Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: GUNS are for weak individuals,. .

Posted 1 year ago on Dec. 22, 2012, 3:52 p.m. EST by jph (2652)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Weak minded, weak willed, weak of character, weak of skill.

Frightened little children in adult bodies, who feel inadequate in themselves buy, own, and lobby for guns.

<UPDATE>

The arms pushers are out in force, and the easily dis-proved full-on bull-sht is being pumped out like they are paying trolls or something,. . ?

Recall that given enough rope dim-witted thugs will inevitably hang themselves,. the truth will prevail as the pure-white-light burns away the lies of the paid fools.

Guns are tools of killing, murder, and death! They serve no useful purpose. Hunters should use bows or lines and hooks, when killing for needed food. Killing defenseless animals with cannons is weak, and skill-less. If you hunt for sport, just shoot yourself! That is truly sporting.

86 Comments

86 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by trashyharry (3113) from Waterville, NY 1 year ago

The cowardly Second Amendment Advocates lack the courage of their convictions.They do not stand up for the Constitution either Armed or Unarmed because they don't want to get shot,go to prison-OR get shot AND go to prison.Standing up to Tyrants UNARMED is what takes courage.Tahrir is still Occupied and will remain so until Democracy Breaks Out in Egypt.

[-] 0 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

You have a selective memory stupido. While crowds were in Tahrir Square, family members back home formed self help and mutual aid networks and pulled out shotguns to protect their neighborhoods from looters. Civilian arms are for defense, not offense, o' gunhate nut.

[-] 2 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

All I have to say about this is if people who own guns are weak minded, weak willed, weak of character and weak of skill 'WE WOULD STILL BE UNDER BRITISH RULE".

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

yes the Brits are so awful,. lol. one set of rulers for another,. great change that was.

We are under banker rule now, in case you failed to notice. How do your guns help you with this? Can you stop the economic terrorism of the 1% bankster class with a hand gun? an assault machine gun perhaps? No! Sorry guns are a tool of weakness and nothing more. They kill individuals and groups caught in buildings, by the insane. They do not bring about political change or revolution,. not at all.

[-] 0 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 1 year ago

The Brits banks still maintained control after the revolution.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

what "revolution" then? a PR revolution? a "revolution" in name only?

the 1%,. the wealthy few, still maintain and exert control over most of the planet,. . GUNs have done little to change this, the GUNs have only served to keep fear alive,. and on and on,. over and over,. . loop!

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

The reason the banks have all the money is because people "borrow" from the banks and use them for their credit card purchases, car loans, house loans and spending debt.

Think maybe if people change their spending habits, it would change them from being under "banker rule".

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

You do know that money is debt right? ( http://www.moneyasdebt.net ) Banksters do not rule because people choose to "borrow", they rule because they control the Money System and the "economies" of the whole planet.

Do you know that ALL your tax dollars go directly to the banksters,. and all spending is new borrowing? Not just borrowing, but borrowing at interest from private for profit banks (the 1% owns)?

Do you know this does not NEED to be the "way it is" that other economic models exist,. ones that do not have in-built systems that siphon off large percents of interest for the 1%, for doing nothing,. systems that increase the wealth of the planet instead of striping it down? There is plenty to provide for all life on this planet, it is being horded by a greedy few, and masses of humanity are made to needlessly suffer and die. The systems that actually sustain life on the planet are being quickly depleted to this end; pure hate-filled greed.

The banker rule is the greedy few simply raping the rest of us over and over for generations,. your children will be born into perpetual slavery, if you choose to not change this fact. We have the power we have the numbers, we have the knowledge,. we can change this!

[-] 2 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 1 year ago

well i don't know about all that. some people have legitimate use for firearms. a lot of people deal in cash. a lot of people live in dangerous areas. a lot of people own guns for legitimate hunting and protection reasons. that being said you don't need a semi automatic weapon to hunt or protect yourself or others. non self loading weapons are more than acceptable and should remain available however semiautomatic weapons need to go the way of the short barrel shotgun, short barrel rifle, and machine gun.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

http://americansforresponsiblesolutions.org/
Gabby Gifford's new anti-NRA group

[-] 1 points by KevinPotts (368) 1 year ago

ATTENTION Gun Debaters…Please Read This Entire Article…‘The Riddle of the Gun’ By Sam Harris
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-riddle-of-the-gun

[-] 1 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

Tell that to any oppressed population around the world....pretty sure they might have a different opinion....or any oppressed group from history (jews etc.)....or the women who have saved themselves from rape and beatings with these tools.

Perhaps our Mary Poppins like lifestyle has deluded people into thinking the world is a safe comfortable place. It wasn't that long ago people relied on these things to protect their families and free themselves from the tyranny of a different country.

[-] -1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

I see, so the jews fought off the nazis with guns? and the rapes and misogyny are now gone because woman carry small cannons in their hand bags?

You have no logic to your fallacy.

Guns do not make people safer or society any safer or more peaceful, actual numbers do not agree with your rhetoric. You are more likely to die from a gun, if you are a gun owner, or live with one. Suicide, domestic violence, and accident,. . not to mention someone finding and taking YOUR gun and killing you with it!

Don't be a frightened aggressor,. try instead to just live in happy, peaceful, understanding. We all die,. so what, why this desire to kill before being killed? Why this fear of death?

[-] 0 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

I don't have a gun in my house....and just because someone might happen to doesn't make them a violent, unhappy, afraid of death, or a not understanding person.

"actual numbers do not agree with your rhetoric"

Yes, they actually do. The person who has done the most comprehensive study on this John Richard Lott (Economist) found that the numbers actually do agree with me. He's even found that in every single instance in the world that they have data from before and after gun laws have been put into place, in EVERY single instance, murder rates went up (not gun related murder rates- murder rates in general). Every single instance.

Or this information:

"The 31 states that have “shall issue” laws allowing private citizens to carry concealed weapons have, on average, a 24 percent lower violent crime rate, a 19 percent lower murder rate and a 39 percent lower robbery rate than states that forbid concealed weapons. In fact, the nine states with the lowest violent crime rates are all right-to-carry states. Remarkably, guns are used for self-defense more than 2 million times a year, three to five times the estimated number of violent crimes committed with guns."

Or straight from Harvard - a review of all the gun control literature:

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Auto deaths outnumber gun deaths every year....are you going to take away peoples right to drive? Take into account that a good majority of those gun deaths are from intruders being shot by someone defending themself....subtract those gun related deaths out and auto accidents vaaaasstly outnumber gun related.

The right to own a gun isn't there for fear of death. It's there to protect freedoms...freedoms that were granted to us by people who were slaughtered in the thousands for them. There are very specific historical reasons for why the founders included gun ownership in the constitution......they weren't red neck idiots who wanted to go out and shoot tin cans in the backyard....this was thought through because of the incredible amount of knowledge and history it took to craft our constitution based on thousands of years of tyranny on the people. People today though will look at something and after giving it two seconds worth of thought say "well that doesn't make any logical sense after i've thought about it for two minutes - even though i haven't studied it or understand why it was included based on thousands of years of history - so i disagree".

Sometimes things are very counterintuitive....like i believe this topic to be. I'm not out there claiming that people who advocate for gun control laws are bad people - i think they're trying to help people....but i believe it to be naive and and understudied however.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

I find it interesting that this is most common response I get from the "gun rights" folks,. as I have never stated anywhere any support for gov't "gun regulations" of any kind! Must be the NRA conditioned response!

I don't have much interest in banning anything, I am more interested in shifts in culture,. the idea of owning guns (tools of killing) is repugnant, and I like to point that out. Shifts in culture are much more powerful than govt' regulations, by far.

As for this so called 'study' it is clear junk science, a deliberate working over of data to fit an intended 'conclusion',. we all know statistics can be INTERPRETED for any result. I am taking about real numbers; i.e. you are more likely to die by gunfire, when you own a gun, or live with someone who does. See; http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17922-carrying-a-gun-increases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

Guns do not protect freedom, this is poppycock, and I think you know it, but use it anyway, again simple since it supports you untenable position. You really think you will "stand your ground" against the USA military and their hardware? That is pure fantasy!

[-] 1 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

See the problem with your studies - and the many studies i see posted around is that it takes a minuscule sample size. The whole point of statistics is to take mass amounts of data and see if there are specific correlations. Taking one city in the entire US (a city in which crime is rampant) and concluding that this is an authentic representation of the statistics as a whole isn't science....it's the very junk statistics you were complaining about. The statistics I provided are from Harvard and they look through ALL of the studies done across the globe....and they don't just find data which supports the conclusions of the NRA - so perhaps you should read it before you call into question its validity.

"ou really think you will "stand your ground" against the USA military and their hardware?"

People have done it all over the world over and over again - Afghanistan has been doing it for the last 10 years. People will go to extraordinary lengths when their freedom is being threatened. In a country where my president can haul me off to prison without so much as an arrest warrant and assassinate me if he so chooses, I kind of like the idea that people have the right to defend themselves.

"I don't have much interest in banning anything, I am more interested in shifts in culture"

I too agree with you on that. Shifts in culture would be a positive direction.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

The "paper" you quote is not a "Harvard study". It's a non-peer-reviewed article written in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, which is a "conservative" Law Review edited by right-wing Harvard Law students. This "study" would never have made it through an actual peer review. It is opinion wrapped up in junk-science!

There ARE actual peer-reviewed "Harvard studies" on gun violence, and they generally come to the OPPOSITE conclusion. You can find some of them here; http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/

I gave you one link of many, this is a fact (an also stands to reason if you just think about it), check it out for yourself. internet = searchable data.

Why do you push this nonsense about fighting the national govt' with guns? Nothing useful will ever be achieved in that violent way. Your Afghanistan example is a perfect case to show the utter uselessness of this tactic for achieving anything except countless murders, chaos, and the rise of fundamentalist dip-shtery,. . is that what you are after?

Freedom is not enhanced when people hold tools of death and killing, this on wrong on it's face. You arms industry shills will sink your feed-boat with your own lame rhetoric, keep it up, way up!!

[-] -2 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

I've seen many of the studies on the other side. Many will take two completely different countries and try to compare data...then say "see, no guns in this country and the gun death rate is lower than our country". That's very misleading....especially because both me and you agree it has to do with the culture. Different countries have different cultures....and different population densities....and different numbers of major cities where gun violence is most prevalent. Another argument is that a certain country that has banned guns may have lower GUN related deaths than ours. That's great...who cares? What about overall murder and violent crime rates.

I mean look at the absurdity of that argument. Take two countries - country A and B. Country A has banned guns and has 0 gun related deaths but 100,000 murders by other means. Country B has 5000 gun related deaths and 50,000 murders by other means. So country B has a lot more gun related deaths....but which country do you want to live in? Which would you be safer in? Country A! It's a hell of a lot more safe.

Who cares in which way people are dying....they're dying! You have to look at overall death and murder rates. That's what Dr. Lott did...and he kept it country specific. So you don't compare apples and oranges...you compare a country that went from having guns to no guns....and check the murder and violent crime rates before and after. He found that in every instance...murders and violent crimes went up.

"Your Afghanistan example is a perfect case to show the utter uselessness of this tactic for achieving anything except countless murders, chaos, and the rise of fundamentalist dip-shtery,. . is that what you are after?"

Hmmm, i think alexander the great...the russians...and the US might disagree with you on that.....they've achieved not being taken over...and it's been very effective.

"Why do you push this nonsense about fighting the national govt' with guns?"

It seems incredibly stupid to most people and i get that...but as the saying goes "history is forgotten in a decade". Just because we have fancy buildings, sewage and better cars doesn't mean that human nature changes. There is always a thirst to concentrate power in the hands of the very few...at the expense of the many...and history shows that this process repeats itself over and over and over and over again....and each time the people think it's a thing of the past.

[-] 0 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

So, If I have a AR or a high cap mag pistoi, does it change the odds? Or how about a armored vest? Would that make a difference?

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

You seem to be hell-bent of adding needless confusion,.

Own a gun in AMERICA, and your likelihood of dying from a gun shot gets multiplied by 4.1!

Thems' the odds!! Play the odds if you will,. . This is a fact, and your favorite " ""study"" ", that has been shown to be tragically flawed, many time over,. does not address this fact. It is designed to willfully obfuscate fact, in favor of fear and misrepresentation of reality.

Good luck with that.

[-] -2 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

"Own a gun in AMERICA, and you likelihood of dying from a gun shot gets multiplied by 4.1"

That doesn't surprise me at all...own a car and i guarantee your likelihood of dying in a car goes up. Use knives and your chances of cutting yourself goes up. Absolutely. What if owning a gun that's used to save you from a murder offsets that increase though? How would we judge that....by the overall death and murder rates. That's what we're looking at. We're looking at overall death rates....because we want to save the most amount of people right? The way we determine if we're saving the most amount of people is to use that as the base to judge performance on.

I'm not trying to add confusion.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Weak fearful people choose tools of killing, over love,. you sir are pushing weakness and fear,. Again, good luck with that!

Murder rate in UK is 1.2, in USA is 4.8 per 100k,. to get you hero Alex Jones into this,. . just kidding.

You do claim; "We're looking at overall death rates", and "we want to save the most amount of people right" well NO,. we are talking about how gun owners, own guns, due to fear! THAT is in fact what this tread is about,. hence the name; "guns-are-for-weak-individuals"!

I could care less about how many,. numbers, numbers,. people die,. I am more interested in people not living in fear, buying into the fear pushed by the arms manufacturers. If people die, free of fear, there is nothing lost! It is the strict materialist that clings incessantly to living,. even if that living, is in painful fear!!!

[-] -1 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

Yeah, i can't stand alex jones....so we're in agreement on that.

"Murder rate in UK is 1.2, in USA is 4.8 per 100k,. to get you hero Alex Jones into this"

Yeah but like i just talked about...that's comparing apples and oranges... like what I wrote above:

"Many will take two completely different countries and try to compare data...then say "see, no guns in this country and the gun death rate is lower than our country". That's very misleading....especially because both me and you agree it has to do with the culture. Different countries have different cultures....and different population densities....and different numbers of major cities where gun violence and murder is most prevalent." You gotta compare crime data from that same country....you can't take different countries and compare the data because there are so many different factors that affect murder and gun deaths.

You said:

"Weak fearful people choose tools of killing, over love"

I completely agree with you on that.....100%

"I could care less about how many,. numbers, numbers,. people die"

But that's what we're trying to save..isn't it? Whats the gun debate for if not to save lives?

[-] -2 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

Your entire premise that gun owners are weak is pure balderdash. I think it more accurate to say people have guns so they don’t have to live in fear. This is simple logic.

The whole idea of humans having a utopian society where peace and love reigns isn’t realistic. Never has been true, never will be true. As much as love, caring, generosity and compassions is part of the human condition, so is greed, hate and lust. Sorry but we’ll never get where you want to go,

[-] -2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Understand that many of us a sick of the whole thing.

In case you missed it?

It's time for the, and here's the truth of who they are, gun fetishists, to finally understand that the rest of us are sick and tired of gun carnage in all it's putrid forms.

They have yet to give a single inch that they have not clawed and scratched to get back. Often at great expense to life and limb among the innocent, the non gun fetishists. Oh, and a high level of tax payer expense too.

I have listened to their threats of violence for decades now. Before I ever heard of the NRA.

Here's the bottom line.

Since the fetishists won't offer any kind of significant compromise. A significant inch, if you will, something will still be done and I doubt that you will like it. But you have been offered many chances to help find a solution.

YOU have failed to do so.

You have given us threats.

YOU have given us Alex Jones.

YOU have given us that wild eyed guy in Tennessee, that just plain threatened to start shooting.

YOU have given us other even more militant militias, that threaten to do the same.

All based on lies.

NO!

It's you who needs to understand OUR position.

We're sick of it.

If you won't help fix it, you really are part of the problem.

If you won't fix it?

Somebody else will.

And even if I personally, don't care for their solution, I will still thank them for trying.

I can be no more candid with you.

Here's another bottom line about how OWS has shown your BS about protecting us from tyranny is also far off point.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/12/how-occupy-proved-we-dont-need-guns-against-the-government/

Grow up.

Too many innocents are dying.

[-] -3 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

I was responding to a response from a few days ago.

"YOU have given us Alex Jones."

Don't lop me in with that nutcase.

I'm willing to help fix it....if it actually makes rational sense...and it isn't an emotional knee jerk reaction. Like trevor the other day...he said he's in favor of banning hand guns....that actually makes sense....because that's where the numbers in gun related deaths resides.

But why when i say that when i ban guns murder rates go up does that still sound like a good idea? That means more people will die. Isn't that what we're trying to fix?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

What trevor and you and I are in favor of is meaningless.

The country is tired of it.

They want something done.

And those are the answers they've received.

If you think Alex Jones did the NRA any favors on CNN, you are mistaken.

The fetishists have run out of excuses.

The emperor has no clothes.

[-] -2 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

Yes, Alex Jones is a nut case. But Ted Nugent is a really cool guy; and lives just a few miles from me.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

All I can say is, in your world psychopaths are "really cool guys".

And that's just sad.

Did you read this yet?

It's time for the, and here's the truth of who they are, gun fetishists, to finally understand that the rest of us are sick and tired of gun carnage in all it's putrid forms.

They have yet to give a single inch that they have not clawed and scratched to get back. Often at great expense to life and limb among the innocent, the non gun fetishists. Oh, and a high level of tax payer expense too.

I have listened to their threats of violence for decades now. Before I ever heard of the NRA.

Here's the bottom line.

Since the fetishists won't offer any kind of significant compromise. A significant inch, if you will, something will still be done and I doubt that you will like it. But you have been offered many chances to help find a solution.

YOU have failed to do so.

You have given us threats.

YOU have given us Alex Jones.

YOU have given us that wild eyed guy in Tennessee, that just plain threatened to start shooting.

YOU have given us other even more militant militias, that threaten to do the same.

All based on lies.

NO!

It's you who needs to understand OUR position.

We're sick of it.

If you won't help fix it, you really are part of the problem.

If you won't fix it?

Somebody else will.

And even if I personally, don't care for their solution, I will still thank them for trying.

I can be no more candid with you.

Here's another bottom line about how OWS has shown your BS about protecting us from tyranny is also far off point.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/12/how-occupy-proved-we-dont-need-guns-against-the-government/

Grow up.

Too many innocents are dying.

[-] -3 points by john32 (-272) from Pittsburgh, PA 1 year ago

I just told you i think jones is a nutcase.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

That's just another excuse.

If you prefer you can add in Lapierre or Ted Nugent, whoever.

It doesn't matter, the public is tired of it.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Deepen the debate and the Info. I don't really have a problem with giving up guns. (maybe I'm confused, but I have lived as a pro-gun dude). The reason I don't mind giving up guns personally is ... I can see my self living in the future in a community where there would be a lot of witnesses to crimes against me. I guessing those crimes in daylight would be witnessed by many people. At night I'm thinking that robbers would not try to breaking in my house ... in general ... since I would be there to witness. This is how I see the Third World countries.

1) Clarification, I'm thinking that Women, Kids, Elderly, Handicaped, and the ill and infirm are the ones that benefit most from firearms. ( Weak minded, weak willed, weak of character, weak of skill... as you say ...the childeren are the ones that get threaten)

2) We could almost ban firmarms and still permit those in #1 above to have and hold firearms ... to protect the most vulnerable members of society.

3) Clarification; there seems to be a safety in numbers truth here. If we don't have people watching us and our house ... then crime takes place. This is pretty clear in Costa Rica which is a great country with the highest Literacy Rate. We should not kill robbers. We should not kill people that steal from us or break into our house. That is very bad. People that steal and rob need money. They may kill your dog and may take your front door, appliances, plumbing or whatever. But we shouldn't kill people that break in.

Consusion: There are myths about guns, but we need to stop killing people. There are strong criminals and killers, but if we can scare them off without killing them ... them perhaps guns are a good investment. The problem is people in general are tired, unalert, unskilled, and have human emotions that play into the use of guns. As far as I know .... guns scare criminals and get them out of your house. In general, it seems that civilians scare criminals by holding a gun much more than they ... do harm or shoot the criminal. The biggest problem with guns seems to be shooting yourself ...but that is followed by shooting someone you know like a family member. We also know that you are more likely to be raped by someone you know .....or to be subjected to violence by someone you know.

I don't see any statistics in your post. There are plenty of statistics around.

Hope you remember ... I see you as a person with common interest ... I am not a organic gardener, don't know a lot about hydroponics, but would like you to know that we all have things in common.

I'd like to simplify my life, and get a little off the grid. RIght now I think living outside of the US is smart. But I might have to learn to raise live stock or agriculture. And if I do this I will not have a firearm. I will be giving up the US rights.

[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

I don't have much interest in banning anything, I am more interested in shifts in culture,. the idea of owning guns (tools of killing) is repugnant, and I like to point that out. Shifts in culture are much more powerful than govt' regulations, by far.

As you say, most people killed with guns are gun owners, or their family members, so that is one statistic that should wake people up, about being scared and being safe. Having a gun makes you less safe!

Where do you live that you have such fear of robbers? Community is the best solution for keeping your home safe, just knowing and talking regularly with the folks next door helps keep both parties safer, and a wider community watch could also help.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Great response. Good post. I have travelled a lot. I have been to like 7 third world countries. I've had a couple of issues, but mostly see that safety is about thinking. I'm trying to cut expenses. Looks like costs are getting complicated in the US,,,

[-] 1 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

And all progressives eat alfalfa sprouts and fuck their poodle. Give me a break!

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

and your proof of this is what now? gun holders show their weakness in their need of tools to kill. Period. End of story. Guns have no other use except to enable the weak to perpetrate death.

[-] 1 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

If I could defend myself from criminals from drawing upon the energy of Gaia, then I guess I could do that. Or if I say please, they may just walk out of my home.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Spreading fear! Is that all you got? fear=weakness,. grow a set.

Words do work, and so does being involved in your community, people protect each other when they know each other, and care about each other. Learn some physical self-defense skills, Aikido is a good defensive tool, among many. Skill and strength, not fear and guns.

[-] 1 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

I could become a black belt. Aikido is an excellent martial art. Makes me think of that sword-wielding Arab in Raiders of the Lost Ark who faced down Harrison Ford with his revolver. Excellent scene in an excellent movie.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

The coward dies a thousand deaths, the brave but one,. . the fearful need tools (guns) to feel safe, the strong need never fear.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

You'll make more friends if you add sugar to that lemon water.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

those hiding behind machines of murder instead of dealing with people face to face have already had too much corn-syrup. the truth may be tough to take for the weak minded and weak willed,. but how else can we toughen them up, they need to hear what we think of them. Weak and frightened is what they are!

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I have several family members that own guns. And not a single one of them would have a conversation with you or listen to any ideas about ways to curb violence if you started the conversation out with name calling that solves nothing.

Taking on issues in this manner is not productive. Constructive is the way to go. That's all I'm trying to say.

Someone mentioned gun owner insurance before, per gun. I thought that was a good idea. Be constructive. Positive energy is good.

[-] -1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

I am speaking in facts; those that seek tools to leverage killing power, are weak willed and skill-less individuals. I am not attempting to open a dialog with gun holders, as their actions show their character. Instead, I seek to encourage others, by example, to let the weapon pushers and owners know that they show their fear and weakness in their choice of tools.

What positive and constructive use has a gun??

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

Yes murderers are weak minded. But you didn't say that. You just said "guns are for weak individuals."

To answer your question - my cousins make excellent deer jerky. Guns also make Arnold Schwarzenegger movies more action packed.

But this premise you're pushing has to go more than 1 way. If we're talking banning guns, police better not have guns either. I don't want to see a politician talking gun control while simultaneously surrounded by men with guns to protect him. The government shouldn't have the military overseas adding to the civilian death toll either.

[-] -1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

I really don't care what laws the gov. makes or doesn't, regarding guns or much else, they have lost all authority in my mind.

Don't get me wrong, I am calling hunters who use hand-cannons to kill peaceful animals weak as well! I could perhaps forgive a bow-hunter slaughtering the defenseless with such a tool,. if done for needed food and not "sport", otherwise yes pure weakness. Hate-filled and mean spirited as well.

I agree the police should not have guns, (should be none, our communities should police themselves) and the military should stay inside the boarders, defense is not drone bombings on villages in the hills of the overseas,.

[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I stand by my sugar comment.

But I am glad you are not one sided on the issue. I can respect your mindset since you include all and not just the few.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Whatever are you talking about? If you NEED a gun to defend yourself, or to take action when the insane run amok then you are indeed weak.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

you are promoting living in fear,. and that is weakness and dumb.

In fact, there WAS an ARMED guard at Columbine,. there was an ARMED civilian at the Gabby Gifford crowd shooting,. in both instances this did nothing to stop the shooting, (Hard to get a clean shot in a panicking crowd isn't it?).

you are wrong, and you persist is spreading fear and hate,. just stop now.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

You view on this sounds a bit extreme but I believe at this time we should be asking what motivates people to think that they need a gun in the first place. If society as a whole doesn't 'clean up it's act' in regards to guns in the near future I will support proposals to ban all guns, period.

[-] 1 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

Yes, your view is a bit extreme. I will probably get my AR-10B with a thousand hollow point rounds Next I will gather some like-minded individuals. That shouldn't be hard since I live in the sticks where most people believe in individual freedom. We will gather enough MRE's, seeds, and supplies for 6-months. Next, we will find a discarded schoolbus, bury it in the ground, and name the place Mount Carmel.
You are one bright, progressive wizard.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

Nobody is going to come looking for you no matter what the law say's. You know that, right?

[-] 1 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

I am just a gun-wielding smart ass. That was the point of the last statement

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

My view is that those people espousing "freedom" for the arms pushers, to sell arms to everyone and anyone, are dumb tools,. and that people who want, or have, guns are weak and needy fearful people.

I really have no concern what laws gov. makes to control or not control arms pushers, my concern is culture,. and spreading the truth about gun owners and pushers.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

I agree.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Great! Spread the meme; gun holders are fearful and weak.

[-] 0 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

Ah, falling back on that old chestnut, huh?

[-] 0 points by highlander (-163) 1 year ago

I hope I do not have the look of a weak-willed milquetoast while I walk down the street and I do not imagine that I look like one. However, if there is someone out there who does and decides that my house is an inviting target, then they will be greeted with a 45 magnum down their windpipe.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by mideast (506) 1 year ago

you could also say that guns are for the descendants of confederate traitors who are so humiliated by losing the war and their slaves that they cling to their guns

[-] 0 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

and small men
...............................................................................did I really say that!

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

Yes seems to involve compensating for smallness in other areas as well,. agreed.
Still, many woman are compensating for something as well. Really, it all seems to come down to power, as to many things do. Guns are tools for the weak, as they seek the power they do not see in themselves, (not that it is not already there they just don't see it!). and so they seek tools to augment their power,. so to me the definition of a gun owner is a fearful and weak person. (at least that is how they see themselves)

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Absolutely true. Which iswhy repubs use fear mongering lies (Dems comin for your guns) to get votes, And NRA spews thesame lies to increase the gun makers profits.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

the elections are over the Dems and Repubs won

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

I know 3rd parties got less than 2 %.

Pretty sad.

In regards to gun crime, & new gun safety measures, we should identify all NRA 'A' rated pols and organize a pressure campaign.

Welcome back. Haven't seen ya'

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

now congress has faked another fiscal crisis and we continue to pay tax to banks for nothing

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Seems like same old nothing.

Except for the 1st time in 20 years we have increased taxes on the top 2%.

Not nearly enough, but WE must agitate all pols & protest for more increases on the wealthiest. The PEOPLE must force additional progress and build on this small success.

Happy New Year Matt

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

fair enough

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (22225) 1 year ago

Amen.

[-] -2 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

Do you include the young lady who’s worried about being raped, the little old lady who keeps a .38 on her night stand because she live in a bad area and the store owner who’s afraid of being robbed. Are they weak willed; or just want to protect themselves.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

perhaps they should make friends in their community,. and the community should protect its own,. or perhaps your examples are figments of imagination.

Perhaps all guns are merely tools of killing, murder and death,. and real security comes from community. Not machines made only for killing.

[+] -4 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

OK, so how will the comunity protect it's members from armed criminals? Remember, when seconds count, the cops are just ten minutes away.

My point is, in our society, some people will kill you over a pair of shoes; and "the community" won't be able to help you any more than the police.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

You Sir, are a fear monger,. working (knowingly or not) for the arms pushers!

Guns do not help or solve any issues,. some frightened people who are made to feel weak and powerless, by arguments emanating from the arms sellers, like what you are reiterating here,. are to blame for creating fear and hatred. There exists no need for your lies,.

I know of no "armed criminals" except those rising from sadly weak members of the community given bad thought processes such as you are pushing here. Cease pushing fear please,. it is counter productive to humanity.

Brave individuals deal with armed madmen peacefully, and fear and violence do not escalate,. that however seems to be the point of your post, to escalate fear and violence.

[-] -3 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

I’m sorry, I don’t think I’m a fear monger. I’m a realist. Some people really will kill you over a pair of shoes. It’s happened a number of times. Also stores get robbed, store employees injured or killed, women raped and murdered on a daily basis, and so on. It’s real and occurs on a regular basis.

I wish we didn’t live in such a violent society. But ignoring danger will not make it go away; and taking guns away from the little old lady and store owner put them at risk.

I’m all for cleaning out the street gangs and cracking down on crime, but until then to not be armed puts you in danger.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

It is not about ignoring anything,. it is about the choice you have, in how you will approach the fleeting life you have,. ?

Will you live in fear, and pay arms manufactures, for the "security" of knowing you have increased your likelihood of dying by gunshot? Or, simply choose to live a peaceful, aware life in expressed in peace and harmony??? Choose to die perhaps at the hands of a madman with a hand-cannon these fear pushing arms-dealers gave him,. but happy and secure in the knowledge that life is more than just you as a lone individual living in marketing induced fear?

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

You are a fear monger.

Every sentence.

The "gun community" (fetishists), have been given EVERY opportunity to DO something.

YOU have failed to do so.

You have given us threats.

YOU have given us Alex Jones.

YOU have given us that wild eyed guy in Tennessee, that just plain threatened to start shooting.

YOU have given us other even more militant militias, that threaten to do the same.

All based on lies.

NO!

It's you who needs to understand OUR position.

We're sick of it.

If you won't help fix it, you really are part of the problem.

If you won't fix it?

Somebody else will.

And even if I personally, don't care for their solution, I will still thank them for trying.

I can be no more candid with you.

Here's another bottom line about how OWS has shown your BS about protecting us from tyranny is also far off point.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/12/how-occupy-proved-we-dont-need-guns-against-the-government/

Grow up.

Too many innocents are dying.

[-] 0 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

OK, Shooz, I through for tonight. Have to finish a couple of threads on Stormfront. We can start again tomorrow. Jeez, now you also now think I’m a racist.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

Really?

Show me where I said that.

I'm just giving you some flat out truth, and I didn't call you anything at all, other than off base.

The country is tired of the excuses of the fetishists.

You got nothing valid left.

[-] -1 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

You are correct. You did not call me a racist. My lame attempt at humor. I apologize.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

And that killer might be armed with only arms - and may kill you on a playground or in a mall or.....................hhmmm I guess it might be a good thing if people were raised to be physically healthy ( as possible ) with some sort of self defense training.

[-] -2 points by bigjoe (-117) 1 year ago

Doubtful a 120 pound little old lady will be physically fit enough to fight off two drug crazed criminals who want her meds. Same thing for a young lady threatened with rape.

Come on, DK, you know your grasping now.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

OK, try this.

Grow the FUCK up.

It's time for the, and here's the truth of who they are, gun fetishists, to finally understand that the rest of us are sick and tired of gun carnage in all it's putrid forms.

They have yet to give a single inch that they have not clawed and scratched to get back. Often at great expense to life and limb among the innocent, the non gun fetishists. Oh, and a high level of tax payer expense too.

I have listened to their threats of violence for decades now. Before I ever heard of the NRA.

Here's the bottom line.

Since the fetishists won't offer any kind of significant compromise. A significant inch, if you will, something will still be done and I doubt that you will like it. But you have been offered many chances to help find a solution.

YOU have failed to do so.

You have given us threats.

YOU have given us Alex Jones.

YOU have given us that wild eyed guy in Tennessee, that just plain threatened to start shooting.

YOU have given us other even more militant militias, that threaten to do the same.

All based on lies.

NO!

It's you who needs to understand OUR position.

We're sick of it.

If you won't help fix it, you really are part of the problem.

If you won't fix it?

Somebody else will.

And even if I personally, don't care for their solution, I will still thank them for trying.

I can be no more candid with you.

Here's another bottom line about how OWS has shown your BS about protecting us from tyranny is also far off point.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/12/how-occupy-proved-we-dont-need-guns-against-the-government/

Grow up.

Too many innocents are dying.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Nope just think if the other people on the street knew how to handle themselves they might just be ready-able and willing to get involved to help out that little old lady. It is a better scenario than to expect that little old lady to pull out her gatt and shoot her assailants before they take it away from her.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

It's time for the, and here's the truth of who they are, gun fetishists, to finally understand that the rest of us are sick and tired of gun carnage in all it's putrid forms.

They have yet to give a single inch that they have not clawed and scratched to get back. Often at great expense to life and limb among the innocent, the non gun fetishists. Oh, and a high level of tax payer expense too.

I have listened to their threats of violence for decades now. Before I ever heard of the NRA.

Here's the bottom line.

Since the fetishists won't offer any kind of significant compromise. A significant inch, if you will, something will still be done and I doubt that you will like it. But you have been offered many chances to help find a solution.

YOU have failed to do so.

You have given us threats.

YOU have given us Alex Jones.

YOU have given us that wild eyed guy in Tennessee, that just plain threatened to start shooting.

YOU have given us other even more militant militias, that threaten to do the same.

All based on lies.

NO!

It's you who needs to understand OUR position.

We're sick of it.

If you won't help fix it, you really are part of the problem.

If you won't fix it?

Somebody else will.

And even if I personally, don't care for their solution, I will still thank them for trying.

I can be no more candid with you.

Here's another bottom line about how OWS has shown your BS about protecting us from tyranny is also far off point.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/12/how-occupy-proved-we-dont-need-guns-against-the-government/

Grow up.

Too many innocents are dying.

[-] -1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 1 year ago

It's time for the, and here's the truth of who they are, gun fetishists, to finally understand that the rest of us are sick and tired of gun carnage in all it's putrid forms.

They have yet to give a single inch that they have not clawed and scratched to get back. Often at great expense to life and limb among the innocent, the non gun fetishists. Oh, and a high level of tax payer expense too.

I have listened to their threats of violence for decades now. Before I ever heard of the NRA.

Here's the bottom line.

Since the fetishists won't offer any kind of significant compromise. A significant inch, if you will, something will still be done and I doubt that you will like it. But you have been offered many chances to help find a solution.

YOU have failed to do so.

You have given us threats.

YOU have given us Alex Jones.

YOU have given us that wild eyed guy in Tennessee, that just plain threatened to start shooting.

YOU have given us other even more militant militias, that threaten to do the same.

All based on lies.

NO!

It's you who needs to understand OUR position.

We're sick of it.

If you won't help fix it, you really are part of the problem.

If you won't fix it?

Somebody else will.

And even if I personally, don't care for their solution, I will still thank them for trying.

I can be no more candid with you.

Here's another bottom line about how OWS has shown your BS about protecting us from tyranny is also far off point.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/12/how-occupy-proved-we-dont-need-guns-against-the-government/

Grow up.

Too many innocents are dying.

[-] -2 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 1 year ago

I'd call that a highly prejudicial statement; guns are for everybody.

[-] -3 points by town (-374) 1 year ago

You're right.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 1 year ago

a right-wing loon, perhaps.