens addresses a gang of CT politicians. His 5th grade daughter's friend was murdered on 12/14/12 'when 911 and lockdown were not enough to protect her from an evil person, not an assault rifle – an inanimate object, an evil person.' He then attempts to educate the group on what the CT constitution and the Bill of Rights say about the right to bear arms.

In closing, Stevens says: 'Criminals and tyrants beware: Lock down is not an option at the Stevens' residence. 911 will be dialed AFTER the security of my home has been established. And finally, 'YOU will have to take my ability to protect my Victoria from my cold, dead hands.'

Please listen to Mr. Stevens' entire epic, inspiring speech in the following video and please pass it on to others.

How dare he use both his 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 8:13:58 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
Great news, Woman now can serve in combat roles, the next step is to change the law to make them register for the Draft. You know equal rights :-)
oldhound
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 8:23:05 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/7/2013
Posts: 203
Location: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
My MOS is Co Ed, had females in foxholes, clearing buildings, rappelling out of UH 60s, even helicasting from a CH 47, they can do the job, just neexs to be the right person fir the job.
sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:24:05 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
Buc wrote:
Great news, Woman now can serve in combat roles, the next step is to change the law to make them register for the Draft. You know equal rights :-)


i wasn't aware that we had a draft. if we DID i'd be ok with both genders registering for it. i am all about equal rights.

Live, love, laugh.
sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:27:59 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
Buc wrote:
You'll Have To Take My Guns From My Cold, Dead Hands
Sandy Hook father, Bill Stevens delivers an epic speech to politicians everywhere



Newtown resident, Bill Stevens addresses a gang of CT politicians. His 5th grade daughter's friend was murdered on 12/14/12 'when 911 and lockdown were not enough to protect her from an evil person, not an assault rifle – an inanimate object, an evil person.' He then attempts to educate the group on what the CT constitution and the Bill of Rights say about the right to bear arms.

In closing, Stevens says: 'Criminals and tyrants beware: Lock down is not an option at the Stevens' residence. 911 will be dialed AFTER the security of my home has been established. And finally, 'YOU will have to take my ability to protect my Victoria from my cold, dead hands.'

Please listen to Mr. Stevens' entire epic, inspiring speech in the following video and please pass it on to others.

How dare he use both his 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment rights.


he has the right to say as he wishes - i support his right to his opinion and voicing it in a public forum. and i understand his grief and anger and he has every right to be angry. be aware, btw, that this is the opinion of one parent. i'd like to hear from the other parents (especially those who lost their own sons and daughters) who may, or may not, agree with his statement.

Live, love, laugh.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:29:13 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
An approximation of how many rounds of ammunition the DHS has now secured over the last 10 months stands at around 1.625 billion. In March 2012, ATK announced that they had agree to provide the DHS with a maximum of 450 million bullets over four years, a story that prompted questions about why the feds were buying ammunition in such large quantities.
To put that in perspective, during the height of active battle operations in Iraq, US soldiers used 5.5 million rounds of ammunition a month. Extrapolating the figures, the DHS has purchased enough bullets over the last 10 months to wage a full scale war for almost 30 years."

Stimulus spending.
sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:38:28 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
oldhound wrote:
Ever see starship troopers? Campy movie, but the book was good. One aspect I liked, if you didnt serve, you didnt get to vote, you had all other rights, but the fate of the nation was left to those who risked all for it.


here i thought that all the pro-gun people were worried about their rights being taken away and then you come out and propose that anyone who hasn't served in the military have their rights taken away. seems to me that you're sending mixed messages here.

oldhound wrote:
Anyway, being gay is a cop out in my book. I served with a score of openly gay men and women. Well openly is the wrong word, all knew but we didnt care because they did their job, stood the line. And by ”right” I should have used another word...like you havent earned it.


you might want to re-read your statement - i'm sure you didn't mean to insult me simply because i haven't served in the military, right? or maybe you did. quite honestly, you know nothing about me and my reasons for not serving. be careful lest you make bold statements like that someday and you get a reply along the lines of "Dude. I'm disabled and CAN'T serve in the military. And i'm glad that you don't care if someone is gay or not. YOU might not care, but even the 'don''t ask, don't tell' policy made it clear that they didn't want gay men and women serving. Thankfully, our president has finally done away with that archaic thinking and i COULD serve, if i so wished. btw, not going to happen for a variety of reasons i won't go into here. :)



oldhound wrote:
He is a one percenter, and the other 99% need to respect that.


i do respect that. what i don't NEED to do is agree with his opinions or how he phrases them. does the fact that he serves give him the right to insult someone with impunity while they sit back and take it in silence? sorry. not in my world.

Live, love, laugh.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:40:04 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
ATTENTION

Even though the Secretary of Defense has decided to allow women in combat jobs, the law has not been changed to include this. Consequently, only men are currently required to register by law with Selective Service during ages 18 thru 25. Women still do not register. "
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:43:04 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
right to insult someone" ? who insulted you
sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:43:12 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
Buc wrote:
ATTENTION

Even though the Secretary of Defense has decided to allow women in combat jobs, the law has not been changed to include this. Consequently, only men are currently required to register by law with Selective Service during ages 18 thru 25. Women still do not register. "


ok... and...? *points to thread title* what does that have to do with the debate on gun laws? you're veering dangerously off course here, Buc. :)

Live, love, laugh.
sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:49:01 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
Buc wrote:
right to insult someone" ? who insulted you


i specifically said "someone" for a reason. not me. it was fairly clear in my assessment of some of your posts that you have very little respect for "liberals, socialists, Omericans, and Obama." if that's not your intent, then perhaps you should be more careful with your words. Also, it was partially directed at Old Hound who seems to believe that since i have never served with the military, i have no right to disagree with your opinions, let alone vote. :)

Live, love, laugh.
oldhound
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:56:23 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/7/2013
Posts: 203
Location: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Ms sprite, yeah my dumbass forgot to exempt those who physically cant serve, no offense intended. As a lame hope to redeem myself, the only tickets Ive written in the last 15 years if not attached to a case ,were child restraint and handicap violations. And I would not write a pregnant woman a cite for using a handicap spot because I consider them temporarily in need of them. My point of the movie remark was, I read a lot of posts, on other sites, where ka bar targets spout off about vets and other related crap. So I fire a salvo along the lines I fired at you. It was meant to sting, like pepper spray nothing more.
oldhound
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 9:58:34 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/7/2013
Posts: 203
Location: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
To add, serve also can mean peace corps, vet assistance, abused person call lines, rape or suicide call lines, etc.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 10:12:08 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
some of your posts that you have very little respect for "liberals, socialists, Omericans, and Obama" Sprit

I am sorry, let me be more clear, I did not mean to show little respect towards those groups ,,,, I meant no respect.
Dani
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 11:53:46 AM

Rank: Big-Haired Bitch
Moderator

Joined: 12/25/2010
Posts: 5,659
Location: Under Your Bed, United States
We're still not done beating this dead ass horse?? Surprised the thing hasn't turned zombie on us yet. Oh no...I said zombie...now someone's gonna bring up the apocalypse.


sprite
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 12:41:31 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,292
Location: My Tower, United States
oldhound wrote:
To add, serve also can mean peace corps, vet assistance, abused person call lines, rape or suicide call lines, etc.


you left out 'waitress'. :)

Live, love, laugh.
oldhound
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 12:52:50 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/7/2013
Posts: 203
Location: Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
How does waitress equate the things I listed...ok, yeah, more evidence that I really am a step or two down the evolutionary ladder lol. Humans are too confusing hahaa
Guest
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 3:28:53 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 659,516
you left out 'waitress'. :) "

I have one rule when it comes to these masters of the dining event. Earn a tip, it is not a forgone conclusion that I will leave one (unless i am at a big top and the gratuity is automatic) I have to work to earn it, you have to work to extract it from my wallet.
ByronLord
Posted: Thursday, February 07, 2013 3:56:52 PM

Rank: Forum Guru
Moderator

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 768
Location: Massachusetts, United States
oldhound wrote:
Ok, one point. Noone who has not worn the uniform, trained , studied fought or bled for their country has one bit of right to insult the intelligence of the ones that do. I can almost guarantee that safely earned college education would fall short of what a service, past or present has to learn and use everyday.


Bullshit.

When I was at school we had a NATO brigader general come to the school and tell us that if the Russians invaded, they would overrun West Germany in three days. Therefore the UK needed its nuclear deterrent.

The stupid fuckwit hadn't noticed that the Soviet army was finding it impossible to hold on to the occupation of Afghanistan at the time despite the opposition being mostly irregulars with light arms. The terrain in Germany is not a great deal better for an occupying force and anyone who knows the history of the siege of Stalingrad knows that urban warfare is exceptionally bloody. The idea that the Russians were going to arrive with snow on their boots was utterly fucking stupid.

Then three years later when I was observing the anti-government protests in East Germany my own fucking Prime Minister was begging Gorbachev to send in the tanks to stop East Germany collapsing. The two faced bitch was saying one thing in public and the exact opposite in private. She wasn't at all worried by Soviet invasion, she just wanted to keep the cold war going to maintain her own power.

The US army spent the first four years in Iraq doing nothing but make matters worse because the generals in charge didn't have the guts to tell Bush that (1) Rumsfeld was totally incompetent or (2) they needed to apply the twenty years of existing doctrine in counter insurgency. I have friends in the Naval graduate school who were telling me that their students were utterly shocked when they discovered that the courses on the counter insurgency strategy being implemented by Petraeus were being taught from materials more than a decade old.

Right now the US military accounts for over half of all the military spending in the world and the generals don't think that is enough despite the fact that over half of the remaining military spending is by US NATO allies. Instead they are claiming that they are desperately underfunded.

Institutions that think they are above criticism are invariably corrupt. We are just looking at a new scandal of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, keeping 30,000 young women as slaves in brutal conditions. None of the people involved ever questioned the notion that something sanctioned by the church could be completely imoral.

oldhound wrote:
That being addressed, as a member of the armed forces, but serving as an MP, I whole heartedly agree that all weapons shpuld be registered and all owners should undergo a background check. The class of weapon used is irrelevant, but if the owner has issues, the weapons should be taken until they are cleared. Before anyone raises their voice, that is the way its done on a military post. You can own weapons, no problem. The will be registered and the owners checked. Any instance comes up that warrants it, the weapons are held till its safe.


Anyone wants to have a weapon, they should go join the army and do it for real.

Otherwise it is just a hobby and nobody has the right to a hobby that results in 30,000 deaths a year. Nobody. It is just a hobby, the NRA goons need to get over it.

Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.