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

page: 9
16
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


You are making zero sense....... You are comparing apples to oranges.

A gun is made to fire a projectile, be it bullet or rubber pellets, whatever. Why would it be a manfucturer's fault if it was used improperly? Why would a manufacturer be responsible for said projectile killing a person? It didn't load itself, cock itself, aim itself, and pull it's own trigger.....

Ford can be sued if they put out a car with faulty brakes or whatnot, that is their fault. Ford cannot be sued if someone misuses the car, by breaking speed limits and smashes into a tree, or if someone misuses the car and plows through a crowd.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:35:19 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


Product Liability protects Ford because the car was misused.
Product Liability does not protect gun manufacturers because their weapons aren't being misused. They are being used in the way they were intended to be used. To kill.
This is why the extra law was added to protect gun manufacturers, because it isn't profitable to make a product that can cause lawsuits against your company from its intended use.




posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


The only way to do that is to take them out of all hands, so no. Until every soldier, every LEO gives theirs up, neither will I.

There is no crystal ball out there, this isn't minority report, this is real life. Saying no one can have guns because a very tiny minority use them for bad things is irrational. I am sorry, but it is irrational. No one logical would stand for that reasoning to ban anything else, so why should we make an exception for guns?

I am not going to give up an important tool because of other idiots. People should not be denied access to a tool, because of a tiny minority of idiots. It does not fly.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 00:40:34 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


You are being disingenuous now. You aren't actually saying that if the Second Amendment were repealed through legal means that you would become a criminal in order to keep your gun?



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 

If keeping tools that I need to survive makes me a criminal, then so be it.
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree, I will never see eye to eye with you.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:03:47 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 

If keeping tools that I need to survive makes me a criminal, then so be it.
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree, I will never see eye to eye with you.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:03:47 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


Again, OP, I ask you..

How do you stand with these gun owners that will be willing to be involved in criminal activity because they need their guns to survive? How do their talking points work against the image that you want to portray of A Respectful Law-Abiding Citizen?



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


Not knowing you at all, probably the only tool that I can assume is a need for you as much as my guns are for me, would be a vehicle. If they were to ban vehicles would you just turn yours in?

If you are a city slicker, car wouldn't really work, as you have buses, and probably a lot for you is within walking distance.

I would no sooner give up my vehicles if they were banned by the way, I need those as well. I had the misfortune of having to walk home from town once when I ended up in the drunk tank after a long night of shots at the bar. Took me 6 hours.......



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


Not knowing you at all, probably the only tool that I can assume is a need for you as much as my guns are for me, would be a vehicle. If they were to ban vehicles would you just turn yours in?

If you are a city slicker, car wouldn't really work, as you have buses, and probably a lot for you is within walking distance.

I would no sooner give up my vehicles if they were banned by the way, I need those as well. I had the misfortune of having to walk home from town once when I ended up in the drunk tank after a long night of shots at the bar. Took me 6 hours.......


If cars were made illegal by a constitutional proclamation, knowing the full weight of requirement needed to get a constitutional amendment passed, yes, I would turn my vehicle in, because society demanded they be illegal. You are correct, we are probably not going to see eye to eye on this. I am not someone who usually agrees with criminal motivations.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


Right...And should we blame the needle or the plunger when a lethal dose of medicine is administered?



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 

If keeping tools that I need to survive makes me a criminal, then so be it.
I think we are going to have to agree to disagree, I will never see eye to eye with you.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:03:47 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


Again, OP, I ask you..

How do you stand with these gun owners that will be willing to be involved in criminal activity because they need their guns to survive? How do their talking points work against the image that you want to portray of A Respectful Law-Abiding Citizen?


I have not dodged your question...I'm still considering ALL of the angles, facets and possibilities, before I offer my sincerest reply...



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 03:04 AM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


If an amendment were added requiring us all to have a slave, would you follow that one as well? Or is there a point where you trust your own instincts, your own moral compass over a law that clashes with them?
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 03:06:29 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


If an amendment were added requiring us all to have a slave, would you follow that one as well? Or is there a point where you trust your own instincts, your own moral compass over a law that clashes with them?
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 03:06:29 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



What a weird stretch.. heck, what if they made a law outlawing BREATHING!?!?! Would I still do it?

Your mentality is that owning a gun is within the same sphere as owning a person? I don't understand your comparing owning a gun with owning a person. Do you believe both are personal human rights? That actually makes sense in a way, seeing as the Founding Father came up with The Second Amendment and thought slavery was just fine.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


Right...And should we blame the needle or the plunger when a lethal dose of medicine is administered?




Happens more often than you think. Medical equipment manufacturers get sued quite a bit. Everything from diabetes testing manufacturers to cotton swabs. This doesn't even take into account malpractice cases and lawsuits against Big Pharma.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 





...against Big Pharma.


Ah-Haa...! An enemy we can join forces against...



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 





...against Big Pharma.


Ah-Haa...! An enemy we can join forces against...


It is always nice to find common ground, friend.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


About as much of a stretch as the second going away lol. I was just trying to make a point, that there is a line some people won't cross, law or not. Leaving my family and community unprotected, because some people in a far away city said so, just happens to be one of those lines for me.

We don't have, nor want a police force to protect us. In order for people to give up your own personal protection, you have to put your own safety into the hands of strangers, who the supreme court ruled don't have the duty to protect anyone.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:52:39 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I have to say Ive been called all those names too. And a few more I can't post here. BUt you know the one name the anti-gun crowd will never be able to call me as long as I carry my firearm? They will never be able to call me "victim". Nor anyone else that's there when the firearm is needed to protect my life.
edit on 27-12-2012 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-12-2012 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


About as much of a stretch as the second going away lol. I was just trying to make a point, that there is a line some people won't cross, law or not. Leaving my family and community unprotected, because some people in a far away city said so, just happens to be one of those lines for me.

We don't have, nor want a police force to protect us. In order for people to give up your own personal protection, you have to put your own safety into the hands of strangers, who the supreme court ruled don't have the duty to protect anyone.
edit on Thu, 27 Dec 2012 13:52:39 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


The second amendment being repealed is being talked about FAR more than your "mandatory slavery" angle.

Look man, you can rationalize your response all you want. The bottom line is clear. If the Second Amendment is repealed, you will be someone who is working against the wishes of the society, and will be a criminal in possession of an illegal weapon. You are perfectly okay with this. You think it is completely reasonable to be this way. No one is going to be able to convince you otherwise. You are rigid in your belief.

Because you firmly believe that you require your gun to be safe and survive.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
I have to say Ive been called all those names too. And a few more I can't post here. BUt you know the one name the anti-gun crowd will never be able to call me as long as I carry my firearm? They will never be able to call me "victim". Nor anyone else that's there when the firearm is needed to protect my life.
edit on 27-12-2012 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-12-2012 by openyourmind1262 because: (no reason given)


Never? They will never be able to call you or anyone else around you a victim because.. what? You would be able to fend off attackers every single time you were ever attacked? What if you miss? What if your gun jams? What if you are shot before you get a chance to shoot?

Could you be called a victim then, or are you under the impression that you are infallible if you have your gun?



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


As promised...

You first wrote:


My question comes from where you stand on your fellow legal gun owner discussing what his plans would be if the Second Amendment is repealed.

As all of the overwhelming majority of firearms in the United States simply become illegal to possess, would you as a law abiding citizen merely hand over your weapons, or would you become a criminal?

The question is a matter of ethics, and whether or not you would be willing to follow a law that you are against, because society would demand you must.


And then again: Second Notice:....lol



Again, OP, I ask you..

How do you stand with these gun owners that will be willing to be involved in criminal activity because they need their guns to survive? How do their talking points work against the image that you want to portray of A Respectful Law-Abiding Citizen?


After much thought, my reply is this;

While I won't state specifically what I would do, were all guns banned in the US, for a number of reasons, first and foremost being I simply do not know, yet, I will give several possibilities, that should be considered by all.

1) Give up your guns.
2) Give up the guns that can be traced to you.
3) Fight the ban, but give up your guns, if you lose the battle.
4) Fight the ban, and fight the ones that come for your guns.
5) Flee the Country, with your guns.
6) Take your own life with your guns.
7) Take others lives, before taking your own, to make a statement.
8) Join forces with others who hold the same beliefs. Plan and execute a course of action, to maintain your way of life.
9) Go on a talk show, and complain about the erosion of the Constitution, and also share your thoughts on all of the conspiracy theories leading to it's demise.
10) Enter politics, to overturn the law at a later date.

I could go on and on, with the rhetoric, but the point is, until it happens, no one knows exactly what they will do.
I don't expect a full frontal assault on guns. But, a continuing gradual slope to total disarmament, has already begun. And whether TPTB continue with it to it's fruition, has yet to be determined...

I, am an individual. I will only throw my proverbial hat into the ring, when the cause seems to fit. And, usually even then, I try to be the voice of reason. The moderator. The go-between. Weighing each side, and attempting to interpret both intention, and misconception for all!

This is the hand that I have been dealt. So, I use it, for the benefit of my species.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


What I want be is an un-armed willing victim. And son, I don't miss. I have used the gun to defend my life. I will again if and when the need arises. If you can't defend yourself against a gun with a gun, might as well be a sheep.



posted on Dec, 27 2012 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by openyourmind1262
reply to post by DoYouEvenLift
 


What I want be is an un-armed willing victim. And son, I don't miss. I have used the gun to defend my life. I will again if and when the need arises. If you can't defend yourself against a gun with a gun, might as well be a sheep.


How about this guy, OP?

What is your take on the people that firmly believe that they are invincible with their guns?

At what point to we begin to see where these stereotypes come from?





top topics
 
16
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join