Shooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 111 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,920 Posts
Looks like things are changing in DC.
I don't want to throw cold water on what is truly an intelligent ruling, but just you wait and see: It will come to pass that some "community organizer" loudmouth (like Al Sharptoon, for instance) with no knowledge whatsoever about how any firearm functions will scream loudly that tens of millions! of innocent children in DC will be mowed-down by the average citizen carrying an M-249 with a full box magazine because the mere possession of any gun fills one person's mind with evil, violent thoughts about killing scores of other people. We all know that such a supposition is pure emotional idiocy. But since when has the looney Left ever been known to employ rationality, reason, experience, history and good sense to take any decision? They don't; they employ emotion to take decisions. No other mechanism or protocol for taking a decision is anywhere near as flawed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StretchNM

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
But since when has the looney Left ever been known to employ rationality, reason, experience, history and good sense to take any decision? They don't; they employ emotion to take decisions. No other mechanism or protocol for taking a decision is anywhere near as flawed.
Both sides do that in abundance. Fear is a very powerful motivator... one of the most primitive and strongest emotions... whether you're inspiring fear of guns or whether you're inspiring fear of a Kenyan Socialist Marxist Communist Muslim who is creating private ***** armies to commit genocide of the white race.

Insults do not add to conversations, they only make conversations more difficult to have.

Back to the topic at hand, it's a good decision for pro-gun folks. It'll be interesting to see what happens going forward as to crime rates, etc. It should be a good case study.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,668 Posts
Walt45,

Thanks the Link to the Court ruling. I saw a brief mention of it last evening on Fox News. It is a logical and proper Court decision.

As a retired federal lawman, I know ALL the criminals are armed in DC. Now that honest folks can carry, it makes the criminals wonder which of their intended victims is ARMED! Now what could be more fair?

Webley
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,872 Posts
The ruling is sound but will eventually be challenged on several fronts, I think. Whether you call leftists names or not, it won;t faze them one iota. Nothing stops their march. And........Fear has nothing to do with anything posted yet in this thread (except for Post#3, where a solid paragraph was committed to insulting someone before the next paragraph said it doesn't help to insult people).

Know what I fear is true? That nvshooter is right, that's what. If only "my side" did "that" in as much abundance and with as much fervor as "the other side", we wouldn;t be so far behind the curve on everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fred243

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,920 Posts
Know what I fear is true? That nvshooter is right, that's what. If only "my side" did "that" in as much abundance and with as much fervor as "the other side," we wouldn't be so far behind the curve on everything.
Ron Paul said it best when he said words to the effect of "Freedom being so hard to sell." The intelligent Right can present facts all day long about how guns in the hands of the law-abiding are no more a threat to another law-abiding person than is a law-abiding person having a pink feather duster in his hand rather than a gun. But again, facts mean nothing to liberals. They wage fear and hyperbole against the ignorant. If 99% of violent crime involving guns in the hands of the evil was to evaporate in DC, the libs would attribute that drop to better policing, "outreach" programs or midnight basketball. Never would they assign the drop to good men armed against evil men. That would explode their propaganda war. If guns were proved to cause a drop in crime, Handgun Control would be out of business and the big cheeses there would have to find actual, productive employment.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,668 Posts
Carrying guns outside our home is merely exercising our Constitutional Right. I often wondered how the Liberals could say, "You may not carry a handgun outside your home." When we walk out our front door of our homes, ALL of our other Constitutional Rights go out our door with us: Free Speech, Freedom of Religion, Right to trial by jury, etc., BUT NOT our Second Amendment Rights!

Where in the Constitution does it say our Rights END when we leave our homes? The Federal Judge got it RIGHT!

Webley
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,920 Posts
Where in the Constitution does it say our Rights END when we leave our homes? The Federal Judge got it RIGHT!
"Rights" are those Freedoms that cost no one anything to exercise other than he who is exercising his Rights. I have the Right to own a gun. No one else is required by law to purchase it for me. I have the Right to not have the government come rifling through my home and my papers upon its whim. That costs no other person anything.

But liberals do not calculate Freedom as do we conservatives. They see "Freedom" to be a blank check for all the hedonism you can afford to buy for them. That is, until you say "I'm not paying for this anymore!" Then you become evil personified-- a hate-monger, a bigot, a homophobe, et cetera. Liberals want to enjoy both ends of Freedom. They want its protections and hide behind them, but do not want others of a different mindset to exercise their Freedoms. I'm sure there's a word for that, but it escapes me at this moment. Fascism? Maybe someone who knows will pipe up and educate me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
Both sides do that in abundance. Fear is a very powerful motivator... one of the most primitive and strongest emotions... whether you're inspiring fear of guns or whether you're inspiring fear of a Kenyan Socialist Marxist Communist Muslim who is creating private ***** armies to commit genocide of the white race.

Insults do not add to conversations, they only make conversations more difficult to have.

Back to the topic at hand, it's a good decision for pro-gun folks. It'll be interesting to see what happens going forward as to crime rates, etc. It should be a good case study.

Gun control is not and never has been about saving lives. It has always been about power and its retention by those on the anti side, and defense against that usurpation of power by those on the 2nd Amendment side. The first gun control laws were passed to prevent Irish immigrants from having the means to stand up to slum lords who prayed on them, and blacks were added to that list after the end of the Civil War.

Anybody who thinks otherwise doesn't get it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
Both sides do that in abundance. Fear is a very powerful motivator... one of the most primitive and strongest emotions... whether you're inspiring fear of guns or whether you're inspiring fear of a Kenyan Socialist Marxist Communist Muslim who is creating private ***** armies to commit genocide of the white race.

Insults do not add to conversations, they only make conversations more difficult to have.

Back to the topic at hand, it's a good decision for pro-gun folks. It'll be interesting to see what happens going forward as to crime rates, etc. It should be a good case study.

Liberalism is a mental illness*, and gun control is just one manifestation of that illness.


*Dr. Lyle Rossiter
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
Liberalism is a mental illness*, and gun control is just one manifestation of that illness.


*Dr. Lyle Rossiter
There are lots of good quotes all over. It's easy to get into a pee match with them. They really don't help the conversation at all.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.
- John Stuart Mill

See... it's trivial to find a quote from the "other side" that disparages just as well. I'm sure the previous quote will raise some hackles... which is exactly what I meant it to do to illustrate a point.

People post things and then sit back in evident wonder when others aren't receptive to their ideas. Perhaps people have heard the old saw about catching more bees with honey rather than vinegar. It's shocking, shocking I tell you, that when people sit on two sides of a point of view and are antagonistic towards the each other that they just aren't persuaded by those antagonistic remarks to see the "light" of the other side's "reasoning". And then people are evidently dumbstruck when they are pushed even further away and work even more against that viewpoint. "The other side" reads posts that are antagonistic and then just decide to tune out any posts by "the other side". Zero headway is made on the issue... in fact, negative headway is made as each side digs their heels in on the point. Neither side cares to listen to the other because the other side is just a bunch of <insert your favorite name calling here>. And then people are just confused as to why the other side would think that way about their "well reasoned" arguments. Basically, being antagonistic doesn't help at all. It just makes people dig in deeper to their viewpoint and neutral people will turn away from negativity and join the other side. Some people just cannot grasp that they are their "side"'s worst enemy.

Anyway, I'm done with this topic. It started out being reasonable but the noise drowned out any reasonable discussion that might have happened. This thread can turn into another echo chamber.... preach to the choir and have the hope of making no difference at all. Enjoy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
547 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Anyway, I'm done with this topic. It started out being reasonable but the noise drowned out any reasonable discussion that might have happened. This thread can turn into another echo chamber.... preach to the choir and have the hope of making no difference at all. Enjoy.
:confused:What discussion? This was not to be an "echo chamber", just an update on whats going on in the country with gun rights.:confused: Since this thread has imploded all we have to do is wait for it to get locked.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,751 Posts
Guys take it easy. No need to rile each other up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,872 Posts
THis thread hasn't imploded. One member has the view that all things are equal and so be equal or there can;t be a discussion. There's no implosion and the thread is perfectly valid. I believe.

Am I mixed up or didn;t the Supreme Court in the (Heller) case just decide an issue in favor of DC gun owners?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,920 Posts
Am I mixed up or didn't the Supreme Court in the Heller case just decide an issue in favor of DC gun owners?
Heller decided that DC citizens had the Right to own and possess firearms within their homes for personal protection. This judge saw that people also need protection when outside their homes, and so struck down the law denying the People the Right to protect themselves in public. I suppose he asked himself "Does my Right to not stand there and be murdered end at my doorstep? I think not."

I lived for 28 years in a small Virginia town about 90 minutes west of DC. At one time, DC had the highest murder rate in the nation. That was in the early and middle 1980s, about ten years after the DC government erased the Rights of DC citizens to own any firearm. With 450 to 550 murders a year, what was blamed? The guns used by the criminals! The criminals were never blamed for their criminal acts. That is the myopia of liberalism. That is the denial of the truth by liberals.

So since 1976, criminals have killed criminals in DC, criminals have killed citizens in DC and criminals would abduct their victims (most usually other criminals) from Maryland or Virginia and kill them in DC because there is no death penalty there. What was blamed for the runaway crime rate? Again, the guns used in the crimes committed by brutal, ruthless, heartless, evil, bipedal mammals. I won't call them people, because they are not. They are vermin that need to be pursued, arrested, prosecuted, convicted and sent to a very unpleasant place with their colleagues in crime until one day soon they sit in Old Sparky for ten to fifteen minutes. No executed criminal ever committed another crime. The death penalty works!

America is a Free nation. But Freedom also carries with it the responsibility that people live their lives in a civil manner. That attribute seems to have been lost since the later 1960s, and seems to be becoming even more lost as the decades go by. I fear for the descendants of our contemporaries. They will never know the America we knew...
 
  • Like
Reactions: StretchNM

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,287 Posts
THis thread hasn't imploded. One member has the view that all things are equal and so be equal or there can;t be a discussion. There's no implosion and the thread is perfectly valid. I believe.

Am I mixed up or didn;t the Supreme Court in the (Heller) case just decide an issue in favor of DC gun owners?[/QUOTE



I think a lot of the Heller case had to do with whether one could own a gun at all in his own home for self defense, everything had to do with it being in the home. This new suit states this:


On July 24, 2014, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled, in Palmer v. District of Columbia, that the District's total ban on the public carrying of ready-to-use handguns is unconstitutional.[79][80] In its decision, the Court stated: "[ . . . ] the Court finds that the District of Columbia's complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms. Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
Three thoughts….

1) When I transferred to DC about 8 years ago, I checked the violent crime statistics in various areas before deciding where to live. I noted that at the time in DC, where guns were essentially banned, the murder rate (on average, it varies a lot by neighborhood) was 21 per 100,000. If it was not the highest in the nation at the time, it was in the running. Across the eastern border in two adjacent counties in MD, where guns are allowed but where concealed carry permits are almost impossible to obtain, the murder rate was 14 per 100,000. Across the river in northern VA, where the population has strong liberal leanings but where state law allows concealed carry on a shall issue basis and where open carry is legal, the murder rate fell to 7 per 100,000.

Establishing actual causation is difficult due to a variety of confounding factors and differences, but it's reasonable to assume that allowing liberal concealed carry and open carry does not increase crime and probably decreases it.

2) Five years later, after I transferred to NC, but still worked in DC two days a week, i was getting my NC concealed carry application notarized in a bank in DC. I expected some liberal BS, but instead the manager i was working with expressed a great deal of excitement and envy at the concept of concealed carry. He noted that in his Columbia Heights neighborhood armed criminals go there to prey on what they know is a disarmed group of victims. He felt concealed carry was the only effective way to defend yourself given the realities that criminals are armed and police response times are at best going to be several minutes too late. Various news reports in any given month show similar patterns with criminals preying on unarmed citizens in nice neighborhoods in addition to the crime you see in the neighborhoods most people avoid.

3) In NC currently, I just moved to a new house and I've noted the neighborhood is very "conservative", as in very religious with "our church family" references and 3 ministers living on the circle of about 20 houses we're located. Most of the people here are very conservative, in a moral sense, but they are not what you'd call "pro-gun" and I probably look a little on the potentially violent side to them.

The reality is that I'm a lot more socially liberal than my neighbors as I don't give a **** whether two men or two women want to get married as it has zero impact on me or my wife, I support pro choice after spending a few years investigating child abuse and sex abuse and I believe in odd little bits and pieces such as equal pay for equal work by men and women and I think there's a need to protect the public interest and at times curb the excess corporate profit taking that's a) buying politicians right and left, b) killing the middle class in American, and c) selling off public resources (such as water) for corporate profit rather than serving the public. That last line probably makes me a flaming liberal by most gun forum definitions as it's not supporting rampant, unrestrained capitalism. (If you like unrestrained capitalism, you really ought to move to China.)

The point here is that it's gets really old reading comments that try to paint the picture as a simple "conservatives" versus "liberals" argument. It highlights the reality that most people who throw those terms around don't really understand them and certainly don't make distinctions between religious, social, political and economic forms of conservatism and liberalism. Most people fall somewhere in the middle along those four dimensions of "conservative" versus "liberal" and most people probably fall on both sides of center when all four are considered - whether they admit it or not.

The problem with this lumping of "liberal" and "conservative" values into one side or the other of the gun control argument is that it's simply not correct. It alienates the moderate and more "liberal" leaning gun owners and shooters (and there are a lot of them - they are usually the ones who are not participating in the rabid "liberal" bashing BS sessions at the range)

Worse, this kind of polarization, particularly when accompanied by well intended but clearly misled spouting of political right wing dogma, makes gun owners appear to be less intelligent or at least less thoughtful and insightful than the average citizen, paints them as being a little scary and does not win people to our cause, or convey the concept that most of us are pretty normal, reasonable, and responsible people. Instead it conveys the impression that we are dogmatic defenders of our God given right to carry firearms (something the Bible is actually silent on, and in fact it's decidedly in the "turn the other cheek" camp, which does not support the concept of concealed carry - just ask my neighbors) and who value our right to carry arms, and do stupid **** like carry our AR-15s in Starbucks, Chipolte or Target, regardless of how uncomfortable it makes the average family of four feel.

So for the good of all of us, stop with the polarized "us" versus "them" propaganda and stop trying to paint all gun owners as rabid right wing conservatives, because we're not. All it does is divide us internally, and separate us as a group from the average non gun owner who has not been steeped in any form of gun or shooting culture, but also has no real axe to grind either. Those are the swing voters who will be swayed by one side or the other and who will ultimately determine the fate of our "God given" second amendment rights. Our best approach is for the more extreme among us to start acting like normal people, and for the rest of us to a) start curbing the rants from the right wing extremist minority when we see and hear them, and b) start speaking out on the issue from a more "normal person who owns and shoots firearms" perspective to send the message that the overage gun owner and shooter is just an average, responsible citizen who happens to own and shoot firearms.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,751 Posts
Well said Model 52.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
THis thread hasn't imploded. One member has the view that all things are equal and so be equal or there can;t be a discussion.
That's exactly the opposite of what I was on about, particularly given that I was commenting on the lack of discussion because the thread was headed to just being another insult thread with a lack of any real discussion. Model 52's post speaks what I was saying much better than I did.
 
1 - 20 of 111 Posts
Top