Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: I don't want to take away all guns, just yours. And I was right.

Posted 5 years ago on Dec. 31, 2012, 4:04 p.m. EST by brightonsage (4494)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

There are people I trust with guns, myself, of course, and some of my family (rural hunters).

But you? Not so much. It seems like every time I hear you say something about guns, it make me more uncomfortable rather than more comfortable. When what you say has the taint of paranoia dripping from it or the aroma of willingness to use them in situations that are questionable at best, we get further apart.

I am reminded of those who scream at me about free speech. That we are are free to do disgusting things is not a mandate for most people to actually do them. With so much room in the middle, why do some people insist on spending most of their time hanging over the edges? You can pick your nose but don't expect applause.

The people who I would trust with guns would never write in this space demanding larger calibers, larger magazines, higher rates of fire, more penetrating bullets, laser sights, the right to shoot someone justified by their uncorroborated statement that they felt threatened by someone without a gun.

I feel threatened by people who become abusive because I won't support them having a gun without knowing anything about their mental health or track record.

So you may have the right, according to the Supreme Court to own a gun, but that alone doesn't make me feel comfortable that you are mature and stable enough to use and store one in such a way that makes me comfortable. The fact that you don't even feel inclined to make people around you comfortable, makes me uncomfortable with you. So, I would be more comfortable if someone, yes, even our government, took yours away before someone gets hurt with it. It might be me and more likely, according to the statistics, it might be you. It might just save your life.

More gun injuries occur to gun owners than to non gun owners.

Thanks for participating, If you read below you will see that my premise is validated with even the small population we have here. If you mention guns in any negative respect, especially if you reject the use of guns for any purpose, and even if you give the game away, there will be unbalanced individuals who will immediately and viciously attack you. And, like a pit bull, they won't let go. This demonstrates that they aren't suitable candidates for protecting the rest of us using guns because their hatred for you may exceed that they would have for perps who would use a gun against you to rob, rape, or otherwise forcibly exploit you. In fact, they might be the first to harm you in a fit of rage for your withholding approval of their love of guns (not guns per se, but the love of the use of guns). We have reason to fear those who claim to be protecting us the most. Vigilantes were never a good idea because of this.

Feel free to comment, but I will not respond to the crazies.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by jph (2652) 5 years ago

Gun owners, and gun advocates, are frightened, and feel powerless,. they are weak of character, and will. The need advanced tools to "protect" themselves or kill wild creatures.

Guns are for killing and have no other use, if you want to hunt for food use a bow, or a hook on a line. If you want to hunt for sport, shoot yourself instead, that is truly sporting.

Gun are for the weak.

[-] 2 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

Your point is well taken and you couldn't have been more right - weak, firghtned and powerless people kill with guns.

These are the people who kill innocent people, children, older people, and people their own age.

These are people who are insecure, have a mental problem, feel picked on, have no self confidence and need something to make them feel powerful. Yes, their solution is to own a gun and to kill -

They kill animals with guns to make themselves feel powerful instead of weak.

They kill people whom they are frightened of and feel threatened by and use any means necessary to carry out that task.

Yes, these are the "frightened, powerless and weak". We need to rid our society of them. So, what is you plan to do this?

[-] 1 points by Clancy (42) 5 years ago

What is wrong with hunting with a gun, it is near impossible to take down an African buffalo or a 1200 pound moose without a gun. It is not weak to hunt with a rifle.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 5 years ago

What you need to ask yourself, Clancy, is why you would need to shoot an African Buffalo, or a Canadian Moose.

You getting a bit hungry all of a sudden?

[-] 0 points by Clancy (42) 5 years ago

First off the animals I hunt are very hard to find. I spent 9 days in Africa to hunt buffalo and didn't get one till the last day. Every day for 12 hours we hiked through some very rough terrain and not to mention dangerous. The hunt beat me down but it was a great experience and I met great people. It's not like I sat on my porch with ice cold beer and just shot stuff in comfort.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 5 years ago

So it's trophies you're hunting?

I used to do that with very large fish.

[-] 1 points by Clancy (42) 5 years ago

Yes I hunt trophies, I've already fished trophies and it boared me after a while. I also kill boar anytime I see them because of how much of a problem they are in the south. But I donate the meat from them.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 5 years ago

Each to their own. I only hunt feral animals.

I managed a small herd of water buffalo for one season. Quite a profitable number, really.

Truth was, the herd was about as tame as longhorn cattle. Drive past, pick your target, shoot. Ten grand a pop.

[-] 1 points by Clancy (42) 5 years ago

The last time I was in Africa I got an elephant and I understand how some people react to that. I wouldn't have hunted it though if it hadn't fed so many people. The native people out their only get good meat maybe once or twice a year. They didn't waste a piece if the elephant either. The it thing you get to keep is a bracelet made from its tail hair.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

You are correct re "frightened and feel powerless" and that is what makes them dangerous. It is the frightened animal that bites you. Your own dog will bite you if it is frightened by something, e.g. storms. strangers, other dogs.etc.

When you say, I don't need a gun to feel secure, it makes a fearful person feel even more fearful and powerless. You are making them feel even less adequate and are therefore, a threat. You threaten to expose their inadequacy and fear. So while you are representing yourself as being no threat, they are interpreting you are a greater threat. You can see where it goes from here.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

Weak people shoot strong people every single day in this country.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I really don't favor the weak shooting the strong over the strong shooting the weak. Maybe if they all tried snow balls for a awhile.......?

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Hey there are a lot of the police I don't trust either. It seems like half of those they shoot (15 times) don't have guns either. (Reaching for a comb or wallet...)

You haven't done anything to make me suspicious....yet. What is that they say...... err on the safe side?

[-] 2 points by agkaiser (2172) from Fredericksburg, TX 5 years ago

I like it. I'd like it better if police and military were disarmed with the rest of the lunatics.

All the world is crazy save me and thee. Sometimes I'm not so sure about thee. . .

[-] 2 points by elf3 (4002) 5 years ago

Yikes but what about all the illegal weapons coming across our borders - then criminals have guns and the cops and people are (in very big trouble) ? I think women should own guns don't hear of women shooting others very often (we may need to check our weapons in a special coded case once a month but other than that I think it's brilliant? Why do so many of us hate hunting? Well see we don't like to kill, we don't think it's fun to watch life ebbing out of a living being as it lies there suffering, we don't call that sport) well unless you're Sarah Palin but she might be operating with a few less marbles than most (has anyone checked to see if she used to have a penis)

[-] 1 points by agkaiser (2172) from Fredericksburg, TX 5 years ago

my son in law thinks Palin's hot. But everyone knows that all sons in law are idiots. I'll bet he'd freak if he groped a bull dagger. I like hunting though. But only if you eat what you kill. Hey! What about that? It would slow down the MMs and fight world hunger while reducing the population. Better than ethical suicide and Soylent Green.

[-] 1 points by KevinPotts (368) 5 years ago

ATTENTION Gun Debaters…Please Read This Entire Article…‘The Riddle of the Gun’ By Sam Harris

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I normally like what Harris has to say. In this case he effectively defends his position but uses devices that he often criticizes in others. I absolutely agree that a cultural change is in order ad could have the greatest impact, however he can deliver that change any more than I can.

But he rejects things that might improve the current situation by some amount. This is the perfect being the enemy of the good. This monograph is not (to me) nearly as good as many of his writings that relate directly to his field, philosophy and neuroscience.

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 5 years ago

It is a dangerous thing to take any tool for granted.More auto injuries occur to drivers than to non drivers.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

It least you can kill deer while you are killing drivers. But I think you may be on to something. Maybe if guns, of some types at least, posed a risk to the shooter as well as the target, they would only be used if the shooter really believed that they were about to be killed. So, if that would work, and a couple of Bushmasters blew up, the rest of the owners would use them a little more judiciously, perhaps?

I have heard that when a semi or full auto gets a bullet stuck in the barrel the next bullet cause something bad to happen. Makes you think, huh?

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 5 years ago

Never heard that about the misfire.Education reduces accidents by a great deal.I think that if it is offered would be key in the reduction of mishaps.That leaves us with crazy and stupid .Unfixable.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Bullets trying to travel a barrel obstructed by another bullet tend to explode.

Re crazy and stupid, access to tools they can't handle is creating an a problem unnecessarily. Sure some crazy and all stupidity can't be fixed but giving children toys that will hurt themselves and others can be fixed.

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 5 years ago

Handled M16 for many years never heard of that one,but ok if you say so.Whom ever gives a child some thing that is dangerous and does not supervise them is an idiot.And yes there are a multitude of idiots.Perhaps you can get them legislated out of existance.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Upgrading to mature, self confident. non fear, caring adults would be good. Maybe like the '50's with equality for all. Culturally, bad practices can just be abandoned. When society generally decides that something is unacceptable it mostly goes away. Strapping your Christmas tree on the top of your car pointy end forward isn't illegal. It's just stupid and you don't see many people doing it. So, some bad Ideas do get abandoned.

[-] 0 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 5 years ago

The Chtistmas tree seems to be a bad idea.Some people would think otherwise.Maybe if we get a large enough group behind us we could have Christmas tree control.People might find that acceptable if we frame it for there own well being and the security of all.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

The one's who haul it the wrong way find that the limbs won't hold up a light or an ornament after being blown down by the stump. They usually only do it once.

The good news about that one is that it doesn't hurt anyone else. Letting go with a Bushmaster and a 30 round clip is another matter. Saying sorry isn't nearly enough. We have to do enough to turn it around.

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 5 years ago

I wish you luck.Ride with the wind at your back.


[-] 0 points by Shule (2638) 5 years ago

May I add that over thirty five thousand people are killed in the U.S. each year by motor vehicles, and of that over three thousand are kids. In light of that statistic one would think we as a society would change our behavior toward driving and the handling of autos in general, but no we couldn't do that. That is too much to ask. Its better to just shovel it all under the rug ( or rather shovel 'em all under some dirt), and keep on driving faster in evermore bigger, faster, more powerfull cars.

What makes us think we would really change our gun laws just because some twenty or thirty some kiddies get shot up in a school by a maniac every so many years?

[-] 1 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 5 years ago

I remember when they put seat belts in.Car makers kicked and draged there feet the whole way.Always greatful to Mr. Nader.


[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I obviously don't know much or anything about these situations. But I do know that nothing is perfect. I heard about a guy getting hit by a meteorite. I can't think of a way to prevent this from happening ever again. I don't know how to make it happen less. But it is the only case I have heard of in my long life.

I have heard of Toyota's accelerating without the driver's involvement. And it happened multiple times. And you know what, they figured out a couple of ways to fix that and I think they should fix all of those cars.

If I was where I could investigate the cases you mention, I would do it and if I could figure out how to prevent them in some reasonable way, I would try to get that done. I think this is a sensible way to deal with problems. Am I wrong about this? I have some patents so some people would say I am an inventor. I have always tried to solve problems in reasonable ways.

I don't cut my meat with a sword. And I don't let my grand daughters play with swords. Neither of these make sense. There are more people that I would trust with pepper spray than I would trust with guns. Some people have been killed with pepper spray, but not very many. Don't know where you can by a used force field do you? Can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Well, Toyota agreed to pay $1.1 billion as a partial settlement. That is what they always do when they aren't at fault.

Time to try all of the above, not necessarily everywhere at the same time, but try them all. Expand what works, drop what doesn't.

Gave most of mine away (young relatives that are hunters) and disabled others.


[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Good for you. I am proud of you.


[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I don't hunt anymore. When I was young it was survival for the family. And I wanted to grow up to be an Indian. Worked very hard at being a tracker. I called up quail and shot them with a beebee gun when I was really young. I eventually figured out that wasn't going to happen. One of my best friends in High School was a Native American, but he couldn't hunt a lick.

I really don't like venison and there isn't any thrill hunting. There are a lot of guys out there who are totally careless. I got shot once guiding pheasant hunters, so it just isn't something I am motivated to do. A strange hunter couldn't make me feel comfortable enough to guide him now.

They make the Amish put big reflective triangles on the back of their buggies. Why? Because so many of us ran into the back of them and it not only killed lots of them, it also killed lots of us driving the cars that ran into them. There must be buggies in the Constitution, but there isn't anything about triangles.

I do have grand kids and if it would keep them safe, I would ask you to give up your hockey stick, your ATV, your dynamite or even your gun. I would even ask you to hang a big reflective triangle on the back of your pick up.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Good Post, you always have so much to offer. I don't know what prinicpals are important in an accident with an Amish Buggy. But it is an important historical fact ... or something we can look up and find examples of having happened.


[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

You will see my other post but I would take a multi part solution or temporary improvements while working on something better.

Flint locks? Sure, but what else are you working on?

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Well okay, there is a point of view here. A valid point of view. A lot of the building up of night vision scopes, armor piercing bullets to penetrate body armor, and 50 round cylinders, or 100 round cylinders.... is all about fear and a kind of fade ... or a kind of group think.

But remember politicians use fear also. They use fear to get us to agree to go to war in foreign countries, to use war technology on foreigners, to take away civil or individual rights...

If you take the Position of Patriarch ... which you sort of are... who will stop our war government? Will you personally stand up with other US Patriarchs and stop war. Have Patriarchs Ever Stopped US Wars?????!!!!!

How do I know you represent Patriarchs? Because you sound like you never met young men or women that were interested in guns. You sound like you are a peace time leader who would never want men that liked guns to be in the military. A young man will want to expereiment with shooting guns, with defeating armor, with defeating mounted warriors, with defeating aircraft, with blowing up stuff by gun shot, with learning explosives and detonation of artillery rounds or explosive material...

I'm not saying that young men are smart or strategic.

I'm not saying that young men shoudl be free with explosives, and any guns or firearms they want to use and experiment with. I think that society would be a Militarized culture. I think we want to step back from that.

But the fact is that congress did terminate our military training programs that developed as a result of the Vietnam War and the Guerilla fighting that we faced. Congress did not want to continue to train the best killers post Vietnam.

But what happened was the continued promotion of war in USA ... and the developement of Violent movies, TV, and Video games. The US Federal Government pushed war. If coporations pushed war, then we probably can find proof in the audit trail. I think the trail is there.

But you take the position that you as a Patriarch know better ... you have the experience ... you have lived the life ... and you know better. You don't trust humans to grow, and test life, and learn, when it comes to guns.

Well this country is Run by Patriarchs that premit the sale of Guns every year to foreign countries ... over 100 years of surplus rifles ... and the congress approves foreign military sales ... every year to foreign countries ....

When does it End? The Patriarchs start wars all over the world as long as they are not on our shores or on our land. Pretty slick. It is not so politically dangerous if the War is 500 miles or 2000 miles away. It is chicken shit. It is Patriarchy. And no Nation will ever stop the USA from these wars.

Will you stop these wars before we give up our arms? You and your patriarchy in the US Congress? If not who will stop Congress and How will we stop Congress???? Don't have any answers...? Well you advocate we give more power over to the Patriarchs who are not nice guys and who make war every year.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Didn't really claim to be a patriarch or the president of the patriarch's club. I was just speaking for plain ole me. I haven't sent anybody to war, and by the way I haven't gone myself. I didn't run away to Canada, but I wasn't invited and wasn't dying to try it, so to speak. So, nominating me as spokesman or the setter of policies for all of the old guys who are happy to send boys to die so they continue to get big checks, is too heavy a load for this old guy.

It saddens me to think that our economy would go down the drain quickly if we decided not to continue as the world's largest merchant of death.

I have lived life and unquestionably I do know better. Better than to advocate things like, "Let's you and him go fight." I know better for me and some might decide I know better for them. If it keeps more people alive, it might be a good result. I don't start wars and they don't do my bidding. But surely is my right not to advocate what I believe is wrong, and to refuse to participate enthusiastically in those same things. "Peace through strength" had a nice ring to it. How about "Strength through peace?"

There are a lot of vegetarians who occasionally eat meat. If you aren't a purist, you get to choose, more or less of something. I don't have a problem making choices and feeling the consequences. I certainly get to feel consequences of choices I don't get to make, as well.

It is a little hard to talk around all of the words you put in my mouth, for example.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Hi. I'm sorry for being harsh. Proabably I wanted to try to shock you into a new frame of reference. I'm not a bad guy. I am not black and white, right and wrong. I may underestimate people that have been around. I think that is probably true here. You certainly have the right to make a point and express an opinion. I support your words and your strong sense of knowing. We can't all have a strong sense of knowing ... it sort of sorts itself out. The young people don't come across as well as those that have lived through things, ... as those that have done things. This is the way of the world.

It is good to oppose you just a little to give people pause... to give me pause ... to get myself to dig a little deeper toward understanding.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Well, I don't shock too easily and this seemed a little inconsistent with many of your other postings. So, I tried to respond constructively, stimulating in my own awkward way.

I don't claim to have much influence, but I try to be careful about the example I set, because of having kids and grand kids.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Yeah, it might be I have some personal issues here. After all my years ... after seeing the system... I'm actually mad at my own father at this point.

I felt we should have been mad at our fathers after 2008 Finanical Crisis. And it hasn't gone away. Not that I got hurt. I got through the crisis very well. But it was lies on top of lies and ... fraud in Ratings Agencies ... fraud in accounting firms... fraud in wall street bansk ... fraud in congress ... conflict of interest that has been institutionalize... it just goes on and on. Congress no longer wants to bring witnesses to testify if they are large campaign contributors.

Why couldn't my father or yours stop this?

Campaign Idea: Guilt the Fathers to get them into OWS.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Think you need to take a deep breath. The people who are responsible are the people who made the decisions and took the actions to make it so. There are a large number of pretty innocent bystanders here as well. I don't have any idea where your Dad fits into this. But I have a pretty good idea why my Dad didn't stop it. The simple answer is, because he couldn't.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

That doesn't fly any more ... we believed in our parents. And their parents. Now we hear there is a Coup in Federal Government.

Coup, means take over. This is what is needed to make us go to war. This is what it takes to attack Iraq. The US Governmet has fallen.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I didn't tell my kids the same thing my father did. What coup?

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Did you see Congress Vote for war in:

1) Korea
2) Vietnam
3) Panama
4) Granada
5) Gulf War I
6) Afhganistan
7) Iraq
8) Pakistan

Nope, No Vote for war. Chicken Shit Congress. Oh, don't feel represented ... Wonder why ... Soft Money & Hard Money, Lobbying and Campaign Dollars.

Seen the List of Covert Wars of the US (CIA Operations in Foreign Countries). Well that is where the US Destroyed the Sovereignity of nations around the world ... since the CIA was created.

Seen the list of Wars called the "Banana Wars"? That appears to be where we went to war because of corporations prior to 1900s.

Seen Presidential Doctrine change since the Powell Doctrine...? That was because we were Raping other Countries.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 5 years ago

If you truly want to end the wars , I suggest you speak to Americas enemies.. and have them lay down their weapons...

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

You mean there Empire is too great a threat? No. We know the can not threaten the US. Maybe in there dreams ... or maybe if we are so afraid of our shadows.... we can't go to the store like people in third world countries... because we might get scratched.

Conservatives would rather nuk the world than be a little uncomfotable on weekends.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 5 years ago

Well, stand back and look at it from an unbiased view.. The USA has excellent human rights laws.. while the Muslim world .. is far far behind .. in a world of religious laws.. very barbaric.. The USA looks at life with a modern educated eye .. while the Muslim world is still stoning people to death .. very very barbaric .. The USA does not wish to bomb the Muslim world.. and in fact has restrained from getting involved in the Muslims atrocities for many many a year .. but when 9/11 happened .. USA had no choice but to get involved .. and it is a stupid unwinnable battle.. The crazies over there in the Muslim world have no sense .. at all .. and simply believe they are doing the right thing.. until they realize otherwise .. this battle can not stop .. They are simply too much of a danger to the rest of the world .. with their fanaticism and crazy religious beliefs. So again .. ask them to lay down their weapons.. and wave a white flag .. and cause no more trouble.. .. the bombing will stop .. But they will never be trusted again .. We need to build a giant concrete wall around the that crazy part of the world .. and police it with drones .. perpetually .. until the muslim way of life becomes extinct.. There is no other way.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Well, stand back and look at it from an unbiased view.. The USA has excellent propaganda, even the military vets keep facts to themselves, all to keep the system moving forward. Looks to me like it is all about money. But that is just my whole life experience.... But think about it... why would anyone making good money want to stop it? Why would anyone say, wow, is this really the right thing to do...

All the people in the military are getting paid. You want money. I want money. Why would we do anything to endanger our jobs. Why would we try to stop it.

We Wouldn't. you wouldn't. I wouldn't. We only hope someone will.

Military Family? Don't appologize. Just try to think how we have ruined the economy of Iraq. Caused Rape, Famine and Disease of Iraqis due to them being Refugees. Just think of the disease/cancer from the shells and shelling. Just think of all the people killed which may be 1 Million... Loss of houses, Loss of business, Loss of old family possesions. Loss of whole families or family leaders.

Are you totally without imagination. American does not remember these things in any living generation. You don't know all of this even if you were a shooter in Iraq. You have to think and imagine. So imagine now.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 5 years ago

Sooner or later the innocent ones that are suffering will come to realize.. it is their neighbors . that have brought on all the hell upon them .. and they will gather up all those bad neighbors .. and that will see the turn of this war. There is really nothing USA can do but continually send in the drones .. and really it can't be so bad over there ..orr they would be waving the white flag by now .. I think all the moaning ..is simply a trick they are playing..on us .. trying to make us feel bad.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Glad you don't work on the Budget. The trade off in Logistics costs for Results is almost nil. There are no results. A couple of CIA guys have written books and are on tv/video sell them I guess. But also some other people are saying the same thing... we are producing terrorist by being in their country.

How would you feel if the Chinese Military was stationed in the USA. You know a few times a year one of our military Rapes a girl in Okinawa. How would you like the Chinese raping some of our women or girls in the USA. This is not Rocket Science here. Occupations produce resentment... in this case the people are tribal and war like ... so we are provoking them to become terrorist.

Like I said this aint Rocket Science ... just look at Palastine. People have family members killed by Israelis and they hate, and some become Terrorist.

Besides do a little research... You can't deploy an army to fight guerillas. By definition Guerillas will look like civilians, mix with civilians, and won't have logistics hubs, trucks, tanks, aircraft, armies, prensidents, ministers, diplomats, ... you can't negotiate with guerillas ... you can declare war on them or call a peace.

You can declare war on a government or a Country. And that war will look like traditional war. terrorists and guerillas can only be policed up - you can't mount a war. So we have wasted $2 trillion, and have a mountain of old M1 Abrams Tanks that need repair for any real war that comes along. We actually have a worse national security posture as a result of the Iraq and Afghan Wars.

But looks like we have the Russians and Chinese gearing up for a cold war. So it is doubtful the Defense budget will be below $700 Billion in 2014.

How do you like the Police getting all military hardware? I guess that might help if someone invaded the USA, but don't really see the use of it at all.

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 5 years ago

War should not be about profit. In fact , the Hell of War should be the deterent of War...and the incentive to work out our differences in a .. civilized / reasonable manner without going to war.

Once we get rid of opportunities for Greed in the world , decisions will be based / geared towards making the world a better place for everyone, not just a few.

  • Occupy is an occupation.. is it not ..

  • It all depends on the reasons, right.

  • War is not an enjoyable discussion. War is really a sympton of a bad system (Bad World System) if we fix the system .. than the WARS may cease. ..(the symptons will go away)

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

I once looked at the Palestine/isreal conflict and probably missed all the important things experts would come up with. What I came up with was some symbols from culture that may or may not have worked for either side. I was trying to kind of create symbols of people and inject them into culture ... through some kind of common agreement that the symbols were important ... and if there was an agreement for peace ... and if all the players were present at the peace table ... then maybe it had a chance. All just my imagination of course...

The truth is that the powers that control government in different countries ... sometimes don't want peace or what would look like peace to most all observers.

The USA has a problem of 1) Thinking it is a Superpower 2) That Superpower status could be used as propaganda under the umbrella of Police actions ... or helping to bring democracy to failed states 3) US has huge Strategic geopolitical plans and an interest in free trade of strategic resources ... or an interest in controling those resources 4) Un official US Powers come through Lobbyist and may be large corporations, large bankers, or wealthy investors that want strategic Investments.

Isreal is another funny one. Don't really think they want peace or to give up territory, so they have their own geographical expansion plan or strategic Interest in holding Territory and pushing Palestinians off land.

China, Russia ... they want influence and resources.

Can we get rid of greed when it is part of the range of Human emotions... Not unless we rise above being human.

The other realization is the the UN can be used for political purposes. Could be the UN tries to put forward common sense simple ideas to aid peace ... but the Assembly could be used by Lobbyist or powerful or influencial countries. Complicated.

A Peace Platform should be well known by now. Something that could be dusted off and have wide support. not sure if we have one or not.

[-] 1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 5 years ago

The harsh Realities ..

Can we prove any of it , and if we could .. can we change any of it.. The world as we know it can be a brutal place ..and if any nation should slack off ..just a little bit, you can be sure other nations will strip them to the bone .. So what to do .. stay on top of the heap .. king of the region .. mighty and powerful .. ..and yes than there is the people .. they pay the price .. in those war torn areas .. it truly has to be awful .. I am thankful everyday for the bit of food I have and running water electricity, a warm roof.. peace in the streets .. but I am aware of far off places where they are not as fortunate as I. They suffer harsh realities .. heartbreaking realities .. and some times I think the world may look at them .. in a ..disconnected way .. somehow ..like they will get through it somehow .. it's their neighborhood .. it's they way it is .. and perhaps ..they are not really human beings any way .. The poor starving conditions .. poor sanitation and all the resy of it .. lack of food and nutrition .. and wars .. always wars .. brutal wars .. killings rape murder and mayhem .. I have heard many a story .. many a bad sad horrifying story.. ..and have really done nothing to help any of them ..nothing at all .. what could I do ? .. What could I do ?


[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

"higher rates of fire" WTF??

I don't trust you with facts or intelligent opinions. You're illiterate.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Can you fire a bolt action faster than a semi auto? Accurately? Really? How about a muzzled cap and ball? Flintlock? Matchlock? Revolver? Are they all the same?

[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

You're clueless,...or just perhaps willfully ignorant. You're scared of your own shadow. You seek to disarm and remove Constitutional rights from law abiding Americans. That makes you a traitor.

I don't care about "higher rates of fire". I care about defending my life and the lives of my family and my country. These are things you don't understand,you're a Quisling.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I submit that it is the people who are scared of their own shadows who must be comforted by guns. Then they comfort themselves further by incorrectly judging non gun owner's assessment of degree of risk that results from the proliferation of weapons driven by the owner's paranoia.

What scares you about me and people like me is that we aren't afraid. We aren't as afraid of property criminals, or sexual criminals as we are of paranoid people who have gun fetishes. To say that the founders didn't anticipate the epidemic of paranoia and the resulting gun fetishism gun is very realistic. It is rational to fear your cure more than the problems that traditionally we have dealt with theft and crimes of (normal) passions.

There are people who are working hard to prevent citizens from voting, and from getting equal pay, and to do things that harm no one and other rights that are actually important in people's lives. My fear of you is justified by your irrational accusation of traitorous "thought" for expressing that you aren't mentally healthy enough to properly exercise your Constitutional Rights. Disarming the paranoid is the furthest thing from being a traitor.

My family have been very involved in the development of this country since 1634, heading one of the first 13 militias (signing it's authorization, actually as well), the Shays's rebellion which triggered the adding of the Bill of Rights (which began as 12 amendments and only 10 were ratified) and a whole bunch of stuff since. My ancestors, I am confident would be appalled by the proliferation of such dangerous "tools" in the hands of such risky owners.

Quisling? Shame is beyond you. You need help.

[-] -3 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

You're convoluted and mixed up. Your Ancestors would be quite ashamed of you. You,who advocate for the repeal of the freedoms and liberties they fought and died for simply because you are a scared,cowardly person. You don't understand anything about this issue,only your Leftist propaganda. Americans that advocate for Leftist political agendas are traitors to the founding ideals and traditions of this country.

You think petty labeling attempts will be effective,better think again.

It is you and those like you that are truly paranoid. You're so paranoid in fact that you feel the need to try and take Constitutional rights away from fellow Americans to somehow relieve your paranoid delusions. You live in fear,that's all you know is fear. You fear everything you can not control. You won't even defend your own life,talk about being a coward. You live to become a victim so you can blame others for your problems. You're a fearful,paranoid coward that can not even defend your families life,that won't take that responsibility to defend your own families life!!!!

A Quisling,a Benedict Arnold,a paranoid,little cowardly whiner that is waiting for someone else to defend his own life because you don't have the courage or honor to take the ultimate responsibility,that of defending your own life.

You're a disgrace to the memory of your Ancestors,a cowardly disgrace.

Sucks to be you.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I think the insane shouldn't be given access to things that might hurt themselves or others. Clearly some of them really, really want them. Children often offer convoluted rationales to try to get their way, but the adults should protect them from themselves. You are obviously the one who is scared and that is a clinical indication that should not be ignored. Most mass murderers have such irrational fears, it is a matter of degree and severity of feelings of alienation. You babbling is classic. Notice how shrill the voice in your head has become?

You really should seek a professional evaluation.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

Well,at least you're not denying what you are. I commend you for coming to grips with the type of person you really are and for not making absurd and disingenuous rebukes that would be completely unconvincing . Enjoy your victimhood,it is the true requiem of the Sheeple/Leftist.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I was serious. Show your post to your wife, a trusted friend or a professional.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

Yeah,we have all had a good laugh at your Forum post already,seriously.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

Who's after you now, that you need such firepower for "defense" from?

[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

You ask ignorant questions because you are willfully ignorant of this and many other issues. Perhaps you should stick with your Donkey routine,it is most likely your favorite and most likely something you do well.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

You can't answer the intelligent questions.

So I figured I'd ask one that was suggested by what you said.

I guess you already forget.

FLAKESnews watcher perhaps?

[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

You haven't asked an intelligent question yet so how would you know?

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

I wasn't talking about me.

I was talking about ALL the intelligent questions you've failed to answer.

Preferring to answer with crap cribbed from the NRA doesn't qualify.

So, FLAKESnews watcher?

[-] -2 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

I must assume by your statements that you are quite comfortable then with the illegal possession of firearms, correct? Because I don't hear anything here about getting the gang bangers off our streets.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Do I have to solve all of your problems for you? What are you going to be responsible for? I haven't broken up any gangs but I think they get most of their money selling illegal drugs, but not to me. I don't have to have drugs because there are illegal drugs out there, do I? Is there a law that I have to have a gun? Which amendment is that?

Do I threaten you in some way? I don't intend to.

[-] -2 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

A thousand people a week die in this country, most killed by illegally possessed firearms; this is the reason people are arming themselves for defense and no one is willingly giving up their guns; dream on.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Wales? Really? How about Australia? How many were stolen from people who owned them legally? I get that you don't care about life. Other's at least. Gotta admire that. Not. That is why yours should go.

[-] -2 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

I care about my own; I care about those of my family; I care about the innocent. And that's why the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.

[-] 3 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

Show me that "well regulated militia" thingy. And how do you know what that means? Are you in Wales or from Wales, or noticed that there was a Wales (Theeighthpieceuv8 (-69) from Seven Sisters, Wales)? How much do you care about the innocent? What would you sacrifice, as long as it wouldn't bruise your ego?

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

I would sacrifice my life for the innocent which is obviously not something you are willing to do; the guns are to protect the innocent from the animals that are everywhere in our society.

The "well regulated militia" is now as it was then - a defense against totalitarian government.

[-] -2 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

Excellent post. Very well put.

brighton calls a "well regulated militia" a "thingy", that pretty much sums up the mentality of this crew.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

I can see that sarcasm is beyond you. I will try to make it kindergarten level in the future.

[-] -1 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

Go play with your thingy. Is that something you can easily understand? You anti-Constitution Liberals are just too low information voter's to have a debate with.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

What's really a shame is that many of us have spent years studying these issues; we know precisely what all of these words mean, and yet, here we are rehashing issues that have already been decided beyond dispute: the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed.

[-] 0 points by outlawtumor (-162) 5 years ago

You are 100% correct and even after the SCOTUS decision the Left still thinks this issue is negotiable. WTF is going on,(besides the the agenda to disarm Americans)???

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

How many times can we rehash these issues; how many times can we re-present the words of the Fathers; how many times must the courts restate it before these idiots start paying attention - the right to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed.

Disarm Americans? If it weren't such a bloody proposition it would be laughable. And look at New York: murders are "down" and yet shootings have almost tripled over the past two years. Murders are down only because these idiotic animals can't shoot straight, and as long as they're shooting each other we don't care, but when they start involving good people, we have a problem. And that's a problem we're going to have to settle with more police officers, more armed citizens, bigger jails and bigger cemeteries.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

Oh please, not another Glenn Beck fan.

Not another insane gun nutter.

Not another irrational interpreter of "constitutional intent".

I suppose you also thing the Boston tea party was all about high taxes too.

[-] -2 points by epirb (-29) 5 years ago

We eto b need to overturn the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th amendments. We also need to overturn Posse Comitatus so the federal government can enter your house and search for weapons with out a warrant.

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 5 years ago

You really think so? Would it save the life of a child to search my house? If so, they won't need a warrant. Just knock and I will invite them in.