Untitled

I have no words of my own…

Lights in the Dark

View original post

Advertisements

24 thoughts on “Untitled

    • I appreciate the sentiment, but that’s just wishful thinking my friend. Just as a piece of paper cannot stop a runaway train, no law conceivable will ever be able to stop a human mind – the most devastating weapon in all of nature – from wreaking carnage when it goes off the rails… ๐Ÿ˜•

      Like

  1. In Colorado, i believe i’m right and maybe other states.
    You do not need a license, you can buy any gun you want and as many as you want, there are no records kept.
    Why would anyone want to own an assault rifle, pump action shotgun, two pistols and more. Its seems it’s standard for American homes to have two or three homes.

    Thank god we don’t have that problem in Briton, ok we have shootings but they are very few.

    Like

    • I don’t own a gun and don’t want one either. But I’m a smart man, and no law could stop me if I chose to go on a killing spree. Reason, and reason alone, is what keeps my anger in check. Unfortunately, our world is full of people with no such constraints…

      Like

  2. Maybe someone can explain something about the gun laws to me. I am a gun owner, but my two are modest, a .22 caliber target pistol and a .410 bolt-action shotgun, but I have trouble understanding the need for high power and high-volume weapons such as assault rifles. Holmes had an AR-15 with a magazine capacity of 100 rounds. That isn’t really required for, say, deer hunting, it is only useful if you’re war-fighting.

    Just take the extreme example. I doubt even the NRA would advocate for citizens’ rights to nuclear weapons. How about battle tanks? Heck, how about RPG’s, the terrorists’ weapon of choice in many places? Let’s just admit it, our country is just plain nuts on this subject, something that seems to be a consensus in this posting.

    This matter defines a distinct difference between factions in this country. The majority take the extreme view, including the “right” to own assault rifles, and the minority want to be like the rest of the world and relatively safe. But even many Democrats go wimpy when up against the NRA. Isn’t it interesting that the NRA’s philosophy seems to be adversarial to government? In effect, their main justification seems to be that government can’t be trusted. Seems to me, that’s exactly the problem on most of the other political issues as well, issues like, say, healthcare. Some say we can trust government to take care of us and others reject the notion. Personally, I would prefer to live in a country where I didn’t fear my government, and having dedicated 22 years of my professional life as part of it, I like to think it’s possible. But, that’s just me.

    Like

    • Jim if IzaakMak doe’s not mind me coming in. Why do you have a gun and a shotgun in the the house, you will likely say its to protect yourself and family. From whom, have you ever been robbed or needed them since you got them.
      If someone got into your house without you hearing, the weapons would be no good to you at all.

      Like

      • I welcome the discussion, drib. In short, you are right. My guns were inherited from my father who was raised liking to hunt the likes of pheasants, doves and rabbits. I have no illusions about them being of much use in self defense. In fact, since I have grandchildren I keep the ammo separate from the guns, and that would further diminish their utility in self defense. At best I might imagine a scenario in which society collapsed and they would help me survive against unarmed looters, but that’s a stretch.

        Owning guns in this country is just natural. I would choose to have it different if I could, but I see that as hopeless, so if others are going to have them, I’m not throwing mine away.

        Like

        • Its hard for us in Briton to understand why anyone would want to own a gun, other than a sportsman or criminal.

          I said this in another blog, if i were President i would sign / pass a bill to totally ban all guns and on the same day close all guns shops and confiscate all weapons to be destroyed.

          Like

          • Well, I get it. You Brits have very few guns in your country and those who have them are thoroughly vetted before being trusted with them. I would that we were like you. But, by suggesting that the President of the U.S. could fix it himself, you betray a serious misunderstanding of the way laws work over here in the colonies. Our Congress reflects the political realities of our body politic, the the body politic does not think deeply. In fact, it typically reacts to political issues viscerally on the ballot and votes the way the National Rifle Association dictates. Hence, the President will never get such a bill to sign.

            We once had a wonderful, intelligent and cynical cartoonist for some decades over here named Walt Kelly. His principal character, a Southern Opossum named Pogo, famously said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us!” Even De Tocqueville couldn’t have described the American voter better.

            Like

    • Sorry to come so late to the discussion guys but, for what it’s worth, here are my two cents worth:

      Being able to protect one’s life and property is important, but I think the primary reasoning behind the 2nd Amendment was to insure the people’s right to “kick the bastards” out if the need ever came to pass. Remember, the founders were revolutionaries…

      Unfortunately, not only have we as a people failed to “keep the bastards in check” but we’ve failed to prove to the world at large, the purpose of the “great experiment” after all, that free people are both more peaceful and more reasonable…

      Like

      • Indeed, they were revolutionaries, but they revolted against rule by royal fiat under which they had no representation. The founders, I submit, believed in just government and the rule of law, and they staked their faith that justice would be obtained by openness and a free press, and a Constitution accordingly designed. Personally, I believe the intent of the 2nd Amendment was actually more about militias than blowing criminals away. IMHO.

        Like

        • The purpose of a militia is to thwart the efforts of those who would take away our freedoms. And what use is that when the people themselves abdicate those freedoms? There are no scientists and philosophers in government today, and I’m not sure if there have been since the founders themselves. So who do I point to as representing the peaceful and reasonable people like me? ๐Ÿ˜•

          Like

  3. Hello me again ๐Ÿ™‚
    I think the point of a militia is to do the dirty work for the army.
    My point in question was Iraq but now it is the militia in Syria.
    Running wild, murdering all round them and then they disappear until the next time they are sent in.

    Like

Express yourself!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s