America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by frankj1. 78 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
This is not OK
MACS Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,943
Al, we have common sense gun laws. The overwhelming majority of law abiding gun owners never commit a crime with their guns. (like higher than 98.2%)

Every damn time some nut job does something stupid with a gun, the libs want to punish every law abiding citizen who DIDN'T do it with more restrictions... which does nothing to deter criminals.
Speyside Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Media is biased, either left or right, that is a given. I don't see a business decision as being a political decision. I think you have lost your sense of perspective. I am still interested in a logical support of your view. If you don't want to do that then so be it. You don't agree with my logic but I have tried to present my view in a logical way.
HuckFinn Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
delta1 wrote:
you guys are too Euro centric...

Whats that joke....if you're American before you go into the bathroom
And American when you come out of the bathroom
What are you when you're in the bathroom ?

You're a peein
Speyside Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
MACS, I'm a liberal and I see no value to further gun control. There must be an answer out there somewhere, but I don't see it. It certainly breaks my heart to see the senseless lose of life.
victor809 Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
ZRX1200 wrote:
And you don't see a coordinated effort by a biased media to portray things in one light (with your example).

I'll worry about lowering bluster when Victor does.


what do I have to do with this? My only two criticisms here are for the georgia governors office trying to go after a private company for treating NRA members like everyone else, and the NRA for their ridiculous rambling speech after the shooting.

What bluster are you talking about?
victor809 Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
bgz wrote:
That's actually the most sane argument I've seen on this topic.

Makes sense to me.


We're living in a real life hunger games and didn't even know it.

Embrace it... start cheering for your favorite school targets... erm... students.
frankj1 Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,296
MACS wrote:
Al, we have common sense gun laws. The overwhelming majority of law abiding gun owners never commit a crime with their guns. (like higher than 98.2%)

this lib proudly agrees

Every damn time some nut job does something stupid with a gun, the libs want to punish every law abiding citizen who DIDN'T do it with more restrictions... which does nothing to deter criminals.

ruined it by assuming all libs. see above


we won't assume all gun owners should be punished if you stop assuming that's their goal.

so, can we work on stopping people's loss of the Right to Life...you know, getting killed?

Guns don't kill people but they seem to be the weapon of choice. How can any discussion be off limits? Legal and responsible gun owners simply have to help solve this.

we can worry about the other two pursuits of rights later, but I'd dismiss any argument that the right to own guns is more important than the Right to Life...there is no Liberty or Happiness without it.

this is not an abortion debate.
delta1 Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,836
HuckFinn wrote:
Whats that joke....if you're American before you go into the bathroom
And American when you come out of the bathroom
What are you when you're in the bathroom ?

You're a peein



sorry about the subterfuge and confusion...

My "euro centric" remark was directed at the guys who were talking about fascism and communism and agreed that fascism made better sauces. Well, those guys were a peein...and have never enjoyed the culinary delights available in the vast communist corner of the world...China.
teedubbya Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
frankj1 wrote:
we won't assume all gun owners should be punished if you stop assuming that's their goal.

so, can we work on stopping people's loss of the Right to Life...you know, getting killed?

Guns don't kill people but they seem to be the weapon of choice. How can any discussion be off limits? Legal and responsible gun owners simply have to help solve this.

we can worry about the other two pursuits of rights later, but I'd dismiss any argument that the right to own guns is more important than the Right to Life...there is no Liberty or Happiness without it.

this is not an abortion debate.



Maybe if we jammed all the school kids back in to the uterus there would be more interest in keeping them alive, you know bending one persons rights to protect another’s.

I couldn’t resist
frankj1 Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,296
teedubbya wrote:
Maybe if we jammed all the school kids back in to the uterus there would be more interest in keeping them alive, you know bending one persons rights to protect another’s.

I couldn’t resist

it does partially define the divide.
MACS Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,943
I don't dispute that most people have a right to life. (I say most, because I don't believe murderers do)

The GUN is not, and has never been the problem. If we want to even the playing field, or fight fire with fire, we should not be discussing restrictions. We should be discussing 'right to carry' laws, CCW reciprocity, and severe penalties for CRIMINALS who use guns in their crimes.

Not penalties (or restrictions) on those who did not.

Just my opinion on the matter. I see far too many repeat offenders with firearms being released. We're not harsh enough.
delta1 Offline
#62 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,836
MACS wrote:
Al, we have common sense gun laws. The overwhelming majority of law abiding gun owners never commit a crime with their guns. (like higher than 98.2%)

Every damn time some nut job does something stupid with a gun, the libs want to punish every law abiding citizen who DIDN'T do it with more restrictions... which does nothing to deter criminals.


Most of our laws are intended to protect us from that nut...that's the way it's been in civilized countries. Societies should respond to threats and implement practices to mitigate them...seatbelts, helmets, stiffer drunk-driving laws are all examples of society's law-abiding citizens willing to give up just a little of their freedom for the greater good.

What some gun supporters are promoting seems to be an armed open carry society where everyone is presumed armed...where openly carrying semi-auto rifles is considered natural. The only images of societies like that in the modern world are in progressive, forward thinking low crime places like....Syria...Libya... Liberia... Nigeria...

We do have common sense gun laws, in many states...but there are some huge loopholes in that so-called protective net...private undocumented gun sales like at gun shows is one example. Lack of uniform gun laws from state to state is another.

What's wrong with taking a close look at some of the states with low numbers of gun deaths compared to the number of gun owners to see if they are doing something other states are not?
tailgater Offline
#63 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Buckwheat wrote:
I heard that it was Mayor McCheese that was behind the push to keep Chik-fil-A out of Boston. Beer


For the win!
tailgater Offline
#64 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
HuckFinn wrote:
Whats that joke....if you're American before you go into the bathroom
And American when you come out of the bathroom
What are you when you're in the bathroom ?

You're a peein


Three guys at a whore house.
One going in.
One busy inside.
One leaving.

What's their nationalities?















tailgater Offline
#65 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
MACS, I'm a liberal and I see no value to further gun control. There must be an answer out there somewhere, but I don't see it. It certainly breaks my heart to see the senseless lose of life.


You can't be liberal.
I like you too much, and Frankie has used up my Love-a-liberal quota.

tailgater Offline
#66 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:
Most of our laws are intended to protect us from that nut...that's the way it's been in civilized countries. Societies should respond to threats and implement practices to mitigate them...seatbelts, helmets, stiffer drunk-driving laws are all examples of society's law-abiding citizens willing to give up just a little of their freedom for the greater good.


But seat belts and helmets were put into law without EVER threatening to ban cars or bikes.

Drunk driving laws were increased without EVER threatening to ban booze.

Take the threat of a ban off the table and you'd be surprised how much might get accomplished.

MACS Offline
#67 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,943
tailgater wrote:
Three guys at a whore house.
One going in.
One busy inside.
One leaving.

What's their nationalities?


Sailor.
HuckFinn Offline
#68 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
tailgater wrote:
Three guys at a whore house.
One going in.
One busy inside.
One leaving.

What's their nationalities?




Russian, Himalayan and Finnish










frankj1 Offline
#69 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,296
tailgater wrote:
But seat belts and helmets were put into law without EVER threatening to ban cars or bikes.

Drunk driving laws were increased without EVER threatening to ban booze.

Take the threat of a ban off the table and you'd be surprised how much might get accomplished.


I always think of driving as a privilege with restrictions and approval controlled entirely by states, not a right.
HuckFinn Offline
#70 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
frankj1 wrote:
I always think of driving as a privilege with restrictions and approval controlled entirely by states, not a right.

Legally speaking, driving is a privilege, not a right.
Gun ownership is a right.

But Frank, just wait till some family member tries to take away your keys...
Speyside Offline
#71 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Had to do that with my grandmother about 2 years before she passed away. It was very hard emotionally for her and us, though all involved including her knew it was the right decision.
tailgater Offline
#72 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I had to take away my father's keys not too long ago.
But I didn't feel bad.
Payback for all the times he did it to me during my high school year.

HuckFinn Offline
#73 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
Speyside wrote:
Had to do that with my grandmother about 2 years before she passed away. It was very hard emotionally for her and us, though all involved including her knew it was the right decision.

Same here. Happened to many of my older family members and friends' family members.
We know and they know they can't drive but for some folks it signals the end of more than just driving eg independence, relevancy, life!

Always makes me think when it happens that it's just a matter of time and....
HuckFinn Offline
#74 Posted:
Joined: 07-10-2017
Posts: 2,044
tailgater wrote:
I had to take away my father's keys not too long ago.
But I didn't feel bad.
Payback for all the times he did it to me during my high school year.


You went to high school for a whole year?
Speyside Offline
#75 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I thought he went for 5 years.

Nothing wrong with that. Just say in.
tailgater Offline
#76 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
HuckFinn wrote:
You went to high school for a whole year?


Not in a row.

frankj1 Offline
#77 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,296
tailgater wrote:
Not in a row.


I can't believe I laughed out loud
frankj1 Offline
#78 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,296
HuckFinn wrote:
Legally speaking, driving is a privilege, not a right.
Gun ownership is a right.

But Frank, just wait till some family member tries to take away your keys...

they'll have to pry those keys from my cold dead fingers

Frank Heston
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12