Ah, the enjoyment of gun ownership and use...

Page 1 of 4  
READSBORO State police say a Vermont hunter shot a friend who was tracking a deer and then killed himself after realizing his friend was dead.
Sgt. Albert Abdelnour says three men were hunting midday Saturday in southwestern Vermont when 39-year-old Benjamin Birch, of Readsboro, shot a deer. The injured deer ran, and Birch and the two other men chased after it.
Police say 49-year-old Timothy Bolognani, of Readsboro, then fired a shot and heard Birch cry out. Bolognani and the third man found Birch injured from the gunshot, and he died.
Abdelnour says a "distraught" Bolognani then used his rifle to kill himself.
An autopsy will be conducted on the two bodies. State police say there is no evidence of foul play.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20111127/NEWS07/111127001/Cops-Upset-Vermont-hunter-kills-self-after-pal-killed
---------------
At least they're taking themselves out, one gun owner at a time (or in this case, two).
If it wasn't from hunting deer, it would be the impending global financial crash and resulting economic turmoil. Those in the US that will be pushed over the financial edge will resort to the handgun under their mattress as they exit themselves (and their families) from this earthly stage.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/27/2011 09:52 AM, Home Guy wrote:

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20111127/NEWS07/111127001/Cops-Upset-Vermont-hunter-kills-self-after-pal-killed
Oh eat me. This is a truly sad story and your politicizing it makes you just look like an asshole.
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What a co-winkydink. Acting like an asshole makes YOU look jes like an asshole.
nb
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/27/2011 10:08 AM, notbob wrote:

If that was aimed at me, show me where I've acted like an asshole.
Hint: calling some mean-spirited idiot lowlife an asshole is not "acting like an asshole." The world would be a nicer place if people weren't afraid to stop every now and then and say "hey, man, that's not cool, knock it off."
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unfortunately, that's not what you posted.
nb
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/27/2011 10:38 AM, notbob wrote:

The OP deserved a stronger caution, especially given his recent history of posting deliberately inflammatory anti-US material. That last post crossed the line to "despicable human being" (if "human being" can be used to describe someone that sick and devoid of feelings.)
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/27/2011 10:38 AM, notbob wrote:

Actually he posted a very reasonable on target response using real words.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
George wrote:

He (Nate Nagel) posted a very emotional if not irrational response to my dry and accurate (if depressing) commentary regarding the quoted story.
He acused me of "politicizing" - as if any aspect of gun ownership and use in the US can be discussed in any other terms. Gun issues rank right up there with abortion and taxes as being the MOST political issues in the US.
Guns are and will be used to kill innocent people, intentionally, by accident, and under very depressing circumstances. Gun proponents can't wish those events away no matter how hard they try.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/27/2011 12:56 PM, Home Guy wrote:

There are no "gun issues" save for people owning them who have not been properly trained in the safe use and handling thereof. US citizens have the right to own guns, don't like it, don't live here - and don't criticize us for our choices if you live elsewhere.

It was a hunting accident, you moron. Now there possibly (likely?) was a lapse of judgment involved, but that doesn't make it any less tragic, nor is an anecdote any kind of justification for running around and yelling "guns are bad! see? see?"
Let me guess, you think that meat magically appears on little shrink-wrapped styrofoam trays?
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 21:59:44 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"

What does "training" have to do with "owning"?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 22:38:25 -0500, "Stormin Mormon"
If you would learn to post, I wouldn't trim it out. As it is you make a hash of conversations.

It really sounds like you were in agreement. Hence, my question.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
gpsman wrote:

The movie "no country for old men" provides some insight into that subject.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nate Your rudeness and name calling are completely obscuring any point that you are trying to make. If your purpose is to alienate people who might actually agree with a rational argument that is thoughtfully presented then keep right on being abrasive.
I have to wonder why some proponents of gun ownership think that turning a right into a duty is a good idea. If gun ownership were a duty imposed on you by the state then that burden could be lifted from you by the state. Gun ownership and carrying a gun is a right intended to make it more difficult for the government to subjugate the citizenry. Giving the government control of gun ownership is legitimately seen as one step in a slide toward despotism. It was Thomas Jefferson who said ""When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty." There does not need to be any grand conspiracy underway for the rights of the people to erode away to nothing. Like water falling on a stone the outcome is inevitable unless that erosion is deflected through the defense of all of the rights that the constitution reserves to the citizens and not just the rights that the government or even a majority of the population find it convenient for citizens to exercise. I do realize that guns can be and are abused but that does not make it a good idea to try to take away the basic right that every American has to keep and bare arms.
-- Tom Horne
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Horne wrote:

I would argue that the vast majority of US gun owners do not know the underlying reason why the "right to bear arms" is in the constitution.
But regardless, the US is way past the point that an armed citizenry makes for an effective counter to gov't tyranny. The original framers could not contimplate that US citizens would one day have more to fear from something called the "IRS" or a "personal credit score" - forms of tyranny that can not be fought back with a gun (or musket).
Did the framers ever forsee or even imagine that civilian gun ownership would take a bigger toll in citizen-vs-citizen conflict (injury, death and misery) - and NOT citizen-vs-gov't conflict?
Where has the right to bear arms ever served US citizens in countering gov't tyranny during the entire existance of the country?
It was a stupid idea from the start - the gov't will always give itself more and bigger guns if it thinks it needs it. Just ask the people of Waco Tx.

No.
When the gov't fears the people, it buys more and bigger guns. And it x-rays them at airports. And it taps their phone lines. And it passes laws allowing the military to be the new police.

And a lot of good the exercise of that right has given you over the years.
But the genie can't be put back in the bottle.
All we can really do is argue the merits of what could have been.
If given the choice between absolutely no private firearm ownership (and hence no possibility for a domestic fire-arm trade, products, black-market, etc) and the situation we have now, who could argue that society wouldn't be better off if NOBODY had guns?
After all, we know from several hundred years of past experience that an armed US citizenry was and is totally ineffective against it's own gov't.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seminole_Wars
<<Seminole victory: Pensacola was taken by General Andrew Jackson, the U.S. Government pays most of the warring Seminole to move to Indian Territory: grants one seat in the House: one seat in the Senate of the State Legislature, and Florida was ceded to the United States.>>
You could quibble and say they weren't US citizens but the case could be made that they had a greater right to the lands they lived in for centuries than Andy Jackson & Co.
You could also say that an armed citizenry was pretty effective at throwing off the Brits during the American Revolution.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

What exactly did they win? And was it because they had guns?

That was before there was a "United States", and before there was a US constitution.
Tell me how you think that would go down today.
(I must have gotten most of the other stuff right, since you only chose that part to quote me on)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Home Guy wrote:

I can.
By quoting the pithy saying: "God made man. Samuel Colt made men equal."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

If everyone having guns makes them equal, then everyone not having guns also makes them equal.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Except that in your words, that genie can NOT be put back in the bottle Why are you arguing something that will NEVER occur And if we look at the theory of if, past history shows that men have ALWAYS tried to dominate those less able to defend themselves Why are you ageing to return to past barbarism ?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Wrong, dumbass, people come in all different sizes. Guns make physical strength less important, equalizing granny and perp.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.