The Cellar

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Home Base (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Do You Own a Gun? (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=13960)

monster 05-25-2007 09:36 AM

mybad poor wording

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 346611)
Guns are made for lots of things and not all of them are killing. ...

:turd: :bs:

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by busterb (Post 346600)
If I promise, cross my heart, to sell, destroy any weapons that I might have, will it stop this horse shit?
Damn. I can't believe folks let kids jack them up. Take a break!

I agree! Why can't these pro-gunners just cut it out?

pelican 05-25-2007 10:01 AM

Here, take mine..
 
Bang! There. Now I don't have to answer you.

Shawnee123 05-25-2007 10:06 AM

I heard on the news the other night a kid (9 years old?) was caught in gang crossfire as he was playing outside, riding his bike. He was killed.

If that 9 year old had his own gun this never would have happened.:right:

Gang members report the gun was not meant for killing; they were going to use it to stir a big pot of beef stew and it just went off. ;)

rkzenrage 05-25-2007 10:49 AM

Cool... I have not seen a post that ignorant in ages.

Shawnee123 05-25-2007 10:51 AM

Tank ya! :)

monster 05-25-2007 12:17 PM

ignorant?

Shawnee123 05-25-2007 12:19 PM

He means he doesn't appreciate my sense of humor and irony. ;) Oh, and he doesn't agree.

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkzenrage (Post 346820)
Cool... I have not seen a post that ignorant in ages.

What - you don't see your own posts? :eek:

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pelican (Post 346799)
Bang! There. Now I don't have to answer you.

Hey all you gunners, should pelican be allowed to own a gun? Would that be responsible gun ownership?

wolf 05-25-2007 01:12 PM

Have pelican fill out this 4473, and we'll see where it goes from there.

Trilby 05-25-2007 01:20 PM

Huh. I happen to know that this particular pelican won't pass the background check. He's an illegal immigrant.

Now. why can't we all just say Some People Like Guns and Some People Don't Like Guns? That's one way to get all you crazy Americans to settle down. Just Be Nice to one another and it'll all come out in the wash.

Just call me the

:angel: with a :rattat:

(actually, I don't have a gun. I didn't pass the background check!)

Radar 05-25-2007 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 346622)
Guns are made to make money, just like everything else. If there were no profit in it, the only guns would be homemade ones. This may not be a terribly useful thought, but it's another tangent for those grasping at straws to keep this thread going....

here's another.

The constitution gives right to bear arms/bare arms/whatever. Would it be unconstitutional to insist that everyone had a gun? Is there a right to be unarmed? Would gun crime be reduced if everyone were armed?

The Constitution doesn't "give" us any rights. It protects the rights we're born with. We have a right to defend ourselves using any weapons we choose and we have the right to choose not to own any. We do NOT have the right to disarm others or to limit which weapons they may own; nor do we have the right to use the force of government to do it for us.

Radar 05-25-2007 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 346787)
:turd: :bs:

You forgot the other part of what I said...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar
Those who make claims to the contrary are only displaying their own personal bias and complete ignorance in the matter.

Actually in your case, you're not only ignorant, willfully stupid, and pathological liar, you also have the added bonus of being an asshole.

Radar 05-25-2007 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123 (Post 346800)
I heard on the news the other night a kid (9 years old?) was caught in gang crossfire as he was playing outside, riding his bike. He was killed.

If that 9 year old had his own gun this never would have happened.:right:

Gang members report the gun was not meant for killing; they were going to use it to stir a big pot of beef stew and it just went off. ;)

Yes, let's all tell the gangs to willingly give up all guns, and then we can live under rainbows with the Easter Bunny and Peter Pan. Oh wait, this is reality and there are bad people in the world.

Only an idiot would try to use the force of government to limit which methods people may use to defend themselves and then use those who violate the law as a reason for attacking the rights of those who don't.

monster 05-25-2007 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla (Post 346675)
Actually, it doesn't "give" the right; it acknowledges that the right exists already, inhering in being a human.

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 346776)
mybad poor wording

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 346948)
The Constitution doesn't "give" us any rights. It protects the rights we're born with.

:rolleyes:

Radar 05-25-2007 02:41 PM

Replied when I read your post. I don't read the whole thread and then go back to see what I want to reply to.

Shawnee123 05-25-2007 02:50 PM

Make a joke around here or disagree and get labeled an "idiot" and "ignorant." Oh, I forgot where I was. This is the Cellar, after all. :rolleyes:

HungLikeJesus 05-25-2007 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 346637)
I have no idea what I speak? Maybe you should try to understand what I say before you rant on something I am not talking about.

I know guns can be used for other purposes, but their main purpose is to kill. In modern day society, the chainsaw's, knife's, and baseball bat's main purpose is not to kill, but for some other reason.

PHE - (sorry if this has already been discussed - I've skipped around in this thread a bit) - Why do police (in the US) carry guns? Their stated mission is, generally, "to serve and protect."

I'm not taking a side in this debate, but just looking for a different perspective.

Radar 05-25-2007 02:55 PM

Sarcasm doesn't convey well in text. Also I apologize. Just getting sick of Spexxvet lying, being an asshole, and attempting to attack my birthright.

My right to own any number of any kind of gun without any permission or oversight on the part of the government is no less or more important than his/her right to breathe.

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 346963)
Just getting sick of Spexxvet lying, being an asshole, and attempting to attack my birthright.
...

I was not an asshole until you started with the insults, asshole. Please cite where I have lied or attacked your birthright. I have done neither, and those who make claims to the contrary are only displaying their own personal bias and complete ignorance in the matter.

Shawnee123 05-25-2007 03:06 PM

I'm not mad. I do try to stay out of gun threads but I just thought that story was an interesting sidebar. I see both sides on this issue; though I don't care for guns, as a woman living alone I wonder sometimes.

And, I'm too sarcastic for my own good. It gets me into trouble even IRL!

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 337492)
... You also have the right to drink alcohol when you've reached the age of majority (18)....

Why do you feel justified in limiting the rights of minors to drink alcohol, but will not tolerate ANY limitations on gun ownership?

monster 05-25-2007 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 346988)
Why do you feel justified in limiting the rights of minors to drink alcohol, but will not tolerate ANY limitations on gun ownership?

Are minors allowed to own guns?

wolf 05-25-2007 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 346990)
Are minors allowed to own guns?

No.

piercehawkeye45 05-25-2007 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HLJ (Post 346961)
PHE - (sorry if this has already been discussed - I've skipped around in this thread a bit) - Why do police (in the US) carry guns? Their stated mission is, generally, "to serve and protect."

I'm not taking a side in this debate, but just looking for a different perspective.

They carry guns so they can kill if they feel threatened. If they shoot their gun they are told to kill.

Radar 05-25-2007 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 346970)
I was not an asshole until you started with the insults, asshole. Please cite where I have lied or attacked your birthright. I have done neither, and those who make claims to the contrary are only displaying their own personal bias and complete ignorance in the matter.

You've lied when you claimed I had no right to own a gun, and you've attacked my birthright to own one. You've dishonestly suggested that gun owners are nuts as opposed to those who are truly insane by attacking their rights.

You are presented with facts and you deny them.

Radar 05-25-2007 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 346988)
Why do you feel justified in limiting the rights of minors to drink alcohol, but will not tolerate ANY limitations on gun ownership?

I don't feel justified in limiting the rights of anyone. Minors have no rights other than basic human rights. They may not make decisions for themselves; only their parents may do it.

If a parent wants to allow a minor to drink alcohol at home, I have no problem with it.

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347042)
You've lied when you claimed I had no right to own a gun, and you've attacked my birthright to own one.

You're lying. Quote me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347042)
You've dishonestly suggested that gun owners are nuts ...

That would not be dishonesty, it would be my opinion. Quote me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347042)
You are presented with facts and you deny them.

I deny facts? Facts can't be denied. Quote me.

Come on, Radar, back up your attack with some evidence.

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 337447)
Our rights come from natural law, which is part of the laws of nature. Where does gravity come from? It's a constant. It's a universal law of nature and is no more or less immutable than our rights. Rights are undeniable and self-evident and are with us from the moment of birth.

If you're unclear about natural law or rights, I suggest you read up on them because they are the foundation of our laws in America.

And yes, all gun control laws are unconstitutional, and a direct violation of our natural rights.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347043)
I don't feel justified in limiting the rights of anyone. Minors have no rights other than basic human rights. They may not make decisions for themselves; only their parents may do it.

If a parent wants to allow a minor to drink alcohol at home, I have no problem with it.

Can you clear up these apparent contradictions?

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster (Post 346990)
Are minors allowed to own guns?

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf (Post 347015)
No.

Wrong.

BigV 05-25-2007 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 347054)
Can you clear up these apparent contradictions?

I'll answer this one.

No.

wolf 05-25-2007 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 347062)

You didn't read what was on that link you posted, did you?

Quote:

Federal law imposes the following restrictions aimed at younger persons:

A person must be 21 years of age to purchase a handgun or handgun ammunition, and 18 years of age to buy a rifle or shotgun or ammunition, from a retail firearm dealer. (GCA, 1968)

A person under age 18 may not possess a handgun or handgun ammunition, and it is illegal for a person to provide a handgun or handgun ammunition to a person under age 18, except for target shooting, hunting, or certain other exempted purposes. (Youth Handgun Safety Act, 1994)

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolf (Post 347074)
You didn't read what was on that link you posted, did you?

I did. What's all this, then?

Quote:

State Laws


The following is a list of additional restrictions imposed by individual states. Please note that cities and localities may have their own firearms ordinances in addition to federal and state laws. Some information on some of these laws is published in the BATF`s State Laws and Published Ordinances -- Firearms, available from the U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 and on the web at www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/statelaws/. However, laws change, so you should always confirm the law with the appropriate federal state and local law enforcement agencies.

Alabama - It is unlawful to deliver a handgun to any person under 18.

Alaska - An unemancipated minor under 16 years of age may not possess a firearm without the consent of parent or guardian.

Arkansas - It is unlawful to sell, give, rent, or otherwise furnish a firearm to a person under 18 without the consent of a parent, guardian or other person responsible for the general supervision of the minors welfare.

Arizona - An unemancipated person under 18 not accompanied by a parent, grandparent, guardian or a certified hunter safety instructor or certified firearms safety instructor acting with consent of the minor`s parent, grandparent or guardian shall not carry or possess on his person, within his immediate control, or in or on a means of transportation a firearm in any place open to the public or on any street, highway, or on private property, except private property owned or leased by the minor or the minor`s parent, grandparent or guardian. This prohibition does not apply to a person between 14 and 17 engaged in lawful hunting, marksmanship practice, transportation of an unloaded firearm for the purpose of hunting or, between 5:00 AM and 10:00 PM, transportation of an unloaded firearm for the purpose of marksmanship at a range or other area where the discharge of firearms is not prohibited. This law applies in counties with a population exceeding 500,000. However, counties with a lesser population, or cities and towns within such counties, may adopt an ordinance identical to this law.

California - A minor may not possess a handgun except with written permission or under the supervision of a parent or guardian.

Colorado - It is unlawful for any person under 18 to possess a handgun, and it is unlawful to provide or permit a juvenile to possess a handgun. Exceptions to this prohibition are:
1. Attendance at a hunters safety course or firearms safety course.
2. Engaging in lawful target shooting.
3. Participating in or practice for a performance by a group organized under IRA code 501(c)(3) which uses firearms as part of such performance.
4. Hunting or trapping with a valid license.
5. Traveling with an unloaded handgun to or from any activity described in subparagraphs 1 through 4 above.
6. While on real property under the control of the juveniles parent, legal guardian or grandparent and who has the permission of the parent or legal guardian to possess a handgun.
7. While at the juveniles residence and with permission of parent or legal guardian to possess a handgun for self -defense.

Connecticut - It is unlawful to sell a firearm to any person convicted of a felony, any illegal alien or any minor under the age of 18. It is unlawful to sell or transfer a handgun to any person who is forbidden to possess a handgun, or to a person under 21. However, a handgun may be temporarily transferred to a person under 21 for target shooting under the immediate supervision of a person eligible to possess a handgun and such use is otherwise permitted by law.

Washington D.C. - All rifles and shotguns must be registered with the Metropolitan Police. To obtain a registration certificate, the applicant must be 21(or be over 18 and have a liability statement signed by a guardian).

Delaware - It is unlawful for a parent to permit a child under 16 years of age to possess a firearm or air or BB gun except under the direct supervision of an adult.

Florida - It is unlawful to sell, give, lend or transfer a pistol or other arm or weapon "other than an ordinary pocketknife" to a minor under the age of 18 without a parent`s permission, or to any person of unsound mind.
It is unlawful for any dealer to sell any "pistol, Springfield rifle or other repeating rifle" to a minor.
A minor under 18 may not possess a firearm, other than an unloaded firearm at home, unless engaged in lawful activities.

Georgia - It is unlawful for any person to sell or furnish a handgun to a person under 21 years of age.

Hawaii - It is unlawful for a minor under 18 to possess a rifle or shotgun. However, a person 16 or over, and any person under 16 while accompanied by an adult, may carry and use any lawfully acquired rifle or shotgun, and suitable ammunition therefore, while engaged in hunting, or while going to and from the place of hunting, or while engaged in target shooting at a range.

Iowa - It is unlawful to sell, loan, give, or make available a rifle or shotgun or ammunition therefor to a person under 18. Caliber .22 rimfire ammunition is deemed to be rifle ammunition. However, a parent, guardian, spouse who is 18 or older, or another with the express consent of the minor`s parent or guardian or spouse who is 18 or older, may allow a minor to possess a rifle or shotgun or ammunition therefor which may be lawfully used.
It is unlawful to sell, loan, give, or make available a handgun or ammunition therefor to a person under 21. Exceptions to this prohibition are:
1. A parent, guardian, or spouse who is 21 or older, of a person less than 21 but at least 14 may allow the person to possess a handgun or ammunition therefor for any lawful purpose while under the direct supervision of the parent or guardian or spouse who is 21 or older, or while the person receives instruction in the proper use of handguns from an instructor 21 or older, with the consent of such parent, guardian or spouse.
2. A person under 21 but at least 18 may possess a handgun and ammunition therefor while on military duty, while a peace officer, security guard, or correctional officer, when such duty requires the possession of such a weapon or while the person receives instruction in the proper use of a handgun from an instructor who is 21 or older.

Idaho - It is unlawful for a child under 12 to possess any shotgun, rifle, or other firearm while in the fields or forests or in any tent, camp, auto, or any other vehicle.

Illinois - It is unlawful for any person under the age of 18 to possess a handgun or concealable firearm. A person under the age of 21 is not required to have an Firearms Owner`s Identification Card (FOI) in order to possess a firearm or ammunition while under the immediate control of a parent, guardian or other adult who has a valid FOI.

Indiana - It is unlawful for any person except a parent or guardian to sell or give a handgun to any person under 18.

Kansas - "It is unlawful for persons under 18 to possess a firearm with a barrel less than 12 inches unless such persons are: (1) in attendance at a hunter`s or firearms safety course, (2) target shooting at an established range, (3) engaging in an organized competition involving the use of such firearm or participating in or practicing for a performance by an organization exempt from federal income tax pursuant to section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986 which uses firearms as a part of such performance, (4) hunting or trapping with a valid license, (5) traveling to or from any activity described in (1) through (4) above with the firearm being unloaded, secured and outside immediate access, (6) on real property under control of their parents, legal guardian or grandparent, with permission to possess such firearm, or (7) at their parents` or legal guardian`s residence with permission to possess such firearm for self-defense."

...
etc.

Spexxvet 05-25-2007 09:48 PM

And what about the article (that I can't find) about the three-month-old who owns a gun?

monster 05-25-2007 09:52 PM

I'm thinking that the legalese makes a distinction between ownership and possesion?

Radar 05-25-2007 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 347054)
Can you clear up these apparent contradictions?

There is no contradiction to clear up. The only thing that needs to be cleared up is your cluttered and dishonest mind.

Ibby 05-25-2007 10:36 PM

No, Radar, I think she's right... It can't be an inherent human right you're born with but that kids don't have... thats a contradiction.

Radar 05-25-2007 10:40 PM

You have a right to life when you are born and with that comes the right to defend that life. Parent's are the guardians of their children until they reach the age of majority and as such, they hold all decision making powers, and decide whether or not it is appropriate for them to have guns or if the parent will exercise the right to defend their family.

So there is no contradiction. We have a right to own guns at birth, and until we have reached the age of majority, that right is either exercised or not by our parents.

When we reach the age of majority we take responsibility for our own life and our parents are no longer our guardians.

Ibby 05-25-2007 10:42 PM

We have a right to own guns at birth that we don't have the right to exercise ourselves?

Still not making sense to me, dude.

Radar 05-25-2007 10:49 PM

From the moment of your birth until the moment you reach the age of majority (Which is recognized as 18 in America) you are not really a person under the law. You are merely the chattel of your parents. You don't have any decision making authority or powers over your life. Your parents hold these powers for you until you reach the age of majority.

Your parents do not have the right to physically endanger you, but they do have the right to decide which of your rights they will allow you to exercise until you are the age of majority and are responsible for your own life and can make those decisions for yourself.

You have the right to own a gun at birth. Your parents decide whether or not you will be allowed to exercise that right.

Let's use someone else as an example other than a child to clear up the point.

If you are a prisoner, you are prevented from exercising certain rights like the right to go where you want, when you want. The warden of the prison will decide which of your rights you will be allowed to exercise while you're in the prison and which you will not. This doesn't mean you don't have the rights, just that you will not be allowed to exercise them. Once you get out of prison, you are able to choose for yourself when you will exercise your rights again.

Ibby 05-25-2007 10:52 PM

So we have basic rights inherent to being a person but only if the government says you're old enough?

wolf 05-26-2007 12:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 347116)
And what about the article (that I can't find) about the three-month-old who owns a gun?

The three month old does not own a gun, but was issued an Illinois Firearms Owner ID card ... all that means when the other legal requirements for gun ownership are met, he'll be able to apply to purchase a gun in that state.

There is a difference between "owning" and "using under supervision."

Aliantha 05-26-2007 02:39 AM

I have a philosophical question which I've thought about often while reading arguments about how it's unconstitutional to have restrictions on gun ownership.

If that is true, then what about all the other laws that restrict people from doing what they want? Some road rules. Smoking laws. Curfews. monopoly laws for business. There are so many situations where this argument can apply. I don't see how it's valid.

Urbane Guerrilla 05-26-2007 02:50 AM

Ringer's Paradox: it states, with considerable justice, that A freedom restricted is a freedom preserved.

In practice, laws of that kind are codified with the aim of preventing problems arising from exercising a freedom with absolutely no limitation whatsoever. The freedom to swing a fist ends where the other fellow's nose begins, and so forth. That is what Ringer's statement amounts to.

Spexxvet 05-26-2007 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla (Post 347185)
Ringer's Paradox: it states, with considerable justice, that A freedom restricted is a freedom preserved.

In practice, laws of that kind are codified with the aim of preventing problems arising from exercising a freedom with absolutely no limitation whatsoever. The freedom to swing a fist ends where the other fellow's nose begins, and so forth. That is what Ringer's statement amounts to.

So restricting guns (not that I endorse it) is an effort to preserve that freedom - cool!

Spexxvet 05-26-2007 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347144)
From the moment of your birth until the moment you reach the age of majority (Which is recognized as 18 in America) you are not really a person under the law. You are merely the chattel of your parents. You don't have any decision making authority or powers over your life. Your parents hold these powers for you until you reach the age of majority.

Your parents do not have the right to physically endanger you, but they do have the right to decide which of your rights they will allow you to exercise until you are the age of majority and are responsible for your own life and can make those decisions for yourself.

You have the right to own a gun at birth. Your parents decide whether or not you will be allowed to exercise that right.

That's not what you inferred. Now you're saying that we have these rights, but aren't allowed to exercise them due to age. What else might be legitimate reasons for disallowing the exercising of rights? And what about the rights to life, liberty, and the pusuit of happiness (drinking alcohol)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347144)
Let's use someone else as an example other than a child to clear up the point...

No, because your point was "from birth" not "from incarceration".

Radar 05-26-2007 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 347147)
So we have basic rights inherent to being a person but only if the government says you're old enough?

No. You have rights regardless of whether or not there is a government, and you can only exercise which rights your parents allow until you live on your own...regardless of whether or not we have a government.

Ibby 05-26-2007 10:48 AM

So... you have rights unless your parents say you don't then. Lovely.

Radar 05-26-2007 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliantha (Post 347183)
I have a philosophical question which I've thought about often while reading arguments about how it's unconstitutional to have restrictions on gun ownership.

If that is true, then what about all the other laws that restrict people from doing what they want? Some road rules. Smoking laws. Curfews. monopoly laws for business. There are so many situations where this argument can apply. I don't see how it's valid.

Because we have the right to do whatever we want as long as our actions don't physically harm, endanger, or violate the property, person, or rights of non-consenting others.

Road rules are there for safety and to ensure that people do not endanger each other. Smoking laws are all wrong as are monopoly laws.

You have the right to shoot yourself up with Heroin. You do not have the right to drive a car on public roads while high on heroin, or fly a jet, work heavy machinery around other people, etc.

Merely owning guns does not harm or endanger others and those who claim otherwise are liars.

Radar 05-26-2007 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 347250)
So... you have rights unless your parents say you don't then. Lovely.

Wrong. You have them, you just can't exercise them unless your parents allow you to.

Radar 05-26-2007 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet (Post 347222)
So restricting guns (not that I endorse it) is an effort to preserve that freedom - cool!

Violating the rights of those who are harming nobody does not preserve freedom. In fact it virtually guarantees the worst kind of tyranny. Only Nazis and their ilk support limiting, restricting, or outlawing gun ownership for regular people and not for government.

Trilby 05-26-2007 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347257)
You have the right to shoot yourself up with Heroin.

How can you have this right when the very substance itself is illegal? Are you saying I have the right to illegal drugs?

Radar 05-26-2007 11:24 AM

Yes I am. I'm saying that all laws against drugs, prostitution, gambling, polygamy, or any other consensual act ore violations of our natural rights. You have the right to put anything you want into your own body (once you reach the age of majority). No government has any legitimate authority to prevent you from doing so.

Ibby 05-26-2007 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar (Post 347258)
Wrong. You have them, you just can't exercise them unless your parents allow you to.

Wait, what? How can you have them if you can't exercise them?

Trilby 05-26-2007 11:27 AM

Ok. I'm down with all that, Radar. Now. Let's say I choose to shoot some heroin, a thing my govt. looks down on, and I become sick--I go to the local ER expecting health care for my breathing problem related to shooting too much H. I've no money to pay for the care and no insurance. Who is responsible for caring for me while I am ill and paying the bill?

Same thing goes if I choose to use sex workers who may be sick with STD's--who pays for my care?

Ibby 05-26-2007 11:29 AM

You are, or the charity of anyone willing to help an addict.

Trilby 05-26-2007 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibram (Post 347270)
You are, or the charity of anyone willing to help an addict.

If i can't pay and no one will help me---I die. I guess this would help with the population problem but it seems rather----uncivilized. :yelsick:

Ibby 05-26-2007 11:35 AM

Well so what do you propose? I mean, those are the two options... either you save yourself or someone else saves you. Otherwise, you die. I mean, thats a rather simple formula, no?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.