On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 02:42:30 +0000, Ed Pawlowski wrote (in article ):
It's next to the bits that say that in order to be accepted/admired by your peers:
a slight edge or
school door in a military
limited options... (C,P,J,X,Y,Z...)
and many, many more things that are not actually written down but nevertheless are "rules." Some are very loose and need only be followed by those seeking some sort of alpha or celebrity status, Close behind are those which to transgress would only have you labelled as "uncool" or "unusual" in some way. Disregarding others would maybe have you considered as "harmlessly eccentric" and maybe regarded more or less suspiciously. Yet others would be very dangerous not to go along with. A lot depends on where (and when) you are and whom you're with.
This stuff doesn't have to be written down. It still provides leverage on society.
I agree that nowhere does it say that man must be a sheep, herded by market forces, manipulated by the marketing industry and driven by advertising to consume or behave in a certain way - but look around you and tell me it ain't necessarily so. Were it not, we would not have seen the tragedy that kicked this thread off.
Look around you and tell me people are _really_ free.
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:02:30 GMT, Lew Hodgett cast forth these pearls of wisdom...:
Typical of legitimate participants, Not so with respect to the criminal element.
Alarmists like to use the phrase "Saturday night specials", because it stirs something up within them, but what in the hell is that name supposed to mean - and more importantly, what in the hell is it supposed to mean in the context of this discussion? Why introduce a red herring that has nothing at all to do with the matter at hand?
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From
1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to
1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------
Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------
China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to
1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated ------------------------------
Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to
1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ---- ------------- -------------
Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to
1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. ------------------------------
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to
1977, one million educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. -----------------------------
Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the
20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. ------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:
List of 7 items:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes,
44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort, and expense was expended in successfully ridding Australian society of guns The Australian experience and the other historical facts above prove it.
You won't see this datum on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.
With guns, we are 'citizens'. Without them, we are 'subjects'.
During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!
If you value your freedom, Please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.
The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.
Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.
I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.
W hen seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.
A reporter did a human-interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 the Ranger was carrying and asked him 'Why do you carry a 45?' The Ranger responded, 'Because they don't make a 46.'
An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity.
The old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. 'Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?' 'No Ma'am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my rifle.'
Beware the man who only has one gun. HE PROBABLY KNOWS HOW TO USE IT!!!
But wait, there's more!
I was once asked by a lady visiting if I had a gun in the house. I said I did. She said 'Well I certainly hope it isn't loaded!' To which I said, 'Of course it is loaded, can't work without bullets!' She then asked, 'Are you that afraid of someone evil coming into your house?' My reply was, 'No, not at all. I am not afraid of the house catching fire either, but I have fire extinguishers around, and they are all loaded too.' To which I'll add, having a gun in the house that isn't loaded is like having a car in the garage without gas in the tank.
I'm a firm believer of the 2nd Amendment! If you are too, please forward
NOTICE: This communication and any attachments may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received without printing, copying, retransmitting, disseminating, or otherwise using the information. Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------ One site has it all. Your email accounts, your social networks, and the things you love. Try the new AOL.com today!
Why? You're the one proposing a new law--it's up to you to demonstrate that it will do what you claim it will. If you don't have the numbers to back your assertion then you're talking out your ass.
Why should I prove that your solution addresses the problem that you claim exists?
Then how is it that buying wheel weights at a store for purposes of casting bullets for reloading purposes is not cost effective when you are charging your ten dollar a bullet tax?
You really don't seem to have even tried to think this idea of yours through and when challenged to do so you fall back on glib responses and attempts to shift the burden of proof. I am curious as to why you are so resistant to examining your own views.
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:46:43 GMT, Lew Hodgett cast forth these pearls of wisdom...:
I know what a Saturday Night Special is - what I am asking is why you introduced that into this thread? SNS's have nothing to do with the discussion that preceeded your introduction of them.
On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 20:13:20 GMT, Lew Hodgett cast forth these pearls of wisdom...:
Not at all impacted. They aren't impacted by the price of guns today - they don't go to Gander Mountain to buy their guns and ammo. They buy them on the street. Price goes up? Sell more drugs.
The whole point is that you can't combat the criminal element with tactics that cost the law abiding elements of society. Those guys aren't affected by prices, inconveniences, etc.
A bit of more recent history. For those who think disarming the populace is a good idea, read very carefully the accounts of what happened in Mumbai last week. Just a couple of armed citizens (heck, one or two armed police officers with ammunition) could have prevented a lot of savagery. Instead, the populace was reduced to being a bunch of unarmed, helpless sheep whom these monsters were able to slaughter at will. The cameraman who got the pictures of one of the savages made the statement that he wished he had a gun instead of a camera.
He also made the statement that the policemen wouldn't fire on the terrorists. There is some speculation that the police may have had guns but no ammunition.
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 03:06:12 GMT, Lew Hodgett cast forth these pearls of wisdom...:
I'm sure he knows well that raising the price of ammo and guns does little to impact the criminal element. It seems only you think it will. The cops and the politicians like to push this stuff because it gets them feel good points with the non-thinkers out there in public land who feel the just have to see something done - anything...
Not yet, anyway. Strong advocate of 2nd Amendment rights, so no argument there. But, what worries me is how much of the illegal immigrant population is currently armed to the teeth? Especially with the Mexican drug cartel increasingly more active *inside* our border.
Maintaining "weapon parity" is something the average citizen is not going to consider.
HomeOwnersHub website 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.