"The Gun Nuts"

[TriggerHappy]

PS, you should work on your rants. It was pretty weak.

[DHC]

No, it's not. There are rules we all have to follow in society. If you break those rules there are consequences. Sometimes the consequences for breaking the rules means you lose a right that is otherwise guaranteed to LAW ABIDING citizens. When I talk about civil liberties I'm assuming most people understand that applies to the law-abiding. If you're a convicted felon or if you've been convicted of DV, you no longer have those liberties...in other words, it doesn't apply to you. I don't see that as middle ground at all.

It's also assumed that people know rights are not generally absolute rights.

This pretty much sums up exactly what I meant and exactly the difference between someone who loses liberties based on their actions and someone who loses liberties based on fear and paranoia of others:

BG,

Not sticking up for anyone, but I am somewhat familiar with an issue that was described upthread wherein a person loses some of their civil liberties through wrongful accusation of DV. It happens a LOT. In fact, your description of "someone who loses liberties based on the fear and paranoia of others" fits perfectly with those instances where a person is wrongfully accused of DV and out of a sense of overprotection, our legislators have all but required LE to charge the person, resulting in ensuing loss of their civil rights. I know this is not directly on-point with the conversation, but as a tangential consideration and since it had been mentioned by others, I wanted to add a bit of clarification.

[Irving]

Personally, I would just kind of shut down on that person, and all other people who aren't your closest friends. That's what I've decided to do (if I can manage it). I think there is something to be said about simply not discussing a topic with a person. Kind of like when your kid asks you about something, and you reply with, "I'll tell you when you're older." They KNOW that you could tell them, but you are purposely not telling them, so they go apeshit.

Do you think felons should be able to have guns? People who have abused their spouses? People who are mentally ill?

The first two, yes. Mentally ill is a more difficult topic. I'm sure you've seen me post this before, but if you have been released to society, then you should have all your rights. If you can't keep your hands off your spouse, or have a mental illness that can't be treated, and you are still in the general public, then that is a different problem that needs addressing.

[Kraven251]

PS, you should work on your rants. It was pretty weak.

I'm generally more pissed when I am quiet and civil.

[Bailey Guns]

BG,

Not sticking up for anyone, but I am somewhat familiar with an issue that was described upthread wherein a person loses some of their civil liberties through wrongful accusation of DV. It happens a LOT. In fact, your description of "someone who loses liberties based on the fear and paranoia of others" fits perfectly with those instances where a person is wrongfully accused of DV and out of a sense of overprotection, our legislators have all but required LE to charge the person, resulting in ensuing loss of their civil rights. I know this is not directly on-point with the conversation, but as a tangential consideration and since it had been mentioned by others, I wanted to add a bit of clarification.

Trust me...I'm pretty familiar with Colorado law re: DV. I also believe the Lautenberg Amendment that allows for ex post facto punishment is unconstitutional.

[lead_magnet]

You should have told your stupid fukin friends they are fukin idiots. IF and when a threat ever arose they would more than likely call you or another gun owner. Also inform them with their head up their collective ass it would be a miracle if none of them was able to reproduce thus bringing more of the same stupid intellect in to this world.

THAT'S HOW YOU SHOULD HAVE RESPONDED, Then enjoy the lamentations of their women.

I just fell in love with you again Jim.

[Great-Kazoo]

I just fell in love with you again Jim.

Getting nervous here. there's too many "members" who are trying to "friend" me.

[merl]

this sums up things nicely to me. We create areas where people cannot defend themselves then get outraged when crazies attack. I don't think you can get that point across to people that don't believe in defending themselves though.






Site I took picture from
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/80659216/

[Kraven251]

So I tried talking to him again, and attempted to have a more civil conversation, and maybe it is the power of the internet and he was feeling ballsy...but this was the response I got when I essentially stated: I own firearms because I like having them and at this time it is a right allowed to me by the Constitution. He called me a hypocrite and said verbatim the following:

"I want the cops to come into your home and RIP the guns from your hands and kick you in the face...yeah, there you go, have some extremism."

So yeah over the past 10 years his views and mine have effectively moved in other directions, but I thought he knew a bit better than to think I will ever allow someone to advocate violence against me especially in my home and for me to tolerate it. um, no

[Skully]

I have had my fair share of mini fights with those who believe complete ban and those that think the 2nd AMendment is for hunting. Emotions are high, it is being plastered everywhere. People are feeding off of it and making emotional responses. Dont feed in to them now.

I had my cousin of all people make a comment to my facebook page (is only veiwable to family and close friends) trying to pick a fight. I simply said

"Not doing this here and right now. Lets do this with you are not on your period."


.........................