“no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”

Originally posted by moonrunner
Agree with me or you are a hate filled bigot, nazi and/or communist.


That's a well thought out debate, this is all adding to the evidence on the sort of people who do and don't think carrying guns in the street is a super good idea.

Its only a Debate when you look at it like one.
Let's recognize Owning a Gun for what it is - a personal choice and not a crime.
I have my own personal choice to own a pink Gun if i want.
I deny ignorance,i will live my own life untill i die.
Make my own choices & face the days, my own way.
If owning a Gun is a crime one day in your world then i will be a criminal,victim of choice.
No debate.

In all the debate today what i thank is funny haha....
Money from illegal drugs funds organized crime just as alcohol did during Prohibition. If & when they ban Guns then criminal enterprises will become part of the open marketplace.
No amount of manpower is going to stop the natural demand people have for buying a Gun.
There is a demand that will be satisfied by some sector of the marketplace.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Anyone wishing to restrict the liberty of any person or people is a hate filled bigot. As I said in the opening.

Yet you want to restrict the freedom of someone to have an opinion. So you are, by your own definition, a hate filled bigot. Cool.

reply to post by FreedomCommander


Surely gun ownership is one of the biggest mechanisms of control there is. You buy the gun as a means to control life, circumstances and factors around you.

You buy the gun because you seek control. Typically, someone who seeks control does so because they fear they have no control.

reply to post by ComeFindMe

surely it isn't, but please, explain your ignorance.

how does a gun serve as a

means to control life, circumstances and factors around you

most guns serve as a 'balance' factor, nothing more.

You buy the gun because you seek control

control of what exactly ?

Typically, someone who seeks control does so because they fear they have no control

equally, those who cannot identify with balance seek oppression ... personally, i prefer balance.

My father was a cop, he had lot's of guns and tought me how to use them but....
I remember 3 times his gun went of by accident in the house, 3 times we were lucky nobody got hurt.
Laws here in Belgium are very strict now. You need a 'proof of perfect conduct' from the police, so you can get a permit. To keep it you must go to a shooting range at a regular base, you are only allowed to transport it when you go there.
If you ever committed a crime you will not get a permit.
If someone breaks into your house and you shoot at them, you will likely go to jail yourself.
Daggers, fistweapons and tasers are illegal to carry.
You can have a pocket knife, with a small blade, if it's not one of those where the blade can be locked into place...
Since Belgians are notorious beer drinkers and we have a bar on every corner of the street, i'm feeling much safer knowing nobody carries weapons when I go for a drink.
But I live in a small town, 30.000 pop. I can imagine things are different when you live in a big city with lot's of crime

Originally posted by ComeFindMe

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Anyone wishing to restrict the liberty of any person or people is a hate filled bigot. As I said in the opening.

Yet you want to restrict the freedom of someone to have an opinion. So you are, by your own definition, a hate filled bigot. Cool.

How do you figure that?

Anyone can have any opinion they want. It does no harm to anyone for a Nazi to hate a Jew or Klansman to hate a Catholic.

The harm comes when they act on that opinion in a manner that would affect the lives their opinion targets.

Originally posted by Morrel

I remember 3 times his gun went of by accident in the house, 3 times we were lucky nobody got hurt.

Bull. Absolute bull.

Three time you remember somebody fiddling with that gun and negligently discharging that gun.

Under no circumstances does a gun just go off. It isnt a game of hot potato or a Jack in the Box just waiting to blow.

Your father or whoever was in control of that firearm was negligent.

reply to post by Honor93


A gun gives you (more) control of a situation. More people don't carry / own guns than people that do, so you aren't "balancing" anything...you are creating a situation where more often than not, you have an advantage = you have more control.

How can you say owning a gun is not an attempt at control? You would own that gun to increase the likelihood of an event occuring or not occuring - it would give you a statistically greater likelihood of your preferred outcome being reached. It is helping you control the outcome of a situation, positively or negatively.

Originally posted by moonrunner
Agree with me or you are a hate filled bigot, nazi and/or communist.


That's a well thought out debate, this is all adding to the evidence on the sort of people who do and don't think carrying guns in the street is a super good idea.

As I asked another poster with a like reply "how do you figure that?"

Disagree all you want.

It's the actions you take that make you a hate filled bigot.

Imposing your will onto others effectively restricting liberty for all is what makes them hate filled bigots.

Simply having an opinion that may or may not be driven by hate/ignorance/fear is just that. A simple opinion.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


You do not want them to exercise their right to hold an opinion (and in this case, act on it as per their mandate). That's a restriction of their liberty.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


So what happens when you feel your simple opinion could drastically improve society, save lives etc...surely not at least trying to act on it is hateful in itself?

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

You do not want them to exercise their right to hold an opinion (and in this case, act on it as per their mandate). That's a restriction of their liberty.

I never said people couldnt have opinions. You're filling that in yourself.

I definitely said they shouldnt be acting on that opinion if it results in a restriction of liberty for anyone.

No man should ever rule another. Acting with intent to rule another is like rounding up slaves on an African shore.

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

So what happens when you feel your simple opinion could drastically improve society, save lives etc...surely not at least trying to act on it is hateful in itself?

Yes it is. It may be driven by some misguided sense of altruism but it is still hateful.

Look at Sanger and the eugenicists. They were driven by a desire to strengthen the human race. Make society better. Of course it meant rounding up all the sick and the minorities and killing them off but they just wanted to make society better.

Those bigots driven by seemingly positive and helpful ideals are the worst kind. The most frightening kind.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Unfortunately, there are many who would see fit to abuse their apparent 'liberties' for gain and self-gratification.

If you honestly, sincerely believe that "no man should rule another" then I cannot see how you can find a place in any developed or even civilised society. That's not me being mean, just pointing out that there is an innate 'order' to pretty much the entire natural world, including humans. It's how we got to the point where we were able to discuss supposed liberties as rational individuals.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Right...so how do you propose people determine what is best to act on and what isn't? I'm guessing anything you coincidentally happen to agree with gets an emphatic yes...

Originally posted by ComeFindMe

If you honestly, sincerely believe that "no man should rule another" then I cannot see how you can find a place in any developed or even civilised society.

And that is the source for all my angst and frustrations. It's why when here in the "land of the free" when I see an individual or a group trying to tell any other individual or group what do to, not through voluntarism but through force, I get really, really, really, pissed off.

It'd be nice to go one day without having to put up a fight to just live my life as I want to live it.

I'm not hurting anyone or causing harm to anything yet I find myself the target of unchecked tyranny driven by the ignorance and stupidity of others daily.

Originally posted by ComeFindMe
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

Right...so how do you propose people determine what is best to act on and what isn't? I'm guessing anything you coincidentally happen to agree with gets an emphatic yes...

The best action is always the one that results in more liberty. Always.

Exsample: Government acknowledgement of gay marriage is not the best action. Ending government involvement in marriage altogether is the best action.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


i think we may be coming at this from very different angles! But, to be fair, I can see what you mean with politics staying out of same-sex marriage etc.

I'd love to live in a world where people could make wholly free choices. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen because for every person like you (or hopefully me) that could eloquently outline their point and a justifiable reason for it, there are ten others who would seek to exploit the sincerity of liberty.

That's why, I feel, Government and systems of power are a necessary evil.

Originally posted by ComeFindMe...

there are ten others who would seek to exploit the sincerity of liberty.

And those ten others always find their way into positions of political power because of the dependency and fear of the masses.

If you're free then it doesnt matter if some nut down the block wants to exploit your freedom because you're free to be exploited or to stop that exploitation.

A giant system of permits and fees and checks and regulations enforced by the worlds largest prison complex and does not keep you free or safe. It keeps itself safe and in control.

Bureaucracies only exist to perpetuate themselves.