XPost: alt.politics, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.art-bell
From: leg@sea
Bama Brian wrote:
> Matt wrote:
>> On Nov 6, 6:30 pm, "Scout"
>> wrote:
>>> Matt wrote:
>>>> On Nov 6, 11:57 am, grey_ghost471-newsgro...@yahoo.com (Gray Ghost)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "RD (The Sandman)" wrote
>>>>> innews:Xns9CBB668B08A2hopewell@216.196.97.130:
>>>>>> Matt wrote in
>>>>>> news:64cd7060-e8e2-437f-abec-10f68a25c196@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 5:58 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" >>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Matt wrote
>>>>>>>> innews:2a516e09-93ad-4cbe-93f1-a143ae
>>>>>>> 3bb...@r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 5:19 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" >>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Matt wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:c7f26fc7-8253-4119-ab1f-
>>>>>>>>>> a4c6c8c0b...@g10g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 5, 4:12 pm, "RD (The Sandman)" >>>>>>>>>> @comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Matt wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:c625d3fb-f8ab-4ef8-a74b-
>>>>>>>>>>>> 8ae131e3d...@g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 3, 5:14 pm, Klaus Schadenfreude >>>>>>>>>>>> @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In talk.politics.guns Matt wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 3, 7:26 am, Klaus Schadenfreude >>>>>>>>>>>>>> @yahoo.co m> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In talk.politics.guns Matt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I do see his point. The problem is, you are only looking
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> at it from one viewpoint.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have rights as well, and your rights stop where mine
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> start.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My gun ownership has zero effect on your rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your gun CARRYING does have an effect on my rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My carrying a gun has absolutely ZERO effect on your rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Really. "Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness".
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Try again. Better yet, don't. You disagree with me, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> that's fine. But simply repeating the same old rhetoric with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> more and more hyperbole isn't getting anyone anywhere.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Or you. Please be specific about how my carrying of a gun
>>>>>>>>>>>> affect s your "life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness".
>>>>>>>>>>>> None of those are affect ed unless your pursuit of happiness
>>>>>>>>>>>> includes disarming me.
>>>>>>>>>>> If you are carrying a gun in a place that I *Must* frequent (as
>>>>>>>>>>> opposed to
>>>>>>>>>>> may, or could) then I consider my life at risk.
>>>>>>>>>> Two questions:
>>>>>>>>>> 1. The only place I can think of where you *MUST* frequent would
>>>>>>>>>> be a government office. Guns are usually banned in there. Do you
>>>>>>>>>> ha ve so me other place in mind?
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Just how would my having a gun put your life at risk? Are you
>>>>>>>>>> planning to attack me or threaten my life?
>>>>>>>>>>> Are you seriously going to
>>>>>>>>>>> tell me that no gun owner or carrier has ever killed anyone
>>>>>>>>>>> that wasn't threatening them?
>>>>>>>>>> Nope, because it has happened. Of course your odds of being
>>>>>>>>>> killed in a Tornado or be struck by lightning are higher that
>>>>>>>>>> that occurrence. If you have proof of the contrary, then feel
>>>>>>>>>> free to post it.
>>>>>>>>> FORT HOOD, Texas – A military mental health doctor facing
>>>>>>>>> deployment overseas opened fire at the Fort Hood Army base on
>>>>>>>>> Thursday, setting off on a rampage that killed 11 other people
>>>>>>>>> and left 31 wounded. Authorities killed the gunman, and the
>>>>>>>>> violence was believed to be the worst mass shooting in history
>>>>>>>>> at a U.S. military base.
>>>>>>>>> The shooting began around 1:30 p.m., when shots were fired at the
>>>>>>>>> base's Soldier Readiness Center, where soldiers who are about to
>>>>>>>>> be deployed or who are returning undergo medical screening, said
>>>>>>>>> Lt. Gen. Bob Cone at Fort Hood.
>>>>>>>> Yep, aware of it. You do realize that most Democrats and
>>>>>>>> antigunners feel that guns should be restricted to just law
>>>>>>>> enforcement or the military. How did that work for you at Ft Hood?
>>>>>>> How did it work for YOU? Could you stand up to an armed soldier?
>>>>> Civilains, properly armed have been standing up to soldiers
>>>>> throughout
>>>>> history. You use your civilian gun to get yourself some military
>>>>> hardware.
>>>>> Don't you read?
>>>> On a very small scale, I will agree with you. There has not, however,
>>>> been an
>>>> armed revolt against the military that has worked in quite some time.
>>>> There have
>>>> been some guerilla efforts that have worked for a short time. Can you
>>>> name a time
>>>> in modern history when the armed populace have successfully stopped a
>>>> large
>>>> scale army?
>>> First Chechen War
>>
>> Not sure which one you mean, the first was a civil war.
>>
>>> Afghanistan
>>
>> Certainly not, if you mean the Russian invasion. We were backing them,
>> as you may recall. If you mean currently, they aren't doing much of a
>> job of defending themselves.
>
> Really? Then why are the generals charged with "winning" the Afghani
> war calling for more soldiers?
>
> If the US were to pull out today, Hamid Karzai wouldn't last a week and
> would be instantly be replaced by a Taliban president.
>
> Having to maintain an army of occupation for generations and feeding
> blood and treasure into a "conquered" country is not a win in my book.
>
> The only way the US can "win" in Afghanistan is by a systematic genocide
> that wipes out every man, woman, and child in the country.
>
> I'm not up for that. YMMV
>
The question at hand remains:
"Please be specific about how my carrying of a gun
affects your "life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness".
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
