From a neighbour to the North of you I couldn't agree more. Your opinion is worth way more than 2 cents and it is refreshing to hear it.

Peace through superior firepower.

Huh.
So, this is diametrically opposed to my own experience.

What -I- see, is that we have demonized guns to the point that we can't admit at work that we're owners, for fear of excoriation. I rarely / never see guns in public. I know some who conceal / carry, but they're very, very low key. If thet aren't, they're accosted by activists everywhere they go. Mothers shield their children from their view if a LEO walks in with his sidearm exposed.

This is directly opposite of what my generation experienced, and probably yours too? We all had guns to go plinking with. In my state and those around mine, every year kids got out of school for ther deer hunt. (We called it UEA, but we all knew what it was for). Several weeks prior to this, every adolescent Male was at the range with dad and grandpa, sighting 'em in.

And there were no shootings in the news.

I don't see any indication that we have become "....way too comfortable seeing guns in public...".
Just the opposite, frankly.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

And... On the micro level, let's hope that more kids don't find their mother's gun in her purse and accidentally blow her head off.

And on the macro level, let's hope we still have cooler heads in our leaders so if we should ever run into another issue like a Cuban Missile Crisis we won't go from a pissing contest directly into nuclear world destruction.

Cuban Missile Crisis & Bay of Pigs et al? Not exactly citations which support "cooler heads". Just sayin'...

They did fire on relatives and friends before they'll do it again. (in this very country no less)

True, mistakes were made along the way. But in the end when 'national security advisers' were pushing a military escalation, yes, cooler heads prevailed.

? ? ?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

1860-1865


I know for a fact that my ancestors were on the CSA. I think there were some from the Union, but I don't know for sure about those*. Regardless after words they clearly became family.


*my maternal grandfather was from Baltimore.

When a group is hell bent on breaking up the USA, going to war with them doesn't really constitute an illegal order to attack. It doesn't matter whether it's blue states or red states. If they break away from the USA, by default they forfeit their citizenship.

You didn't specify citizenship you wrote friends and family.



So a group of people aren't allowed to leave the country?

Are we allowed to leave individually?

What if we feel that other states are dictating what we do in our states (say for instance with what we do with guns or cars)?

What if we feel like each state should more independent, be separated from other states politically because of their inherent differences geographically which lead to needing different rules?

But I did say "Illegal orders to attack". If a group wants to secede and is hell bent on breaking up the USA, that constitutes an act of war. Then orders to attack would not be illegal, just as they weren't illegal in the Civil War. Unfortunate as it was.

Any individual or group can leave. Pick up and leave. Go elsewhere. They're free to do so. If they fundamentally don't like America they are free to leave. Or they can legally organize and effect changes by electing leaders more favorable to their interests. Breaking up the USA is a whole different animal.

States already have independence. Case in point, some states legalized cannibus use, while others haven't. It's when said states want to break away from, and thus breaking up the USA that there will be problems.

How is that different from a cop pulling you over and asking for license and registration?

I worked in Manhattan for years and YOU are the one going thru life in fear???

I appreciate your sentiment, and agree.
I used to argue every day at work with a guy who was my political opposite. One day, he said "I bet you hate me because we are always at odds." I answered, "No I respect you. I think you are wrong, but at least you care and are willing to defend what you think - who I hate are the aprox. HALF of the people who are too lazy to vote."
Giving thought is always better than being thoughtless.

How does that differ from a cop pulling you over and asking to see license, registration and insurance???

I really find it funny that I worked in Manhattan and Joisey City for years and YOU are the one that is afraid....

My Dad is the man that found the 1st missile site under construction in Oct 1962.

Was trying to stay out of this, but here we go.

Last I knew a cop had to have some reason to pull you over. Seems like there is a amendment about unlawful search and seizure, but whatever. You are so willing to give up your rights, so who care about civil liberties.

Wow, you worked in Manhattan and joist city, good for you. NO, I do not walk around afraid because I know I can defend myself and my family.

You want to feel nervous, Walk a patrol in Baghdad, or outside the green zone, or the albon village complex, or up around tikrit, OR the pesh river valley, or the Korgal valley. Not even gonna sit here and list them all. If you have never picked up a weapon and defended this country, why are you so willing to give up our rights that you didn't put anything on the line to protect.

If YOU don't want to be able to protect your family, that's fine. Don't stop me from doing it.

Three types in this world. Wolves, Sheep, and Sheep dogs.

Sheep dogs try to protect the sheep

Wolves try to eat the sheep

Sheep think as long as they don't see a wolf in front of them that there are no wolves.

You must decide what you are. I know from over 26 years of service what group I fall in.

I just hope one day you don't wake up and see a wolf at the door, and wonder where the sheep dogs are.


And if you think people CC because they are afraid, then you just don't get it. I am not afraid, I carry because I've seen the wolf and will make sure I am between it and the Sheep. Just say thank you to the people keeping you and your family safe since you don't have the fortitude to do it.

I believe legislation was tried and exhausted as a last means for decades before shots were fired on us that started the War Between the States.



Bringing it back full circle; yes the military is smart enough not to place their troops so randomly that they might encounter their relatives/family members. They have done it before.

So mindless automatons set for kill… no, but strategically placed people who don't care or are "just following orders" Yes. I was just citing northern aggression as a close to home example. But trust me around the world are much more grievous examples of humans behaving in such a manner.

WOW. So much here.....

I'll start with the bit that made me decide to actually respond again:

Qingdao, if I'm understanding you correctly, you're suggesting that the "war between the states" was caused by the "Northern agressors", and that this is an example of the government overreach that can result in a government taking-up arms against its citizens, and brothers fighting brothers. Am I understanding that correctly?

Because if I AM understanding you..... well, that's gonna steam me.... haha :troll:

The Southern states were, in fact, KILLING PEOPLE. Just because they were not WHITE, doesn't mean they weren't PEOPLE who were being mistreated, abused and KILLED. You think that wasn't enough to justify the "Northern Agressors" to do something about it? Oh sure.... I've heard it all before: "it's about states' rights." We're hearing it all again now, about Gay Marriage.... "states' rights" was code-talk for "We want the right to OWN PEOPLE and RAPE THEM and KILL THEM, and we don't want the rest of you saying we can't".

You want to know what sort of people were in that southern-states army? You shouldn;t have to look any further than what they were fighting to protect; but if you need more, then look no further than General Lee himself, who ordered the summary execution of EVERY MAN NOT WEARING THE Confederate Uniform as they retreated across the United States, beaten. That's right: he knew the war was over. He knew they were beaten. And as they tore back west to avoid the Union troops, they executed THOUSANDS of men, on the excuse that they were "either spies or deserters." LEE was a coward, and an A$$-Bag. and he SLAUGHTERED many of my wife's family tree.
YEAH.... THAT'S what kind of people were fighting against the government.

And as Piper already said: that wasn't an "illegal order to take up arms", that was an order to PUT DOWN a treasonous Insurrection.
And NO: you don't just get to decide you don;t want to be a part of the club anymore and take your state and go home. Sure: YOU can leave.... but do plan to leave your state where it belongs.

I can't believe we're reaching this far, and grasping at this many straws to try to defend gun rights. and this from ME: a 2nd Amendment SUPPORTER!


And SMK SHOE!!??
SO. RIGHT. ON.
and Thank You!
I'm not sure I could disagree with any of what you just said.... even if I felt so inclined.

Wow way to drink the kool aid. Step one deaminize your enemy. They did that well enough with you.

Thanks for trash talking my predecessors. And not fully comprehending history.

But hey its the internet :D

Once again people are auguring the validity of "candy cigarettes'" as a metaphor. I could have mentioned 8 other instances where arms are taken from people and that's when government overstepping happens.

Your response to me is to insult me, but you haven't said anything substantive. Because of that, I'll stoop lower than I usually do and give you a spelling tip: "deamonize". Verb. Describes the act of creating the impression that something or someone is a demon.

So: you say I don't understand history? WHICH history do you think I've misunderstood? Go ahead: correct me. School me up, professor.

I'm sorry if you feel like your predecessors fit into the group of belligerents that I described. I didn't know them; I'm sure they were wonderful people.

For my family's part, our family tree is chock full of people who went north from Missouri, Arkansas, Georgia, to fight with the Union, against the confederacy. They knew they'd be "fighting against their own", but the values at stake demanded they choose the right side. We take a tremendous amount of pride in them. As one would, when their ancestor risked literally EVERYTHING in order to take a moral stand.

Again: learn me up. Don't just stop at hurling insults my way: Tell me which part of history our family journals got wrong?

I took issue with your portrayal of the "Northern Agressors firing on the poor law-abiding citizens of the Confederate states" as an example of government taking-up arms against its citizens, thereby necessitating current law-abiding Americans bearing arms, so it can't happen again. You seem to have missed my point, so I'll make it ever-more-clear: if a bunch of red states decide to leave the Union because Bernie wins the next election, then yes, I fully support taking up arms to keep it from happening. Even more so if a bunch of blue states decide to leave because they don't like Christians.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

Are y'all getting the same ads I am in this thread? Hahahahahttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...e4ddc75722.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

WOW! No. I'm just getting Pelican Parts ads. But then I'm on a PC with cookies blocked, not on a phone, if that makes any difference.

I don't see many insults; only describing your misconceptions. And yes of course defending my bloodline.

I can see as in every one of my posts (save the one explaining the events in America during the 1860s) an attempt at reigning in the topic back to gun control. Or at least governments control over how we should not buy guns etc.



I'll indulge this tangent away from the topic at hand, but I'd like to for a third time state that I was using this as a metaphor to illustrate that a government can use soldiers to harass or abate citizens (or ex citizens).




I'll admit I've never actually read South Carolina's declaration. Reading it was informative. I'd still like to see the hard copy, but the internet will do for now.

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states#South_Carolina

It basically prattles on about how they have attempted legislation with the northern states for 25 years, and enough is enough. Or at least that's what I gather from it.

Further it describes how our relationship with England was dissolved.

That is a part that is interesting. Apparently, we didn't jump right into the "union" until 1788. We apparently just wanted to be a "free and sovereign state"

After the American revolution I would assume there was considerable war debt. This is probably why we joined into a union only after the fact.

It goes on to describe how we didn't like how (take offence stopping pills now) non-slave holding states were not abiding by the legislation set in place for returning of slaves. Basically extradition laws were not being adhered to.

The Declaration then goes on to take the words of the constitution and write that the USA was not making a "more perfect union" it was not "establishing justice" yada yada yada.

Finally, the people of SC did NOT like Lincoln. Apparently not one bit.




The wiki article seems to summarize pretty well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Immediate_Causes_Which_Induce_a nd_Justify_the_Secession_of_South_Carolina_from_th e_Federal_Union





All this being said I get the feeling of "Trump is not my president" syndrome from the southerners at that time. But they are my kin and being I am so much like my father and his father before him; I can only imagine myself in a southern man's shoes at that time. I'd probably do the same thing they did. As Nietzsche believes so do I in eternal recurrence.



You take offence because you believe me a bigot?

Or just because I am a proud southern man?

Regardless you are only going to see or hear what you want to and this is the internet so none of it is real :D

As for spelling errors... Spell check can't catch them all Mr. Samsung tapatalk

Wait.. so this is what happened to our popular gun thread?!

As a California Bail bonds agent I am authorized to carry concealed weapons while in pursuit of a bail jumper.

I take my H&k combat shotgun with 7 12ga capacity mag., My 9mm Glock & my COP.357

As a subscriber to "Easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" and "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6" I just conceal, and quite nicely. When **************** hits the fan I'll take my lumps. :cool:

I carry too. I have a concealed carry permit. I just don't need an assault weapon, especially not one with large magazines. ;)

Why do you think you have the moral high ground to determine when a weapon is an assault weapon or a defensive weapon, or what constitutes a large magazine.

If I am at my house and use an AR-15 to protect my family and property from a group of (6) people intent on doing harm - that’s (5) rounds per person. That AR-15 becomes a defensive weapon.

If I use that same gun to go on the offensive and harm my neighbor it becomes an assault weapon. The label “assault weapon” applies to any implement intended to be used as an offensive weapon be it a rifle, sidearm, knife or baseball bat.

Why do otherwise intelligent people fall prey to the culture creators who introduce emotionally charged words/phrases into the lexicon to advance an agenda.

BTW - the AR in AR-15 stands for ArmaLite, not assault rifle. It is a product naming convention from the company that invented it, ArmaLite. In fact, there were a number of rifles with “AR” names, like the AR-1, AR-5, AR-7, AR-10, AR-16 and AR-17.

Im'a just put this here for now. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...f58be81b48.jpg

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

That was a sensical response.



Nice try, May, but that tortoise holds 30 rounds.

If you need 5 rounds per person, you don't need an AR-15 You need shooting lessons. :D:D

Exactly my question. Otherwise intelligent people are falling prey to the narrative that "everyone's out to get you and you need to buy our guns to protect yourself." Buy buy buy!

The NRA doesn't give a **************** about us, nor the 2nd Amendment. Their sole priority is to sell guns and get themselves rich at our expense. Why do you think they're out in Russia pushing guns? Does Russia have a 2nd amendment? The NRA is nothing but an arm of the gun manufacturers.

Dude, why are you so emotionally invested in the left/right paradigm. I did not use any oft repeated emotionally charged phrases, ie. “Assault Weapon” that have been trumpeted (sorry for the trigger word) (oops did it again) and programmed into the minds of a certain segment of society by politicians and the mass media. I am trying to inject some critical thinking and common sense into the argument.

Apparently you believe “everyone is out to get you” since you’ve taken the steps to obtain a concealed weapons permit. An AR-15 is not unlike a tool that is best used in the proper situation - for example I wouldn’t use a hacksaw to take down a tree, I would use a chainsaw. I am not going to walk down Main Street with an AR-15 slung over my shoulder but I will use it in the proper environment and scenario.

My original point was and still is a weapon can be anything to inflict harm on another being. Intent determines whether or not it is an “assault” weapon. Just because a group of politicians labels a thing, does not make it so.

DISCLAIMER - I am not on team red or team blue - in my opinion most if not all of our political leaders are as corrupt as the day is long. :D

Oh - and another thing. I am not a member of the NRA. Just someone who believes I have the right to protect my family and property from those who intend harm or would like to take unlawful possession of said property.

Yes, I believe there are some bad people out there, and a handgun is a very capable tool to defend myself and my home. Although I have an unloaded shotgun under my bed, in case someone comes in, I believe all they need to hear the sound the gun makes when I "load the chamber" and they'll scurry out of the house like cockroaches. But I really don't expect anyone coming in. It's just an insurance thing.

I also wouldn't use a hack saw to cut down a tree, but I wouldn't use a grenade, either. I think an AR is like a grenade when it comes to self-defense, and a handgun is more like a chainsaw in your analogy. We have difference in opinions on this and we can leave it at that. You'll never convince me otherwise and I'll never convince you. I do, however, believe we both have the right to express our opinions. :cheers:

HA! Talking about emotionally invested, I've seen countless bumper stickers of guns, AR's, gun stick families, etc.

I've never seen stickers of chainsaws, to bring back your analogy. Who's emotionally invested?

Wait..... where's piper6909, and what have you done with his body?

;-)

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

HAHA! :D:D

Look back at all my posts, and you'll find nothing has changed. I've always been on the side of people being able to express their opinions, unless they personally attack others. :cheers:

OK. Game on.

I'm going to mount on my truck's rear window a family sporting chainsaws. Yup. I'll find them. eBay. Amazon. Etsy. Thanks for the great idea!

Now... if I were in China they'd be a family sporting knives... or machetes cause, you know... gun control. However, I believe a machete doesn't make the same sound as a shotgun shell being chambered. ;)

:cheers: