Gun Control Tramples On The Certain Virtues Of A Heavily Armed Citizenry

[TomServo92]

I see the seemingly heavy handed actions of the police as a result of the concept that overwhelming force is required to control a situation. For example, there was an animal shelter in Wisconsin (I believe) that had a fawn in their care. Per state law, that's illegal. Instead of sending a couple of sheriff's deputies, they sent the SWAT team with helicopters flying air coverage to kick in the doors to serve the warrant and retrieve the fawn. Why such a military-style show of force? I don't know whose policies are causing the militarization of our police but it's concerning to me.

[Langston Hughes]

I see the seemingly heavy handed actions of the police as a result of the concept that overwhelming force is required to control a situation. For example, there was an animal shelter in Wisconsin (I believe) that had a fawn in their care. Per state law, that's illegal. Instead of sending a couple of sheriff's deputies, they sent the SWAT team with helicopters flying air coverage to kick in the doors to serve the warrant and retrieve the fawn. Why such a military-style show of force? I don't know whose policies are causing the militarization of our police but it's concerning to me.

 

I don't believe that the police are any more heavy handed than at other times, they just use different tactics. My parents tell me stories of the Big Four units in Detroit that used physical intimidation and violence towards anyone they felt like. Although black neighborhoods felt most of the wrath, white youth still got some heavy handed treatment too. Back then a raid didn't require a swat team but then again they were a lot more physical with people they pulled out of after hours clubs or something like that.

 

Now they use Swat but don't smack you around as much.

[TomServo92]

 

I don't believe that the police are any more heavy handed than at other times, they just use different tactics. My parents tell me stories of the Big Four units in Detroit that used physical intimidation and violence towards anyone they felt like. Although black neighborhoods felt most of the wrath, white youth still got some heavy handed treatment too. Back then a raid didn't require a swat team but then again they were a lot more physical with people they pulled out of after hours clubs or something like that.

 

Now they use Swat but don't smack you around as much.

 

That's a valid point however the Big Four had a specific mission to find and arrest worst felons on the streets of Detroit and they did abuse the power that came with it. My point is that SWAT is used in situations where it doesn't seem necessary. Sometimes I think police are using the "Fallujah surge" play book in their daily operations. Also, I think that it could be a case of justifying the expense of having a SWAT team by using them in situations where overwhelming force isn't necessary. One of my old high school buddies is a long-time Dallas SWAT team member (and now a SWAT trainer) and he's told about me about the scenarios in which they are called and it isn't to serve warrants for illegal possession of a fawn. I firmly believe SWAT teams are a necessity but some of the smaller police and sheriffs departments have questionable policies regarding their use.

Edited October 25, 2013 by TomServo92

[Langston Hughes]

I think that's a valid point.

[Langston Hughes]

[FiredMotorCompany]

And penises don't rape women or children, but they make it easy as ****

 

Crimes are committed by people, using a variety of tools/weapons. The tools/weapons did not commit the crime, the person/criminal did.

 

So banning, registering, eliminating, the tools/weapons is not the solution. Other tools/weapons will be used in their place.

 

The solution is to eliminate the criminal, not the tool/weapon.

Edited November 2, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany

[Langston Hughes]

And penises don't rape women or children, but they make it easy as ****

 

Crimes are committed by people, using a variety of tools/weapons. The tools/weapons did not commit the crime, the person/criminal did.

 

So banning, registering, eliminating, the tools/weapons is not the solution. Other tools/weapons will be used in their place.

 

The solution is to eliminate the criminal, not the tool/weapon.

 

Really, you went with that? Your going to compare the relative ease in which a firearm can kill someone with a discussion on rape? You won't type out fuck but you'll talk about disks and rape?

[Langston Hughes]

By the way you forgot fathers. What about all the father rapers.

[FiredMotorCompany]

 

Really, you went with that? Your going to compare the relative ease in which a firearm can kill someone with a discussion on rape? You won't type out fuck but you'll talk about disks and rape?

You are sidetracking the issue.

 

The criminal is the problem. Not the tool/weapon used.

 

A screwdriver laying on a table can do good or harm. It's the person who picks it up that determines what it is used for.

 

Make the criminal responsible for the crime.

 

More people are killed by cars than guns. The driver determines how it is operated. Every driver should behave with the same level of responsibility as a pilot. No drinking for 8 hours before or under the influence with more than 0.04% BAC.

 

Imagine knowing your pilot flies the same way you drove to the airport. No one would accept that. RESPONSIBILITY! Try that concept. No one else seems to know how. Including our president.

[FiredMotorCompany]

By the way you forgot fathers. What about all the father rapers.

Hang the my their testicles.

 

Totally missed the typos.

 

Hang them by their testicles.

Edited November 2, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany

[Langston Hughes]

You are sidetracking the issue.

 

The criminal is the problem. Not the tool/weapon used.

 

A screwdriver laying on a table can do good or harm. It's the person who picks it up that determines what it is used for.

 

Make the criminal responsible for the crime.

 

More people are killed by cars than guns. The driver determines how it is operated. Every driver should behave with the same level of responsibility as a pilot. No drinking for 8 hours before or under the influence with more than 0.04% BAC.

 

Imagine knowing your pilot flies the same way you drove to the airport. No one would accept that. RESPONSIBILITY! Try that concept. No one else seems to know how. Including our president.

 

I'm not sidetracking anything, criminals are the issue. I'm just pointing out the obvious, it's a lot harder to have a mass shooting at the airport (LAX) with a screwdriver, especially if it's in a plastic cup.

 

 

Oh, and let me know when you've put 100,000 rounds through a gun or even averaged 10,000 rounds a year, then we can compare cars and guns.

Edited November 3, 2013 by Langston Hughes

[Langston Hughes]

Here you go Fired

 

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ar-wear-confidence-protection-that-can-be-worn

 

OUR STORY

We developed this product so that women and girls could have more power to control the outcome of a sexual assault. We wanted to offer some peace of mind in situations that cause feelings of apprehension, such as going out on a blind date, taking an evening run, “clubbing”, traveling in unfamiliar countries, and any other activity that might make one anxious about the possibility of an assault.

We believe that the tools of self-defense currently available are not effective in many common settings of sexual assault. Training in martial arts or products such as pepper spray, tear gas, stun guns, etc. can only help if the potential victim is extremely alert and bold when an attack occurs. Worse still, products of self-defense can be taken from the victim and used against her.

We read studies reviewing the statistics of resisting assault, whether by forceful or non-forceful means. We learned that resistance increases the chance of avoiding a completed rape without making the victim more likely to be physically injured. We concluded that an item of clothing that creates an effective barrier layer can allow women and girls to passively resist an attacker, in addition to any other form of resistance they may be able to carry out at the time of an assault.

 

[BlackHorse]

If guns kill people then spoons make them fat.

[cal50]

If guns kill people then spoons make them fat.

 

Large spoons cause obesity, just like a large soda.

[Langston Hughes]

If guns kill people then spoons make them fat.

Fast food doesn't make people fat but it sure makes it easy as fuck.

[FiredMotorCompany]

Fast food doesn't make people fat but it sure makes it easy as fuck.

Your argument is so much more compelling because you resort to gutter talk.

 

How intellectual.

 

 

 

Not.

[napfirst]

Your argument is so much more compelling because you resort to gutter talk.

 

How intellectual.

 

 

 

Not.

I've noticed that his use of 4-letter words is becoming the norm as of late.....I think his skin is getting very thin and he's tired of trying to defend barry on here by himself....

[Langston Hughes]

Your argument is so much more compelling because you resort to gutter talk.

 

How intellectual.

 

 

 

Not.

Your arguments are so much more compelling because you act better than others...

 

Not.

 

If you did not notice i was referencing the point made in the meme i posted.

 

 

And if i was an intellectual I would not be here on the ass end of the Blue oval forums, that's for f*** sure.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Langston Hughes

[Langston Hughes]

I've noticed that his use of 4-letter words is becoming the norm as of late.....I think his skin is getting very thin and he's tired of trying to defend barry on here by himself....

 

It does get a bit onerous listening to you hypocrites blast Obama for lying about whether heathcare plans would change or not after we spent 8 years with a republican admin that lied almost daily.

 

 

Can anyone guess which person the Bush admin lied about was born today?

[Langston Hughes]

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Study-finds-racism-gun-ownership-linked-in-U-S-4957118.php

 

Study finds racism, gun ownership linked in U.S.

U.S. residents who own guns are more likely to have racist attitudes than are people without firearms at home.....The authors describe symbolic racism as a belief structure underpinned by an anti-black feeling established in younger years through exposure to negative stereotypes such as "blacks are dangerous.

 

 

They must have been paying attention to this forum.

[xr7g428]

Wow, Langston called somebody a racist. Didn't see that coming.

[napfirst]

Wow, Langston called somebody a racist. Didn't see that coming.

He losing it....maybe a new user name would cure his ills......

[FiredMotorCompany]

And if i was an intellectual I would not be here on the ass end of the Blue oval forums, that's for f*** sure.

 

And we see you are still here.

Ipso facto.

 

 

Therefore, it is evident, by that logic, I have over-estimated your qualifications.

 

That may explain why you have not seen the preponderance of evidence, as presented against your positions, as documenting your erroneous assumptions.

 

Perhaps we should quit picking on you since you are not up to the task....by your own words.

Edited November 6, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany

[FiredMotorCompany]

 

It does get a bit onerous listening to you hypocrites blast Obama for lying about whether heathcare plans would change or not after we spent 8 years with a republican admin that lied almost daily.

So you suggest Obama is permitted to lie for 8 years since Bush did it?

 

How the hell can you suggest such when Bush is your whipping boy for all that ails the world?

 

But, it's ok if Obama does it?

 

And I am certainly NOT cheering for what Bush did. But, he ain't in office. He ain't running this country into the ground. He ain't spying on EVERY AMERICAN, FOREIGN LEADER, CRIMINAL AND INNOCENT, ALIKE!!!!!

Granted, Bush did start some of it, but OBAMA IS IN CONTROL, HAS BEEN INFORMED IT IS OCCURRING, AND CONTINUES TO AVAIL HIMSELF OF THE OPPORTUNITY!

 

Tell us how that makes him ANY better than Bush!

 

 

He's just "BUSH, ver. 2.0" at best

 

or "Carter, bis ad eundem" at worst.

Edited November 6, 2013 by FiredMotorCompany

[xr7g428]

The irony of the "Bush did it" deflection is that Obama supporters are implying that Bush is the benchmark for comparison. It is good to know that they regard Bush so highly, but disappointing that they set the bar so low.

 

Wouldn't it be refreshing to hear an Obamanite say "It was wrong when Clinton did it, when Bush did it, and it is wrong when Obama does it."