Who Shouldnt Have Guns?

[numinus]

Numinus, your obviously a very intelligent person because you are so verbose. I'm sure you have heard the saying 'you'll catch more bees with honey than vinegar'. There is nothing wrong with having your own opinion, in fact its beneficial for people so we can, at least, get another perspective of the object in debate. I'm new to this site, but from the time I have been hear your lack of respect has waned your credibility for me. I mean this in the highest regards and I'm only trying to give helpful criticism and not a malicious personal attack in any way. If I were you, I'd start being nice and civil so you don't become an annoying poster that that people don't give you credibility, or you can start fresh and start a new account with another name. Once again, I'm sure your a nice and intelligent person, so use your knowledge to the best of your advantage- be nice and respect people when trying to get your point across. People don't take personal attacks very well and it puts up unneeded walls, if you know what I mean.


~Peace~

And here is some advice for you:

You cannot go about calling people stupid in the public domain and not expect a tit for your tat. I believe your advice should have been addressed to your friend, duh-ermit.

 

[revolution4PAUL]

Your right. It was miscommunication, I apologize. I said that 'thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard' in regards to you saying 'the only only people that should have guns is the military. The reason why I think that is extremely stupid is because the people need a way to defend ourselves if the gov't gets too corrupt. Just look at what the USA is doing to the middle east. Why do we have to police the world? Whos to say that they gov't doesn't have esoteric agendas to join the USA with Mexico and Canada to make the 'North American Union'? Or who's to say the gov't deems it best that every citizen be fitter with a Vchip? Why do you not see that the people we have that are in power right now are corrupt as they come.

Look up "Vchip" and "North American Union" on youtube... (Or if your not a youtube fan, look it up somewhere else.) Is this going to happen? I honestly don't know, but if we are armed and can protect ourselves just in case.

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

 

[revolution4PAUL]

Take heed boys and girls!


http://youtube.com/watch?v=vuBo4E77ZXo


Just keep this in mind. Do your own research if you don't believe this video. Lets not let them turn us into sheeple. We need to keep our constitution to keep our unalienable rights, and thats why its so important to exercise your constitutional rights! Go get a gun if you are a responsible, mature, law abiding citizen.



~Peace~

 

[numinus]

Your right. It was miscommunication, I apologize. I said that 'thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard' in regards to you saying 'the only only people that should have guns is the military. The reason why I think that is extremely stupid is because the people need a way to defend ourselves if the gov't gets too corrupt. Just look at what the USA is doing to the middle east. Why do we have to police the world? Whos to say that they gov't doesn't have esoteric agendas to join the USA with Mexico and Canada to make the 'North American Union'? Or who's to say the gov't deems it best that every citizen be fitter with a Vchip? Why do you not see that the people we have that are in power right now are corrupt as they come.

Look up "Vchip" and "North American Union" on youtube... (Or if your not a youtube fan, look it up somewhere else.) Is this going to happen? I honestly don't know, but if we are armed and can protect ourselves just in case.

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

The right to resist a corrupt government is ALWAYS present. It resides in the body politic, NOT IN THE AVAILABILITY OF GUNS.

In fact, modern revolutions have taken place without guns.

 

[dahermit]

And here is some advice for you:

You cannot go about calling people stupid in the public domain and not expect a tit for your tat. I believe your advice should have been addressed to your friend, duh-ermit.

Review all your past posts asswipe, and see how many there were with the insulting "Duh?" to other people before I ever Begin to insult you. Yup, you are being insulted for NO fault of your own...right?

 

[dahermit]

LMAO

Did you hope that if the morons of the world came out in force to agree with you, that would make your argument anything other than irrelevant and dishonest?

What a complete bonehead!

All the other posters here are just morons, right?

 

[numinus]

Review all your past posts asswipe, and see how many there were with the insulting "Duh?" to other people before I ever Begin to insult you. Yup, you are being insulted for NO fault of your own...right?

That is correct.

Don't insult me based on what I said to other people. You simply are not aware of my 'history' with some of the posters here.

And if you intend to insult me, nonetheless, you might as well be prepared for the acid in my reply. I have no intentions of suffering verbal abuse from low-brows like you.

 

[numinus]

All the other posters here are just morons, right?

You'd be a better judge of that once you take a good look at yourself in the mirror.

Duh?

 

[dahermit]

That is correct.

Don't insult me based on what I said to other people. You simply are not aware of my 'history' with some of the posters here.

And if you intend to insult me, nonetheless, you might as well be prepared for the acid in my reply. I have no intentions of suffering verbal abuse from low-brows like you.

Here it is numinus. The only reason I have been rude to you is in response to the rudeness you have given to me and other posters. It was intended to be tit for tat. It has not worked. I am aware that you are likely a young person who has excelled in math.
This is an offer of an olive branch. I am willing to not write posts of an offensive nature if you do likewise.
I would like to know, however, your real bio. Your age, occupation, and your education. I am 64 (65 in two months), retired from teaching high school and industry, and my education I have listed previously.
Now the ball is in your court. I would look forward to discussion of the firearms issue in a civil manner.

 

[numinus]

Here it is numinus. The only reason I have been rude to you is in response to the rudeness you have given to me and other posters. It was intended to be tit for tat. It has not worked. I am aware that you are likely a young person who has excelled in math.
This is an offer of an olive branch. I am willing to not write posts of an offensive nature if you do likewise.
I would like to know, however, your real bio. Your age, occupation, and your education. I am 64 (65 in two months), retired from teaching high school and industry, and my education I have listed previously.
Now the ball is in your court. I would look forward to discussion of the firearms issue in a civil manner.

I am a 39 yrs old (born aug 25, 1969) geodetic engineer (or what you call in your country as a professional licensed surveyor). I am usually involved in infrastructure projects like roads, dikes, bridges, etc. Currently, I am doing geodetic control surveys using survey-grade gps technology.

International engineering consultants I have worked with include nippon koei (japanese), wagner biro (austrian), hanjin (korean) and louise berger (american). I have worked on usaid small and medium scale infra projects also.

Oh, and I obtained my degree on a full scholarship.

 

[dahermit]

I am a 39 yrs old (born aug 25, 1969) geodetic engineer (or what you call in your country as a professional licensed surveyor). I am usually involved in infrastructure projects like roads, dikes, bridges, etc. Currently, I am doing geodetic control surveys using survey-grade gps technology.

International engineering consultants I have worked with include nippon koei (japanese), wagner biro (austrian), hanjin (korean) and louise berger (american). I have worked on usaid small and medium scale infra projects also.

Oh, and I obtained my degree on a full scholarship.

Welcome. I appreciate the honesty. I look forward to discussing your views on the many subjects. May I ask what country you are from?
Given your background, I would be very interested on your opinion and/or comments on the levies the surrounded New Orleans pre-Katrina.

 

[numinus]

Welcome. I appreciate the honesty. I look forward to discussing your views on the many subjects. May I ask what country you are from?
Given your background, I would be very interested on your opinion and/or comments on the levies the surrounded New Orleans pre-Katrina.

I'm afraid I have very little to say regarding that except what is painfully obvious through a cost-benefit ratio.

One simply cannot stand against a force of nature of that magnitude for long.

 

[dahermit]

I'm afraid I have very little to say regarding that except what is painfully obvious through a cost-benefit ratio.

One simply cannot stand against a force of nature of that magnitude for long.

What mystifies me is that they are rebuilding the city exactly like it was for the most part. A few have rebuilt homes on elevated footings, but most seem content to trust their luck with the rebuilt levies. Well, that is their choice.

Back to gun control.

Unlike most who post here, I am not a Conservative Republican. Aside from the gun rights issue, I am a Socialist (in the European style). One has to be careful in saying that because it will be interpreted as being Communist.

I grew up in poverty and we used shotguns to supplement our food supply with wild rabbits, ducks, squirrels, ruffed grouse, and an occasional deer. Hunting was economically feasible back then because a hunting license was not expensive, three dollars as I remember. Shotguns were passed down from generation to generation. Nowadays, it makes less economic sense because of the cost of licenses, gas for travel, and the price of guns and ammunition. Nevertheless, there are some areas where an annual harvest of a moose, caribou, or elk is deemed essential for the Winter.

We viewed guns as tools by which to gather additional food and to provide verity to our diet just as was fishing as Lake Michigan and other inland fresh water lakes were nearby. Hunting and fishing were within walking distance from our home.

Given that background with firearms, it is hard to see them as other than a tool that provided food.

At my stage of life I have given up hunting. I prefer to go through the motion of hunting for deer, but never shooting one. I sit in my small woods on my property, with a gun for the purpose of shooting any fox I should see because they present a threat to my pet domestic geese when they have young. They also have put me out of the pet chicken business having killed almost all of my chickens including some beloved bantam roosters.

Also, I have attempted to control raccoon and opossum numbers because they will take the goose eggs out of the nest and eat them. I have shot a few of those also, but have had more success with poison on 'coons and 'possums...hate to poison them though because it is a very painful death for them.

 

[numinus]

What mystifies me is that they are rebuilding the city exactly like it was for the most part. A few have rebuilt homes on elevated footings, but most seem content to trust their luck with the rebuilt levies. Well, that is their choice.

Back to gun control.

Unlike most who post here, I am not a Conservative Republican. Aside from the gun rights issue, I am a Socialist (in the European style). One has to be careful in saying that because it will be interpreted as being Communist.

I grew up in poverty and we used shotguns to supplement our food supply with wild rabbits, ducks, squirrels, ruffed grouse, and an occasional deer. Hunting was economically feasible back then because a hunting license was not expensive, three dollars as I remember. Shotguns were passed down from generation to generation. Nowadays, it makes less economic sense because of the cost of licenses, gas for travel, and the price of guns and ammunition. Nevertheless, there are some areas where an annual harvest of a moose, caribou, or elk is deemed essential for the Winter.

We viewed guns as tools by which to gather additional food and to provide verity to our diet just as was fishing as Lake Michigan and other inland fresh water lakes were nearby. Hunting and fishing were within walking distance from our home.

Given that background with firearms, it is hard to see them as other than a tool that provided food.

At my stage of life I have given up hunting. I prefer to go through the motion of hunting for deer, but never shooting one. I sit in my small woods on my property, with a gun for the purpose of shooting any fox I should see because they present a threat to my pet domestic geese when they have young. They also have put me out of the pet chicken business having killed almost all of my chickens including some beloved bantam roosters.

Also, I have attempted to control raccoon and opossum numbers because they will take the goose eggs out of the nest and eat them. I have shot a few of those also, but have had more success with poison on 'coons and 'possums...hate to poison them though because it is a very painful death for them.

I have no doubt that guns may be used for things other than killing. That is what I have been saying all along.

BUT,

one cannot deny the fact that it is indeed being used to kill other people at a rate that makes it necessary for the state to intervene;

That the proliferation of guns constitute a clear danger to the peaceable existence of society;

That the prohibition of personal ownership of a gun does not, in any way, infringe on your fundamental right to life, liberty and estate -- hence can be the subject of government regulation entirely;

That for a law prohibiting the personal ownership of guns to be valid, it must be applied equally to everyone;

That the purposes for which law abiding citizens use guns (hunting, sport, etc.) is a small price to pay for maintaining the peace;

Therefore, the conclusion is inescapable -- only law enforcemnet officers and the military should carry guns.

 

[revolution4PAUL]

To put it briefly....... YOUR WRONG. You do not have to own a gun, that is your right. It is our constitutional right to carry them if we are law abiding citizens.

What don't you understand about the fact that criminals will always have guns. The only difference is that, every criminal will know that every home is unprotected. Would you rather break into a car that might have a pit bull in there? You might think twice about breaking into someones house if you know anyone can be packing.


RON PAUL REVOLUTION


~PEACE

I have no doubt that guns may be used for things other than killing. That is what I have been saying all along.

BUT,

one cannot deny the fact that it is indeed being used to kill other people at a rate that makes it necessary for the state to intervene;

That the proliferation of guns constitute a clear danger to the peaceable existence of society;

That the prohibition of personal ownership of a gun does not, in any way, infringe on your fundamental right to life, liberty and estate -- hence can be the subject of government regulation entirely;

That for a law prohibiting the personal ownership of guns to be valid, it must be applied equally to everyone;

That the purposes for which law abiding citizens use guns (hunting, sport, etc.) is a small price to pay for maintaining the peace;

Therefore, the conclusion is inescapable -- only law enforcemnet officers and the military should carry guns.