Author Topic: Politics .................................................................  (Read 14145 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #810 on: September 13, 2019, 01:22:28 pm »
My ancestors didn't show up until the Civil War. I believe a potato famine caused it. lol

Some of mine came here around that time too.  From the county Clare in far western Ireland. 

Offline Realtime

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10001
  • Karma +385/-65
Re: Politics
« Reply #811 on: September 13, 2019, 02:35:12 pm »
There would be a massive armed uprising if they tried.

We should do back ground checks on private sales and if even be ok with banning private sales and making all sales go through a dealer.  If someone wants to sell a gun to someone they can sell it to a dealer and the dealer can do the background check and sell it to the person.  I'm okay with that, but getting rid of the 2nd amendment will never happen.  That would be the last straw and the ties that bind us would be dissolved.
So you're like most then, copy that post and send it to your congressman/senator.

None of that sht is getting done__not a bit of it__nada, zip, zilch. All R's and many D's are afraid of being denied their easy breezy NRA contribution.

BTW most is 50% plus one.
Like Like x 1 View List

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #812 on: September 13, 2019, 03:20:52 pm »
So you're like most then, copy that post and send it to your congressman/senator.

None of that sht is getting done__not a bit of it__nada, zip, zilch. All R's and many D's are afraid of being denied their easy breezy NRA contribution.

BTW most is 50% plus one.

Like I said if we give an inch, it's just a launch pad for liberals to demand a mile.  What's worse if you then don't agree to give them the mile, you are just as awful according to liberals as you were before you agreed to give them an inch.  I could give you example after example after example of this in many different contexts until the cows come home.  When it comes to something as fundamental as the right to self defense and bear arms, I'm not willing to give an inch only for that not to be good enough as soon as I agree to it..  I know where it leads to.  If you don't like it blame all the liberal activists.  I am on to them.  They don't StFU once they get their way.  They scream louder and for more and more. 

What's the point of agreeing to it when you will just immediately turn around and demand more.  Also additional laws called for would have prevented almost none of the mass shootings.  So it's not gonna have much of an effect and will just lead to ever increasing demands.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #813 on: September 13, 2019, 03:28:56 pm »
Right now liberals want to close loopholes for background checks.  If we keep saying nope, they will be too occupied b1tching about this issue to make even further demands.  << that's much better than agreeing to their current demands only for them to demand more once you agree.

You know it will play out like this and what I am saying is not without merit.

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #814 on: September 13, 2019, 03:31:14 pm »
If it ever gets close to banning AR-15s I'm gonna buy a bunch of them before the ban kicks in and a bunch of ammo and a bunch of other guns ... cause I know it won't stop there and that's just the beginning ... and I don't even own any guns.  So  practical effect of banning guns will be just to make more people buy them and become even more radical. 

I mentioned the cobra effect the other day.  ^^ this is it in action.  Democrats are too knee jerk to think that far ahead, tho.

Online Teaman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19853
  • Karma +273/-31
Re: Politics
« Reply #815 on: September 13, 2019, 03:47:48 pm »
Like I said if we give an inch, it's just a launch pad for liberals to demand a mile.  What's worse if you then don't agree to give them the mile, you are just as awful according to liberals as you were before you agreed to give them an inch.  I could give you example after example after example of this in many different contexts until the cows come home.  When it comes to something as fundamental as the right to self defense and bear arms, I'm not willing to give an inch only for that not to be good enough as soon as I agree to it..  I know where it leads to.  If you don't like it blame all the liberal activists.  I am on to them.  They don't StFU once they get their way.  They scream louder and for more and more. 

What's the point of agreeing to it when you will just immediately turn around and demand more.  Also additional laws called for would have prevented almost none of the mass shootings.  So it's not gonna have much of an effect and will just lead to ever increasing demands.

No one has defined what a loophole is.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #816 on: September 13, 2019, 03:48:23 pm »
Right now liberals want to close loopholes for background checks.  If we keep saying nope, they will be too occupied b1tching about this issue to make even further demands.  << that's much better than agreeing to their current demands only for them to demand more once you agree.

You know it will play out like this and what I am saying is not without merit.

If we agree to ban AR-15s, they will demand other guns be banned ... next thing you know they will demand to ban a glock 19 handgun cause it holds 10 bullets and a person with one or a couple of those and a few extra clips can do a lot of damage.  Then once they ban that and people start using handguns with less bullets, they will demand those are banned.  Also just like they say the only purpose of an AR 15 is to kill people ... the only purpose of a handgun is to shoot people if need be.  You don't go hunting with a handgun.  What else you gonna use it for but to shoot someone if you have to?

Then once they ban all guns, you'd think they would be happy and say yay we won the good fight and have a beer to celebrate and then retire from whining about the need to ban things, but I have bad news for you, that still won't be good enough.  In England stores have banned the sale of knives because of stabbings.  It never ends I tell you.
Agree Agree x 1 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #817 on: September 13, 2019, 03:50:57 pm »
No one has defined what a loophole is.

Even if they did they'd think of more that need to be closed a split second after we reach consensus to close the ones they currently don't like, until you can only buy butter knives.

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #818 on: September 13, 2019, 03:55:22 pm »
I can already see them arguing "what do you need a hand gun with 10 bullets in it for ... the only purpose of that is to kill a bunch of innocent people at once."

Online Teaman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19853
  • Karma +273/-31
Re: Politics
« Reply #819 on: September 13, 2019, 04:03:02 pm »
I can already see them arguing "what do you need a hand gun with 10 bullets in it for ... the only purpose of that is to kill a bunch of innocent people at once."

I like (not) how someone determines what another one needs. I don't think they need tha big house they're in or bodyguards, or expensive cars, and so on. Elitists and serfs. 
Agree Agree x 1 View List

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #820 on: September 13, 2019, 04:07:35 pm »
I like (not) how someone determines what another one needs. I don't think they need tha big house they're in or bodyguards, or expensive cars, and so on. Elitists and serfs.

Exactly.  It's just like them lecturing people about the environment, while they own 5 mansions that they heat and cool and fly all over in private jets.  "Do as I say, not as I do."
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Offline Jackie

  • 25 Grand Member
  • *
  • Posts: 31393
  • Karma +1037/-90
  • To the Moon Alice !!
Re: Politics
« Reply #821 on: September 14, 2019, 01:29:50 am »
I never owned a gun, but always wanted to purchase a small handgun for my self protection, if I ever need it.

But if this proposed social credit system on purchasing guns goes through,, if they check any of my posts (opinions) about certain issues around the world, they might say I can't get one.
What a joke that would be.

Who knows what the social credit system can do????

I see China's Social Credit System, and they can't say anything about anything, but that is a communist country.

I hp[e this country never has a Social Credit System, I don't see how it can, this is a free country.

Offline Realtime

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10001
  • Karma +385/-65
Re: Politics
« Reply #822 on: September 14, 2019, 07:48:42 am »
Right now liberals want to close loopholes for background checks.  If we keep saying nope, they will be too occupied b1tching about this issue to make even further demands.  << that's much better than agreeing to their current demands only for them to demand more once you agree.

You know it will play out like this and what I am saying is not without merit.
Not Libruls, depending on which poll you like between 70 and 80 percent of Americans want stronger background checks including 65% of NRA members.

Should never have let this expire   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban


NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #823 on: September 14, 2019, 12:35:25 pm »
Not Libruls, depending on which poll you like between 70 and 80 percent of Americans want stronger background checks including 65% of NRA members.

Should never have let this expire   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

I would support it too if I didn't know that ultimately it will just be used as a launchpad for more and more restrictions, like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

Was only over turned because of the Supreme Court, and trust me they will keep pushing the envelope to see how close they can get to a complete ban.  I highly doubt many people in that poll of yours who believe in the right to bear arms have thought this far ahead.

I'd be for better mental health screening.  I am for red flag laws connected to mental health and provided it isn't based on one's views and whether liberals think you are an extremist or not.  I don't see such a slippery slope there if we do a better job keeping guns out of certified mentally unstable people. 

I personally don't think a lot of people should own guns ... I feel a lot more shouldn't than would be screened out by mental health reasons, but to me it's an important enough right that this trumps my feelings about this.  I don't really like guns.  That's why I don't own any.  To me the risks aren't worth ownership and I don't really feel I need one for self defense.

I even told my brother he shouldn't own a gun cause he's not very good at controlling his temper  when he gets angry.  I will vent verbally when I am really angry.  He starts breaking and throwing **** and  has done worse than that.  I told my whole family he shouldn't have his gun at my parents house and I told him that and said I don't want to be around him with a gun.   If you have self control issues, you shouldn't own a gun, IMO.  I don't know how you legislate that though without it going too far.

There are adverse costs to the right to bear arms, for sure, but it's a very important right I feel.  A lack of an ability of folks to defend themselves has caused more genocide and death than all mass shootings ever by a factor of a hundreds of thousands.  Who knows what kind of government we will have in 200 years and how it will behave.  Who knows what the world will look like.  I think people should have the right to overthrow their government when it goes too far ... that may not be possible without the right to bear arms.
Like Like x 1 View List

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #824 on: September 14, 2019, 12:42:42 pm »
I would support it too if I didn't know that ultimately it will just be used as a launchpad for more and more restrictions, like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

Was only over turned because of the Supreme Court, and trust me they will keep pushing the envelope to see how close they can get to a complete ban.  I highly doubt many people in that poll of yours who believe in the right to bear arms have thought this far ahead.

I'd be for better mental health screening.  I am for red flag laws connected to mental health and provided it isn't based on one's views and whether liberals think you are an extremist or not.  I don't see such a slippery slope there if we do a better job keeping guns out of certified mentally unstable people. 

I personally don't think a lot of people should own guns ... I feel a lot more shouldn't than would be screened out by mental health reasons, but to me it's an important enough right that this trumps my feelings about this.  I don't really like guns.  That's why I don't own any.  To me the risks aren't worth ownership and I don't really feel I need one for self defense.

I even told my brother he shouldn't own a gun cause he's not very good at controlling his temper  when he gets angry.  I will vent verbally when I am really angry.  He starts breaking and throwing **** and  has done worse than that.  I told my whole family he shouldn't have his gun at my parents house and I told him that and said I don't want to be around him with a gun.   If you have self control issues, you shouldn't own a gun, IMO.  I don't know how you legislate that though without it going too far.

There are adverse costs to the right to bear arms, for sure, but it's a very important right I feel.  A lack of an ability of folks to defend themselves has caused more genocide and death than all mass shootings ever by a factor of a hundreds of thousands.  Who knows what kind of government we will have in 200 years and how it will behave.  Who knows what the world will look like.  I think people should have the right to overthrow their government when it goes too far ... that may not be possible without the right to bear arms.

I'm okay with holding people liable for not securing their weapons and taking reasonable precautions to keep them out of the hands of people who should not have them.  I think the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter should have been charged had she not been killed too.  To me it's not reasonable to allow an child like that free access to guns. She should have had a secured combination lock so he couldn't get ahold of them.  She would still be alive and so would all those kids.

I am also okay with closing any loop holes that allow private sales without a background check.  Again that is mental health and a violent felon and such shouldn't own guns.

There are things we can do that may help, but bans are a slippery slope that will ultimately imperil the right to bear arms.

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #825 on: September 14, 2019, 12:44:36 pm »
I never owned a gun, but always wanted to purchase a small handgun for my self protection, if I ever need it.

But if this proposed social credit system on purchasing guns goes through,, if they check any of my posts (opinions) about certain issues around the world, they might say I can't get one.
What a joke that would be.

Who knows what the social credit system can do????

I see China's Social Credit System, and they can't say anything about anything, but that is a communist country.

I hp[e this country never has a Social Credit System, I don't see how it can, this is a free country.

If we had a credit score for nations, China would be pretty low.  They are a bully.  They lie, they cheat, and they steal, and treat their own people like they are serfs.

NC Yankee

  • Guest
Re: Politics
« Reply #826 on: September 14, 2019, 12:59:12 pm »
Do you think North Koreans would live like slaves if they had the right to bear arms?  No, of course not.

Do I think we are gonna have to overthrow the government anytime soon or in the next 200 years, no I don't.  I think it's quite remote, but it's an insurance policy.  No one knows what the future holds.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Realtime

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10001
  • Karma +385/-65
Re: Politics
« Reply #827 on: September 14, 2019, 03:37:34 pm »
I would support it too if I didn't know that ultimately it will just be used as a launchpad for more and more restrictions, like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

Was only over turned because of the Supreme Court, and trust me they will keep pushing the envelope to see how close they can get to a complete ban.  I highly doubt many people in that poll of yours who believe in the right to bear arms have thought this far ahead.

I'd be for better mental health screening.  I am for red flag laws connected to mental health and provided it isn't based on one's views and whether liberals think you are an extremist or not.  I don't see such a slippery slope there if we do a better job keeping guns out of certified mentally unstable people. 

I personally don't think a lot of people should own guns ... I feel a lot more shouldn't than would be screened out by mental health reasons, but to me it's an important enough right that this trumps my feelings about this.  I don't really like guns.  That's why I don't own any.  To me the risks aren't worth ownership and I don't really feel I need one for self defense.

I even told my brother he shouldn't own a gun cause he's not very good at controlling his temper  when he gets angry.  I will vent verbally when I am really angry.  He starts breaking and throwing **** and  has done worse than that.  I told my whole family he shouldn't have his gun at my parents house and I told him that and said I don't want to be around him with a gun.   If you have self control issues, you shouldn't own a gun, IMO.  I don't know how you legislate that though without it going too far.

There are adverse costs to the right to bear arms, for sure, but it's a very important right I feel.  A lack of an ability of folks to defend themselves has caused more genocide and death than all mass shootings ever by a factor of a hundreds of thousands.  Who knows what kind of government we will have in 200 years and how it will behave.  Who knows what the world will look like.  I think people should have the right to overthrow their government when it goes too far ... that may not be possible without the right to bear arms.
That's a windy response.  So, what you're saying is that you're malleable on gun control. I like that.