Am I a Cold Hearted SOB or WHAT ?

Call it darwanism or whatever you want to call it. Ghandi changed things without guns.

MLK, just the accronyms and you know who it is. Do you remember who the clan's grand wizard was back then ? We remember Ghandi and the philosophy of change he promoted. Do you remember who the British leaders that punished Ghandi are ? The ones that used guns are forgotten.

Guns are tools. The people that don't use them are not any less. People that try to enact change with guns fail. Just look back at history.

That student in tinamen (spelling?) square that stood in front of a tank. You remember that don't you ? Foolish yes, but wise beyond comparison because it moves people the idea spreads. Imagine if he had a gun and shot at the tank, a bazoka, another tank. You would have forgotten about it a month later. Many times it is more effective to NOT have a gun.

I own guns because they are a tool. But guns are also a crutch, a security blanket that in many ways makes us less.

I'm not going to change your mind and your not going to change mine. I just think it is foolish to think of someone as less than because they choose to not use guns.

 

we only have a constitution because we had weapons to run the brits back across the pond and to start what we wanted then.

gandi is the exception to the rule.pretty much the only one in how many 1000's of years of humankind???

women libbers and no guns...stick em in the middle east for a year.they will change their minds fast.you ever see the video on tv of the lady being shot in the football field in afganistan??very eye opening.

i dont want to hurt anyone...but if they want to hurt me...well....i then want a dillion gatlin gun on my side.3000 rounds a minute will make me safer and happier person.man has not changed in 1000's of years.we are jsut seeing the true effects of a world over populated.same as any animal on the planet....you invade anothers territory..well there will be a fight....over....food,water,all resources.

our only recourse is to know the rules of the game and play as others play.if they want to play nice....thats great..but if they start doing bad stuff.then the rules change.....

 

hartage you're way to close to a left wing fruit for me .

You run your yap about people remembering Ghandi and not the Brits that dealt with him , had they chosen to put a bullet in his head in public the first time he opened his mouth no one would remember him but you could sure bet the "Lesson" taught by the Brits would have , even with the person who shot him having been forgotten .

Did the kid who stepped in front of the tank bring about any change in the Communist Government ? No not one little bit , and for all we know he could be dead by now .

Control through brutality ended in the USSR because they put to much emphasis on the military machine which served as a constant reminder of their situation .

In China it still thrives because they not only worked on the military but also on world trade and in doing so created millions of jobs unrelated to the military and allowed their people some minor entertainment and freedom giving them a facade of happiness and freedom .

China was also aided by a much more forgiving climate throughout much of the nation .

None of this has anything to do with a stupid liberal who lived her life in denial as to how dangerous life is and took no steps whatsoever to protect herself in her home despite having obvious financial means to do so . Instead she preferred to believe in the "nanny state" always being there and in not facing the facts as to just how brutal one human can indeed be to another .

I spent six years working in her neighborhood and was completely shocked at how much of a world of illusion those people live in .

Just as a good example , less than ten years ago much of the municipality was still very old family farms and if I recall it borders the river and another large muny that still has several farms and nurseries were every year they buy the flower for their gardens . Much of the general area is still undeveloped and as such has a great deal of wildlife .

The deer population began to explode about 6-8 years ago and naturally spilled over into neighborhoods .

You should have heard the way these women squawked about the damage the deer did to their yards and gardens , not to mention the many auto accidents caused because they and their children love to drive like they own the roads while talking on their cell phones and would hit the deer .

Then of course they took a committee of old bitties to community meetings that made the news , over the city not "Controlling" the deer as though they were children not obeying a curfew .

When the only solution to come from all of their meetings was to kill the deer through selective bowhunting they began squawking even louder because they saw no reason the deer couldn't simply be "Moved" .

I actually overheard a few conversations in which they also saw no reason why the deer couldn't be given birth control pills to control the population .

The pen is mightier than nothing and only through the good graces of those with guns are they allowed to doodle their useless garbage until it begins to annoy someone , then they get killed dumped in a mass grave and forgotten about .

 

I almost hate to admit it but we agree here..pull up a chair, My "favorite" scene in "the deer hunter"is when Deniero (the tortured vet forced to play russian roulette by his captors) confronts his "greasy"civillian friend (the actor who played"Fredo" in "thegodfather")for alway carrying a .38 snubby all over He takes the revolver from him and shouts

"THIS IS THIS"!! THAT'S ALL THAT THIS IS..: THIS IS THIS!!"


I.E. .Not a magic talisman, or strength, it launches a projectile to impact a target.

I am not anti-gun by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think guns are played up as having magical powers by the culture. The "A-team" on tv never killed anyone. they showed up in the van with tires screetching; they jumped out and sprayed the sky with a burst from the ac556's( full auto mini-14's) and the bad guys lay down their equal arms and just give up..magic,the town is saved (no blood, no court).

Back "in the day" as you might say, I subscribed to all the gun rags, I pored over now defunct titles like "American survival guide and especially "fire power" and"swat",( fps ,energies had half the speer reloading manual committed to memory, it was in the bathroom magazine rack)...
I found there were times ( military change of station moves) when circumstances were such I had a few guns in the house but no ammunition. and I felt insecure
and a bit of anxiety, I attributed that to a perceived weakness of character. I did eventually break that but it comes back easily...That's why you might see me being highly critical of attributing magical powers to the gun.
(oh yeah magazines exist to ignite an interest in you and sell you stuff) which is why my gun collection is/was constantly in a state of flux."I can sell/trade this to get that!"don't shoot it much anyway...(Stay the hell away from gun magazines...)

 

No issues here, I have my guns too. I understand they are tools and when you need to cut wood (example) without the proper tool it won't happen. Being grounded in reality is always a good idea. It is impossible to be grounded in reality without understanding and appreciating ( or at least trying to) the other side. I don't agree with the anti-gun stance but to think they are less because of being anti-gun is just ignorant.

 

So what is it you can't handle ? Is it the "don't think they are less because they don't use guns" thing ? Or is it that someone does not agree with you ?

I have my guns so it's obvious I agree with you on them being tools and the need for them. I do IPSC and have had the priveledge to practice a few times with the local LE entry team. So I must agree with you that putting rounds in another human at times may be necessary.

I guess that only leaves thinking of someone else as less because they don't agree with or use guns. Yeah, I definately don't agree with you there.

 

Hard to disagree with that.

 

Yeah he was. Notice you remember Ghandi and what he stood for. Do you remember the guy that shot him ? Funny how we quickly forget things that don't matter. You can kill the man but the idea lives on and spreads.



The guy that shot him was a hindu fanatic that thought a gun will change anything. The nut was against Ghandi trying to mend fences (Ghandi was Hindu) with the Muslims.

 

I don't think anyone is necessarily "less" for not owning guns, to each his own...... but I also don't think that the lady in question was making any kind of "statement of principle" by not owning. I think she was probably just a sheep, deluded into thinking that big brother will supply all she needs, and she paid the ultimate price for that.

Is the pen mightier than the sword.... yes, but only on the macro level. On the micro level, here in my home (and yours), the gun wins every time. The pen can change policies, but you can't stop a zombie with well placed punctuation.

 

Can't argue with that now can I ? I must say punctureation (is that a word? ) would be a far more effective zombie tool than punctuation.

 

that's a real good point I just couldnt come up with the
words:ghandis ideas were powerwerful but the guy that shot him rocked ghandi's world
for good.It made a 100"% difference in Ghandi's life ...perhaps even contributing to his fame by adding to his "legend"ie.(martyrdom)"

 

I don't disagree with that at all. I just believe in our constitution. We NEED opposing but equal points of view to keep us balanced. The executive branch, without the judicial and legislative branches would run amok. Same with the other two. Anti-gun people are needed as much as gun supporters are to keep our larger community balanced and sane. It just isn't right to think of them as less-than because they hold the opposing view.

 

Since you mentioned it Brokor, I am right in the middle of rereading (for the umpteenth time) the Sword of Truth series. I always appreciated the story of Renwauld the country located between mortal enemies who refused to join sides. They thought hiding behind their walls and staying neutral would keep them safe. They ended up being overrun all the men killed or enslaved and the women treated even worse. Sometimes you can't stay neutral and when you do have to pick a side it is better by far to be well armed.

 

Hmmm..... I agree completely about the system of checks and balances in our government. I'm not so sure about the antis being needed to keep a balance with firearms. I don't see a balance that needs maintained here. I'm open to it if you can convince me, but I don't see it as of yet. To illustrate it by extreme example..... do we need some people that are "pro-child molestation" to balance our view of "anti-child molestation" (not in any way linking anti gun to the other, just an example).

In my mind at least
I don't think the antis are "lesser" for their belief (as long as they don't try to make me follow their belief), but I do pity them for their misunderstanding of the world around them that leads to them volunteering as victims, but I can deal with that debate on a purely intellectual level..... where emotion comes into it, and where I get pissed, is when their belief leads them into trying to make myself and others volunteer victims. I believe in "live and let live"... I support anyones right to not be armed, I will not ever try to restrict that right, so don't f**k with my right to be armed.

When someone begins thinking they can tell me how to live, that's when I begin considering them as lesser.

Every time I hear someone say "it takes all kinds"..... I always reply with "no, it doesn't, there just are".

 

Follow up.... I think I may be misusing the term "anti". Anti would seem to mean that the person doesn't want any of us owning guns, and tries to get that belief legislated.... big difference between that person, and a person who chooses not to be armed but doesn't try to force that on me. I know several people that fall into that category, and I bear them no malice, but I do have malice for those who would impose their beliefs on me.

I think the lady in the story might not have been an "anti", but she was unarmed by choice (at a minimum).