Do some of you really think that the left wants to take all your guns away?
Return to Board  •  Menu  •  Bottom  Page 5 of 6  
Message
re: Do some of you really think that the left wants to take all your guns away?
Posted by TrueTiger on 1/13 at 8:16 am to Draconian Sanctions
No, not all of them. At least not my "Red Ryder Carbine-Action Two-Hundred-Shot Range Model Air Rifle."


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by VOR on 1/13 at 8:30 am to weagle99
quote:

many gun enthusiasts hold the ability to own guns as sacred,


I've always thought this kind of rhetoric was weird. What the frick is "sacred" about owning a gun.

I absolutely believe people should have the right to own guns (with reasonable restrictions, e.g., fully automatic, large magazine capacity weapons, no rocket launchers, no tanks, etc.), but it's never occurred to me that there's anything "sacred" about it.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Patrick O Rly on 1/13 at 8:34 am to VOR
Maybe the sacred part is the right to defend oneself.


Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by VOR on 1/13 at 8:34 am to Patrick O Rly
quote:

Maybe the sacred part is the right to defend oneself.




My hands are weapons, brah.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by VOR on 1/13 at 8:38 am to NC_Tigah
quote:

quote:
Do some of you really think that the left wants to take all your guns away?

100% yes. To say otherwise is silly.

Think of it this way: if Feinstein et al could snap their fingers and instantly vaporize all privately held guns in the US, would they do it?
Of course they would.

Is there ANYone in their right mind who thinks they'd not happily pursue confiscation if it were feasible?


C'mon, NC. RogertheShrubber is right. There really isn't a "collective left" on this issue. Sure there are some lefties in government and in the media that spout crap, but they are not the majority when it comes what is or will be proposed now or in the foreseeable future.

Seriously, who do you mean by Feinstein, et al? How many dumbasses do you really think are in the "et al"?

I have no doubt there are voices out there that preach extreme shite. Just as there are on the right.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by TrueTiger on 1/13 at 8:41 am to Patrick O Rly
quote:

Maybe the sacred part is the right to defend oneself.



This is the heart of it, and the firearm is perhaps the single greatest ability enhancer of self defense ever devised.

Grandma in a wheelchair won't fair well with a 300 pound brute crashing through her door. Put a pistol in her hand and she is immediately on "par" and actually has a decent chance.




Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by CITWTT on 1/13 at 8:46 am to VOR
Oh Reasonable hack a RIGHT is given not by our govt., it is from the Creator acknowledged in the DOI. Therein lies the sacred nature of the 2nd Amendment. The Constitution would not be the law of the land except for the addition of the Bill Of Rights to the original document in the first place. Where do you place the restriction on the govts. arsenal when 200 years ago it was an equal balance of power that defeated the tyrant of the day. For anyone to think that a tyrannical govt. is beyond the pale of possibilities in America that person is a fool.

This post was edited on 1/13 at 8:53 am

Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by weagle99 on 1/13 at 8:52 am to VOR
quote:

I've always thought this kind of rhetoric was weird. What the frick is "sacred" about owning a gun.

I absolutely believe people should have the right to own guns (with reasonable restrictions, e.g., fully automatic, large magazine capacity weapons, no rocket launchers, no tanks, etc.), but it's never occurred to me that there's anything "sacred" about it.



Hello VOR.

Among other things, owning a gun provides the following:

- the ability to defend the owner and family regardless of physical stature
- a vehicle for providing for one's family through hunting
- a source of recreation and enjoyment

What other object available today provides those things? Maybe a bow and arrow? Maybe. Plus the ability to own firearms is enshrined in the Constitution.

I am sure that there is something in your life that you hold dear that some others wouldn't understand.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by redandright on 1/13 at 8:53 am to LSU alum wannabe
quote:

The first black President?


Really? You just can't resist can you?



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Patrick O Rly on 1/13 at 8:54 am to VOR
quote:

My hands are weapons, brah.


K.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by LSU alum wannabe on 1/13 at 9:32 am to SoulGlo
quote:

Only guns that would be useful in defense against a tyrannical government.



Which tyrannical government do you speak of? And what could you do about it Rambo, if you had an
AR-15? Hell even a FULL-AUTO?

When the "left" gets "too far left" they will be voted out. Just as the "right" when they get "too far right" have been.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by NC_Tigah on 1/13 at 9:41 am to VOR
quote:

There really isn't a "collective left" on this issue. Sure there are some lefties in government and in the media that spout crap, but they are not the majority when it comes what is or will be proposed now or in the foreseeable future.

Seriously, who do you mean by Feinstein, et al? How many dumbasses do you really think are in the "et al"?
Again, feasibility is the limitation. The OP asked about what the Left "wants". Not what it can attain.

I would lump ANYONE into the "et al" category if they address gun-control as a sole or major SandyHook remedy. That inclusion would incorporate a vast vast majority of the Left in Congress. It would involve few on the Right. So for starters "et al" would involve those, and absolutely Obama, Holder, Biden along with a MSM majority.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by wickowick on 1/13 at 9:49 am to VOR
quote:

Seriously, who do you mean by Feinstein, et al? How many dumbasses do you really think are in the "et al"?


Well who made her the left's spokesperson, she is speaking for the party even if all don't agree with her...



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by LSU alum wannabe on 1/13 at 9:54 am to redandright
quote:

The first black President?


Really? You just can't resist can you?



This point is not valid?

I made this point on here in 2008 when Bush had the shoe guy throw TWO shoes at him in Iraq (I believe). Made the point that the Secret Service needs to get their shite together before the black guy gets the job.

But I was mainly making the point that the POTUS needs more security than.... Me...



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Vegas Bengal on 1/13 at 10:04 am to HonoraryCoonass
quote:

Do some of you really think that the left wants to take all your guns away? quote: I guess calling people ignorant and loonies will do fine on his part. Right from the Alinsky handbook, rules 5 and 12.


And this is followed by two successive posts calling the OP names (not to mention many many other posts in this thread).

The conservatives' MO on this board is personal attacks (thanks to right leaning admins that's perfectly acceptable) while at the same time accusing the Left of Alinsky tactics. Hell there is no greater practitioner of this than Rush.

You guys learn well.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by homesicktiger on 1/13 at 10:25 am to Vegas Bengal
Hmmm ... The OP's second sentence called "us"

quote:

paranoid and crazy


followed later by

quote:

delusional


at least twice, simply for discussing the topic of the day. And, he hasn't offered much to argue his position other than that.

What were you saying again?




Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by moneyg on 1/13 at 10:29 am to VOR
quote:

I've always thought this kind of rhetoric was weird. What the frick is "sacred" about owning a gun.

I absolutely believe people should have the right to own guns (with reasonable restrictions, e.g., fully automatic, large magazine capacity weapons, no rocket launchers, no tanks, etc.), but it's never occurred to me that there's anything "sacred" about it.



It is as fundamental a right as freedom of speech. If you want to call that sacred or not, I don't care.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by Burt Reynolds on 1/13 at 10:29 am to weagle99
quote:

the ability to defend the owner and family regardless of physical stature

so does a taser

quote:

a vehicle for providing for one's family through hunting

maybe .0000001% of the population

quote:

- a source of recreation and enjoyment

yes, the deaths of thousands of people is worth it so rednecks can have "leisure" time.

quote:

I am sure that there is something in your life that you hold dear that some others wouldn't understand.


Yes, but it isn't deadly toys that have cost America thousands of lives.



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by wickowick on 1/13 at 10:34 am to Burt Reynolds
quote:

quote:

a vehicle for providing for one's family through hunting


maybe .0000001% of the population


Once again, proven wrong...

In addition, a reported 13.7 million people, about 6 percent of the total population over the age of 16, went hunting,

Read more: LINK



Reply  •  Back to Top
Posted by KosmoCramer on 1/13 at 10:36 am to wickowick
You mean the ones that cost ~$10k and haven't been produced for 1st party sale since the 1980s?

These people need to educate themselves before they go trolling, it's not as effective if they don't have basic concepts.



Reply  •  Back to Top  •  Refresh
Return to Board
Jump to Page   

           Page 5 of 6           


 

 Message Boards
 Tiger Rant
 Recruiting Board
 SEC Rant
 Saints Talk
 Pelicans Talk
 More Sports Board
 Coaching Changes
 Soccer Board
 O-T Lounge
 Tech Board
 Outdoor Board
 Movie/TV Board
 Music Board
 Political Talk
 Money Talk
 Fark Board
 Gaming Board
 Fantasy Sports
 Food and Drink Board
 Ticket Exchange
 Help Board
 

 News
 LSU
 More Sports
 Sports Lite
 

 Other Options
 >> Search
 

 SECRant.com Links
 SEC Rant
 SEC Recruiting
 SEC Tickets
 Off-Topic Board
 

 Geaux.com Dining Guide
 New Orleans
 Baton Rouge
 

 Site Features (Full Version)
 Home Page
 LSU Football Schedule
 Pick'em Home Page
 
Back to top
Sign In 
View in: Desktop
Copyright ©2014 TigerDroppings.com.