stories about people protecting themselves and others with guns

canndo said:
THose laws are just one more way for the gun grabbing government to slowly erode our 2nd amendment rights. First it was an additional manditory sentence for finding guns in a crack house, then it was for finding guns in places where there was marijuana (even though the drug is well known for its passive users).

What next? Guns found with houses containing significant amounts of sugar? Guns found next to cans of crisco?
Click to expand...
Your proving my point, you say it right in your second sentence "manditory sentences". These are the posted rules and its a good idea to stay within them if possible. Most of us including myself dance on the line daily. Im not supporting the govenments laws in this instance im only pointing them out. RIU is supposed to point out growing errors and i belive that this is a HUGE error. Everyday theres another gun thread making RIU members look like a bunch of gun finatics and lessening our legal credibility. Guns are cool, i love mine, but if i wanted to talk about them all day id be on a different website than this. Im a pot user therefore really not trying to start conflict here but it would be nice to go just one day without seeing a post about guns....what if i say pleeeze?.....pretty pleeeze with a cherry on top?
 
walkinggun.jpg
 
lifegoesonbrah said:
In my 27 years on this earth ive never seen a child drink a 44oz carbonated beverage, have you? You can't regulate stupid, they will just get 4x12 oz anyways. Should we limit the amount of alcohol or tobacco people can buy? Limit the size of ATV's? Limit the effectiveness of pencil sharpeners?
Click to expand...


Brings up a number of interesting things then doesn't it? When does it make sense to make a certain number of legal things... illegal? It is currently illegal for me to purchase more than 10 boxes of perfectly legal cold medication. One? legal, five? legal, 11? illegal. so there is precedence.
 
canndo said:
Brings up a number of interesting things then doesn't it? When does it make sense to make a certain number of legal things... illegal? It is currently illegal for me to purchase more than 10 boxes of perfectly legal cold medication. One? legal, five? legal, 11? illegal. so there is precedence.
Click to expand...

Give 'em an inch, they take a mile.
 
canndo said:
Brings up a number of interesting things then doesn't it? When does it make sense to make a certain number of legal things... illegal? It is currently illegal for me to purchase more than 10 boxes of perfectly legal cold medication. One? legal, five? legal, 11? illegal. so there is precedence.
Click to expand...


If you call the failure of prohibition precedence then go for it. Sounds like something you would do.
 
Winter Woman said:
Of course you don't understand. That must just be your lot in life to follow the herd. This is what is coming and those of us who are independent thinkers know it.
Click to expand...


We all "follow the herd", the modern free market not only survives on this principle but whereever it can, it encourages it, if not down right enforces it.

Are you saying that I don't understand the fundamental differences between two legaly and historicly divergent populations? Or are you saying that I fail to comprehend the slippery slope concept that your posted article seems to indicate.

Tough for me to understand how you post another's article as being reflective of your own thoughts on the matter and yet claim that you are an "independent thinker".

I may pride myself on thinking differently than the majority but I know deep down that it is an illusion. 6 billion people, all thinking 24 hours a day makes the concept of an original thought seem awfully remote.

But what is it that you are trying to say with that article and your response to me?
 
kelly4 said:
What laws? You mean laws which are based on the Constitution? You know...that little piece of paper that you hate.
Click to expand...

That would be the one - different, our right to keep and bear has the backing of the founding document itself. the UK has no such protection.

As far as my hating the constitution? I defy you to show by way of any post I have ever made here, that I "hate" the Constitution.

I get that a lot. It seems that if your interpetation of the document conflicts with mine, I must actually hate the Constitution. By that line of reasoning I could say that you hate it - you don't do you?
 
canndo said:
It no longer matters why the founding fathers put the 2nd amendment in the document, it is there.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. I think the WHY is the most important detail(s) when we consider changes to the constitution. If we don't misunderstand, ignore, or misinterpret history we can eliminate repeating the same mistakes that have been made throughout history.

While its true that there are regional differences we all share in the fact that man is fallible.
 
kelly4 said:
I thought you said that the American prison system is a corporation.
Click to expand...


Although portions of it are, I never said such a thing. What does that have to do with the challenge? If the UK is as violent as it appears due to some stat that I can't rightly recall having seen, why is there such a disparity in incarceration numbers?
 
lifegoesonbrah said:
10allhomicide.gif


Are you for gated lakes and oceans too? That would save more lives..... How much do accidental gun deaths have to decrease to make you happy?

AccidentalDeathRate.PNG
Click to expand...


Why? Why has the incident rate of accidental firearm deaths steadily decreased since the 1980s?

Is this taking into account an increasing number of guns as well?
 
canndo said:
Although portions of it are, I never said such a thing. What does that have to do with the challenge? If the UK is as violent as it appears due to some stat that I can't rightly recall having seen, why is there such a disparity in incarceration numbers?
Click to expand...

Because America loves to put it's people in jail for nonviolent offenses. I'm not the first one to say this to you today....so, why are you asking again?
 
Mr Neutron said:
How many crimes are averted by someone just showing their firearm, without firing a shot? 90% of the time, that is all that is needed to change the perps mind and those never make into the news.
Click to expand...

Neither do the stories about a kid playing with a gun and *almost* pulling the trigger.
 
kelly4 said:
I didn't make my signature up...
Click to expand...


you took the fucking quote completely out of context now didn't you. THe conversation was over the concept of a static vs actively changing document.

Dead meaning no longer adaptable,no longer changing in relationship with culture. OF course there is a chance that you actually believe that 1. I think the Constitution is dead - meaning no longer applicable or no longer functioning and 2. you think I actually think hold that it is good that the document can no longer function.


The right (and I don't necessarily mean you personaly) have an ongoing need to remove statements from their context in order for them to "prove" their assertions. It sort of casts doubt on those very assertions.
 
kelly4 said:
Because America loves to put it's people in jail for nonviolent offenses. I'm not the first one to say this to you today....so, why are you asking again?
Click to expand...


Why you must be talking about drug related incarcerations - am I missing something or is marijuana still illegal in the U.K.?
 
canndo said:
you took the fucking quote completely out of context now didn't you. THe conversation was over the concept of a static vs actively changing document.

Dead meaning no longer adaptable,no longer changing in relationship with culture. OF course there is a chance that you actually believe that 1. I think the Constitution is dead - meaning no longer applicable or no longer functioning and 2. you think I actually think hold that it is good that the document can no longer function.


The right (and I don't necessarily mean you personaly) have an ongoing need to remove statements from their context in order for them to "prove" their assertions. It sort of casts doubt on those very assertions.
Click to expand...
Number 2.

You forget that I am not part of the right. How many times do I have to remind you of that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

vostok
In the US, you don't have to kill to be a murderer
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
UncleBuck
UncleBuck
VIANARCHRIS
Growing opportunities
Replies
2
Views
754
gb123
G
bearkat42
No Charges for Cops Who ‘Accidentally’ Fired 107 Bullets at an Innocent Mom and Daughter
Replies
15
Views
2K
hellmutt bones
hellmutt bones
P
Brazil protects drug dealers and arrests a man fighting for freedom and the home growing of cannabis
Replies
1
Views
1K
Pontafina
P
Padawanbater2
US police killed 77 people in September
Replies
17
Views
1K
greenlikemoney
greenlikemoney
Back
Top