
This is a placeholder text
Group text

by GSD Admin on 14 April 2013 - 13:04
And God is okay with guns and violence, isn't he?

by Two Moons on 14 April 2013 - 13:04
You'd have to ask him I think.

by Carlin on 14 April 2013 - 14:04
The attempt to debate this issue independently of broader political ideology is just about fruitless. If we’re all honest, it’s ignorant of the conservatives to deny the abuses of liberty across time – man is an evil creature, look around. It is just as ignorant of liberal sympathizers (necessarily distinguished from politicians and theorists) to support reactionary legislation, addressing social concerns on the micro level, while denying the impact of the philosophical shift over a period of time. Civil government in this country was never intended to take on the form it has. Some will argue (primarily liberals) that it has evolved as society has evolved, that modern problems require modern solutions. Conservatives would like to bury their heads in the sand and deny the fact that their lack of integrity and commitment to their own principals has been instrumental in setting the table for the statist solution. The proposed gun legislation is un-Constitutional by the principals held by those who wrote it, but it appears at the end of a long list of similar subversive laws. It will accomplish nothing, except pave the way for subsequent, more pervasive legislation. A state solution that would effectively curb the violence would have to include disarming the public at large, as the sociopaths running around committing these atrocities seem to be demographically diverse.

by Two Moons on 14 April 2013 - 14:04
BINGO...!
Except I don't like putting people into groups or using terms like liberal and conservative, it's a bit more complex than that.
Except I don't like putting people into groups or using terms like liberal and conservative, it's a bit more complex than that.

by Mountain Lion on 14 April 2013 - 14:04
good afternoon everyone....

by Two Moons on 14 April 2013 - 14:04
So far so good...
hello whoever you are.....lol
hello whoever you are.....lol

by Mountain Lion on 14 April 2013 - 14:04
I am the ghost of Christmas past....

by GSD Admin on 14 April 2013 - 15:04
I know exactly who you are, it was not hard to figure out. Did you know your IP has been reported as a source of spam? Gasp, you are a spammer. Shame you blew your chance to come back with your regular name.

by Micaho on 14 April 2013 - 15:04
"Where does it end? I mean if the 2nd allows any weapon then where does it end?"
Then there is the converse of your question. Would people prefer no guns were available to private citizens? How about police? What about Dorner and other rogue cops? How about the military? What about Fort Hood and other ex-military suffering from undiagnosed mental problems. It's interesting that, when we have every opportunity to "screen" people before arming them, we don't do it all that well. So, to be completely safe, guns should be illegal period. Then only criminals would have them. Unless no one made guns any more. Not anyone anywhere in the world. Unfortunately we have no control over what other countries allow. And if guns become rare, they will become very valuable for the power they would give their owners, therefore profitable to illegally manufacture and smuggle. So this route isn't taking me very far.
Would people be happy if everyone without a known criminal or mental health history could have one gun with say, a limit of five rounds, which should be adequate to defend oneself after a little target practice? Seriously, what do people want to be the outcome of all the discussion?
And Admin, I am never offended by what you write. You are as entitled to your opinion as I am to disagree.
Then there is the converse of your question. Would people prefer no guns were available to private citizens? How about police? What about Dorner and other rogue cops? How about the military? What about Fort Hood and other ex-military suffering from undiagnosed mental problems. It's interesting that, when we have every opportunity to "screen" people before arming them, we don't do it all that well. So, to be completely safe, guns should be illegal period. Then only criminals would have them. Unless no one made guns any more. Not anyone anywhere in the world. Unfortunately we have no control over what other countries allow. And if guns become rare, they will become very valuable for the power they would give their owners, therefore profitable to illegally manufacture and smuggle. So this route isn't taking me very far.
Would people be happy if everyone without a known criminal or mental health history could have one gun with say, a limit of five rounds, which should be adequate to defend oneself after a little target practice? Seriously, what do people want to be the outcome of all the discussion?
And Admin, I am never offended by what you write. You are as entitled to your opinion as I am to disagree.
by joanro on 14 April 2013 - 16:04
I saw a bit on tv, where anyone with a 3d printer can make their own assault rifle. According to the report, it's not difficult and very doable. So even if manufacturing was shut down, there'd still be guns produced.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top