It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
Who wants to be a victim? I don't even lock my doors.
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..
Then please prove there has ever been one single concerted effort to ban all fire arms...
Innuendo doesn’t count.. if they are actually trying to ban guns. It’s gonna take a lot more than innuendo...
Aren’t bills constantly proposed?? So are dems constantly filing bills to ban all the guns??
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.....
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.
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.