Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Phoenix: Dozens of armed citizens attend todays Obama Speech

page: 18
64
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by guardstarr
 


I appreciate your idealism but that type of idealism is not reserved for this planet nor the other people on it.

Hopefully you will never have to defend yourself because you will truly be defenseless.




posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by guardstarr
 

Why all the yawns and groans? Got a cramp from looking down your nose?

I already knew that I wasn't going to change your mind. From your statements, it became obvious that there wasn't that much to change. Therefore, you CAN'T be like me.

Wouldn't want me around kids? My children had their own rifles at age six, including my daughter, and could shoot skillfully and responsibly as soon as they were capable of getting a good sight picture.

They grew up to be responsible young people who happened to be very familiar and very respectful of those tools.

Guns are deadly? Is that your justification?

So are cars, 16-ounce hammers, hair dryers, aircraft, power supplies, gas fireplaces, extension cords, swimming pools, screwdrivers, pain killers, kitchen knives, alcohol, and chain saws.

Your point?

Firearms have likewise saved millions of lives. Good lives.

Your snide remark about the superhero t-shirt is time-worn, especially since I already explained I have no illusions, nor do I wish for a repeat.

To emphasize your firm beliefs, I think it would be a great gesture if you'd stick a large sign in your front yard that states you are against all firearms, and do not allow them in your house.

Thus, passers-by can be assured that yours is a firearm-free structure.

"Gun freaks" as you call them, really don't enjoy conversing with flaming pansies either, so that argument cuts both ways.

You may not return to the thread, but I assure you, as soon as I hit "reply," yours wasn't the last word on the topic.

Are you ever right about anything?



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by wraith001
 


Because it is my right to defend myself. Just because the president is around doesn't mean laws are suspended.

Nobody is going to hurt the guy, they are exercising their rights. I don't see what makes the cops and secret service agents different from anybody else, they aren't super-humans.

Those people have their weapons way closer than the protesters would even be allowed to get.


Well, yes they are different from everybody else. Because they have something called a badge and it is their JOB to PROTECT. It sure as heck isn't yours. You're not trained, paid, qualified nor wanted by them to do it. A dose of common sense sure wouldn't hurt here. (I know I said I wouldn't be posting on this thread anymore but this comment just begged me to reply.)



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by guardstarr
 


So guns should never have been invented, and cops are always good guys because they have badges? Come on man, come live in reality with the rest of us! Everything your argument is based on is idealism. Nobody is arguing with idealism, but the rest of us are capable of separating the ideal concept of life from the realistic one.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
Guns are deadly? Is that your justification?

So are cars, 16-ounce hammers, hair dryers, aircraft, power supplies, gas fireplaces, extension cords, swimming pools, screwdrivers, pain killers, kitchen knives, alcohol, and chain saws.


Look, what you said here is hypocritical. People didn't show up at Obama's rallies carrying hammers and hair dryers, power supplies and gas stoves. Nobody dug a swimming pool in the middle of the street to welcome Obama, and nobody downed a bottle of painkillers to make a point.

People took deadly weapons to a public gathering, so please enough BS about dangers of hairdryers and Tylenol.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


Seeing your replies to my posts makes me wonder if you are truly reading what I am typing or if you are just making odd interpretations or perhaps you have a problem processing information correctly. Where in my post did I say cops are good guys because they wear badges? WHERE? Reread what I typed. Read it nice and slow. Make double sure you understand it, then respond. Read. Think. Comprehend. Retort. It's pretty easy.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Well, yes they are different from everybody else. Because they have something called a badge and it is their JOB to PROTECT.


That was your response as to why cops can carry guns and people can't. Because they "carry badges and it is their job to protect." I can read. Are you capable of remembering what you've typed, and what you typed it in response to?

Cops are no less likely to go nuts and start shooting than civilians (if not more so,) so anywhere a cop can have a gun, a civilian should be allowed to have a gun. There's no excuse for there to be a disparity.

You seem pretty capable of making baseless points that don't stand on anything, but you are very bad at seeing bigger pictures... and it's getting old. Hey, didn't you storm off from the thread in a temper tantrum anyways?

[edit on 27-8-2009 by mattifikation]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


Once again I direct you to my last response. You still don't seem to have gotten the hang of this yet. You really haven't READ anything I typed have you? I mean really read it. Is it possible for you to take your eye out of the rifle scope and really see what is wrong with guns being at a peaceful political rally that is NOT about bearing arms? Alas, no. You will never get it. You are incapable of understanding. That's really sad. Now go ahead and work on your zinger of a reply that wont really matter, because frankly I'll just ignore it as you offer nothing constructive nor thought provoking. All it really is about is promoting the carrying of a deadly weapon. Which serves only one purpose. To destroy.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


You really need to read the posts before you make an argument against the specific topic discussed and then addressed. We have this thing in the English language called "context." It's a very complicated logical approach to evaluate and respond to statements, but helps enhance the process of discussion, point by point.

The claim that was addressed, if you had a basic understanding of English, was that firearms were dangerous. That was it. FIREARMS ARE DANGEROUS.

Potentially? Practically? Always? Under certain conditions? In the hands of certain people? Thrown into a fire?

I have a dozen or more weapons, kept and maintained for decades, some even by my father, and his father before him, and not one has cocked itself, not one has pulled its own trigger, not one has aimed itself in a threatening manner, and not once has one shot anything all by itself.

Not one.

A firearm isn't any more dangerous than the items I already listed. A firearm is just another tool, and will remain where it's put, exactly in the manner it's put.

Face it. It's people who are dangerous. I don't know if you realize this, but folks managed to kill each other wholesale for millennia, long before the firearm was invented. Ever wonder how that happened? How DID they manage?

You argument doesn't hold water. These weapons were NOT deadly. No one got shot. Not one gun took off on it's own and went on a rampage.

Hey - if you don't like firearms - STAY AWAY FROM THEM.

You want our national rights to be determined by YOUR criteria. Only under specific conditions, at specific times, in specific places, only to specific people.

Now THAT'S hypocritical.

A right is a right.

I guarantee, you won't be determining mine.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by guardstarr
 


If my eyes roll anymore, they're gonna pop out of my head. Is that your goal? Win a debate by making me die from exposure to ridiculousness? I'm perfectly capable of reading, like I've said. It's not my fault that you're horrible at making your point.

I'm aware that guns are intended to be used as tools for killing. Nobody is disputing what guns are made for. The crux of the matter - the BIG PICTURE I mentioned, which you still haven't seen - is that if the bad guys can have them, the good guys can have them.

Now, since bad guys don't follow rules, that means they can have guns wherever they want. Guess what that means? That means that good guys can have guns wherever they want!

So, and here's where I have to fill in the gaps for you, you can make guns illegal at Obama rallies, but that doesn't stop bad guys from having them there. That only stops good guys from having them there. But that isn't right. That's not the philosophy this country was founded on. Since the bad guys can have guns wherever they want, good guys should be allowed to have them also.

That includes the rally, because the rally was held in something called a "place," which is part of "everywhere." Again, bad guys can show up anywhere with guns. Rather than absent-mindedly criticizing my reading comprehension, try and exercise some of your own this time.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 

You say:
"A firearm isn't any more dangerous than the items I already listed. A firearm is just another tool, and will remain where it's put, exactly in the manner it's put."

I say to that:
Are any of those other items you mentioned used for the express purpose of killing or seriously injuring someone? No? I didn't think so. So tell me, what other practical use is there for a gun other than to shoot someone with it? Can you slice vegetables with it? Build a desk with it? A gun is made for one purpose. To kill. Killing something....sounds pretty deadly to me....



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


And that's exactly why at the rallies there are policeman, Secret Service, etc. etc. for protection. It's not the job of the public. Ya know, just because someone has a gun in their holster out in the open doesn't mean they are less dangerous than the guy with it under his coat. What. wearing it in a holster is showing you don't have violent tendencies or something. Crazies come in all shapes and forms. That is why there are PROPERLY trained people who have badges and guns to protect John Q. If you want to protect people so badly and if you are just itching to have a gun in your hand everywhere you go join the Army or the Police Force. Leave it to the people whose job it is. Sheesh talk about beating a dead horse. Look, I have no ill will toward any of you. We have a very strong difference of opinion. A Very strong difference. It's an emotional subject. I have had loved ones killed by gun fire. I feel a very strong hatred toward firearms. If I came off harsh or rude, my apologies. I can swallow my ego here. But I still think guns have their place and those with the proper authority should use them. Ya know, alot of people with guns are not as dillegent about locking them up securely or as educated as you Dooper or Mattifikation and that's what scares me. The uneducated gun owners and those who have kids that have been killed because they found dad's gun. Gun's have taken away alot. And that you cannot argue with. Everything has its place and there's a place for everything.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by guardstarr
 


This is the part that absolutely confounds me.

You make a blanket statement or claim that a gun is solely designed to kill someone.

This suggestion clearly exhibits your pure ignorance on firearms, which in turn, makes your arguments invalid.

I have many weapons.

Is a hammer just a hammer? Of course not! You have your framing hammer in different weights, your sledge hammer in different configurations, your cut nail hammer, your roofing hammer, your tile hammer, your jeweler's hammer, the rubber mallet, plastic hammer, bronze hammer, claw hammer, ball pein hammer, cross pein hammer, joiner's mallet, pneumatic hammers, and another hundred other types of hammers.

Each one is a specific tool intended for a specific task.

I have a pump .308 that is weather-proof, a scoped .270 that can drive nails at 100 meters. I have a .22 rifle for plunking and small game, a .338 for big game at long distances, a Sharps for fun and nostalgia, a lever action .30-30 that can drive nails at under 100 yards, a .12-guage 1897 pump Winchester that I hunt ducks with, a Browning over/under highlander, a .20-guage pistol grip/short barrel for home defense, a Colt AR-15 that's a lot of fun, an M-14 that's all business and can drop a 200-pound animal at 800 meters, a 5" Springfield Model 1911 by my bed, a 3" Kimber Ultra CDP II with laser sights in .45ACP for concealed carry, a Ruger .357 magnaported, a .44 magnum with 7.5 inch barrel, a Ruger LCP for backup concealed carry, and the list goes on and on and on.

Not one of these weapons are interchangeable with the other. Each one does one thing very well.

So when I hear someone say that the only reason for a firearm is to kill someone, I have to conclude their unfamiliarity with firearms, their limited understanding of firearms, and then I soberly conclude: they don't know what in hell they're talking about.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by dooper]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by guardstarr
A gun is made for one purpose. To kill. Killing something....sounds pretty deadly to me....


So, this is what you're argument has come to? Like dooper said, a gun won't kill anything by itself, it needs a finger to pull the trigger. Guns are made to kill, but why? You're making a moronic, blanket statment, with absolutely no context. If guns are made to KILL only, why are you okay with police carrying them? Their job is not to kill people, but to "protect and serve". Why would anybody who is tasked with protecting, carry a weapon meant only to kill? Because sometimes, in order to protect, you need to kill. Any one of those citizens could potentially save the president's life. This is AZ, we can carry guns here, get over it. Those people were not arrested, so the law is on OUR side here. Go to a city like chicago, where there are heavier restrictions on firearms. I hear it's VERY safe there.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by guardstarr
Leave it to the people whose job it is.


That's YOUR choice, do not try and force that on us. It won't work. The police are a phone call away, in the heat of the moment, CRIMINALS, who will ALWAYS have access to guns (regardless whether guardstarr feels they should) will probably not being willing to hold on while you make a call to cry for somebody else to come save your family, and wait for them to arrive. You can hate guns all you want, and it sucks you know somebody who got shot. You probably also know somebody who's been killed in a car accident too. Regardless whether their SOLE purpose is to kill, automobiles are BY FAR the most dangerous thing to any of us. You're arguing purely on an emotional basis.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by 27jd]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by guardstarr
reply to post by mattifikation
 


Look, I have no ill will toward any of you. We have a very strong difference of opinion.


Well, that's the most important thing: Not to be divided by difference of opinion. That takes priority over all other subjects and discussions, in my opinion. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 

You said:
"That's YOUR choice, do not try and force that on us. It won't work."

The futility of this debate is that the same could be said about you. Are you not putting viewpoints out there. We could go back and forth all day. Bottom line is we don't agree. That's ok. You feel your right, I feel I'm right. Okay, AZ does allow guns in public. Just because that is so, am I not allowed to voice my displeasure or opinion about that? As alot of you that don't like my point of view say. This is America and I have a right to have a voice. Just like in AZ you have a right to carry a gun. I don't like it but I can scream it from the mountain tops all I want and that does not make me wrong. It makes me someone with an opinion.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by guardstarr
The futility of this debate is that the same could be said about you.


No, no it couldn't. It could be said if i was trying to force you to own and carry a firearm, but that's not the case. I fully support your right not to own one, and to put yours and your family's safety in the hands of somebody else. Your opinion, is one that seeks to TAKE AWAY my right to protect my family, because you are uncomfortable with guns. There's a huge difference there.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


Look, the only way you are going to stop attacking everything I say is to dance to the tune that you are playing. I wont do it. The only thing I was trying to ask was that bringing a gun to a peaceful rally serves what purpose? How does that do anything for the rally? What contribution did the AR-15 rifle make to the government function? That's like me showing up at a Star Trek convention with a lightsaber....IMO it's oil and water. Carry the guns all you want. But again I ask, what USEFUL purpose does a gun serve at a political rally that wasn't about guns? I'm not trying to step on toes or cause trouble. I just can't seem to make the connection. Why would I bring a fork to a soup dinner? Why would I bring a trumpet to a chorus recital if it wasn't needed? That's only my opinion. If you want to attack me for that or call me stupid have at thee. But I don't want to fight. Just have a nice calm debate where people put their cards down on the table. Who knows? Maybe I will learn something from you? Or you from me?



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Out of curiosity. What do those of you do who live in a state that allows guns in public do when you visit a state that it is illegal to carry a gun in. Or do you not go to those states? Because then you would have to count on the police for protection. I know you carry the gun to protect yourself and loved ones but when you can't carry the gun because of other states laws....do you just wish for the best like the rest of us? This is really a serious question, I'm not trying to provoke anyone in any way.





new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 15  16  17    19 >>

log in

join