We just don't see eye to eye...

[Ronin13]

So I had a conversation with my old man, who is a conservative, and he made a few comments that kind of upset me, saying how "You're as far right as anyone I know," and "some of the feelings you have toward the left are just plain mean." He thinks that my opinion of liberals is that they're all stupid... We've butted heads before on the 2nd Amendment, he's flat out said that he doesn't see a need for regular folks to have 30-round magazines, and high powered, semi-auto rifles. I honestly think his view on the constitution is a very liberal one. I can't talk to him about some of these issues (like potential AWBs), am I going about it wrong? Or is he just too stubborn to see from my perspective that a) democrat/liberal ideology is what's poisoning America, and b) The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with just owning guns, but everything to do with keeping the government in check because if we're as well armed as them, they won't try and subjugate us... Is he a lost cause?

[Mazin]

Yep

[blacklabel]

Yeah, I'd let it go.

[Teufelhund]

Introduce him to BaileyGuns. Then see if you're still the "furthest right" person he knows.

[Poke]

[Ronin13]

Introduce him to BaileyGuns. Then see if you're still the "furthest right" person he knows.

[Poke]
Well I know Carl, albeit not very well... Unfortunately dad doesn't... he's really missing out!

[SA Friday]

Introduce him to BaileyGuns. Then see if you're still the "furthest right" person he knows.

[Poke]
Or BS.

[Rucker61]

So I had a conversation with my old man, who is a conservative, and he made a few comments that kind of upset me, saying how "You're as far right as anyone I know," and "some of the feelings you have toward the left are just plain mean." He thinks that my opinion of liberals is that they're all stupid... We've butted heads before on the 2nd Amendment, he's flat out said that he doesn't see a need for regular folks to have 30-round magazines, and high powered, semi-auto rifles. I honestly think his view on the constitution is a very liberal one. I can't talk to him about some of these issues (like potential AWBs), am I going about it wrong? Or is he just too stubborn to see from my perspective that a) democrat/liberal ideology is what's poisoning America, and b) The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with just owning guns, but everything to do with keeping the government in check because if we're as well armed as them, they won't try and subjugate us... Is he a lost cause?

He's not a lost cause, he's your father. You're not supposed to agree with him. And he's right, no civilians have a need for high powered (sic) semi-auto ARs with 30 round magazines. But it's not about need, is it? The only government type that mentions "need" as a matter of policy is the one created by the writings of Marx. Just remember, no one is ever 100% correct. While you state that the democratic/liberal ideology is what is poisoning America, you have to understand that there is no one such ideology, and liberals in the past have driven policies that have helped America and that raised your standard of living, whether you accept that or not. Anti-pollution efforts, for one. The 40 hour work week. Food standards. Sure, there are lots of policies endorsed and created by the other side that have been and continue to be detrimental to the US.

Are you ever going to change his mind? I doubt it. Can you learn to live with him and his beliefs? I sincerely hope so.

[Sharpienads]

Aww, poor Ronin has daddy issues!

Jk. Sucks he doesn't see things the same way.

[ChunkyMonkey]

So I had a conversation with my old man, who is a conservative, and he made a few comments that kind of upset me, saying how "You're as far right as anyone I know," and "some of the feelings you have toward the left are just plain mean." He thinks that my opinion of liberals is that they're all stupid... We've butted heads before on the 2nd Amendment, he's flat out said that he doesn't see a need for regular folks to have 30-round magazines, and high powered, semi-auto rifles. I honestly think his view on the constitution is a very liberal one. I can't talk to him about some of these issues (like potential AWBs), am I going about it wrong? Or is he just too stubborn to see from my perspective that a) democrat/liberal ideology is what's poisoning America, and b) The 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with just owning guns, but everything to do with keeping the government in check because if we're as well armed as them, they won't try and subjugate us... Is he a lost cause?

I don't have the need of your father to continue having a successful insurance agency, but I will not infringe on his rights to pursue happiness. My right to purchase and own firearms are protected by the highest law of the land. As simple as that.

[NMB2]

Anti-pollution efforts, for one.

dont even get me started on this.

[Monky]

Dear Diary.. I work in an office full of liberals and I want to tell everyone about it.. again.

[BPTactical]

Your just mad because he had you over circumcised.

[cfortune]

Your just mad because he had you over circumcised.

lololol

[Ronin13]

Your just mad because he had you over circumcised.
You nearly killed my brother with that one yesterday... yeah, that's right, he showed me the emails... He said he laughed so hard he nearly came to tears. [ROFL1]

[Clint45]

he's flat out said that he doesn't see a need for regular folks to have 30-round magazines, and high powered, semi-auto rifles.

Ask him if he thinks it is appropriate or just to convict citizens of felonies and send them to prison simply for failing to comply with a ban and turn over ever single hi-cap magazine they own.

[Teufelhund]

He's not a lost cause, he's your father. You're not supposed to agree with him. And he's right, no civilians have a need for high powered (sic) semi-auto ARs with 30 round magazines. But it's not about need, is it? The only government type that mentions "need" as a matter of policy is the one created by the writings of Marx. Just remember, no one is ever 100% correct. While you state that the democratic/liberal ideology is what is poisoning America, you have to understand that there is no one such ideology, and liberals in the past have driven policies that have helped America and that raised your standard of living, whether you accept that or not. Anti-pollution efforts, for one. The 40 hour work week. Food standards. Sure, there are lots of policies endorsed and created by the other side that have been and continue to be detrimental to the US.

Are you ever going to change his mind? I doubt it. Can you learn to live with him and his beliefs? I sincerely hope so.

I have to disagree with this. . . again. This is a false premise perpetrated entirely by the gun-grabbers; they've been saying it so long we're starting to say it too. It has been stated many times over, quoted as truth from the framers of the Constitution, and reiterated by constitutional scholars and Supreme Court Justices that the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm the Militia (all able-bodied citizens) appropriately against a tyrannical government. This means having equal firepower to that of a standing army (which we are not supposed to have in times of peace). These rulings have appeared in part through various statements issued in cases by the SCOTUS and contradict every current gun-control law on the books (e.g. NFA).

I have a tendency to ramble, so in case the above was too long for anyone: YES, we do need everything in common use by the military.

[sniper7]

I wouldn't worry about it. he has his opinion, you have yours. neither will affect anything in the end. no point in making it an issue. the assholes in DC and down in denver will be the ones that screw everyone over.

[Ghosty]

Interesting point Teufelhound. I originally was thinking the same thing, that no one "NEEDS" a 30-round magazine, but we all WANT them out of convenience, reloading, carrying less, etc. I still believe that, but understand about "vs. a standing Army". Unlike you (and possibly some other "1776 Civil War Revolution is needed" extremist people), I don't believe that will happen, and I will not "NEED" a 30round mag.

That said, I STILL WANT MY 30round mags, because it's that many less you have to sit and load before going to the range, shoot more means more fun, more practice, etc. Convenience, lol, because I don't forsee requiring being able to shoot more than 20 times against a home intruder and my AR isn't for home defense anyway, I'll buy a shottie for that, to suppliment my handgun. Statistically speaking in home burgleries are usually only one or two perps, right? Just trying to use logic. If you believe in Texas style ceceding from the Union and civil war, then that's another story I won't argue with because it's borderline ludicrous. Just my opinion.

[Rucker61]

I have to disagree with this. . . again. This is a false premise perpetrated entirely by the gun-grabbers; they've been saying it so long we're starting to say it too. It has been stated many times over, quoted as truth from the framers of the Constitution, and reiterated by constitutional scholars and Supreme Court Justices that the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm the Militia (all able-bodied citizens) appropriately against a tyrannical government. This means having equal firepower to that of a standing army (which we are not supposed to have in times of peace). These rulings have appeared in part through various statements issued in cases by the SCOTUS and contradict every current gun-control law on the books (e.g. NFA).

I have a tendency to ramble, so in case the above was too long for anyone: YES, we do need everything in common use by the military.

I interpret it as we have the right to the common use items, we need access; if it were a need as defined by Maslow, everyone would either buy one or be issued one. Works out the same, I think, in practice.

[Ashton]

Sounds like Ronin needs some time out in the whoppin' shed.

But yes. You will never be able to change him.

[Bailey Guns]

And he's right, no civilians have a need for high powered (sic) semi-auto ARs with 30 round magazines.

I need to take issue with this. What about police officers?

[Ronin13]

I have to disagree with this. . . again. This is a false premise perpetrated entirely by the gun-grabbers; they've been saying it so long we're starting to say it too. It has been stated many times over, quoted as truth from the framers of the Constitution, and reiterated by constitutional scholars and Supreme Court Justices that the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to arm the Militia (all able-bodied citizens) appropriately against a tyrannical government. This means having equal firepower to that of a standing army (which we are not supposed to have in times of peace). These rulings have appeared in part through various statements issued in cases by the SCOTUS and contradict every current gun-control law on the books (e.g. NFA).

I have a tendency to ramble, so in case the above was too long for anyone: YES, we do need everything in common use by the military.
You are aware Rucker is one of those "pro-gun liberals", right? Oh hell, where is Carl to slap me for using an oxymoron again!? [LOL]

I interpret it as we have the right to the common use items, we need access; if it were a need as defined by Maslow, everyone would either buy one or be issued one. Works out the same, I think, in practice.
False. Need, as in necessity... "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." So thus, those who have, by our freedom and beliefs (not required like Switzerland or Israel), chosen to become the militia (again, defined as the individual who would bear arms in defense of self, liberty and/or nation) NEED to be as armed as the military, like Teufelhund said. [snow]

[Bailey Guns]

You don't have to agree with the Old Man. He doesn't have to agree with you. No sense making waves and creating hard feelings and it won't hurt to swallow your pride a little when dealing with him and his views. Respect his views and the fact he's your father. There will come a time when you won't be able to have those discussions with him.

[Zundfolge]

So I had a conversation with my old man, who is a conservative...
No, no he's not.


So I had a conversation with my old man... Is he a lost cause?

He's your old man ... he'll likely never see eye to eye with you because to him you're still a little snot nosed kid (will be the same when you're in your 70s assuming he's still around).

[Rucker61]

I need to take issue with this. What about police officers?

Cops don't regard themselves as civilians, IME, but I take your point. I was having trouble coming up with wording satisfactory to myself. My main point is that "need or don't need" doesn't enter into the criteria for whether or not law abiding citizens have the right to those items.

[Rucker61]

You are aware Rucker is one of those "pro-gun liberals", right? Oh hell, where is Carl to slap me for using an oxymoron again!? [LOL]


You should see how the real liberals on Facebook feel about my positions. They tar me with the same brush they tar the likes of you.




False. Need, as in necessity... "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." So thus, those who have, by our freedom and beliefs (not required like Switzerland or Israel), chosen to become the militia (again, defined as the individual who would bear arms in defense of self, liberty and/or nation) NEED to be as armed as the military, like Teufelhund said. [snow]

It doesn't matter. Need has nothing to do with what we should have access to.

[Teufelhund]

It doesn't matter. Need has nothing to do with what we should have access to.

Did that make sense in your head before it reached your keyboard?

[Rucker61]

Did that make sense in your head before it reached your keyboard?

Yes. Try reading it this way: "Need" has nothing to do with what we should have access to. It isn't about need. Some believe that the "Need" does exist by the wording of the Second Amendment, and others don't, but in the US, "need" isn't a requirement to legally own anything.

[Ronin13]

You don't have to agree with the Old Man. He doesn't have to agree with you. No sense making waves and creating hard feelings and it won't hurt to swallow your pride a little when dealing with him and his views. Respect his views and the fact he's your father. There will come a time when you won't be able to have those discussions with him.
Touche, Carl... well said. We're nearing that point with his father (87) and it tears my dad up to see him think that his father won't be around much longer.

No, no he's not.



He's your old man ... he'll likely never see eye to eye with you because to him you're still a little snot nosed kid (will be the same when you're in your 70s assuming he's still around).
Maybe he's a conservative of the modern times, he's certainly not a dem, but he has become somewhat less socially conservative while maintaining his fiscal and voting conservatism.
But he did say in our conversation that he thinks people my age (24-30) don't know enough to be truly informed, we haven't been around long enough or seen enough. I let him speak, and didn't dare say "Please tell me about your military and combat exper- oh that's right, you've never done that..." That would be an asshole thing to say, and though I have been accused of being a dick, I'm not that big of a dick. [Coffee]

[Ronin13]

Yes. Try reading it this way: "Need" has nothing to do with what we should have access to. It isn't about need. Some believe that the "Need" does exist by the wording of the Second Amendment, and others don't, but in the US, "need" isn't a requirement to legally own anything.
I read it as this... Need: as in things you need over things you want. I want a nice car, but it is not vital to my survival or my family's survival. I need food, shelter, water, and protection from those who would take my food, water, shelter... thus I need arms and accessories to those arms so people like Diane Feinstein (not sure what her end game desires are) don't use mil/LE to take my food, shelter, water, etc. and "redistribute" it... Or my means to purchase said food, shelter, water, etc. (money).

[Melvin]

Respect his views and the fact he's your father.

Respect is earned. It isn't a right because you have a pulse or because your loins work. Any effective leader knows that without the respect of his charges he is nothing. If a man cannot respect his son when he becomes a man he forfeits reciprocation. This philosophy of blind allegiance to a parent, because some guy thousands of years ago said it was so, is mindless.

[RMAC757]

[fagpole]

[ronaldrwl]

Avoid the issue with family and enjoy the time you have together. In 55 years I've never changed anybody's mind that wasn't ready to be changed. It's not worth the family friction.

[cstone]

What a lonely world it would be if the only people here were others who believed exactly what I do.

Speak your peace when necessary. Reserve your words when appropriate. Respect your elders and honor your father, whether he deserves it or not.

Be safe.

[exxonv]

What a lonely world it would be if the only people here were others who believed exactly what I do.

Speak your peace when necessary. Reserve your words when appropriate. Respect your elders and honor your father, whether he deserves it or not.

Be safe.

AMEN to that! Great advice!

[Bailey Guns]

Respect is earned. It isn't a right because you have a pulse or because your loins work. Any effective leader knows that without the respect of his charges he is nothing. If a man cannot respect his son when he becomes a man he forfeits reciprocation. This philosophy of blind allegiance to a parent, because some guy thousands of years ago said it was so, is mindless.

Yeah? Well in the context of this conversation and those involved your response is misplaced and ignorant. His old man isn't some POS that doesn't deserve his respect or allegiance. FFS. Try to keep up.

[Delfuego]

Dear Diary.. I work in an office full of liberals and I want to tell everyone about it.. again.Great... Now he's gonna bitch about his Dad all day...

I can already see the next thread: Old man in my office disagrees with me and uses all the bandwidth.

Somebody please tell this guy that different people have different views, that how the world works. Just because this forum is mostly a sounding board for people to bitch about "lefties" and others to agree doesn't make it a microcosm of America. Your gonna have a rude awakening if you ever get on with a department.

[TEAMRICO]

My dad, A Nam Vet, makes me look like a Liberal!
Damn I love him!

[Singlestack]

This whole "need" thing is really starting to bug me. Liberals love to use that so that you have to justify to them why you should be allowed...whatever.

Good advice here Ronin, maintain a good and respectful relationship with Dad - even if you need to eat some humble pie and not confront him as you would others. It is worth it.

[Marlin]

Avoid the issue with family and enjoy the time you have together. In 55 years I've never changed anybody's mind that wasn't ready to be changed. It's not worth the family friction.

This...

My dad didn't speak to me for about 9 months after He found out I voted for Reagan. He did attend my HS graduation though. [Abused]

[Teufelhund]

Definitely some good advice here, Ronin. Value every minute you have with him and realize you probably don't know everything. Someone (here, I think) said the other day "the older I get, the smarter my dad becomes." Truer words were never spoken.

[Troublco]

You don't have to agree with the Old Man. He doesn't have to agree with you. No sense making waves and creating hard feelings and it won't hurt to swallow your pride a little when dealing with him and his views. Respect his views and the fact he's your father. There will come a time when you won't be able to have those discussions with him.


What a lonely world it would be if the only people here were others who believed exactly what I do.

Speak your peace when necessary. Reserve your words when appropriate. Respect your elders and honor your father, whether he deserves it or not.

Be safe.

These. Don't let differences of opinion harm your relationship with your dad. You're entitled to your opinion, and he's entitled to his. You don't have your dad forever; enjoy having him around while you do.

[Mazin]

Did that make sense in your head before it reached your keyboard?

Lmao


Sent from my Magpul enhanced tactical iPhone using Tapatalk.

[Melvin]

Yeah? Well in the context of this conversation and those involved your response is misplaced and ignorant. His old man isn't some POS that doesn't deserve his respect or allegiance. FFS. Try to keep up.


Since when do things like respect honor and truth have asterisks in order to be applicable or not? At West Point cadets are taught from the get go that a man with no honor shall never command respect. (there isn't any special exclusion clause for parents) And lost honor is like death. Not reversible. Would you tell your son to respect a man who disrespected him?

If, and I said If, a man was disrespectful to his father or the other way around, the person that was disrespectful needs to apologize. This unconditional respect thing is no different than saying a woman should honor and respect a husband that beats her.

Hold all men to one standard. Enough of this blood hypocrisy.

And you might want to point out to your parent you may very well have a say in which retirement home he ends up in. Just sayin'.

[Ghosty]

I can't believe some of the more disrespectful posts in this thread, but I guess on a public forum you get all types. Props to those who gave you sound advice, including respect for blood relations, regardless of differences of politics. Enjoy having someone who cares enough to share his opinion with you, as long as the respect is mutual, both ways.

[GilpinGuy]

You don't have to agree with the Old Man. He doesn't have to agree with you. No sense making waves and creating hard feelings and it won't hurt to swallow your pride a little when dealing with him and his views. Respect his views and the fact he's your father. There will come a time when you won't be able to have those discussions with him.

This is right on. He's your father man. You gotta respect him (and I'm sure you do), not necessarily his views - but the man for sure. Just discuss other things when you spend time together. He'll only be around so long. Make your memories with him good ones, not stupid shit like arguments about politics.

[Byte Stryke]

Or BS.


Someone called?

[JM Ver. 2.0]

Since when do things like respect honor and truth have asterisks in order to be applicable or not? At West Point cadets are taught from the get go that a man with no honor shall never command respect. (there isn't any special exclusion clause for parents) And lost honor is like death. Not reversible. Would you tell your son to respect a man who disrespected him?

If, and I said If, a man was disrespectful to his father or the other way around, the person that was disrespectful needs to apologize. This unconditional respect thing is no different than saying a woman should honor and respect a husband that beats her.

Hold all men to one standard. Enough of this blood hypocrisy.

And you might want to point out to your parent you may very well have a say in which retirement home he ends up in. Just sayin'.
This is a great way to introduce yourself to the other members of the forum... Enjoy your stay!

I can't believe some of the more disrespectful posts in this thread, but I guess on a public forum you get all types. Props to those who gave you sound advice, including respect for blood relations, regardless of differences of politics. Enjoy having someone who cares enough to share his opinion with you, as long as the respect is mutual, both ways.
You'll have to excuse some of the posts... I'm assuming you don't understand the "relationship" some of us have with each other...

[Bailey Guns]

Well, hell, Melvin. I put my crayons away 50 years ago. Otherwise I'd try to draw a picture in order to help you understand because apparently the written word doesn't work out to well for ya.

Or maybe the Grand Wizard can explain it to you at the next clan meeting? (Unless YOU are the GW....that would explain some of your views.)

[alxone]

carl where do these people come from ?
melvin does not seem to respect much and he thinks that the people should not be on an even playing field as the gov ?
also im pretty sure that even at West Point honor is earned not given and i bet if you expressed complete disrespect for your parents that they would have a little talk with you about respect.

[Bailey Guns]

Well, Alex...I've never been to West Point but I've known lots of graduates from there and the other service academies. None ever described honor and respect in the same terms as the Melvin.

[alxone]

ronin13
i dont agree about much with my father but , i try like hell to have a quality relationship with him . when i was younger we fought a lot and when i was your age. i tried to change his mind or make him see my way of thinking and all that happened was a lot of not talking to each other . i finely realized that i should be letting him tell me his way of thinking so i can tell my kids about who he really is/was not who i thought he is/was . i have only known him one way as "dad" not the man everybody else knows. as an adult through listening and understanding his point of view , not necessarily agreeing , i can start to see the man that the world knows


yes i say was because i know (as much as it hurts to think about ) that my father is sick and when my kids are finely old enough to really understand the old man he will be gone .

[alxone]

Well, Alex...I've never been to West Point but I've known lots of graduates from there and the other service academies. None ever described honor and respect in the same terms as the Melvin.no sh*t . maybe we have a W.P. graduate thas a coar15 member that can help the melvin out [Coffee]

[Melvin]

Well, hell, Melvin. I put my crayons away 50 years ago. Otherwise I'd try to draw a picture in order to help you understand because apparently the written word doesn't work out to well for ya.

Or maybe the Grand Wizard can explain it to you at the next clan meeting? (Unless YOU are the GW....that would explain some of your views.)




“He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself, while he who feels, and hence manifests, disrespect toward others, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred against himself ”
~ Major General John M. Schofield ~



You will note there isn't an asterisk in this statement. And if you disagree with it you may want to ask yourself why it is plastered on the West Point website. Maybe you do need to dig out your crayons, because English comprehension isn't your strong suit.

And dragging out the old fallback cliche accusation of racism as a means of attempting to silence debate about respect and honor only serves to prove how vacuous you are and how vapid your position is.

[Teufelhund]

Melvin, I don't think you understand that quote at all, because it does not support your previous posts, and in fact contradicts them. Perhaps you need to see the rest of the quote for some context:


The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instruction and to give commands in such a manner and such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling, but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or the other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself while he who feels, and hence manifests disrespect toward others, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred toward himself.

Major General John M. Schofield


Or maybe you need to have experienced leadership training in some branch of the military to comprehend the overarching theme, which is respect at all levels. The Marine Corps focuses on this intensely, wishing to instill exemplary leadership traits in all ranks, such that even a lowly Private may pick up the reigns of leadership on the battlefield if the need arises. The good leader knows he has something to learn even from his subordinates, listens to all and decides the best course based on a mutual respect.

[Ronin13]

Great... Now he's gonna bitch about his Dad all day...

I can already see the next thread: Old man in my office disagrees with me and uses all the bandwidth.

Somebody please tell this guy that different people have different views, that how the world works. Just because this forum is mostly a sounding board for people to bitch about "lefties" and others to agree doesn't make it a microcosm of America. Your gonna have a rude awakening if you ever get on with a department.
^ Ghostly says it best... why must some turn a simple commentary into a bitchfit? Del, did your mother have any children that lived? Talk about disrespectful...

I can't believe some of the more disrespectful posts in this thread, but I guess on a public forum you get all types. Props to those who gave you sound advice, including respect for blood relations, regardless of differences of politics. Enjoy having someone who cares enough to share his opinion with you, as long as the respect is mutual, both ways.
Well said!

Yeah? Well in the context of this conversation and those involved your response is misplaced and ignorant. His old man isn't some POS that doesn't deserve his respect or allegiance. FFS. Try to keep up.
Indeed! And yes, while we lock antlers on some issues, and both of us being Alpha type personalities, I still love my old man, respect him, and think he's a great man... He taught me a lot of great lessons and molded me into (what I believe and have been told) a good, well rounded, respectful person. Hell, our talk about my incendiary language toward liberals made me think maybe I should tone it down and exercise more restraint. Either way, despite our tiffs and arguments, we both have a mutual respect- he taught me everything he knows about insurance, I teach him about how to properly shoot a pistol (he was always more of a shotgun guy).

To Melvin's WP crap- I served under several WP grads, some were very disrespectful, some- like my most recent company commander- were awesome people, it still had no bearing on the fact that if you fail to follow their lawful orders you get into a lot of hot water. Lesson to everyone here, don't follow Melvin's armchair general advice- he most likely doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

[Melvin]

Melvin, I don't think you understand that quote at all, because it does not support your previous posts, and in fact contradicts them. Perhaps you need to see the rest of the quote for some context:


The discipline which makes the soldiers of a free country reliable in battle is not to be gained by harsh or tyrannical treatment. On the contrary, such treatment is far more likely to destroy than to make an army. It is possible to impart instruction and to give commands in such a manner and such a tone of voice as to inspire in the soldier no feeling, but an intense desire to obey, while the opposite manner and tone of voice cannot fail to excite strong resentment and a desire to disobey. The one mode or the other of dealing with subordinates springs from a corresponding spirit in the breast of the commander. He who feels the respect which is due to others cannot fail to inspire in them regard for himself while he who feels, and hence manifests disrespect toward others, especially his inferiors, cannot fail to inspire hatred toward himself.


Major General John M. Schofield


Or maybe you need to have experienced leadership training in some branch of the military to comprehend the overarching theme, which is respect at all levels. The Marine Corps focuses on this intensely, wishing to instill exemplary leadership traits in all ranks, such that even a lowly Private may pick up the reigns of leadership on the battlefield if the need arises. The good leader knows he has something to learn even from his subordinates, listens to all and decides the best course based on a mutual respect.

My position has been from the beginning of this thread exactly what the Gen stated and what you stated. Substitute the words "parent" and "child" into the Gen's statement or your statement where the words "leader" and "subordinate" are, and tell me how this suddenly renders either statement no longer valid. An undeniable truth of life is an undeniable truth. If you had a daughter whose husband abused her would you council her to "suck it up" and quit whining? I hope not.
Unconditional love is overrated.

[Melvin]

To Melvin's WP crap- I served under several WP grads, some were very disrespectful, some- like my most recent company commander- were awesome people, it still had no bearing on the fact that if you fail to follow their lawful orders you get into a lot of hot water. Lesson to everyone here, don't follow Melvin's armchair general advice- he most likely doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

So again you prove my point. But your blind hate only allows you to project and see in my statements what you want to see rather than what is written. I clearly stated that officer cadets are taught that respect is earned by respecting those they command. They are taught that. That doesn't mean they all abide by it when the graduate. That doesn't render the teaching any less valid. So you have stated you had leaders that were disrespectful and tell me did that make you respect them? Obeying them doesn't mean you respected them does it. And the same goes for people here telling you to respect your father when he disrespects you. It's called a double standard.

[Teufelhund]

My position has been from the beginning of this thread exactly what the Gen stated and what you stated. Substitute the words "parent" and "child" into the Gen's statement or your statement where the words "leader" and "subordinate" are, and tell me how this suddenly renders either statement no longer valid. An undeniable truth of life is an undeniable truth. If you had a daughter whose husband abused her would you council her to "suck it up" and quit whining? I hope not.
Unconditional love is overrated.

I suppose I misunderstood your previous posts in relation to the quote then. My mistake. I do think our elders, and especially our parents, are due a disproportionate amount of respect than we are due from them. Probably just something to do with the way I was raised, but the older I get the more I come to recognize the wisdom they tried to impart that I was too stubborn to hear.

The analogy of a wife (someone's daughter) having respect for her husband no matter what, is a different relationship altogether; he didn't give birth to her, raise her, protect her or care for her before she was able. That's some Old Testament stuff and probably a different discussion as I don't subscribe to that philosophy. If I were to smack my wife around, I would not expect her to respect me at all afterward.

[Ronin13]

So again you prove my point. But your blind hate only allows you to project and see in my statements what you want to see rather than what is written. I clearly stated that officer cadets are taught that respect is earned by respecting those they command. They are taught that. That doesn't mean they all abide by it when the graduate. That doesn't render the teaching any less valid. So you have stated you had leaders that were disrespectful and tell me did that make you respect them? Obeying them doesn't mean you respected them does it. And the same goes for people here telling you to respect your father when he disrespects you. It's called a double standard.
Apples and oranges... I'm not bound by the UCMJ to respect my father (person or position). In the military, you don't have to respect the person, but you do have to respect the rank/position. Sure, O's that were disrespectful to me didn't received my respect as a person, but I still respected their rank. You can't compare fatherly respect to superior officer respect, it's no where near the same. When my old man disrespects me it's usually in the heat of the moment, and I can fire back at him without much repercussion (what's he going to do? Ground me? I don't think so). The military you can't just shoot back (verbally) at an officer when they disrespect you, otherwise you get some nice paperwork and possibly loss in rank.

[Bailey Guns]

You will note there isn't an asterisk in this statement. And if you disagree with it you may want to ask yourself why it is plastered on the West Point website. Maybe you do need to dig out your crayons, because English comprehension isn't your strong suit.

And dragging out the old fallback cliche accusation of racism as a means of attempting to silence debate about respect and honor only serves to prove how vacuous you are and how vapid your position is.

It wasn't intended to silence "debate"...if that's what you want to call your posts. It was meant to illustrate what a fuckstick you've been since you started posting in this thread about people you don't know. Nothing more than that. I guess I won't be so subtle next time.

[Troublco]

Melvin seems to be missing the fact that most of the pushback he's getting here is because of his attitude more than anything else. The pushy, rude noob thing only ticks people off, Melvin, even if you're just trying to make your point. And showing off your vocabulary only accentuates that. Most folks here don't mind discussion with others who don't share their viewpoint, but when you waltz in and start pushing it's going to get some attention...negative attention.

[Ronin13]

Melvin seems to be missing the fact that most of the pushback he's getting here is because of his attitude more than anything else. The pushy, rude noob thing only ticks people off, Melvin, even if you're just trying to make your point. And showing off your vocabulary only accentuates that. Most folks here don't mind discussion with others who don't share their viewpoint, but when you waltz in and start pushing it's going to get some attention...negative attention.
Well put! I'd still have a beer with Rucker even if we disagree on a few things... Nynco- not so much, because he starting doing the same thing... Funny, he hasn't been on here in a while. Maybe he took the hint? Bottom line, even if you disagree, try and play nice, don't be an abrasive person, even if not every topic is one you agree with the OP, at least show some respect and try and act like a freaking adult- lesson I learned pretty hard, but lesson learned nonetheless.

[Melvin]

It wasn't intended to silence "debate"...if that's what you want to call your posts. It was meant to illustrate what a fuckstick you've been since you started posting in this thread about people you don't know. Nothing more than that. I guess I won't be so subtle next time.

I would love to see what you would call a black man whom you had decided was a "fuckstick"? What do you call people on the road who may cut you off? Is your vocabulary so limited that everyone who pisses you off gets a racial slur regardless of what they did?

I have never spoken about individuals in this thread.. I have spoken about ideas and undeniable, time tested truths.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________________________

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. " - Eleanor Roosevelt

[Melvin]

Melvin seems to be missing the fact that most of the pushback he's getting here is because of his attitude more than anything else. The pushy, rude noob thing only ticks people off, Melvin, even if you're just trying to make your point. And showing off your vocabulary only accentuates that. Most folks here don't mind discussion with others who don't share their viewpoint, but when you waltz in and start pushing it's going to get some attention...negative attention.

Like I said before, WWE referee syndrome is at epidemic levels. Is there a clause in the TOS that I missed that requires people posting to stick to 2 syllable words? If so I apologize.

[Ronin13]

I would love to see what you would call a black man whom you had decided was a "fuckstick"? What do you call people on the road who may cut you off? Is your vocabulary so limited that everyone who pisses you off gets a racial slur regardless of what they did?

I have never spoken about individuals in this thread.. I have spoken about ideas and undeniable, time tested truths.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________________________

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. " - Eleanor Roosevelt
To add to your quote, as I believe you may be taking it out of context... "...and idiots think it's impossible to discuss all 3."
Why would you turn it into a racial slur argument, rather than perhaps some people, like BG, look past color and just see stupid. No need to make it about color, or insult based on a great term (fuckstick) that you accuse of having a limited vocabulary. "I have an extensive vocabulary, but I use swear words because it punctuates the point better. 'You're a good man,' doesn't have the same ring as 'You're a fucking good man!'" -Will Forte

Like I said before, WWE referee syndrome is at epidemic levels. Is there a clause in the TOS that I missed that requires people posting to stick to 2 syllable words? If so I apologize.
Can you please explain this "WWE referee syndrome"? I don't watch WWE.