Why we don't need liberals ideas

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

The problem is, Detroit isn't typical, it's the exception to the rule.

Yes they do.

Right. And they're coming off looking like gun nuts. And not in a good way.

Then what is the answer? There is NO way to have the "media" go after those in government who are taking out the Bill of Rights, the media is in bed with those who would? Just give in? Fight? No, far too many people believe the lies and BS that is being spouted about guns and those who own therm
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Well, first thing that should be done is to stop giving the media a chance showcase "unstable gun nuts" who go into places like Chili's with rifles slung over their shoulders. Is a response not unlike a three year who goes STOMP, STOMP, STOMP, "I'll show you!" With the typical followup when that doesn't work being the classic temper tantrum. Just what people want to see, a group of people with guns throwing a temper tantrum.

Next thing would be to just be nice. Work the problem of gun violence instead of dismissing it as irrelevant. There are a few states which allow guns in restaurants and bars that serve alcohol. They also allow business owners to post signs saying no guns allowed. So what do the gun nuts do? They make a list, not of the places where guns are welcomed, oh, no, no, they make and publicize a list of the "unsafe" places to eat and drink. That's not nice. It's mean. And childish. Juuuust the kinds of things we want those with guns to be doing, mean and childish things.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Well, first thing that should be done is to stop giving the media a chance showcase "unstable gun nuts" who go into places like Chili's with rifles slung over their shoulders. Is a response not unlike a three year who goes STOMP, STOMP, STOMP, "I'll show you!" With the typical followup when that doesn't work being the classic temper tantrum. Just what people want to see, a group of people with guns throwing a temper tantrum.

Next thing would be to just be nice. Work the problem of gun violence instead of dismissing it as irrelevant. There are a few states which allow guns in restaurants and bars that serve alcohol. They also allow business owners to post signs saying no guns allowed. So what do the gun nuts do? They make a list, not of the places where guns are welcomed, oh, no, no, they make and publicize a list of the "unsafe" places to eat and drink. That's not nice. It's mean. And childish. Juuuust the kinds of things we want those with guns to be doing, mean and childish things.

Be NICE? Did you REALLY say that? LOL!! Work the problem with the "gun violence"? That is likely a TOTAL waste of time. These "mass shootings" are being done by people, who for the most part, are on drugs that no one should ever be on. They KNOW that these drugs cause problems and, often at the insistence of the government, put people on them. The "normal" crimes involving guns are already illegal, no law has stopped them, no law, new or old, ever will.

Why not try this? (And you can bet your boots NO anti-gun person/government official would EVER even CONSIDER this, since it is THEY that have no intention of working the gun violence problems since it suits their needs) Right now, under law, it takes a proper form of ID to purchase a firearm. INSTEAD of ASSUMING that everyone is a criminal and making them PROVE that they are not, do the OPPOSITE. When a felon gets out, gets a drivers license, code into that license that, he/she/it is not legal to buy one. In other words, ONLY go after the criminals and ASSUME that MOST people, which they are, law abiding citizens.

This government ONLY tries to restrict the rights/movements of law abiding citizens, despite the fact that it has been proven time and time again that such restrictions increases crime instead of putting the blame where it be placed, on the criminals.

The MAJOR causes of crime will also never be addressed. Like far too much welfare, the destruction of the family, no fathers in the homes, again encouraged by the welfare system. It is NOT a "gun" problem. Gun crimes are the symptom of FAR greater problems that are not now, and will never, be addressed, because the primary causes are the government's drive to control.
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Don't ask, don't tell. That pretty much eliminates long guns from Chili's but certainly not carrying at Chili's, regardless of what the general public or management or anyone else may think and believe.
If someone would say - with the intent to do so - that they were purposely going to bring a firearm into a place of business - surreptitiously, onto that business' property - in knowing violation of the owner/proprietors policy/rules, then I would say that's well down the path to gun nut la-la land ...

It largely shows that they probably aren't mature enough to be owning or possessing a fire arm ... basically because they aren't willing to respect the rights of others ...
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

If someone would say - with the intent to do so - that they were purposely going to bring a firearm into a place of business - surreptitiously, onto that business' property - in knowing violation of the owner/proprietors policy/rules, then I would say that's well down the path to gun nut la-la land ...

It largely shows that they probably aren't mature enough to be owning or possessing a fire arm ... basically because they aren't willing to respect the rights of others ...

Or the flip side is when it turns into Luby's 10/91 or Luigi's 8/93 or Chuck E Cheese 12/93 or IHOP 9/2011 or McDonald's 7/84 or any number of other situations and the competent and capable and qualified and mature individual who chose to ignore the preferences of others and saved many lives in the process is thanked for ignoring the preference of the one who wasn't competent and capable and qualified and based on their choice perhaps not mature either. I wonder how many of the people in those events wish someone had ignored the stupid request.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Take the number of restaurants there are, times the number of days in a year they are open, and divide that into the the number of incidents where it was beneficial to have someone carrying in the restaurant. It's a really, really small percentage, not nearly high enough to use that as a week reasoned argument. It makes for a bang-up emotional argument, tho.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Other ways to cut back on crime. IF a person steals a gun, and is convicted of it, that person SHOULD be jailed, for a minimum of 5 years, PER STOLEN gun. IF a person uses ANY weapon during the commission of a crime, there is ANOTHER 5 years added on to the sentence, some one hurt, another 10, a death, never get out.

Making a criminal out of law abiding citizens, or treating law abiding citizens like criminals will just increase crime.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Take the number of restaurants there are, times the number of days in a year they are open, and divide that into the the number of incidents where it was beneficial to have someone carrying in the restaurant. It's a really, really small percentage, not nearly high enough to use that as a week reasoned argument. It makes for a bang-up emotional argument, tho.[/QUOTE


Not if it involves my wife's life and safety, my life and safety or the safety of any other law abiding citizen. ONE time being robbed shot or killed by one of the thugs out there is one too many.

It boils down to this one, very cold, very hard, fact: NO government, at ANY level, can EVER guarantee the safety of 100% of the people 100% of the time. It falls on the individual to do what ever they choose to try to protect their own lives and property. ANYONE who attempts to interfere with the absolute right of self defense cannot be trusted.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Yes, a very very small percentage. You get to be the one to tell the families of the victims it's too small a percentage so their dead loved ones aren't worth it.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Not if it involves my wife's life and safety, my life and safety or the safety of any other law abiding citizen. ONE time being robbed shot or killed by one of the thugs out there is one too many.
The people who want all guns banned and destroyed agree with you, one hundred percent.

See, the thing is, I believe "shall not be infringed" can only be interpreted one way. I also believe going all "gun nut" over that one, simple fact is counter productive, because "shall not be infringed' cannot be argued with. The infringements we now enjoy are a direct result of gun nuts arguing something else.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

The people who want all guns banned and destroyed agree with you, one hundred percent.

See, the thing is, I believe "shall not be infringed" can only be interpreted one way. I also believe going all "gun nut" over that one, simple fact is counter productive, because "shall not be infringed' cannot be argued with. The infringements we now enjoy are a direct result of gun nuts arguing something else.

The infringements we enjoy now are a direct result of the take over of the People by an oppressive, Marxist, government. The move to take away the right to own and carry arms started LONG before the "civil disobedience" started. There were no groups open carrying into Taco Bells in 1968.

The "demonstrations" are the result of the governments actions waking up a large portion of what had once been a "silent majority".

As I stated before, the government is in NO way interested in stopping or reducing gun crime, or ANY type of crime for that matter. It is not in their interest to do so.

I carry concealed. I do not patronize those establishments that do not allow me to exercise my absolute right to defend myself. I have, yet, never carried open, BUT, the more my rights are restricted the greater the chance that I will. "Civil Disobedience" has a proud history in this country.
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

featured2.jpg
 

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Or the flip side is when it turns into Luby's 10/91 or Luigi's 8/93 or Chuck E Cheese 12/93 or IHOP 9/2011 or McDonald's 7/84 or any number of other situations and the competent and capable and qualified and mature individual who chose to ignore the preferences of others ...
No ... it's not ignoring "the preferences of others" ... it's ignoring and disrespecting the right of a putative property owner (ie. owner or leaseholder or renter) to determine how their property is used ...

The class of retard who thinks their 2A right to bear somehow overrides someone else's private property rights - and what conditions/rules/prohibitions those others can impose - is quite "special" indeed ... with the level of narcissism being pretty much off the chart ...

The right to bear ends at the point where one sets foot on someone else's property who says you can't ...

Don't like someone's rules ... then be honest and do the ethical and moral thing: don't patronize the individual/establishment/firm ... and respect their rights with the degree of care you'd like shown to yours ...

The person who will not respect others rights is the type of individual who is actually endangering the right to bear arms (by providing ammo to anti-gun folks) ... often simply by virtue of opening their yap in an ill-advised manner ... because most normal, sane individuals consider them to be at least slightly nuts ...
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

Yes, a very very small percentage. You get to be the one to tell the families of the victims it's too small a percentage so their dead loved ones aren't worth it.

If eating chimichangas at Chili's while wearing rifles on your shoulders saves the life of just .one . child. then it will all be worth it..
 
Last edited:

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Re: Why we don't need liberal's ideas

If eating chimichangas at Chili's while wearing rifles in your shoulders saves the life of just .one . child. then it will all be worth it..

And how would you prove it did not?
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I still want to know why we have to ONLY restrict the rights and freedoms of law abiding citizens instead of those of criminals? What was wrong with tagging ID's? Can't buy a gun without one, why pay for and require FBI investigations of every law abiding citizen that wishes to own a firearm? Could it be that they ONLY have other motives?
 
Top