Anyone opposed to the hard right propaganda, please stop debating BS..

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

Do you have a better "trick" than to prepare to defend your home? I mean...what are you suggesting here? Is there some magic im not familiar with?

Well for starters, here it is not a do-or-die situation for theif.

It sounds like where you are, if a crook planned to steal from your home he must come prepared to defend his life meaning he better be armed too. And if you get caught by LEO entering a home with a weapon, I imagine the state will kill you just as quickly.

If they did end up in jail they are going to be there for a very long time with others that are there for a very long time and any hope of rehabilitation is fools hope?

Ok. If I lived in a state that bread criminals as vicious as the ones where you live, maybe I would want a gun. But I would also be writing my government endlessly to plea with them to stop being so damn hard on criminals and give them something to live for.

The trick is rehabilitation or revolving door but don't make them believe their life doesn't mean # or they will return the thought in kind.

My mentality is that of a man who will not be made a victim. Period. You can think whatever you want of that. But I will not be made a victim. Period.

Who wants to be a victim? I don't even lock my doors.

FWIW, the US isn't the greatest nation on Earth. I don't think there are really any "great" nations on Earth. Maybe that is the problem: we all wallow in the lackluster and argue about which is more shiney when none of them actually shine? I dunno...but im glad you find Canada to be so wonderful. Too bad you think so little of the US. But thats cool...i only tolerate it until another habitable planet opens up.

See that just makes me feel bad. I do think poorly of the US but only in regard to it's reluctance to change and almost solely on the subjects of gun control and public healthcare. And that, you should know is derived from some Americans poor attititdue towards those countries that have strict gun control and public health care.

And I am sorry to say this but no habitable planet is going to open it's doors if our mightiest nation behaves the way the US does with guns and criminals. Nobody would touch us with million light year pole. Thanks for that BTW.

a reply to: jimmyx

It sure would. Its why I hvae a Judge. I can load it with 410 or .45cal.

And when im hunting I will take either my 30.06 or the 30-30 that was my dads.

When I am concealed carry Ill use the .40. When hunting i carry a 9mm as a side arm, though, as the smaller .40 doesn't rest on my hip as well (it gets carried inside the pants). When hunting for fowl, i use the 12 ga shotgun. When handling varmints Ill use the 22 long rifle.

Point being, i have several tools. I use each for certain tasks.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

Do you have a better "trick" than to prepare to defend your home? I mean...what are you suggesting here? Is there some magic im not familiar with?

behaves the way the US does with guns and criminals

You found the main cause right here. We have a serious crime problem. And guns aren't causing it.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA


Well for starters, here it is not a do-or-die situation for theif.

It sounds like where you are, if a crook planned to steal from your home he must come prepared to defend his life meaning he better be armed too. And if you get caught by LEO entering a home with a weapon, I imagine the state will kill you just as quickly.

If they did end up in jail they are going to be there for a very long time with others that are there for a very long time and any hope of rehabilitation is fools hope?

Ok. If I lived in a state that bread criminals as vicious as the ones where you live, maybe I would want a gun. But I would also be writing my government endlessly to plea with them to stop being so damn hard on criminals and give them something to live for.

The trick is rehabilitation or revolving door but don't make them believe their life doesn't mean # or they will return the thought in kind.

If someones life means something to them, they won't break into homes in Texas in the middle of the night. It should be pretty well known the whole world over now, as there have been quite a few "stand your ground" headlines in the last several years.

You fail to acknowledge that when someone violates my home, they have violated my rights too. There isn't "just some teenager". If there is, then the Darwin Award can be given to them. But if someone is in my house in the middle of the night, I don't care what their reason is or how peaceful they may be. It does not matter.

And im not even worried about thiefs and crackheads. Im worried more about guys like this:

Teens Arrested For Raping Woman In Front Of Her Child

Man Sexually Assaulted 2 Kids In New Jersey

MMA Fighter Killed In Home Invasion

or, even worse, this guy:

The BTK Killer

Who wants to be a victim? I don't even lock my doors.

Good for you. I may or may not lock my doors, too. A locked door is only a momentary obstacle. My dogs will alert me to an intruder.

Until May i lived in a small town 2.5 hours from Mexico that had 5 prisons and a forensic mental hospital. You bet your ass that I had any level of protection I felt made sense. Since I've moved, it find it less risky to live here just north of Austin near I-35. But I work right off I-35 in a pretty remote location where we have had quite a few people arrested for doing things that are just downright creepy over the last 3 months. In this time, one lady I work with (from San Francisco, and very politically liberal in her views) get her CCW. She now packs a .380 everywhere she goes. The first episode we had here just was more than her spidey senses would tolerate.

Does it make her safer? Probably not. But it makes her feel safer. And to feel psychologically secure is still something that people should strive for. Confidence is something that everyone should have.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

.380 helps a lot more than screaming.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Try reading past the summary. It included all semiautomatic pistols and shotguns as well. Anything that could either accept or modified to accept high capacity magazines or threaded barrels (which can be done to any firearm). For example James Bond's PPK was threaded inside the barrel to accept his suppressor. And while you can buy a 10 round Beretta 92FS the 15, 20 and 30 round mags fit in there just fine.

Never mind

I'm amused by the anti-Constitutional gun-grabbers.

They actually think that we need to justify "why" we want to own something.

It's very. . . dictatorial of them.

a reply to: DBCowboy

That reminds me, do you have a bill of sale to your car or does the state hold the title and issues you a copy?

I mean every firearm I have purchased had the details. Even if just a receipt, it did have the serial number listed. All to prove that I actually owned that firearm and not once has the state requested a yearly payment and issued a registration sticker proving I paid that year.

More I think about it, this is starting to sound like they really hate the 5th more than the 2nd. That whole thing about removing property without due process.

a reply to: Ahabstar

Don't give anyone any ideas!

a reply to: Ahabstar

You are sounding like that kid that would interrupt the teacher at the end of class to reminder her she didn't issue out homework assignments.

a reply to: face23785

Much more immediate help.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: SlapMonkey

I don’t expect you to do anything but continue preaching tired old scare tactics that are not and were not going to ever happen in the first place,but..

Listen--I'm not trying to scare anyone, and especially not in my response to your OP. I basically pointed out that there are logical reasons to discuss the possibility of gun confiscation, as it has happened many times in the past and guns are basically illegally in many nations at this very moment. It's an appropriate discussion because it's a reality for many, even if not for us at this very moment in time.

But if you interpret that as "preaching tired old scare tactics," that problem is on you, not me.

Then please prove there has ever been one single concerted effort to ban all fire arms...

I don't have to prove jack sh*t to you about concerted efforts, because I never claimed that there was one. Pay attention to what I actually say, because so far in this response, you're batting 0-for-2.

Innuendo doesn’t count.. if they are actually trying to ban guns. It’s gonna take a lot more than innuendo...

No, innuendo DOES count in regard to making issues relevant to discuss. Just because you don't like it and want to lament that reality in a new thread, that's on you.

0-for-3.

Aren’t bills constantly proposed?? So are dems constantly filing bills to ban all the guns??

Again, this is nothing that I claimed.

0-for-4.

95% of the American people would be against it as well as most of the elected officials..

Even saying you had a realistic plan you wanted to implement would be political suicide..

It is exactly as laughable as shiria law coming to America.. which coincidentally is the same crowd.....

Apparently you seem incapable of separating a "concern" that people want to discuss from an "imminent threat," and in being so incapable, you're attributing claims to me that I didn't make.

You know...speaking of tired tactics.

You will not be debating me on a gun ban because I never claimed that there is one or that one is imminent. I'm glad that you think that you're being so assertive and intelligent with me, but in reality, you're now just 0-for-5.

Not that I'm keeping count, but when someone responds to me so horrendously and in a way that makes it clear that they read what they assumed that I was saying instead of what was actually said, it's doing this thread an injustice not to call it out.

I wish there were some "F'n genies," because my first wish would be that you could comprehend my words better. A close second would be that you (and others, including lawmakers) better understood why a right (that shall not be infringed) to keep and bear arms is something that should not ever be "F'n" messed with, and that includes whittling away piece by piece at that right in lieu of a full-on concerted effort to ban and take all guns.

But as others have noted--banning new sales of any firearm is a form of gun ban, like they did with fully-automatic rifles as well. The fact that you bemoan logical fallacies (and call out to ignore them) in your OP, but then say that we should say things like, "No elected official has ever even proposed a ban nor confiscation," is laughable.

If you're unwilling to see your own fallacies, how can you call out others on theirs?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

When I lived in Clarksville, TN, one of my son's daycare friends was the victim of a terrible--very terrible--home invasion incident. At the time, my son was about six, and his friend was five.

If you want to know the details, you can read about it here, but be warned that it's a very horrific story, and it still tears me up to read and think about it to this day. Having to tell my son why his friend was never coming back...

This incident was one of the main reasons that I started getting serious about protecting my family--up until then, we had lived most of our lives on military bases where home security was more of an afterthought...not anymore.

But seriously--it's terrible story. The short of it is that the mother amazingly survived, but her three children died from the stab wounds and the house fire. The father was not home at the time of the murders.

Okay, I'm done. I don't want to think about it anymore.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

When I lived in Clarksville, TN, one of my son's daycare friends was the victim of a terrible--very terrible--home invasion incident. At the time, my son was about six, and his friend was five.

If you want to know the details, you can read about it here, but be warned that it's a very horrific story, and it still tears me up to read and think about it to this day. Having to tell my son why his friend was never coming back...

This incident was one of the main reasons that I started getting serious about protecting my family--up until then, we had lived most of our lives on military bases where home security was more of an afterthought...not anymore.

But seriously--it's terrible story. The short of it is that the mother amazingly survived, but her three children died from the stab wounds and the house fire. The father was not home at the time of the murders.

Okay, I'm done. I don't want to think about it anymore.

That is a horrific story. Then you get people that come into threads like these and say people who want to own a gun to protect themselves and their families are pussies or aren't real men. Reality vs. lala land.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Yet some would still require us to "justify" having a firearm of any sort.

a reply to: face23785

Yes, it is terrible, and it still affects me greatly. I can't imagine the terror that family went through. It turns out that the murderer--a DirecTV technician--had been to the family's home before on a job and that it wasn't just a random occurrence. He was not there on a job at the time of the atrocities.

As a parent of two children, I cannot imagine the helpless feeling that the mother had when all of this was happening.

Like I said, this incident was a large reason behind me determining that I will do whatever I can to limit the helplessness that would accompany such a scenario in my and my family's lives, even if the odds are stacked against us that it would ever happen to me or my family. It's so much better to be prepared with tools and skills and never need either than to be a helpless victim when it's avoidable.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

A) Not in America it hasn’t...

That’s just like it is reasonable to discuss the potential threat of restarting African slavery..

Oh no, that would be just as ridiculous..


B) no you can’t prove it to me because it has never happened...

There is a difference...

Won’t, suggests you could if you wanted to and you can’t, so....

I put up a thread asking for quotes of elected democrats saying they wanted to ban all guns , repeal the second or start any confiscation program for guns..

Not one has been submitted.. not one single example..

C) innuendo only counts to propagandists and idiots..

Innuendo .. just means that same old tired line of..

“I know they didn’t say they want to ban the guns, but we know what they really mean.. “


And please explain to me how they are going to pass Congress the senate and the president. Before magically taliking the military or law enforcement to enforce it in innuendo????

The whole point of innuendo is that your implying they have a hidden meaning that you don’t even know if they remotely have?!?!!


Aka not evidence..


Your every argument here would get you laughed out of a court of law , or even a high school debate class..

Because that ms when I learned the difference between logical fallacies and legit arguments..

In reality it is mental masterbation that directs a big chunk of the countries voting habits and political leanings..

For decades.. and it was even less realistic in the past.

I still remember my father, who was the definition of an average joe who only knew about politics from random conversation. Telling me he was voting for bush senior “because Dukockus wanted to take all the guns..”

It is a BS totally unrealistic fear that has been the primary motivation politically for millions of people..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

A. No, it is nothing like discussing the resurgence of enslaving Africans, unless you can show me multiple elected officials who are openly advocating for that.

0-for-1

B. This tells me that you are lazy, because there have been many posts on ATS that have videos of exactly what you're asking for. But, since you're apparently unwilling to look it up yourself (remember, the onus is on YOU because you make the claim that it hasn't happened), here's Senator Dianne Feinstein with some double speak of sorts:

If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban--picking up every one of them...Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in--I would have done it. I could not do that; the votes weren't here."

Now, if your silly (and false) comparison in "A" above was accurate, we would need to have evidence of an elected official saying something similar to: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright reinstitution of slavery--picking up every African...Mr. and Mrs. America, buy 'em all up--I would have done it. I could not do that; the votes weren't there."

But see, the interesting thing, though, is that we don't have ANY--not one--elected official saying anything of the sort. If you take that Feinstein video and keep going with it on YouTube, you'll see that she's not an anomaly, and that many have called for weapons bans and confiscation over the years, and definitely enough to make discussing the topic appropriate.

Why you're still unwilling to accept that reality is very telling.

C. Ah, yes...resorting to name-calling because you have no ammo in the magazine. I see.

Innuendo is a perfectly valid reason to talk about something, whether you accept it or not. But as shown in the embedded video, innuendo isn't all that there is--but I'm sure that you'll find a way to dismiss or explain away Feinstein's comment.

Now, if you think that my comments would get me laughed out of court (I'm not concerned about evidence that would stand up in court--this isn't a courtroom) or a high school debate class (this isn't high school), it's only because you're not doing your due diligence in backing up your own claims, otherwise you would encounter evidence to the contrary of your statements.

If you truly think that you are devoid of logical fallacies in this thread and in your comments to me, you are blinded by your own ideology.

See, I don't think that very many elected officials would ever make statements in public like Feinstein does--she's protected by her voters in California who are lemmings to the extreme-left ideology (I know, I grew up there), but that doesn't mean that there aren't some out there (which are easily found on the internet). I also don't think that an outright ban and confiscation would EVER be considered constitutional or be proposed in Congress.

But those two beliefs of mine doesn't meant that I can't and shouldn't engage in intelligent discussion on the matter, even if it hurts your sensibilities concerning what "should" and "should not" be discussed. Because, honestly, your opinion of me and on this matter are left wanting, and your unwillingness to remove your blinders on the matter is a problem, especially for Mr. No Logical Fallacies Allowed.

Sir, I'm removing myself from this conversation, as it has become (once again) a lesson in futility with you.

Best regards.

No the combat scenario requires 6 30 rd mags.
We JUST have to teach kids how to shoot.