Guns will protect you from tsunamis.

[Hippikos]

Or you're trolling. Again.

Pot calling the kettle black...

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Your attitude seems to meet the definition.

What? How have I even gotten close to any of those definitions? I just said some people with guns scare me, that is not an uncontrollable, irrational, and persistent fear. Stop making judgment about people because it is wrong.

So kindly focus your legal attention on people who use weapons illegally.

Wouldn't that be easier? If you can tell me a way to be able to solely focus on people that use weapons illegally I will be all ears.

Ah we're back to the old "prove you need it" argument again; I'm not going there. Without proving I need a fire extinguisher or a smoke alarm, I have them both because they are a sensible precaution in my judgement. So is exercising my right to carry arms for defense of myself and others, as the law clearly permits.

Why can't I drive drunk, I want to excersise my right to be able to drive drunk but people are taking right that away from me?

Why do *you* feel the need to disarm me? Are you projecting onto others your own fear that you can't control your anger, as your example suggests?

I can control my own anger perfectly fine, its just others that I cannot control. As I said many times before but you keep to seem ignoring this fact, as long as you are trained I have no problem with you owning guns.

Then who do you want to disarm & how?
I think that is the issue.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Stop making judgment about people because it is wrong.

Oh, is that your judgement? :-)

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

As I said many times before but you keep to seem ignoring this fact, as long as you are trained I have no problem with you owning guns.

But you insist I leave them at home?

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Wouldn't that be easier? If you can tell me a way to be able to solely focus on people that use weapons illegally I will be all ears.

I would suggest actually enforcing the laws against ag assault, armed robbery and related offenses. Instead of the revolving door currently operated by most urban areas.

I'd also be in favor of legalizing all drugs and allowing Darwin to sort things out. But my sense is that that proposal is *way* ouside the current Overton window.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

Why can't I drive drunk, I want to excersise my right to be able to drive drunk but people are taking right that away from me?

You claim to have a right to drive drunk? Can you cite a basis for that right?

[tw]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

I don't advocate "gun control". I simply don't particularly strongly to the current Federal law on who may possess a handgun: over 21 and non-ex-felon.

At the same time, I wouldn't particularly object to removing the restriction for ex-felons (except when it has been imposed as a condition of parole). I don't object to the law forbidding children to posess handguns other than under the currently provided conditions of adult supervision, but if you call that "gun control" then you're using the term in a highly unconventional way; children are not allowed to posess alcohol or buy tobacco but nobody calles that "prohibition".

Gun Control is restrictions on

-- concealed carry without a permit in jurisdictions where a permit is required,

-- use of a firearm in comission of a felony,or posession of firearms by those not legally qualiied to posess them: convicted felons, those to whom firearms are prohibited as a condition of their probation

-- handgun posession by anyone under 21.

Nothing unconventional about it. That has always been called gun control. MaggieL says she is opposed to gun control when just yesterday, MaggieL approved of gun control.

So how do we reconcile MaggieL's opposition with when she posted yesterday? Apparently MaggieL wants us to believe that Rush Limbaugh lie that gun control means removing all guns. Classic fear tactics? Apparently MaggieL has a Rush Limbaugh interpretation.

When confronted to provide facts and details, well, MaggieL really does approve of gun control. It is the expression (a phrase hyped as evil in Rush Limbaugh propaganda) that she fears.

MaggieL approves of gun control. She approves of restrictions on 155 mm howitzers. She does not approve of "posession of firearms by those not legally qualiied to posess them". And she admits to all this while kicking and screaming - pretending to be opposed. It is called gun control not matter how she denies the phrase. MaggieL has approved of 'gun control' – once we eliminate hype and fear from Rush Limbaugh lies and propaganda.

Sure, I, probably like Maggie, approve of Gun Control... just less than we have today.

[Aliantha]

Sounds like an arms race to me. Something one of your presidents worked very hard to stop a couple of decades ago.

I only want the guns I have, which are not many... just don't want any damn restrictions on my rights to them now or in the future.

[MaggieL]

Originally Posted by tw

When confronted to provide facts and details, well, MaggieL really does approve of gun control.

Quoted out of context, tw. You really are pathetic.

I didn't say I "approved of gun control". My words that you quoted were from my enumeration of why such gang bangers are in violation of current law...which context of course you conveniently trimmed off. I was not offering support for those laws.

So you stand convicted. Again.

The gang-bangers shouldn't even be on the street--not for "gun posession", but for assault and robbery and other crimes-- but liberal urban municipal governments are unwilling to keep them locked up, so they're soon out and killing each other (on the rare occasion when they're able placed accurate fire, and killing bystanders otherwise).

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Brianna

(*muses*)

Has anyone here ever shot a person?

No, but I've come closer than I'd ever like, considering it might be a present possibility that I'd have to cap a roomie who was going crazy. Didn't like it. Really didn't like it.

There was a hollow-core door between me and Crazy Neil the Roomie, acting -- well, living up to that name. If he'd started kicking that door in...

Some months earlier, he'd suggested he'd like to buy one of my guns -- not being Army- nor Marine-trained he didn't say rifle or pistol. Wasn't much likelihood a cokehead like Crazy Neil would have ever been either, really. I didn't take him up on the idea.

Then he committed what I suppose was simple assault -- on the person of the mayor of Laurel, Maryland. He got brought home in squad cars a couple of times, separately from this, having made himself an absolute plague to a couple of different police departments, though I never knew the details.

Not too long after that, Crazy Neil was prevailed upon to check himself in to Saint Elizabeth's -- the Washington DC-area mental-hygiene hospital. This disembarrassed me and a couple other roomies of a real pest. Crazy people with keys to your place ain't a good thing.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Why do *you* feel the need to disarm me? Are you projecting onto others your own fear that you can't control your anger, as your example suggests?

This is usually, if seldom consciously, the motivation behind the anti-self-defense lobby. It would seem they haven't the emotional resources for self-control the gun people do. It really doesn't take a lot to elicit a hysterical reaction here, and that is, in a rather quiet way, what we are seeing.

NRA'ers wouldn't disagree that this lot could really use therapy. These are passionately wedded to the unreal, and at this time, the pro-self-defense and genuinely antigenocide people are rolling this bunch up like a tatty rug.

Again, Yesman, look to the link I posted to the JPFO earlier this thread. You will find complete justification for a full auto weapon over every mantle -- yours too -- therein, in argument that has never been rebutted, not once. I think those guys have happened upon an eternal truth: that armed populations shall not and will not endure genocides; and that its corollary is that the better armed the population, the more remote are the chances that they would ever suffer it.

And I perceive that tw keeps me on Ignore, writing in blissful ignorance on points I've already addressed -- jabber on, you dumb Soviet; the more you talk the better I look. The better I look, the harder sensible people laugh at you.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by tw

MaggieL posts justifications for Gun Control.

Crime control, not gun control, tw.