Outgun them when you can’t disarm them

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Flanders, Apr 15, 2012.

  1. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6,554
    Thanks Received:
    634
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,580
    Mitt Romney walked into the lion’s den carrying an unloaded gun when he spoke at a National Rifle Association forum. A Steve Kornacki piece in Solon tells us:

    Romney is also on record in support of gun registration. That position is far more anti-Second Amendment than is a ban on assault rifles. For the umpteenth time: Registration is the final step before confiscation.

    Kornacki goes on to put in a plug for Hussein:


    Kornacki should know that Hussein is not going to poke a sleeping lion. He even tells us why:

    And this:

    Friday, Apr 13, 2012 2:47 PM 18:08:15 EDT
    When Democrats gave up on guns
    The NRA’s attacks on Barack Obama are a reminder of the futility of his party’s 2nd Amendment strategy
    By Steve Kornacki

    When Democrats gave up on guns - Salon.com

    Instead of mounting a frontal assault on the Second Amendment by trying to disarm law-abiding Americans, Hussein’s strategy is to outgun them. It is a pity he is not trying to outgun America’s enemies since he cannot disarm them either.

    Hussein’s sneak attack on the Second Amendment began in July 2008 when he said:


    Obama calls for civilian paramilitary force - YouTube

    Pundits never mention it but funding is in the Affordable Care Act only it’s called the Ready Reserve Corps. Spending billions of tax dollars organizing and arming millions of street punks, dedicated Communists, angry America-haters, and drug-soaked radicals from the Alinsky School of Revolution would neuter the Second Amendment more effectively than repeal. Hussein’s armed goons will make nasty groping airport screeners look like humanitarians on a mission from God.

    To imply that Hussein the Community Organizer is somehow a staunch defender of the Second Amendment is a testament to spin and doublespeak. In all things Hussein succeeds in appearing to be the exact opposite of what he is. I cannot think of another politician, living or dead, who pulled it off to the extent Hussein is getting away with it. Or perhaps he simply has more to lie about.

    Gingrich and the Second Amendment

    Newt Gingrich addressed the NRA forum after Romney. There is no doubt that he is far more trustworthy on the Second Amendment than is Romney. That should have given me hope Gingrich would pick up some momentum ending in an open convention. Sad to say Gingrich’s resurrection would have gained more traction had he NOT tied a good idea to the United Nations:


    Newt Gingrich Calls for Universal Right to Bear Arms at NRA Forum
    by Michael Ames | April 13, 2012 7:05 PM EDT

    Newt Gingrich Calls for Universal Right to Bear Arms at NRA Forum - The Daily Beast

    Romney is a New World Order—United Nations guy. Gingrich did not help himself by suggesting a UN treaty. Giving the UN credibility is not the way to separate his views from Romney’s tenuous support of the Second Amendment. Being one very nervous conservative, any mention of the United Nations scares the hell out of me unless it calls for shutting the place down à la Ron Paul.

    Bottom line: Newt is smart enough to know that the UN would never agree to such a treaty, and he surely knew that the UN has been pushing for a worldwide ban on all hand guns. This Youtube video is a MUST-MUST-MUST-SEE for everyone who is interested in learning about the UN’s attack on the Second Amendment:


    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO0k9SHljCc&feature=player_embedded]United Nations and the Global gun ban - YouTube[/ame]

    Hussein gets the final word

    Hussein can hardly be called Second Amendment friendly since he is in favor of the UN’s Gun Control Treaty. He and his UN-loving pals in the Senate would ratify it today if they had the required number of votes:


    Obama Continues Pushing UN Gun Control Treaty

    Finally, the thugs in Hussein’s civilian national security force would not be covered by the UN’s Gun Control Treaty because they would enjoy the same status enjoyed by government-armed goons in every dictatorship. This old saw has never been truer: When guns are outlawed only the outlaws will have guns.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2012
  2. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +915
    Your masters don't like guns. They're oily and dirty and loud. They have peones for security. It's just money ! What ? You cant afford private security ? Useless eater.
     
  3. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6,554
    Thanks Received:
    634
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,580
    To Douger: Do you ever make sense? Maybe the creatures living on your home planet in a faraway galaxy understand garbled thoughts expressed in verbal shorthand, but earthlings demand more clarity.
     
  4. Sallow
    Offline

    Sallow The Big Bad Wolf. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    56,535
    Thanks Received:
    6,132
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    New York City
    Ratings:
    +7,394
    The second amendment is nothing what you "gun righters" think it is. It is a prescribed method for maintaining a ground force..without having to have a professional army. There is no right to wild west justice, hunting, or anything else you guys imagine.

    It's terrible that the NRA continues to push for the unfettered access of guns to every imbecile with an agenda. Some 40K citizens and LEOs die each year because of this insanity. And unsatisfied with that bloodbath..the NRA continues to push for more absurd laws..like "Stand your ground". Hopefully..that was the bridge to far.
     
  5. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6,554
    Thanks Received:
    634
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,580
    To Sallow: In addition to Supreme Court decisions try the Founding Fathers:

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VMy5S1UuKQ&feature=player_detailpage]Founding Fathers: The Right to Bear Arms - YouTube[/ame]
     
  6. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,746
    Thanks Received:
    4,242
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,156
    All Second Amendment arguments aside, too many innocent Americans are killed by guns. The NRA and its minions have never addressed this issue and never will. The gun business is profitable and the hysteria "They'll take your guns" is nothing more than fear mongering by those whose sole fear is the loss of the golden goose.

    My position is very simple, keep whatever weapon one needs IN their home. If they are too scared to leave home without it, they should stay home. The simple fact of having a firearm in one's custody and control is little different than someone under the influence of alcohol. Both make the actor 'brave' and more likely to engage another than if sober or unarmed.

    I suspect Zimmerman is an example of what can go wrong when unvetted and poorly trained citizens are allowed to walk our streets armed with deadly weapons. He and others are more likely to put themselves in harms way, thinking a firearm will protect them can unwittingly create the situation where they or others are killed or wounded.
     
  7. Flanders
    Offline

    Flanders ARCHCONSERVATIVE

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2010
    Messages:
    6,554
    Thanks Received:
    634
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,580
    To Wry Catcher: You are presenting the same old argument: The gun is the villain.

    Too many innocent victims are killed by vicious individuals with a gun. The NRA has addressed that distinction time and time again.


    To Wry Catcher: That’s unbelievably naive. Try telling gang members and assorted criminals to stay home.

    To Wry Catcher: Hardly. There is no evidence that drinking alcohol encourages the fatal violence associated with guns in the hands of criminals. And let’s not overlook “Happy drunks.”

    It is interesting that you relate alcohol to guns. Let me remind you that in the early part of the 20th century sick do-gooders joined with Socialists in order to save mankind by prohibiting alcohol. Instead of saving anybody they gave the country organized crime:


    Today’s do-gooder freaks are joining with big government butchers in order to save mankind by disarming everyone except the people they need as bodyguards. You might ask yourself what the country will get this time around if law-abiding Americans lose their Right to own guns?

    To Wry Catcher: Deadly weapons? Does that include knives, clubs, and stones? No matter the weapon the user is the villain not the weapon. Even if you could eliminate every object that can be used to kill, you are still left with individuals who will kill with their bare hands. In short: The gun is not the problem; so why is the United Nations hellbent on disarming everyone?
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2012
  8. The Gadfly
    Offline

    The Gadfly Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,190
    Thanks Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +611
    Wry,
    Those assertions are almost funny. I maintain a VERY non-aggressive posture when I'm carrying, right down to eye contact and body language. Usually, that's because I think I might be in a high-threat environment, and I'm not looking for trouble; I'm merely alert, should trouble come looking for me. Now, If I'm not carrying (at least not anything that's legally considered a weapon; I always have something that can be improvised), I will maintain a slightly more aggressive posture, appropriate to both the threat level, and the need for deterrence. This is my preferred mode, 90% of the time, because it gives me more options; with a gun, the weapon and distance are really my only two defenses, and the last thing I need or want is an unpleasant surprise at arm's length.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. M14 Shooter
    Online

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    20,104
    Thanks Received:
    1,747
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Ratings:
    +4,482
    This is a lie.

    This is a strawman, and a lie.

    Another lie.

    Clearly, the truth is not your friend.
     
  10. M14 Shooter
    Online

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    20,104
    Thanks Received:
    1,747
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Ratings:
    +4,482
    One is "too many".

    This is a lie. The NRA has never addressed the issue the way YOU think it should be addressed, which is not the same thing.

    Never the great many of those who -would- take away guns if they did not think trying to do so would get them voted out of office.

    How does your right to self-defense end at your front door?
    How does your right to arms end at your front door?

    OK...
    Should we then treat alcohol the way we treat gun or treat guns the way we treat alcohol?

    "An" example of what "can" go wrong?
    :lol:
    Of the hundresds of thousands of people in the US that hold a CCW, how many similar cases have there been?
     

Share This Page