DISCUSSION: The Ridiculous Stereotypes Leveled at Guns and Gun Owners & Where They Come From...

page: 5
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


That might make sense if the idea behind the armed personnel were to keep the children in check.


That's your response? That because the intentions are good it's not orwellian or anti-freedom?

Okay, well isn't that what anti-gun people say too. That they're taking away guns not to be anti-freedom, anti-liberty, but to protect children.

how does one make a mockery of freedom where the other doesnt?




posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 07:45 AM
link   
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


I'm sorry, I really don't get what you're trying to say here. The way I see it -and I know my views aren't the "end-all-be-all"- is that in an "Orwellian" world, armed personnel in a school would be there to control the behavior of students and maintain order... not for protection like some gun owners suggest.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


I'm sorry, I really don't get what you're trying to say here. The way I see it -and I know my views aren't the "end-all-be-all"- is that in an "Orwellian" world, armed personnel in a school would be there to control the behavior of students and maintain order... not for protection like some gun owners suggest.


Right, and that's why most gun advocates are hypocrites. Because they'll say that then they'll turn around and scream about totalitarian dictatorships when government tries to remove guns to protect children. Which is more orwellian, making gun ownership more difficult or posting armed guards at every school. only in america is the former more outrageous

what i'm saying is quite straight forward



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Are you sure you used every name the OP gave you?
The only thing you have done, is shown your closed minded slave views and lack of intelligences.




Considering the rest of the world regulates them harshly and has much less shootings (MUCH LESS) it stands to reason your assessment is biased and wrong.

Really?
Can you see how ignorant that is?
No? (wonder why)

Anyway, let me ask you this.
Why are there ANY shootings in countries that ban guns?
Why do your masters need them if you don't?
Why......
Nevermind, I would not want you to hurt that "Homo Rhodesiensis" brain of yours.




posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Coopdog
 





The problem as I see it is that the criminals are well armed. You talk of banning all guns, and the criminals laugh about it all, waiting for the day they can rob and plunder at will.
It is funny that the people out side the US that care so much about our gun laws, ignore what evil people are doing in places like Africa and Mexico where the criminals have the guns and the people are raped, robbed and murdered at will, living a life of fear.

And the anti-gunners are happy these people can't defend themselves from the criminals, cartels, governments, gangs, and gorilla forces.
In fact I can't understand why so many people dream of coming to America, when life is so much better in non-gun countries. Why come to the evil gun toting America?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


I think you may be a little confused as to what the term "Orwellian" means.

Gun owners in America wish to maintain their gun rights in order to deter the government from becoming totalitarian; guns are America's last line of defense for such an occasion.

We have guns and the government fears us. Take guns away and the government no longer fears us. A lot of the Anti-gunners seem to think that the government would never abuse it's power (despite it's grotesque display of foreign policy) and that if we turned over our gun rights, gun violence would disappear (despite our violent culture and media). They seem to think that our government has our best interests at heart.

Gun supporters have simply offered a suggestion that protects their gun rights, but it'll never satisfy anti-gun camp.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


I think you may be a little confused as to what the term "Orwellian" means.

Gun owners in America wish to maintain their gun rights in order to deter the government from becoming totalitarian; guns are America's last line of defense for such an occasion.

We have guns and the government fears us. Take guns away and the government no longer fears us. A lot of the Anti-gunners seem to think that the government would never abuse it's power (despite it's grotesque display of foreign policy) and that if we turned over our gun rights, gun violence would disappear (despite our violent culture and media). They seem to think that our government has our best interests at heart.

Gun supporters have simply offered a suggestion that protects their gun rights, but it'll never satisfy anti-gun camp.


Yes, and that's hilarious. To deter government from becoming totalitarian, you want the state to put armed guards and armed teachers in every class room. If you don't see the irony then I'm beat, I can't think of how I can word it any better.

Anybody proposing that as a solution, no matter what you or they say, does not give a damn about liberties or freedom. There's nothing free about schools run like high security prisons.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by GunzCoty
reply to post by Coopdog
 





The problem as I see it is that the criminals are well armed. You talk of banning all guns, and the criminals laugh about it all, waiting for the day they can rob and plunder at will.
It is funny that the people out side the US that care so much about our gun laws, ignore what evil people are doing in places like Africa and Mexico where the criminals have the guns and the people are raped, robbed and murdered at will, living a life of fear.

And the anti-gunners are happy these people can't defend themselves from the criminals, cartels, governments, gangs, and gorilla forces.
In fact I can't understand why so many people dream of coming to America, when life is so much better in non-gun countries. Why come to the evil gun toting America?


You know you've lost when your only argument is to say that America is better than countries and continents that are pretty much 3rd world.

Why don't you compare America to 1st world European countries, or Australia or NZ. Or Japan or something. Why don't you do that, champ?

America: Better than North Korea and Mexico. That should be your official slogan, because it seems about the only argument Americans have when confronted with the abject failures of your nation.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by GunzCoty
reply to post by Coopdog
 





The problem as I see it is that the criminals are well armed. You talk of banning all guns, and the criminals laugh about it all, waiting for the day they can rob and plunder at will.
It is funny that the people out side the US that care so much about our gun laws, ignore what evil people are doing in places like Africa and Mexico where the criminals have the guns and the people are raped, robbed and murdered at will, living a life of fear.

And the anti-gunners are happy these people can't defend themselves from the criminals, cartels, governments, gangs, and gorilla forces.
In fact I can't understand why so many people dream of coming to America, when life is so much better in non-gun countries. Why come to the evil gun toting America?


You know you've lost when your only argument is to say that America is better than countries and continents that are pretty much 3rd world.

Why don't you compare America to 1st world European countries, or Australia or NZ. Or Japan or something. Why don't you do that, champ?

America: Better than North Korea and Mexico. That should be your official slogan, because it seems about the only argument Americans have when confronted with the abject failures of your nation.


Do me a favor and describe the shape and color of the planet earth... I wanna know if we're seeing the same thing.
edit on 24-12-2012 by Generator85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
And it's not just schools, is it. What about all the other shootings. Are you going to take the armed guards argument to its logical conclusion and put them in every public place as protection? When somebody shoots up a restaurant or a store what then, you're going to roll them out everywhere right?

Is that american freedom lol, is that what your forefathers were aiming for, a nation where the state has gunmen on every corner policing the people, "just in case"


I'm amazed that there are people who think a society like that is more free than one without guns. I can go anywhere I like without state-provided gunmen following me around, watching my every move, ready to shoot me for being "suspicious". At this rate Americans won't be able to do that in the near future, if the NRA and the other pro-gun eejits have their way

but don't worry, it's for the children, right? so that makes it just dandy.

You guys, you're not all there!



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by GunzCoty
reply to post by Coopdog
 





The problem as I see it is that the criminals are well armed. You talk of banning all guns, and the criminals laugh about it all, waiting for the day they can rob and plunder at will.
It is funny that the people out side the US that care so much about our gun laws, ignore what evil people are doing in places like Africa and Mexico where the criminals have the guns and the people are raped, robbed and murdered at will, living a life of fear.

And the anti-gunners are happy these people can't defend themselves from the criminals, cartels, governments, gangs, and gorilla forces.
In fact I can't understand why so many people dream of coming to America, when life is so much better in non-gun countries. Why come to the evil gun toting America?


You know you've lost when your only argument is to say that America is better than countries and continents that are pretty much 3rd world.

Why don't you compare America to 1st world European countries, or Australia or NZ. Or Japan or something. Why don't you do that, champ?

America: Better than North Korea and Mexico. That should be your official slogan, because it seems about the only argument Americans have when confronted with the abject failures of your nation.


Do me a favor and describe the shape and color of the planet earth... I wanna know if we're seeing the same thing.
edit on 24-12-2012 by Generator85 because: (no reason given)


We're not seeing the same thing. I'm seeing the ridiculousness of the NRA and pro-gun solution, where as you're blindly accepting it because you support guns.

"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Who said that? Does anyone know who said that?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85
reply to post by GrandStrategy
 


I think you may be a little confused as to what the term "Orwellian" means.

Gun owners in America wish to maintain their gun rights in order to deter the government from becoming totalitarian; guns are America's last line of defense for such an occasion.

We have guns and the government fears us. Take guns away and the government no longer fears us. A lot of the Anti-gunners seem to think that the government would never abuse it's power (despite it's grotesque display of foreign policy) and that if we turned over our gun rights, gun violence would disappear (despite our violent culture and media). They seem to think that our government has our best interests at heart.

Gun supporters have simply offered a suggestion that protects their gun rights, but it'll never satisfy anti-gun camp.


Yes, and that's hilarious. To deter government from becoming totalitarian, you want the state to put armed guards and armed teachers in every class room. If you don't see the irony then I'm beat, I can't think of how I can word it any better.

Anybody proposing that as a solution, no matter what you or they say, does not give a damn about liberties or freedom. There's nothing free about schools run like high security prisons.


No, we want to deter a totalitarian state by keeping our guns.
The idea of armed personnel in schools addresses an entirely different issue.. completely unrelated... I don't see how you're not getting that.

Gun owners are not suggesting that schools be ran like prisons... that's absurd... In a prison - where convicts are held, not school children- guards are there to keep the prisoners IN.

If there were armed personnel in schools - such as teachers and security guards(like in banks)- their job would be to keep bad people OUT.

Do you see the difference now? Or is up still blue?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."


That does not fit the context here..

Placing armed personnel in schools is in no way trading liberty or freedom for security.
But you seem to think so... tell me, what freedom would we be giving up exactly?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."


That does not fit the context here..

Placing armed personnel in schools is in no way trading liberty or freedom for security.
But you seem to think so... tell me, what freedom would we be giving up exactly?


It perfectly fits the context, but you're too hypocritical to see it. You cry about your freedoms when people suggest getting rid of guns, but you don't see any loss of freedom with the state putting gun men everywhere in society to "protect" you

It's astounding that you can't see it. I'm wholly astonished. You keep claiming to be anti-totalitarian, anti-controlling government, while begging the government to interfere and control society to the nth degree.

You're all crying "get armed guards in school" but you're the same people who would turn around and cry if the government put cameras in the schools for security measures. You're the same ones who cry when TSA agents pat someone down for security.

It's an amazing hypocrisy. You love guns so much that you're ready to sacrifice the most basic of freedom, to exist without being controlled and spied upon, to ensure you can still keep them.

Just, wow.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."


That does not fit the context here..

Placing armed personnel in schools is in no way trading liberty or freedom for security.
But you seem to think so... tell me, what freedom would we be giving up exactly?


It perfectly fits the context, but you're too hypocritical to see it. You cry about your freedoms when people suggest getting rid of guns, but you don't see any loss of freedom with the state putting gun men everywhere in society to "protect" you

It's astounding that you can't see it. I'm wholly astonished. You keep claiming to be anti-totalitarian, anti-controlling government, while begging the government to interfere and control society to the nth degree.

You're all crying "get armed guards in school" but you're the same people who would turn around and cry if the government put cameras in the schools for security measures. You're the same ones who cry when TSA agents pat someone down for security.

It's an amazing hypocrisy. You love guns so much that you're ready to sacrifice the most basic of freedom, to exist without being controlled and spied upon, to ensure you can still keep them.

Just, wow.


You have no idea what our constitution says, do you?

We're not suggesting we place state or federally sanctioned guards all throughout society, or in our schools!!

We're talking about teachers and/or privately contracted -average civilian- guards! In schools only!

This idea violates no rights.. whereas a gun ban would!



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."


That does not fit the context here..

Placing armed personnel in schools is in no way trading liberty or freedom for security.
But you seem to think so... tell me, what freedom would we be giving up exactly?


It perfectly fits the context, but you're too hypocritical to see it. You cry about your freedoms when people suggest getting rid of guns, but you don't see any loss of freedom with the state putting gun men everywhere in society to "protect" you

It's astounding that you can't see it. I'm wholly astonished. You keep claiming to be anti-totalitarian, anti-controlling government, while begging the government to interfere and control society to the nth degree.

You're all crying "get armed guards in school" but you're the same people who would turn around and cry if the government put cameras in the schools for security measures. You're the same ones who cry when TSA agents pat someone down for security.

It's an amazing hypocrisy. You love guns so much that you're ready to sacrifice the most basic of freedom, to exist without being controlled and spied upon, to ensure you can still keep them.

Just, wow.


You have no idea what our constitution says, do you?

We're not suggesting we place state or federally sanctioned guards all throughout society, or in our schools!!

We're talking about teachers and/or privately contracted -average civilian- guards! In schools only!

This idea violates no rights.. whereas a gun ban would!


Oh privately contracted, well that makes it better lol?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."


That does not fit the context here..

Placing armed personnel in schools is in no way trading liberty or freedom for security.
But you seem to think so... tell me, what freedom would we be giving up exactly?


It perfectly fits the context, but you're too hypocritical to see it. You cry about your freedoms when people suggest getting rid of guns, but you don't see any loss of freedom with the state putting gun men everywhere in society to "protect" you

It's astounding that you can't see it. I'm wholly astonished. You keep claiming to be anti-totalitarian, anti-controlling government, while begging the government to interfere and control society to the nth degree.

You're all crying "get armed guards in school" but you're the same people who would turn around and cry if the government put cameras in the schools for security measures. You're the same ones who cry when TSA agents pat someone down for security.

It's an amazing hypocrisy. You love guns so much that you're ready to sacrifice the most basic of freedom, to exist without being controlled and spied upon, to ensure you can still keep them.

Just, wow.


You have no idea what our constitution says, do you?

We're not suggesting we place state or federally sanctioned guards all throughout society, or in our schools!!

We're talking about teachers and/or privately contracted -average civilian- guards! In schools only!

This idea violates no rights.. whereas a gun ban would!


Oh privately contracted, well that makes it better lol?


Yes. That would mean that they're not government employees.

Name one American right this idea infringes upon. Just one constitutional amendment it violates.
I won't hold my breath.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy

Originally posted by Generator85

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


"Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither. Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."


That does not fit the context here..

Placing armed personnel in schools is in no way trading liberty or freedom for security.
But you seem to think so... tell me, what freedom would we be giving up exactly?


It perfectly fits the context, but you're too hypocritical to see it. You cry about your freedoms when people suggest getting rid of guns, but you don't see any loss of freedom with the state putting gun men everywhere in society to "protect" you

It's astounding that you can't see it. I'm wholly astonished. You keep claiming to be anti-totalitarian, anti-controlling government, while begging the government to interfere and control society to the nth degree.

You're all crying "get armed guards in school" but you're the same people who would turn around and cry if the government put cameras in the schools for security measures. You're the same ones who cry when TSA agents pat someone down for security.

It's an amazing hypocrisy. You love guns so much that you're ready to sacrifice the most basic of freedom, to exist without being controlled and spied upon, to ensure you can still keep them.

Just, wow.


You have no idea what our constitution says, do you?

We're not suggesting we place state or federally sanctioned guards all throughout society, or in our schools!!

We're talking about teachers and/or privately contracted -average civilian- guards! In schools only!

This idea violates no rights.. whereas a gun ban would!


Oh privately contracted, well that makes it better lol?


Yes. That would mean that they're not government employees.

Name one American right this idea infringes upon. Just one constitutional amendment it violates.
I won't hold my breath.


I'm not an American. What do I care about your idiotic constitution?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by GrandStrategy


I'm not an American. What do I care about your idiotic constitution?


that's what I thought.
But you cared enough to have a long debate with an idiotic American.
Enjoy the freedom and liberties of your country... if you have any.
edit on 24-12-2012 by Generator85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Coopdog
 


Very well put. And, thank you for your contribution...





new topics
top topics
 
16
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join