Greg_W

Your ideas of freedom warm my heart.

Rudy, you are talking out of your ass when you say "I don't care how the Bill of Rights is worded..." Plus, you have no fucking clue: NO PERSON can walk into WalMart and buy a pistol without a background check. First off, I think WalMart stopped selling handguns. Second, any buyer has to go through a 7 day waiting period AND background check; even CWP holders have to submit to the NICS check at time of purchase. The fact that you think you know what you are talking about and you come up with this is assinine. It's clueless fucking people like you that lead to stupid laws that punish law-abiding people. You make me fucking sick. Greg_W

Seattle tame? Tell that to the girl who was attacked and the guy who tried to help her (who was killed) during the Mardi Gras riots. What about WTO? Do you think that crime is no problem here? Give me a fucking break. What about the crackdown on all the hip hop clubs in Pioneer Square? Call me what you want, I don't care. Just don't infringe on my rights. Enjoy learning to love Big Brother, cause that's what you are going to get when you ask for what you're asking for.

it has been shown ever and over that the best to protect yourself and your family is to not have a gun in your home. the same way that wearing a seat belt while driving is shown to be necessary, or wearing a helmet while biking and climbing, etc ... the only difference whith these other examples is that your insistence to have the proliferation of guns go unchecked actually endangers my life and that of my family THis isn't true, j_b. Just because you can draw a correlation statistically doesn't mean it has meaning of causality. I can show you numbers that prove the fact that because I walk the streets of Seattle wearing a gun, you and your family are safer walking the streets of Seattle. do statistics show that gun owners and their families have a greater chance of getting shot? yes. case closed. does unchecked gun proliferation lead to more bad guys having guns and greater murder rate? yes. case closed. now you can spin all you want, quote the bill of rights, etc .. it won't change the statistics. full of shit, as always. Believe what you want, I don't try and change people's minds anymore.

We have the "right" to health care? Where was that in the Constitution. No fucking way, man. You apparently don't know shit.

Wrong, it expressly states that he loses his right to gun ownership, as well as the right to vote.

it has been shown ever and over that the best to protect yourself and your family is to not have a gun in your home. the same way that wearing a seat belt while driving is shown to be necessary, or wearing a helmet while biking and climbing, etc ... the only difference whith these other examples is that your insistence to have the proliferation of guns go unchecked actually endangers my life and that of my family THis isn't true, j_b. Just because you can draw a correlation statistically doesn't mean it has meaning of causality. I can show you numbers that prove the fact that because I walk the streets of Seattle wearing a gun, you and your family are safer walking the streets of Seattle.

That's an idea I've entertained. Makes as much or more so, sense than to say that these are God-given rights. In the history of Man, we had to fight for these rights and to forge a government and its guiding document. The established orthodoxy of religion sure didn't give these rights to us. The Church would have been all to glad to keep us under its thumb. Reform does not usually come from institutions (which BTW tend to be conservative). Now, as for God-given, well that makes as much sense to me as the phrase, "All men were created equal." I wasn't privileged to have an expensive private school education so maybe I'm missing something here in my interpretation of the world around us. These ideas: Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness are abstractions. Government is the vehicle that imposes the order or stability on our world to realise the concrete reality of these abstractions, in other words, to make them manifest. It does worry me, to see that the opposite is becoming the case because the ruling elite is afraid of losing control. So, maybe I had a moment of lucidity in an otherwise murky existence... Simply a misunderstanding... Playing the devil's advocate. Conviction... So you're saying that this is the basis of our rights? ...our individual convictions? If you believe that a government gave you your rights, you have to believe that that same government can take them away. You can't have one without the other - and you have to accept that as your lot. I do not. I personally believe in God, and believe (as our Forefathers did) that these rights are God-given. That's my personal conviction, it doesn't have to be yours. You seem to be relying on Government quite a bit for your reality; by accepting that, you accept that government has the right to change your reality. The inalienable rights, both enumerated and not, guaranteed by the Constitution are not abstractions, you practice them every day. Note the language of the Constitution in that is says these rights are "guaranteed", not granted. You say that institutions are largely conservative, but I would have you look at where this "ruling elite" you talk about comes from. Where did the Political Correctness movement start? College campuses with liberal professors inculcating their students. Is Berkeley a conservative institution? Conservative institutions such as the Citadel, and VMI, and others, have been under attack for their convictions. Taking God out of the argument for a moment, the basis for your rights is the fact that you EXIST. You exist, you are conscious of it, and have knowledge of it. You cannot have knowledge without being conscious, and you cannot have consciousness without existing. Therefore, this logically tells us that EXISTENCE is primary. Your existence is by what you claim these rights.

So, are you saying that it is a privilege to decide HOW I can defend my self? There are ways I CAN defend myself and ways I CAN'T defend myself? Okay, Rudy, in simple, but harsh terms: Someone enters your house and threatens you (or your wife) with a knife. What privileges do you have to defend yourself with? Wouldn't you want to be able to decide, free from government intervention into your private life (which is what it is) on how best to protect your family? Who knows better how to protect your wife and darling son? You? The BATFE? Regarding your "historical documentation" about the meaning of the Second Amendment, you are flat wrong. There is an abundence of work done showing that the Second Amendment supports the INDIVIDUAL'S right, just like all the other Amendments in the Bill or Rights. Don't state your opinions as facts, it's misleading.

Doesn't the thong pull your ass hairs? No silly, I shave. Oh, right. Forgot. Why not wax? Those Brazilians are a wonder at that.

Doesn't the thong pull your ass hairs?

I would say the parent was the problem. THe gun is the owner's responsibility; i.e., the parent. My ol' man was career military. Thus, my brother and I grew up with guns, shooting at beer bottles in the water and hunting. I would have never thought of bringing a gun to school because there was the fear instilled in us by the ol'man. You see, he used to leave his coiled belt in the same closet where the rifles and ammo were. A visible reminder. So, yeah... I gotta agree with ya, Greg. Maybe we gotta point at a more elusive culprit, the loss of time to spend with kids to teach them or the lack of foresight on the part of parents or... However, I do think that access to guns has increased dramatically over time and that is part of the problem. Now, the knee-jerk reaction is to limit accessibility, which I don't necessarily accept. when I was a child all the guns in my home were on a gun rack next to the front door. It was never an issue. Do ya think that maybe there are substandard people? And that, we should raise the bar a bit in permitting people privileges such as driving? And maybe, the same reasoning could be applied albeit to rights granted by government in return for your willingness to be governed? DING DING!!! We have a winner!! Thanks for letting your true belief shine through. DO YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE, AS YOU SAY IN YOUR POST, THAT RIGHTS ARE GRANTED BY THE GOVERNMENT ??? This belief is the FUNDAMENTAL problem. No government "grants" you rights, man. Who gave rights to those before there was a government? Second, "we should raise the bar a bit permitting people priveleges such as driving"? Man, I'd hate to live your life; hoping someone "gives" you the right to do things. So, you're saying that we should bring the intelligent responsible people down to the level of the stupid and irresponsible? Hmm...that's essentially the Communist Ideal, there. I was born with my rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness (as noted in the Declaration of Independence), and noone can take them away. I intend to fight to keep those rights, including my right to decide how I protect myself and those I love...not to mention the right to speak my mind (or did the government grant me that, too), associate with those groups I so choose, and deny government thugs entry to my house without proper justification.

This is because you are completely unaware.

I would say the parent was the problem. THe gun is the owner's responsibility; i.e., the parent.

Incorrect. Lack of education on the part of the father on proper gun safety, and the practice thereof, is the problem. People don't give kids enough credit; so many kids grow up with guns in the home and don't do what you describe. What is the underlying problem? It's not the gun, is it the parent?

As we have discussed in another political thread, there is always the desire to increase government. Also, don't think that high-cap magazines are the issue. It is a stepping stone to banning all handguns - they outright admit it. Your reasoning is flawed because you do no take the time to learn the lessons of history and apply them to current situations. Choose your battles, yes, but defend your rights and convictions. The way you float like a leaf on the wind (despite your girth), I can see you have to convictions. Good luck to you.

Maybe Erik realized that his cup size now rivals most of the other chics on cc.com

Maybe you should read some history. Read why the Founding Fathers put so much importance on the Second Amendment. It's not about guns, it's about individual freedom and liberty...much like the freedom of speech, or freedom of assembly, or the freedom from illegal search and seizure. They are all connected Erik.

Shut up, toddler, or you'll go through the rest of you life with a permanent limp.

"you gun owners"? Last I heard, you were a gun owner too, Erik. If you do truly care so little about freedom, don't bitch when it's gone. Seriously. You bitch about your "lack of freedom" to travel in NF land and the "Tool" and all that. Where is the difference?

Good logic, Erik. We need some guy to make a movie filled with errors and outright lies and that's A GOOD THING? You're smoking too much pot. Better a movie than an entire administration. Feel free to pick your administration of choice on that one. Do you honestly think they are all lily white?

Don't bother, I'm already the bad son.

You might be on the right track, but you're totally missing what these parties want. Both parties want power. At the heart, one party believes that PEOPLE are the answer, and the other believes that GOVERNMENT is the answer. Now, bear in mind that I said "at the heart"; it doesn't always end up that clear cut. Don't be fooled, the Democrats aren't so responsible as to want to "...pay for it as we go along by not cutting taxes." They want more money for more programs; also, more money means more BORROWING POWER. Why do you think they won't let us control our Social Security dollars? They use that money as collateral to borrow other money; if we controlled it in private investment vehicles, they couldn't do that. It's all a shell game...on both sides. Cutting useless waste and bad programs is the only way.

Good logic, Erik. We need some guy to make a movie filled with errors and outright lies and that's A GOOD THING? You're smoking too much pot.

Now that's something you and I both support! That's the way it was meant to be. Early congressmen had fields and flocks to tend to, they couldn't spend all their time squabbling over this shit...then Ted Kennedy was born...oh, the horror.