07-18-2006, 05:23 AM | #41 (permalink) | |||
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
Quote:
It's not that the government doesn't WANT to protect them, they will simply be unable to for almost a week. Does that make me afraid of the oncoming horde? No, quite honestly. I don't fear for myself, but I do fear for my family and all of those around me who will be defenseless because those who wish to disarm everyone because of their own fears or insecurities, put us all at risk. Will we ever be invaded? we already have, in my opinion. Will the illegals ever attack us violently and try to take back what they think is theirs? I don't know and I don't think anyone else does either. Should we accept the fact that it's possible and prepare for it or do we naively believe that something like that would never happen? We either take steps to protect ourselves and our country or we change the constitution by de facto. Quote:
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
|||
07-18-2006, 05:40 AM | #42 (permalink) |
Psycho
|
Could this thread be a wind-up? I don't think I've ever seen one on the TFP before, but I'm sure there's a first time for everything. You know, like the first time all the illegal immigrants in the US, all high on crack, simutaneously reach under their beds for their Uzis and gather at the local Dairy Queen, ready to overthrow the government and reclaim the San Andreas fault.
|
07-18-2006, 06:24 AM | #43 (permalink) | ||
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
What really disappoints me about people like you is that you've seen examples of what even TWO people can do with automatic weapons yet 10 or 20 is just TOO FAR FETCHED to be believable. It's that or you're so cemented in your complacency and belief that you can stop all crime by making laws banning guns that you couldn't possibly see anything insidious by people to destroy your newfound utopia of a crime free city. I guess that a couple hundred deaths would be nothing to you, except to scream about MORE government protection. well, since some people seem to think that i'm delusional on this southern border thing, let's have a little fun, shall we? what do we think of this? Rosarito officers beheaded Quote:
a copy of that hearing can be found here titled 'Impact of Mexico's Presidential Election on the U.S.' Isn't 'beheading' something that terrorists do? shouldn't THAT make us nervous?
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." Last edited by dksuddeth; 07-18-2006 at 10:03 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
||
07-19-2006, 10:33 AM | #44 (permalink) | |
Gentlemen Farmer
Location: Middle of nowhere, Jersey
|
DK, I am inclined to agree with the premise that gun control is a concern, although I might not place it at the top of national security concerns list.
I thought that you might be interested in this article from US NEWS and World Report within the last two weeks: Quote:
This makes ~me~ less concerned about gun control. -bear
__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission. |
|
07-19-2006, 11:49 AM | #45 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
I did read that one, it's heartening, but there are still many democrats (and even a few republicans) who continually put forth bills to restrict the right to keep and bear arms and I fear that if democrats get hold of congress again that they will just pass more.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
07-19-2006, 12:41 PM | #46 (permalink) |
Registered User
Location: Right Here
|
I believe in the right to keep and bear arms. I have a .22 rifle, that's it. I don't see the point in owning anything heavier. I can defend myself as effectively with a .22 as I could with a higher caliber gun. (Unless we're talking about combating tanks, which is beyond unlikely) Others lack the skill and/or confidence to do the same, so they require higher caliber or automatic weapons. As long as they don't try to use them unlawfully I see no problem with them owning them.
|
05-06-2007, 03:15 AM | #48 (permalink) | ||
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/24846.html Quote:
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
||
05-06-2007, 03:39 AM | #49 (permalink) |
Addict
|
Sigh. I don't quite comprehend your need to feel utterly safe from any and all potential threats, real or imagined. It's impossible. It would be impossible even under a police state, which none of us would want. You are seriously asking us to be more worried about an eventuality that, as DJ Happy has pointed out, is almost comically absurd.
Why would immigrants try so hard and risk so much to get out of Mexico only to make their adopted home ... once again part of Mexico? I also am having a really hard time buying that it would take an entire week for the US government to respond to a direct attack on its soil. What did our response - both municipal and military - look like on 9/11? Finally, the article linked in the OP mentions neither gun control nor a possible 'invasion' of Mexicans. You're really grasping at straws here. |
05-06-2007, 07:44 AM | #50 (permalink) |
Huggles, sir?
Location: Seattle
|
The British are not coming, and you are not Paul Revere.
The gravest threat to this nation's security is its own government. THAT is what we need to be armed to protect ourselves from, not crop-picking/house-cleaning Mexican illegals. Keep focusing on practically irrelevant external factors and you will completely miss the gradual erosion of our individual rights by those who we vote into government positions. Eminent domain. The draft. The PATRIOT act. Hillary Clinton. (I kid.) These are the gravest threats which face us today.
__________________
seretogis - sieg heil perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames |
05-06-2007, 07:46 AM | #51 (permalink) | ||||
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I predict that there will be massive urban deaths and casualties due to terror attacks by jihadists using automatic weapons and most people will be helpless against it because of left wing wacko gun control who fear their own people more than anything else.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
||||
05-06-2007, 08:57 AM | #52 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
How will carrying your gun protect you from someone near you in a crowd with a bomb strapped to his body...or from a car bomb?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 05-06-2007 at 09:04 AM.. |
|
05-06-2007, 10:43 AM | #53 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." |
|
05-06-2007, 02:04 PM | #54 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
dk...I read the article and I am just not as impressed with the Northeast Intelligence Network and Douglas J. Hagmann's "facts and conclusions" as you:
"One case, however, can serve as an example of what is taking place all across the U.S. involving the procurement and disbursement of weapons to Muslim ‘jihadists.’ On Tuesday, May 2, 2007, a federal indictment was unsealed in the U.S. federal court in St. Louis naming eight Islamic men as defendants in a case involving the buying, selling or hiding of automatic weapons, an anti-personnel mine and other explosives.Where is your/his evidence that this "is taking place all across the U.S. involving the procurement and disbursement of weapons to Muslim ‘jihadists?" Why didnt he mention above that the charges in the unsealed indictmen say it was a crime for profit but do not specify who the ultimate customers would have been. (St Lous Today) Do you have any evidence that these guys have ties to any "jihadists"? BTW, Douglas Hagmann was also the guy who said on the Coast-to-Coast radio show that the marketing stunt by Comedy Central in Boston and other cities several months ago was really a terrorist plot. More on Douglas Hagmann, the "phony "terrorism expert" --who is positive that UFOs and Bigfoot exist but knows little else" (link) And you still didnt answer my question....when have automatic weapons been the MO of jihadists rather than the more dramatic and destructive other weapons of choice?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 05-06-2007 at 02:42 PM.. |
05-06-2007, 02:57 PM | #55 (permalink) | ||||
Tone.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Ya know what the problem with your pro-gun stance is? Your arguments just don't hold water. For what seems like years now you've been preaching that we must be armed in case the government becomes tyrannical and stops doing what the people want it to do. Beyond the obvious arguments that you still don't seem to understand that a few farmers with rifles won't stop a tank, that argument still doesn't make sense. After all, over 70% of the people want us out of Iraq, and the government is refusing to comply with that desire, all while suppressing freedoms and rights at an astonishing rate. In short, the situation that you claim we need our guns for is here, right now, and I don't see anyone shooting. Could it be that this has occurred to you and that's why you're suddenly switching to the "damn evil foreigners and their scary weapons" tactic? |
||||
05-06-2007, 03:15 PM | #56 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Here is another article from Doug Hagmann's Northeast Intelligence Network (NEIN):
Quote:
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
|
05-12-2007, 02:53 AM | #57 (permalink) | |
Crazy
Location: Shoreline, WA, USA
|
Quote:
1. VA Tech was caused by there not being a link between the judge declaring a young man insane and then not allowing that young man to purchase weapons or bullets. Period. Ronald Reagan gutted the budget for the insane assylums and therapy for those poor people and the large homeless and disturbed walking around today are due to Reagan's stupid choices. Yes, the young man at VA Tech was bullied for over a decade, but that does not justify his killing people. Anyway, a sensible logical approach would be to offer students training on how to non-lethally disarm a man with a gun with martial arts. Even making the classroom doors lockable and give teachers and janitors keys, would be sensible. Also adding an intercom system for the admin staff to use in an emergency would be logical. Arming all kids on campus who wish to be is not logical knowing how hormonal boys and girls are at that age. More bullets being fired from even more guns and from more angles means more friendly fire and deaths. You should have learned that in the military. I suspect that you might be carrying over knowledge, war instincts, and good combat paranoia into the private sector where many people who disagree with you live in safe homes and communities. Another option to use before arming college students with guns, would be to let the students be able to carry stun guns, mace, or tazers instead of guns. Heck, even rubber bullets would be fine to have teachers carry if they got proper training. But the fact that you jumped first to arming the college kids with the choice of real bullets proves you are a knee jerk gun paranoid in my book. 2. 9/11 was caused by two things. Corporate greed of airlines who told the pilots that they did not need strong door into the cockpit. The pilots asked for the doors for years and weight and cost was the issue and the doors would have stopped 9/11. Also Bush got the memo that 9/11 was going to happen and did nothing about terrorists taking pilot classes. Bush should be impeached for that and shipped away to Saudi Arabia with his oil friends. Bush did not read the memo or act on it because in his first term, he went on vacation more than any other president in history. 3. There are thousands of peaceful americans who own ranches in mexico and none of them are getting lots of gunfire and being chased off of their land. This has drug purchase/dealing gone bad written all over it. You wanna stop gun fights on the border of mexico ? Legalize drugs, get the gov to regulate them just like alcohol, and tobacco. As someone who supports choice so much, I am sure you agree with me. Or do you ? 4. I used to work at a gun range in wa state. We had wheel chair ramps everywhere. Because it was required by law ? Nope, the range has had them for decades before the laws required them. The ramps are for the "safe" gun users who accidentally shoot each other (like Cheney VP did) and you can bet Cheney was drunk at the time. We might not know what really happened out there for a few more years or maybe if someone who was there finally tells all. But Cheny was purposefully not tested for alcohol levels and most hunting accidents are kept well hidden. Many wheel chair stories were told to me during the 3 years I worked there. Many "cleaning gun" stories where the cleaner dropped the gun and it went off and they shot themselves in the leg. Seeing a man with a fake leg was a daily sighting on the days I worked. One guy had a war wound and he had a flag on his fake leg. His type was a rare sight. There was even a woman in a wheelchair who was shot by a fellow hunter as she was "making noise in the brush like a deer". So you go ahead and keep guns all you want, and you can shoot yourself accidentally some day or you might shoot your friend like Cheney did, but I will avoid places with lots of gun owners and avoid the forest areas during hunting season. I have purchased my non-lethal forms of home protection and have been trained in non-lethal martial arts. If Texas is that bad, then sorry it has gotten that way. Jonathan
__________________
"We are sure to be losers when we quarrel with ourselves. It is a civil war, and in all such contentions, triumphs are defeats." Mr Colton ================================== |
|
05-12-2007, 04:53 PM | #58 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: bedford, tx
|
Quote:
You can sit there and blame a dead president, the government, republicans, conservatives, or anybody else you'd like to blame and you can sit there and spout all these BS liberal 'love' messages that sound great but have ZERO realistic capability in accomplishing anything you'd like to wish to see happen, and in the end it won't make a damn bit of difference. You go with the kumbaya crowd and stay away from me and my guns while I make sure THIS sadistic depravity does not happen to me and mine. Tell me how much you THINK your 'non-lethal' self defense would prevail in this situation. and as an afterthought, tell me which you prefer....being paranoid and carrying a gun or driving around carefree, unarmed, and having to watch your loved one suffer like those above!
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him." Last edited by dksuddeth; 05-12-2007 at 04:57 PM.. |
|
05-12-2007, 07:42 PM | #59 (permalink) | |
Muffled
Location: Camazotz
|
Quote:
__________________
it's quiet in here |
|
Tags |
control, gravest, gun, national, security, threat |
|
|