Beemaster's International Beekeeping Forum

MEMBER & GUEST INTERACTION SECTION => THE 2ND AMENDMENT => Topic started by: iddee on March 16, 2019, 09:21:47 am

Title: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on March 16, 2019, 09:21:47 am
""Knife violence is now sweeping the United Kingdom, and is at a nine-year high, according to the BBC. Police have even taken to confiscating anything remotely pointy, making for some dystopian Twitter posts.""

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/britains-safe-gun/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=newletter-patriotupdate&utm_campaign=homepage&utm_content=western-journal
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: herbhome on March 16, 2019, 04:54:19 pm
The picture with the lineman's pliers got me chuckling. :smile:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on March 19, 2019, 10:26:40 am
If we regulate anything that can hurt people we will have no tools.  Also no sports...  We need to outlaw golf clubs...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Hops Brewster on April 02, 2019, 12:09:00 pm
the Brits are working on that, Michael.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 04, 2019, 12:59:35 pm
the Brits are working on that, Michael.

Not that I know of, but we have worked on AK47s a la El Paso! Looks like another Right Wing sheeple on the rampage. Probably a member of the IRA doh! Sorry, probably NRA. :cheesy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 05, 2019, 08:15:36 am
I wish the perpetrators in El Paso and Ohio just had knives.  Or maybe we should regulate only the white people and let the brown people have guns.  That might change the number of terrorist shootings.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 05, 2019, 08:32:06 am
For Cider........

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/08/04/dayton-shooter-leftist-elizabeth-warren-fan/

For Acebird.......

https://www.rferl.org/a/militants-storm-kandahar-police-hq-after-suicide-car-bombing/30062973.html

Left or right, guns or bombs, a nut cannot be stopped by giving him pills and sending him home.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 05, 2019, 09:14:27 am
For Cider........

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/08/04/dayton-shooter-leftist-elizabeth-warren-fan/

For Acebird.......

https://www.rferl.org/a/militants-storm-kandahar-police-hq-after-suicide-car-bombing/30062973.html

Left or right, guns or bombs, a nut cannot be stopped by giving him pills and sending him home.
But you forgot the salt to go with your pills then you could be sent home to sleep. :smile:

You don't believe the tripe in 'Red State' do you? Its a news feed for RW Sheeple, its like saying "it must be true its on Google"
The big deflection game has started its everyone else's fault except the RW nut with an AK 47. Where did he get an AK47?
Did he nip to the next state to legally buy what is to all intents and purposes a military weapon.
cider   
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 05, 2019, 10:47:58 am
The semi-auto has been around since about the 1930's. The AK-47 does nothing the M-1 wouldn't do. If it's the gun's fault, why have we not had mass shootings like this since that time?
Easy answer to that one...... We closed most insane asylums and let the inmates go on the street and decided to blame an inanimate item rather than the guilty semi-human.
My semi-auto rifle sets in the closet and never harms anyone.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 05, 2019, 01:17:56 pm
Hey Cider, how much of this would a semi-auto rifle ban stop?

?Audio from the tragic shooting at 18th & Kildare yesterday shows that criminals have no deterrent to carrying illegal guns in our city and this is what residents and police are up against,? Chicago Police Chief Communications Officer Anthony Guglielmi posted Monday alongside a clip containing sounds of one of the attacks in that area.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-weekend-shootings-7-dead-46-injured

Absolutely none, that's how much.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 05, 2019, 02:31:32 pm
... My semi-auto rifle sets in the closet and never harms anyone.

Now, that's interesting! I've had the same experience with mine! ... hmmm .... very interesting indeed ...  :cheesy: :cheesy: :cheesy: :cool:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 06, 2019, 02:09:38 am
The semi-auto has been around since about the 1930's. The AK-47 does nothing the M-1 wouldn't do. If it's the gun's fault, why have we not had mass shootings like this since that time?
Easy answer to that one...... We closed most insane asylums and let the inmates go on the street and decided to blame an inanimate item rather than the guilty semi-human.
My semi-auto rifle sets in the closet and never harms anyone.
I suppose there must be lots of "inmates" around with semi-auto in the closet. If it never harms anyone/thing why do you need it? Not withstanding the other weapons you undoubtedly have hunting rifle/ hand gun etc. Its about the culture iddee if you feel the need for 300m guns you need to accept the collateral damage.

Watched a TV programme last night 'BBC Newsnight' they were interviewing a spokeswoman from the White House and asked about the massacres, besides stating the blindingly obvious "he must be insane" (Trumps line) she was at a loss. Eventually rolling out "well your having problems with knives" I've never heard of one person knifing to death 22 people in Harrods in a short space of time. Come shopping in London, its a lot safer than El Paso. Where do the White House find these people? :shocked:   
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 06, 2019, 07:03:53 am
""If it never harms anyone/thing why do you need it?""
If you never want to use it, why do you have insurance?
If your drill never gets up and drills a hole for you, why do you have it?
If it's not raining, why would you patch your roof?

Now there's 4 useless questions if I've ever seen one.

""I've never heard of one person knifing to death 22 people in Harrods in a short space of time. ""

So why did your Gov. restrict them?
Because the first person killed with one is just as dead as the twentieth one, that's why.

NOW GET REAL..........l
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 06, 2019, 08:00:56 am
""If it never harms anyone/thing why do you need it?""
If you never want to use it, why do you have insurance?
If your drill never gets up and drills a hole for you, why do you have it?
If it's not raining, why would you patch your roof?

Now there's 4 useless questions if I've ever seen one.

""I've never heard of one person knifing to death 22 people in Harrods in a short space of time. ""

So why did your Gov. restrict them?
Because the first person killed with one is just as dead as the twentieth one, that's why.

NOW GET REAL..........l
Re  insurance: Do you take out 4 or so policies to cover any damage to your car when you reverse into your fence etc? In the UK it is illegal to claim on multiple policies for the same thing. An intruder shot with a handgun would be just as dead as with an M1
Re Drill: I have it to drill a hole! I don't need it to put its own drill bit in.
RE Patch your roof: See  buildings insurance!
Knives aren't banned I can buy any type I wish for a legitimate use. What I cannot do is secrete a large knife about my person with the intent of using it on a stranger. Unlike you with your concealed hand gun.
NOW GET REAL iddee come to London or elsewhere in the UK to do your shopping in safety.
We will even throw in some pills and salt administered by a professional nurse from the NHS.
cider
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 06, 2019, 08:07:31 am
Yes, I have multiple policies. Car, home, life, health, ETC. Different policies for different situations, just like guns.
We do have self chucking drills.
The others are just as answerable, but why bother, you don't listen. You know what is right, but get your kicks by trolling. You would argue if I said the sun rises in the east. You would say, "not on a cloudy day".
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 06, 2019, 08:26:22 am
Yes, I have multiple policies. Car, home, life, health, ETC. Different policies for different situations, just like guns.
We do have self chucking drills.
The others are just as answerable, but why bother, you don't listen. You know what is right, but get your kicks by trolling. You would argue if I said the sun rises in the east. You would say, "not on a cloudy day".
Aw shucks.

GET REAL iddee. You live in a dangerous country and need to carry a concealed gun. Come shopping in the UK in safety. We wont lock you up as you cross the border unless you bring your plinker with you :cheesy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 06, 2019, 08:34:55 am
Make sure you keep shopping and don't go to a concert,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing

or

cross the bridge to eat or drink.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_London_Bridge_attack

YOU get real, Cider. Insane people are going to kill people. We need to use a bit of sense and remove the people, not the weapon.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 06, 2019, 08:59:12 am
We closed most insane asylums and let the inmates go on the street

Yes, we should rethink that decision as being fiscally responsible along with many others.  The instantaneous effect to the bottom line doesn't show the true cost over time.  Just like giving 31 trillion to the rich.  That is what depressions are made of.
When you have a president that has no morals you encourage a small sector of the population to imitate his actions.  Over the years in the interest of cutting costs you ignore the problem of treating insanity which in the end costs you ten fold.
The policies of the far right are just as dangerous and costly as the policies of the far left.  The solution to mass shooting is nether far right nor far left it is in the middle.  Unfortunately due to our present political era we are in a flip flop mode which accomplishes nothing positive.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 06, 2019, 09:34:46 am
""When you have a president that has no morals you encourage a small sector of the population to imitate his actions.  Over the years in the interest of cutting costs you ignore the problem of treating insanity which in the end costs you ten fold.""

You are right. We are filip-flopping this after 8 years of it failing. Hopefully, we will be successful in getting it back toward the middle.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 06, 2019, 11:52:17 am
Quote
Its about the culture iddee if you feel the need for 300m guns you need to accept the collateral damage.

I am going to kind of agree with you for a change  :wink:  You missed one thing that I will add, and that is that it is about rights.

Our culture is very different from yours.  In spite of our leftist friends wishing to make us a dependant society, most of us reject this change in whole or in part.  This is a cultural difference from much of the once ruled European world.  We do not wish to be subjects and fought a whole war (in fact, more than one) to keep that from happening. 

Your "rights" are given and taken by your government.  Ours are understood to be natural rights. We, and they, are protected from our government. 

And so yes, we accept that there are people who will abuse any right and we do accept that collateral damage. 

The gun control issue has never been about saving lives.  There are a million ways that lives could be saved with restrictions and new laws about all kinds of things other than guns.  You could ban backyard pools and/or raise the driving age to 21.  1000s of lives would be saved. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 06, 2019, 12:18:18 pm
Make sure you keep shopping and don't go to a concert,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing

or

cross the bridge to eat or drink.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_London_Bridge_attack

YOU get real, Cider. Insane people are going to kill people. We need to use a bit of sense and remove the people, not the weapon.
Make sure you keep shopping and don't go to a concert,  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Arena_bombing

Oh you mean something like this.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Las_Vegas_shooting


iddee I'm sure you're on a loser trying to quote things like a terrorist incidents or others of a similar ilk. You have probably more 
mass shootings this year than we have had in the last 20 years if not longer. What happened to all the CC vigilantes in Walmart, keeping their heads down and being quiet? I'm sure you would be quite willing to back your plinker against an AK47 :cheesy:
cider
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 06, 2019, 01:07:47 pm
Quote
What happened to all the CC vigilantes in Walmart, keeping their heads down and being quiet? I'm sure you would be quite willing to back your plinker against an AK47

His plinker would have taken out a shooter with any type of weapon if he'd been there and been able to shoot back and hit the guy.  As for CC people in the mall, my understanding is that the mall is a gun free zone.  Even so, the one CC carrier that was interviewed and armed had chosen to take some kids to a safe place and protect them. 

Is your objection to the style of weapon?  As far as I know we do not know exactly which weapon was used.  Different weapons use different ammo.  Maybe it is the type of ammo to which you object? 

The Virginia tech shooter killed 32 people with handguns. 

We should be asking better questions.  Why are there so many angry, nutty, people running loose?  In my area we have had random assaults with knives, hammers, cars, and clubs.  People have been killed and seriously injured.  The attackers were crazy and should have been locked up, but they were loose on the streets.    The people they killed and damaged are no less dead and injured because something other than a gun was used. 
What has changed in our society that makes people think attacking others is a good idea?  Is it lack of respect for life?  Letting nuts out on the streets?  Social media, 24/7 news, infantilizing young adults, lack of consequences for behaviors, violent video games and movies,  Because we killed God and morality,  all of the above and more?  Is it the way we talk to each other?  Is it fair to call people who support a certain politician or political point of view, fascist, Nazi, racist, etc.?  Then in the next breath, blame the same people for a lack of civility and caring in society?

You can take the guns, but if you don't figure out the underlying issues, people will just find other ways to kill.  Trucks work.  Bombs work.  Fires work.  There are lots of creative ways to kill. 



Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 06, 2019, 01:19:08 pm

https://nypost.com/2019/08/06/protesters-shout-death-threats-outside-mitch-mcconnells-home/

These are the people who think I should be disarmed.  Pretty sure I don't want them telling me what I should and should not be able to do. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 06, 2019, 03:16:09 pm
Cider, you missed the whole point. I'm not saying who has the most. I'm saying both have the problem. Your gun control did not stop the mass killings and gun control will not stop them here. Both countries need a different approach.

'Of course, as I said above, you know all that. You just want to troll.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 06, 2019, 03:18:04 pm
....   What has changed in our society that makes people think attacking others is a good idea?  Is it lack ..,  Because we killed God and morality,  all of the above and more?  ...


Very well said, as always Kathy. Your total list of reasons is spot-on imo. ... I surely believe that, the lack of resistance the criminals are facing is a strong factor in their decision process. If any would-be criminal thought they would encounter armed (lethal) civilian resistance  (long before the cops arrived) - most of them would change their minds ahead of time.

But alas - we (the law abiding citizens) have been disarmed in most public places, either by laws, or by the courts (think wrongful-death lawsuits). ... so the criminal element has virtual free-reign these days.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 06, 2019, 06:01:31 pm
Because we killed God and morality,
It doesn't help when your president is immoral, habitual liar, clearly a white supremacist and a sex offender.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 06, 2019, 06:15:49 pm
Yes and having 8 years of an immortal President really messed up this country. Hopefully 8 years of having our president president will turn back the clock and correct all of them damage done.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 06, 2019, 06:50:21 pm
Quote
It doesn't help when your president is immoral, habitual liar, clearly a white supremacist and a sex offender.

we have no evidence that he is either a white supremacist or a sex offender.  Immoral?  Perhaps.  He has even been inaccurate, although I would argue that lying implies intent rather than just off the cuff mistakes. 

We have had immoral presidents.  We have had presidents who are sex offenders.  We have had white supremacist presidents.  We have certainly had presidents who have lied to us.  Many were combinations of a number of these things.

Prior to this presidency, we have had both left-wing and right-wing nutters and many who were not definable, shooting people and blowing things up.  I realize it is political sport to blame someone for whatever is going on, but it gets us no closer to answers.  It is not helpful. 

Overall violent crime in the US is down.  However, we seem to have a rising problem of spectacular crime.  I suspect the answer is in the word spectacular. In 1966 we had the TX tower shooting.  It was locally spectacular, but most people around the nation read about it in the paper or heard it mentioned on the radio...perhaps TV news a night.  The church pastor might have mentioned it in prayer on Sunday morning.  That was it.

What do we do today?  We have 24/7 coverage, comments from anyone who will stand still and spew and opinion, and a deep dive into motives.  Meanwhile, every nutter out there is watching and thinking "Hey, I can do that and do it better!".  We have politicians whipping people up on one side or another and looking for a convenient political person or side to blame.

I have not been on FB for over a week, but I skimmed some stuff that came across my phone.  There has been nasty, vicious, from my leftist FB "friends".  I have had enough.  I don't care what the left thinks and I am tired of trying to have that dialogue they keep talking about.  My patients with stupid has flat run out.   
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 06, 2019, 07:29:22 pm
   
It doesn't help when your president is immoral, habitual liar, clearly a white supremacist and a sex offender.
     

Your seriously joking Ace ... right?


We have had immoral presidents.  ...

Prior to this presidency, we have had both left-wing and right-wing nutters  ...

Yes - from both "sides of the isle". Idiots, amorals, and crooks - that's not political, that just human nature. No political party required to join that club.


... seriously Ace, seriously. ....
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 06, 2019, 07:48:41 pm
""It doesn't help when your president is immoral, habitual liar, clearly a white supremacist and a sex offender.""

No, he was only half white and not supreme at anything. He is also no longer president.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 07, 2019, 08:46:00 am

we have no evidence that he is either a white supremacist or a sex offender.
To an ostrich with it's head in the sand.  You already admitted he is immoral.

Quote
I don't care what the left thinks and I am tired of trying to have that dialogue they keep talking about.
No doubt in my mind that they are equally tired of your spin.
Seriously Coolbees.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 07, 2019, 09:14:09 am
Ace, were you as vocal about Monica?

How about ""I will stand with my father's people?""

Not just a bit hypocritical, are you?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 07, 2019, 11:20:16 am
Quote
To an ostrich with it's head in the sand.  You already admitted he is immoral.

By my standards, he has committed immoral acts.  If we made lists of those presidents who have and those who have not done the same, the have not list would be shorter.  Most of us understand this and know we are not hiring a celibate clergy member as president.  Not an excuse for immorality, but a recognition that SH and they are human.

Probably have asked before, but please list the thinks you think he has said or done that point to him being a white supremacist?  My take on this is that it is the left screaming RACIST as they always do when someone on the right does something they don't like. 

Quote
No doubt in my mind that they are equally tired of your spin.

The comment was mine.  I will talk to someone all day and all night if we are having a conversation that is rational and factual.  What I am getting from my leftist friends is hate filled crap.  It is not factual, civil, or anything on which a dialogue can be built.  And in the next breath they accuse anyone who disagrees with them as being divisive, RACIST, or whatever other leftist tag lines come to mind at the moment.
This is what has put me off even trying to have that dialogue.  While I agree that conversation is important and sharing points of view is important, I have become convinced that the left does not feel the same.  We have reached that divide that has been coming for a long time and there is no cure for it. 

Those things that held us together regardless of our political ideology are gone and it is the left that has destroyed them.  I see no future for a united country. 

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 07, 2019, 12:24:40 pm
...  We have reached that divide that has been coming for a long time and there is no cure for it.  ....  I see no future for a united country.

Kathy - that is a sad commentary. Unfortunately, I have come to the same conclusion - mostly. The one shining hope that I'm seeing is the young generation coming up now (12 to 25 yr old). Many of them (not nearly "all of them") are asking questions, and searching for answers. It seems that the Bitter, Vengeful Left has not been able to reach them. Or, more specifically, that they have heard the Left and rejected them. Of course this group is by-far the most indoctrinated generation to date - tv media, social media, hollywierd, facecrook, classrooms, professors, music, etc, etc. But they aren't buying off on it - this has been my observation during the last decade. ... so I have some small hope left remaining. Cheers!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 07, 2019, 01:52:01 pm
Quote
But they aren't buying off on it - this has been my observation during the last decade. ... so I have some small hope left remaining. Cheers!

IDK, I have a 19 year old granddaughter.  She was brought up in conservative homes, and lives in my home now.  She was educated in extremely liberal public schools. 

While she still has some conservative leanings and enjoys shooting, the rest of her developing ideology is so confused I can't figure it out.  Pretty sure she can't figure it out.
Because she lives in my home we have had conversations about policy.  She claims to be a Bernie supporter, but when we went over his policies point by point, she didn't know what he was actually supporting.  She has never given real thought to cost and implementation of government-run healthcare, or what impact artificially raising wages has.  She believes that genders are fluid, as is sexual preference.  Her last HS English class dropped creative writing to study social justice issues. 

What does give me a small glimmer of hope is that many parents are recognizing that our public schools are indoctrination camps.  What does not give me hope is that to many parents are to lazy to actually pull the kids out of public school.  My youngest son is going to put his kids in public school because the schools in his area "are really good".  My son is far more conservative than his wife, but she is a family counselor and does not want the kids in public school.  She has seen the results. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryJteQTPBlU&feature=player_embedded

When you are done laughing, remember that these people are the result of our choice to allow the state to spend more time with our kids than we do, and that they now are at the highest levels of our government.  Some of our leaders spoke here, as did candidates.

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 07, 2019, 01:52:29 pm
One more from the DS convention.  this is longer and shows more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szd73ryg5bE&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Troutdog on August 07, 2019, 02:24:12 pm
""When you have a president that has no morals you encourage a small sector of the population to imitate his actions.  Over the years in the interest of cutting costs you ignore the problem of treating insanity which in the end costs you ten fold.""

You are right. We are filip-flopping this after 8 years of it failing. Hopefully, we will be successful in getting it back toward the middle.
Kool aid drinking antifa stroking libtard.  Job opening for you in venezula. Peckr inspector.

People like you make America suck. Keep your progressive BS to youself and your fellow knuckle dragging basement dwelling bed wetting ignorant ingrates.

What have you done lately to make the country better?
What have any left leaning rimmers done?


Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 07, 2019, 03:02:43 pm
Quote
Kool aid drinking antifa stroking libtard.  Job opening for you in venezula. Peckr inspector.

People like you make America suck. Keep your progressive BS to youself and your fellow knuckle dragging basement dwelling bed wetting ignorant ingrates.

What have you done lately to make the country better?
What have any left leaning rimmers done?

Wait!  Tell us how you really feel   :cheesy:

I don't think every leftist is anti-American, but every one of them is woefully uninformed and uneducated on social and constitutional issues, never mind history.  Of course, there are true believers, but they embrace leftism in spite of the evidence of its disastrous results. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 08, 2019, 09:07:46 am
Ace, were you as vocal about Monica?
Who's hypocritical?  He got impeached didn't he?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 08, 2019, 09:15:05 am
Quote
Kool aid drinking antifa stroking libtard.  Job opening for you in venezula. Peckr inspector.

People like you make America suck. Keep your progressive BS to youself and your fellow knuckle dragging basement dwelling bed wetting ignorant ingrates.

What have you done lately to make the country better?
What have any left leaning rimmers done?

Wait!  Tell us how you really feel   :cheesy:

I don't think every leftist is anti-American, but every one of them is woefully uninformed and uneducated on social and constitutional issues, never mind history.  Of course, there are true believers, but they embrace leftism in spite of the evidence of its disastrous results.
Kathy I can see where your coming from re the above troutdog rant. Presumably you now understand the trepidations of right (as opposed to right wing) thinking people. I believe your right, it could lead to a civil war. What a calamity. :sad:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 08, 2019, 09:16:30 am
Those things that held us together regardless of our political ideology are gone and it is the left that has destroyed them.

If you come to a conversation pointing fingers what do you expect?  That is like saying all divorces are a result of one person.

The unfortunate thing is tragedies bring people together.  Wars where we were attacked bring people together (none since WW2).  So I guess we need more tragedies and wars.  We will just have to wait until Putin or the nut in Korea shoots something at us.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 08, 2019, 01:56:37 pm
"Who's hypocritical?  He got impeached didn't he?"

Impeached only means tried. He didn't get convicted nor punished, even tho he admitted wrongdoing, and it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. How much more politically biased can you get?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 08, 2019, 06:28:07 pm
Quote
To an ostrich with it's head in the sand.  You already admitted he is immoral.

By my standards, he has committed immoral acts.  If we made lists of those presidents who have and those who have not done the same, the have not list would be shorter.  Most of us understand this and know we are not hiring a celibate clergy member as president.  Not an excuse for immorality, but a recognition that SH and they are human.

Probably have asked before, but please list the thinks you think he has said or done that point to him being a white supremacist?  My take on this is that it is the left screaming RACIST as they always do when someone on the right does something they don't like. 

Quote
No doubt in my mind that they are equally tired of your spin.

The comment was mine.  I will talk to someone all day and all night if we are having a conversation that is rational and factual.  What I am getting from my leftist friends is hate filled crap.  It is not factual, civil, or anything on which a dialogue can be built.  And in the next breath they accuse anyone who disagrees with them as being divisive, RACIST, or whatever other leftist tag lines come to mind at the moment.
This is what has put me off even trying to have that dialogue.  While I agree that conversation is important and sharing points of view is important, I have become convinced that the left does not feel the same.  We have reached that divide that has been coming for a long time and there is no cure for it. 

Those things that held us together regardless of our political ideology are gone and it is the left that has destroyed them.  I see no future for a united country.
So what do you see, a civil war and the country split? After a split what would be left of the country? Arms after all have moved on somewhat. What is surely needed is a rise of the centre ground to leave the left and right zealots behind to fight it out amongst themselves. :smile:
cider 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 09, 2019, 12:08:41 am
quoting cider

''So what do you see, a civil war and the country split? After a split what would be left of the country? Arms after all have moved on somewhat. What is surely needed is a rise of the centre ground to leave the left and right zealots behind to fight it out amongst themselves. :smile:
cider ''

What I see is the country is split already. We in America are now in a time of reprieve. Our economy is booming, oil, coal, and natural gas industries are thriving, making energy, (the ability to do work). Our industries are once again on the move. Our farmers are producing crops and are thriving.  Things are once again on the move and folks are on the go. This is once again a Nation who is making, against all odds, a substantial comeback. But, the folks on the left are so brainwashed, blinded, or just don't care, All they seem to see is hate, hate put out by the propaganda of the New World Order by whatever means or tools the leaders can find or use, which may be handy for their agenda, to divide AMERICANS.  I have heard it said hate is blind. I now see it. Just look at the shape this country was in up until this last Presidential election. Most on the left and, many powerful leaders on the right, had us going down a one way road, leading to a DEAD end, over a cliff scenario, which lead straight to a bottomless pit, hypothetically speaking.  How quickly this generation of people forget, or are blind, or perhaps brainwashed, or simply just do not care........   YET
A cilvil war would mean every American looses. There will be no winner here. The winner will be ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.  The World Order hates the values of America and its God fearing base, which has protected the rights of ones that do now even agree with said. Hates also Americas Freedom Proclaiming Constitution.  No Cider, it will not be the extreme left and extreme right that fight it out. It will the America hating world order pitched in with the left that fight it out with every one else and AMERICA will be theirs. The winner Will be the World Government aka United Nations, or vise versa; unless; God himself intervenes.  The looser will be the Right and Left, all Americans, as all who are left will be slaves to the NEW WORLD ORDER. This stated is my opinion weather agreed or not.

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: cidersabuzzin on August 09, 2019, 04:54:04 am
quoting cider

''So what do you see, a civil war and the country split? After a split what would be left of the country? Arms after all have moved on somewhat. What is surely needed is a rise of the centre ground to leave the left and right zealots behind to fight it out amongst themselves. :smile:
cider ''

What I see is the country is split already. We in America are now in a time of reprieve. Our economy is booming, oil, coal, and natural gas industries are thriving, making energy, (the ability to do work). Our industries are once again on the move. Our farmers are producing crops and are thriving.  Things are once again on the move and folks are on the go. This is once again a Nation who is making, against all odds, a substantial comeback. But, the folks on the left are so brainwashed, blinded, or just don't care, All they seem to see is hate, hate put out by the propaganda of the New World Order by whatever means or tools the leaders can find or use, which may be handy for their agenda, to divide AMERICANS.  I have heard it said hate is blind. I now see it. Just look at the shape this country was in up until this last Presidential election. Most on the left and, many powerful leaders on the right, had us going down a one way road, leading to a DEAD end, over a cliff scenario, which lead straight to a bottomless pit, hypothetically speaking.  How quickly this generation of people forget, or are blind, or perhaps brainwashed, or simply just do not care........   YET
A cilvil war would mean every American looses. There will be no winner here. The winner will be ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT.  The World Order hates the values of America and its God fearing base, which has protected the rights of ones that do now even agree with said. Hates also Americas Freedom Proclaiming Constitution.  No Cider, it will not be the extreme left and extreme right that fight it out. It will the America hating world order pitched in with the left that fight it out with every one else and AMERICA will be theirs. The winner Will be the World Government aka United Nations, or vise versa; unless; God himself intervenes.  The looser will be the Right and Left, all Americans, as all who are left will be slaves to the NEW WORLD ORDER. This stated is my opinion weather agreed or not.
Time to calm down Ben, what has the UN got to do with this? My question was to Kathy re "I see no future for a united country" was she forecasting civil war, a no win no win situation which would end up with an authoritarian government after the war was over. Time to dig a foxhole in the back woods.
Still think you need to see the centre rise (after all I believe most Americans are of a moderate, decent, law abiding disposition) I suppose its all about candidates. Someone who will not pander to the left or right.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 09, 2019, 05:53:36 am
""Someone who will not pander to the left or right.""

Add "far" and I agree totally. FAR left or right will never be successful. Like Cider and I, all have to give in just a bit.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 09, 2019, 09:49:45 am
""Someone who will not pander to the left or right.""

Add "far" and I agree totally. FAR left or right will never be successful. Like Cider and I, all have to give in just a bit.

Oh I am calm Cider. Just saddened to see my countries citizens so blinded by hate.  I also agree with you two that it would be good if the middle would rise up and vote in sanity.  And really that is what has already happened during the last election. The folks in the middle, the sober minded Americans rose up, elected neither the far left candidates nor the far right candidates which were running. Americans took a chance and voted for a non politician , a man who promised to leave his lushest way of life in order to take on the many great problems here in America. A person who promised to do his best to help EVERY American have a better chance of prospering, and at the same time honoring our Constitution. Yet The left now calls such Americans, in the middle Deplorables, Racist, Nazis, Even our kids whom we love dearly are attacked by the left, some, while on a once in a life time class trip visiting our Nations Capital.  Young patriotic students who love America, simply for wearing a cap that says Make America Great Again were demonized by the leftist. This saddens me. I DO NOT want to see a even a scratch on anyone, be he from the left or right. Unfortunately, the Powers behind the scenes will not let up. I love my country and ALL it?s citizens and am saddened to see my fellow AMERICANS pitted against one another like game roosters at a gamecock fight,  for the pleasure and greed of the extremely powerful, behind the scenes, world leaders. I am not upset but saddened. I certainly hope there will be no such war, It is my hope the New World Order will he stopped. And it (seems) there is only one fleshly man who has the chance to do this. And to be honest I do not put an overly amount of faith in him. There is only one that can be trusted and he is the King of kings and Lord of lords.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 10, 2019, 09:10:14 am
I also agree with you two that it would be good if the middle would rise up and vote in sanity.  And really that is what has already happened during the last election. The folks in the middle, the sober minded Americans rose up, elected neither the far left candidates nor the far right candidates which were running. Americans took a chance and voted for a non politician , a man who promised to leave his lushest way of life in order to take on the many great problems here in America.

Man I don't know what you are smoking Ben but I could enjoy a puff.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 10, 2019, 09:22:16 am
Ace,
Ben is as clearheaded as ever. He is just speaking the truth.
Just look at how many people are back at work. Some day, you will wake up and say how did I ever believe all of that nonsense the media was spouting?
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 10, 2019, 10:49:22 am
I also agree with you two that it would be good if the middle would rise up and vote in sanity.  And really that is what has already happened during the last election. The folks in the middle, the sober minded Americans rose up, elected neither the far left candidates nor the far right candidates which were running. Americans took a chance and voted for a non politician , a man who promised to leave his lushest way of life in order to take on the many great problems here in America.

Man I don't know what you are smoking Ben but I could enjoy a puff.

I noticed that you did exactly as the leftist media does when quoting anyone who does not agree with their agenda. They pick and choose and edit.  Ace, your sure left yourself wide open for what I could say, I?m still chuckling..  Thanks for the private laugh.
Phillip

Quote from: sawdstmakr link. =topic=52068.msg472920#msg472920 date=1565439736
Ace,
Ben is as clearheaded as ever. He is just speaking the truth.
Just look at how many people are back at work. Some day, you will wake up and say how did I ever believe all of that nonsense the media was spouting?
Jim Altmiller

Poor Ace, I hope he will Jim.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 10, 2019, 08:52:46 pm
Ace is like Cider. He learned the truth long ago, but is just too proud to admit it. I've seen a few times he "almost" let it out.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 14, 2019, 12:02:36 pm
Quote
"I see no future for a united country"
Quote
Those things that held us together regardless of our political ideology are gone and it is the left that has destroyed them.

If you come to a conversation pointing fingers what do you expect?

In many ways we already have a civil war.  We'll see what happens in Portland next weekend.  We have groups of people who feel comfortable violently forcing other groups of people to conform to their way of thinking.  Portland is a small scale example of ideological upheaval and on a larger scale, we have seen the results around the world.  None of those results ended up well for the countries. 

Now, to the second bit:  Regardless of right or left, I think most of us agree that society on many levels is crumbling.  Why?  Because foundations are crumbling.  Why?  Because leftist ideology destroys foundations.  They redefine everything from family to gender.  Each society is built on certain things and those things must remain more or less constant.  You can make adjustments around the edges, but wnen you undermine the base, the whole thing loses stability.  Here we are. 

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on August 15, 2019, 09:44:12 am
It's obvious that mass shootings are CAUSED by gun free zones.  Every one of them has taken place in a gun free zone.  The culpable parties are the ones that keep the people unarmed so that mass shooters can kill them with impunity until the police show up, and the news media who make them famous, and the pharmaceutical companies who won't admit that the SUI are the cause of this behavior and the doctors who keep handing it out like candy...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Live Oak on August 15, 2019, 11:56:39 am
It would seem that 99% of "Amerika" just does NOT "get it".  I totally agree with Micheal on the "Gun Free" (read "predator/murderer empowerment zones").  Patrice Lewis recently wrote a very on point article in the WND that hits the nail square on the head but due to our squeamish communist cultural "values" does not drive it down flush. 

https://www.wnd.com/2019/08/why-the-mass-shootings-will-continue/ (https://www.wnd.com/2019/08/why-the-mass-shootings-will-continue/)

I suppose and for politically correct pressures on her the other part that should go along with her excellent article is that none of us should be living in a feral world.  The world I long for and I DO realize will probably NEVER happen is the one where I can staple a $100 bill to my fence and it would stay there until the weather and nature dissolved it.  A world where I can leave my key in the ignition of my truck, leave my doors unlocked, my gates unlocked, our children can play on their OWN without being under guard or watch, a world in which government is barely an after thought in its reach, size, and scope, a world in which my Natural Born Rights surround me uninhibited but are reined in by ME voluntarily out of respect and value for the Natural Born Rights and sensibilities of my neighbors.  I think you get the point. 

Unfortunately, with over 7 billion humans roaming the world, many doing whatever they please, there MUST be a point at which Free people must draw a line of intolerance of evil conduct in that some criminal acts deserve NO redemption and the perpetrators are put down to prevent them from any further criminal acts.  Sadly, therein lies the rub.  Just WHO decides and how this gets implemented without human nature corrupting the process???
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 15, 2019, 01:25:32 pm
Quote
Just WHO decides and how this gets implemented without human nature corrupting the process???

Which is exactly the question the founders asked and the answer was that the government was not the solution and that this freedom given was suitable only for a religious and moral population.  It was not that they thought everyone should tromp off the church 3 times a week, but that the foundation had to be the morality of the Judeo-Christian belief system.  A people free of government oppression must still have a regulating force or we have Mad Max and Lord of The Flies going on. 

If you kill God, your only other force for regulation is the government. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 15, 2019, 04:56:30 pm
If you kill God, your only other force for regulation is the government.
When people of a military background start talking religion my butt twitches.  God is not a regulator.  He might be judge and jury at day of reckoning.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 15, 2019, 05:18:48 pm
Quote
When people of a military background start talking religion my butt twitches.  God is not a regulator.  He might be judge and jury at day of reckoning.

It is about what regulates behavior.  There is a reason communist countries ban religion, especially Christianity.  You don't have to advocate for a particular belief system to recognize that the belief system has value in a society.  Historically, societies have been built around them.  Doesn't matter whether it's live human sacrifice, or something else.  It is the glue.

Not sure why there is a problem with military and religion?  You seem not to have read much of what the founders or even past presidents have said.  Ever read FDRs d-day announcement?

Text of Radio Address - Prayer on D-Day, June 6, 1944:
"My fellow Americans: Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest-until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and good will among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.

Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

And for us at home -- fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas -- whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them--help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.

Many people have urged that I call the Nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

Give us strength, too -- strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.

And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.

And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen."
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 16, 2019, 09:15:28 am
A politician and religion is even more of farce.  That is what you have with Trump and the rest of the swamp.
God = Thou shalt not Kill.  Military = Kill or be killed.
God = Thou shalt not steal, lie, or commit adultery.  Politician = rob, lie like hell, and screw anything that walks.
For self preservation all religions teach "we are the way to heaven".  Most have killed to prove it.
Religion is not the glue.  They all suffer from the problem of "do as I say not as I do".  Every major religious organization is run by the swamp of its own.
The true glue of any society is the family unit.  The family today is torn apart by economic times.  The biggest difference between my parents generation and my children's generation is it takes 2 to 3 jobs to provide for a family.  That leaves no parent home to rear their own kids.  This has nothing to do with God or religion.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 16, 2019, 09:34:17 am
"" The biggest difference between my parents generation and my children's generation is it takes 2 to 3 jobs to provide for a family.""

No, it takes 2 to 3 jobs to provide 5 to 6 times the lifestyle today's family demands. Go back to 1 car per 3 families, carry buckets of water from the spring, raise half or more of your own food, no air conditioning, ETC. and a family could easily make it on one job.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 16, 2019, 12:24:02 pm
Quote
A politician and religion is even more of farce.  That is what you have with Trump and the rest of the swamp.
God = Thou shalt not Kill.  Military = Kill or be killed.
God = Thou shalt not steal, lie, or commit adultery.  Politician = rob, lie like hell, and screw anything that walks.
For self preservation all religions teach "we are the way to heaven".  Most have killed to prove it.
Religion is not the glue.  They all suffer from the problem of "do as I say not as I do".  Every major religious organization is run by the swamp of its own.
The true glue of any society is the family unit.  The family today is torn apart by economic times.  The biggest difference between my parents generation and my children's generation is it takes 2 to 3 jobs to provide for a family.  That leaves no parent home to rear their own kids.  This has nothing to do with God or religion.

You miss the point and I think you miss it intentionally.  No society exists without controls.  Those controls either come from a common belief system or they come from the government.  It is not about the practice of religion.  Communist countries kill off religions because they want the only controls on behavior to come from the government.  They want the only belief to be a belief in the government. 

Iddee is correct.  The issue is not money, but lifestyle.  You can raise a family on one income if you choose well where you live and if you do without things...as our parents did.  I don't think most of us grew up wealthy, but I bet most of us grew up with only one parent working.  WE worked when we wanted something extra.  We earned it. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Live Oak on August 16, 2019, 12:47:57 pm
A politician and religion is even more of farce.  That is what you have with Trump and the rest of the swamp.
God = Thou shalt not Kill.  Military = Kill or be killed.
God = Thou shalt not steal, lie, or commit adultery.  Politician = rob, lie like hell, and screw anything that walks.
For self preservation all religions teach "we are the way to heaven".  Most have killed to prove it.
Religion is not the glue.  They all suffer from the problem of "do as I say not as I do".  Every major religious organization is run by the swamp of its own.
The true glue of any society is the family unit.  The family today is torn apart by economic times.  The biggest difference between my parents generation and my children's generation is it takes 2 to 3 jobs to provide for a family.  That leaves no parent home to rear their own kids.  This has nothing to do with God or religion.

Totally incorrect.  That is NOT what the Bible states and references.  Thou salt not murder is what it DOES say if it was correctly transcribed.  The Heavenly Father has endowed us with natural born rights. These are rights we are endowed with from Him which are referenced and pre-exist the Bill of Rights & the Constititution by virtue to being born in the image of God.  Chief among these natural born rights is the right to protect yourself, family, and loved ones from harm.  This is NOT murder. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on August 16, 2019, 03:16:55 pm
Re:  what Kathy and others said?-

The family WAS, when most of grew up, a unit of father, mother and children.  Now, thanks in large part to the social engineering and laws passed in the 1960s, the ?family? is a mother (or frequently grandmother) and children and an absent sperm donor.  Mom has maybe a high school education and can never expect to make a good living.  Her children grow up without an appreciation for either an education or training for a good trade, so their future is about as dismal as Mom?s. 

Pessimistic?  Darn right, but that?s what our society has become, in my opinion.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 16, 2019, 04:09:54 pm


Totally incorrect.  That is NOT what the Bible states and references.  Thou salt not murder is what it DOES say if it was correctly transcribed.  The Heavenly Father has endowed us with natural born rights. These are rights we are endowed with from Him which are referenced and pre-exist the Bill of Rights & the Constititution by virtue to being born in the image of God.  Chief among these natural born rights is the right to protect yourself, family, and loved ones from harm.  This is NOT murder.

This is correct on all counts. We have every right - even a responsibility - to protect our families, freedoms, & the society that allows us to keep those freedoms (such as the freedom to suffer, or reap the rewards of, our own person decisions).

Funny fact - I heard (on the news the other day) that drug overdose deaths had passed 42,000 people/year in the USA. ... to put that in perspective - that's over 4 TIMES the rate of gun deaths/year according to the FBI. Quick fact-check: Who brouht us and/or promoted to our youth, all of these drugs? Last I knew, it was a single political party responsible for this - their goal? ... to use drugs to undermine the Family Unit in order to make people more likely to be dependant, and therefore more likely to vote themselves into the slavery of Socialism/Communism/Progressivism/Whatever-name-you-want-to-give-it. ...

Funny fact #2 - that political party (mentioned above) can't get the government it wants (so desperately) while honest men and women have guns in this country. ... so they need any-and-every excuse to take them from us without too much fuss ... is there anyone that really thinks "gun-free zones" were intended to "prevent" violence? ... Well, ... quick wake-up call - They are Shooting Galleries. ... that give the aforementioned political party day-and-night TV/Internet coverage of their excuses to take the guns away from We The [Law-abiding] People - all while everyone cheers them ...

If you really don't see what's happening with all this ... I don't know what to say.
If you do see it ... then I didn't need to say anything.
In either case, it made me feel better.  :cheesy:

If Beemaster had a "like" button I'd have worn it out on this thread - between Iddee, Mr. Bush, Live Oak, Kathy, Sawdust, (and the rest of you).  :cool:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 16, 2019, 06:03:32 pm
CoolBees,
Your funny fact is open to interpretation. In the interest of full disclosure; according to the CDC homicides with firearms for 2017 was 14,582 but the number of firearms deaths was 39,773 if you include suicides (23,854), legal intervention (616) and accidents (486) (I don't know what the 235 difference is). That being said, more murders are committed with fists and feet than (assault style) rifles.


The CDC publishes statistics on death from all sources. I have not reviewed the statistics in years (before now) but firearms related deaths are near the bottom of the list of causes of accidental death.  https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_09-508.pdf (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_09-508.pdf)

If you follow the statistics from year to year, you can conclude that the more dramatic rise in automobile deaths - due in part to distracted driving / texting - is a more concerning trend. But since most people are guilty of that infraction to some extent the outrage is muted.

Yes we have problems - many noted in this topic - but the focus on LEGAL gun ownership is misguided.

My semi-autos are also safely secured and well behaved. Imagine that.




Number of deaths for leading causes of death: Source: Deaths: Final Data for 2017, table B pdf icon[PDF ? 2 MB]
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 16, 2019, 06:44:25 pm
Incognito - thank you for the follow-up. The additional statistical data definitely adds great information to this topic.

To clarify, it is my understanding that the FBI's** statistics regarding gun deaths include all firearm related deaths - including suicide by gun. As such, on a year-to-year average, approximately 50% of 10,000 gun deaths are suicides. This leaves on average, around 5000 people killed by others (gangs, mass-shootings, robbery, police shootings, self defense, drug wars, etc), of which usually less than 300 are with "long-guns" (long-guns are the umbrella group that ASSAULT RIFLES are listed under - unless something has changed recently).

2nd comment - I've never heard of "intentional self harm" by name, or as a standalone statistic. Interesting. That statistic would seem to be harder to quantify in some cases. Just my thoughts.

 **(FBI Gun Death statistics - for those that may not know - these are listed on the FBI's website)
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 16, 2019, 06:59:03 pm
What needs to be pondered is why the firearms death rate varies so significantly by race and age.

That alone shows that the firearm is not the cause, but the tool. There is something different about the sub categories that needs to be addressed.

I don't know how to have an honest discussion about this without being labeled a racist, so I will leave the numbers to speak for themselves - or beg the questions themselves.


Edited to add:
What also needs to be pondered is why the firearms deaths from mass shootings seems concentrated in white males and those with extreme cultural beliefs. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 16, 2019, 07:22:29 pm
CoolBees,
I rest my case regarding the interpretation of the data.
Two of our "finest" government sources can't even seem to agree on the numbers.  They are not even close to each other. You would think that they would consult the other's data sources and iron out the differences.

So the CDC can categorize some of those homicide deaths as firearms related whereas the FBI has them listed as other or unidentified???? I am truly impressed with the CDC's thoroughness!


I have also seen statistics breaking down the race of the assailant as compared to the race of the victim. It is possible that it is on the FBI's website. If that data is reliable, it also refutes what the media and some community activists would like us to believe the main issue is.

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 16, 2019, 08:27:48 pm
Quote
What also needs to be pondered is why the firearms deaths from mass shootings seems concentrated in white males and those with extreme cultural beliefs.

My theory:  The young white male shooter is no different than the gang banger.  There are not many white gangs, and so the extreme ideology becomes the gang.  They have no anchor, bad family life, and yes, mental illness.  They do not have community ties, church ties, or school ties.  They have broken or dysfunctional families.  Most of them have acted out for years before they get to the shooter stage.  They embrace something that they think gives meaning and eventually act out to prove themselves just as the gang banger does. 

They are Martin Sheen in Badlands.

I think there is some other stuff that goes with being a white male these days, but I don't think those things are major causes.  They might contribute to the feeling of being disenfranchised. 

The other than white male extreme cultural beliefs are pretty self-explanatory. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 16, 2019, 09:06:59 pm
Today the average family has both parents working and often times at least one of them is working two jobs not because we have more frills but because the government in now taxing us from every direction. They tax our income then they tax our property and add sales tax on everything we buy. Before an item reaches the sales floor, they tax the manufacturer to the max which means they have to pass those taxes onto the consumer before the sales taxes are added on.
Back in the 50s and 60s my father fed our family of 10 on one main job. We had one of the first color TVs in the neighborhood. We had 2 cars, usually one was bought new and the other used.
We were able to keep most of the money my father made. The governments take was much less back then.
Our founding fathers went to war against the most power country in the world over 2 cents tax on one item. We are now taxed on every item and service and our labor.
Our founding fathers are rolling over in their grave and we all should be embarrassed fro letting these politicians do it.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 16, 2019, 11:32:18 pm
Quote
What also needs to be pondered is why the firearms deaths from mass shootings seems concentrated in white males and those with extreme cultural beliefs.

My theory:  The young white male shooter is no different than the gang banger.  There are not many white gangs, and so the extreme ideology becomes the gang.  They have no anchor, bad family life, and yes, mental illness.  They do not have community ties, church ties, or school ties.  They have broken or dysfunctional families.  Most of them have acted out for years before they get to the shooter stage.  They embrace something that they think gives meaning and eventually act out to prove themselves just as the gang banger does. 

I agree with your theory.
Add isolation from being a latch key kid and too many adult supervised activities to the list.

In the 1960s and 1970s we grew up outside the home after school. You learned how to fit in in that environment. You learned how to settle differences. Nobody got seriously hurt and offending others was the goal - LOL. We learned how to take criticism and dish it out.  You were shamed as a sissy (even the girls) if you couldn't take your share of friendly abuse. We organized our own sports and refereed our own games. 

Parents are trying to make the world too gentle and fair for their children. Real life is neither.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 17, 2019, 08:29:25 am
Incognito,
Quote
In the 1960s and 1970s we grew up outside the home after school. You learned how to fit in in that environment. You learned how to settle differences. Nobody got seriously hurt and offending others was the goal - LOL. We learned how to take criticism and dish it out.  You were shamed as a sissy (even the girls) if you couldn't take your share of friendly abuse. We organized our own sports and refereed our own games. 

Parents are trying to make the world too gentle and fair for their children. Real life is neither.
Modify message

Very true.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 17, 2019, 09:27:05 am
The Heavenly Father has endowed us with natural born rights.
I don't know what religion you are sighting but most catechisms I was taught from told you to turn the other cheek if stricken.  The only right "God" proposed was to enter his kingdom by following his teachings.  All other "rights" are BS interpretations from the men who wrote them.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 17, 2019, 12:34:16 pm
Quote
All other "rights" are BS interpretations from the men who wrote them.

So you would rather have the government interpreting what are our rights?  The reason we have "inalienable rights" given by our creator (even if the founders made it up) is that what the creator gives the government has no right to take. 

Again, choices.  Government control or personal responsibility.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 18, 2019, 12:41:30 am
Quote
When people of a military background start talking religion my butt twitches.  God is not a regulator.  He might be judge and jury at day of reckoning.

It is about what regulates behavior.  There is a reason communist countries ban religion, especially Christianity.  You don't have to advocate for a particular belief system to recognize that the belief system has value in a society.  Historically, societies have been built around them.  Doesn't matter whether it's live human sacrifice, or something else.  It is the glue.

Not sure why there is a problem with military and religion?  You seem not to have read much of what the founders or even past presidents have said.  Ever read FDRs d-day announcement?

Text of Radio Address - Prayer on D-Day, June 6, 1944:
"My fellow Americans: Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest-until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and good will among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.

Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

And for us at home -- fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas -- whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them--help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.

Many people have urged that I call the Nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

Give us strength, too -- strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.

And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.

And, O Lord, give us Faith. Give us Faith in Thee; Faith in our sons; Faith in each other; Faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.

Amen."


Noah Webster said,

"If the citizens neglect their Duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the Laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the rights of the citizen will be violated or disregarded"
"Every child in America should be acquainted with his own country. He should read books that furnish him with ideas that will be useful to him in life and practice. As soon as he opens his lips, he should rehearse the history of his own country."Every civil government is based upon some religion or philosophy of life. Education in a nation will propagate the religion of that nation. In America, the foundational religion was Christianity. And it was sown in the hearts of Americans through the home and private and public schools for centuries. Our liberty, growth, and prosperity was the result of a Biblical philosophy of life. Our continued freedom and success is dependent on our educating the youth of America in the principles of Christianity." Noah also said, "The freedom of the press is a valuable privilege; but the abuse of it , in this country, is a frightful evil. The licentiousness of the press is a deep stain upon the character of the country; & in addition to the the evil of of culminating good men, & giving a wrong direction to public measures, it corrupts the people by rendering them insensible to the value of the truth  & of reputation. The ecclesiastical establishments of Europe which serve ;to support tyrannical governments are not the Christian religion but abuses and corruptions of it. "All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible." No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people." Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States."

NOW FRIENDS, DON'T BE TRICKED INTO THINKING NOAH WEBSTER WAS A DUMB, UNHINGED, OFF THE WALL, JOHNNY COME LATELY;  FOOL...
HE WAS NOT.

Noah Webster Jr. (October 16, 1758 ? May 28, 1843) was an American lexicographer, textbook pioneer, English-language spelling reformer, political writer, editor, and prolific author. He has been called the "Father of American Scholarship and Education". His "Blue-backed Speller" books taught five generations of American children how to spell and read. Webster's name has become synonymous with "dictionary" in the United States, especially the modern Merriam-Webster dictionary that was first published in 1828 as An American Dictionary of the English Language.

Born in West Hartford, Connecticut, Webster graduated from Yale College in 1778. He passed the bar examination after studying law under Oliver Ellsworth and others, but was unable to find work as a lawyer. He found some financial success by opening a private school and writing a series of educational books, including the "Blue-Backed Speller." A strong supporter of the American Revolution and the ratification of the United States Constitution, Webster later criticized American society for being in need of an intellectual foundation. He believed that American nationalism was superior to Europe because American values were superior.[3]

In 1793, Alexander Hamilton recruited Webster to move to New York City and become an editor for a Federalist Party newspaper. He became a prolific author, publishing newspaper articles, political essays, and textbooks. He returned to Connecticut in 1798 and served in the Connecticut House of Representatives.
In 1806, Webster published his first dictionary, A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language. The following year, he started working on an expanded and comprehensive dictionary, finally publishing it in 1828. He was very influential in popularizing certain spellings in the United States. He was also influential in establishing the Copyright Act of 1831, the first major statutory revision of U.S. copyright law. While working on a second volume of his dictionary, Webster died in 1843, and the rights to the dictionary were acquired by George and Charles Merriam.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 18, 2019, 07:51:16 am
Nice history lesson on Webster.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 18, 2019, 09:19:19 am
Quote
All other "rights" are BS interpretations from the men who wrote them.

So you would rather have the government interpreting what are our rights?

What the hay do you think the constitution is?  A hand full of people deciding what the rights are for other people.  And as written not equal for everyone.  Something like the bible/bibles.
Some of the propaganda of our fore fathers centers around "We the People".  They never hoped this would come true.  They certainly didn't believe in it.  Even today people sight the phrase but don't believe one bit of it.

So to answer your question, whether you like it or not, government does decide what are rights are.  In our country "we the people" have some influence on the direction that government moves.  And with all governments the sector of the population with most of the wealth has most of the influence because money is power.  I don't ever see this changing even if by some miracle the world becomes united.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 18, 2019, 06:06:52 pm
Quote
What the hay do you think the constitution is?  A hand full of people deciding what the rights are for other people.  And as written not equal for everyone. 

This is not accurate.  As written, it is equal for everyone.  As implemented in those times it was not.  However, it was the thing that brought equality eventually for blacks, women, and assorted other groups since.   
Quote
A hand full of people deciding what the rights are for other people.

Again, not accurate.  It does not decide rights, but it does protect rights.  It protects our rights from government interference.  It specifically instructs the federal government (congress) not to interfere in our rights, but does not restrict, in most things, our state governments. 

Quote
"We the People".  They never hoped this would come true.  They certainly didn't believe in it.  Even today people sight the phrase but don't believe one bit of it.

Can you site your reasoning for this argument?  There was debate between the federalists and anti-federalist which I am assuming you have read, and it did have to do with the amount of govenrment needed, but I am not sure where you get the ideas for the rest of your statement.

Quote
So to answer your question, whether you like it or not, government does decide what are rights are.  In our country "we the people" have some influence on the direction that government moves.  And with all governments the sector of the population with most of the wealth has most of the influence because money is power.  I don't ever see this changing even if by some miracle the world becomes united.

there is some truth in some of this.  Money has always given power no matter the country or government.  However, we have chosen to give over much of our power in exchange for stuff.  If we were following the constitution the federal government would have little to do in our daily lives and little impact.  As it is, they are passing out the goodies and in return they expect your vote.  There's a reason those advertisements about throwing granny off the cliff were done.  to many grannies and others have a fear of the feds not passing out the goodies. 
There is a reason the current crop of leftists are trying to outdo each other with the "free" stuff.  You take from them, and they forever own you and your vote. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 19, 2019, 12:14:40 am
Good post Kathy.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 19, 2019, 09:20:15 am
As written, it is equal for everyone.  As implemented in those times it was not.  However, it was the thing that brought equality eventually for blacks, women, and assorted other groups since. 

It was implemented exactly as they planned.  and NO it was liberal minded people that fought for the change in the Constitution because it was wrong!
Quote
A hand full of people deciding what the rights are for other people.

Quote
It does not decide rights, but it does protect rights.  It protects our rights from government interference.  It specifically instructs the federal government (congress) not to interfere in our rights, but does not restrict, in most things, our state governments. 
Extremely naive.  All governments decide rights based on what the population will endure.
Quote
"We the People".  They never hoped this would come true.  They certainly didn't believe in it.  Even today people sight the phrase but don't believe one bit of it.

Quote
Can you site your reasoning for this argument? 
  When they used the word "People" they were thinking us not them.  Never did they think the general population would be educated enough to make decisions.  And it was liberal minded people, again, that brought education to the population.
Quote
So to answer your question, whether you like it or not, government does decide what are rights are.  In our country "we the people" have some influence on the direction that government moves.  And with all governments the sector of the population with most of the wealth has most of the influence because money is power.  I don't ever see this changing even if by some miracle the world becomes united.

Quote
However, we have chosen to give over much of our power in exchange for stuff.
  Yes we have, pitfall from self rule I suppose.  Some like it others don't.
Quote
If we were following the constitution the federal government would have little to do in our daily lives and little impact.
  We are following the constitution of today and it wouldn't have changed if the population of the US were as it was in 1976.
Quote
There is a reason the current crop of leftists are trying to outdo each other with the "free" stuff.  You take from them, and they forever own you and your vote.
No one has taken more then the present administration.  Not even close.  Empowered by the righties.  Now whether they own enough votes to continue gouging the american people will remain to be seen.  Unfortunately they have set the stage for future administrations.  So it is likely we will get screwed no matter what.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 19, 2019, 11:30:27 am
Quote
It was implemented exactly as they planned.  and NO it was liberal minded people that fought for the change in the Constitution because it was wrong!

I think you make the common mistake of thinking that the social norms of the time were enshrined in the constitution.  they were not.  The changes made to the constitution by amendment were done to enshrine the changes in the social norms.  The constitution was used to force many of the changes in what society did.  This has not always been done correctly IMHO. 

I agree that it was classically liberal people who forced many changes.  They were not liberal (progressive) as we understand the word today. 

Quote
Extremely naive.  All governments decide rights based on what the population will endure.

This is correct and all the more reason to look at the constitution as our law and protect it.  IT protects our rights.  Government will not. 

Quote
  When they used the word "People" they were thinking us not them.  Never did they think the general population would be educated enough to make decisions.  And it was liberal minded people, again, that brought education to the population.

Those liberal minded people who encouraged education were our founders. We had public education here before we were a country.  Jefferson and Webster, among others, created the first public school system for the post-revolution population.  What they did not want was a democracy.  They did not want the whims of the population convinced by whatever had roiled them up, to be able to rule the country.  (Think a Hitler or Mussolini, or some incident that stirred up emotion). 

Quote
Yes we have, pitfall from self rule I suppose.  Some like it others don't.

Yes, being responsible for ones own self and those around us is hard.  Much easier to turn responsibility over to the government.  In the same way the 26 year old finds it convenient to live in the parents' basement, so do the people find it convenient to not have to worry about anything and take what they are given.  We have decades of examples of how this works out, but hey, let's see if history really does repeat itself and try it again!

Quote
We are following the constitution of today and it wouldn't have changed if the population of the US were as it was in 1976.

I suspect you need to read the thing.  It's short and won't take much of your time.

Quote
No one has taken more then the present administration.  Not even close.  Empowered by the righties.  Now whether they own enough votes to continue gouging the american people will remain to be seen.  Unfortunately they have set the stage for future administrations.  So it is likely we will get screwed no matter what.

Can you be more specific?  What has been taken and by whom?  In what way are you being gouged?  Set the stage for what?  Screwed in what way?


Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 19, 2019, 02:27:59 pm

Quote
No one has taken more then the present administration.  Not even close.  Empowered by the righties.  Now whether they own enough votes to continue gouging the american people will remain to be seen.  Unfortunately they have set the stage for future administrations.  So it is likely we will get screwed no matter what.

Can you be more specific?  What has been taken and by whom?  In what way are you being gouged?  Set the stage for what?  Screwed in what way?

Acebird,
I need help with this also.

What has been taken?
The middle of the county was lost by the Democrats, and lost by mainstream Washington.  Donald Trump was the Hail Mary pass to the end zone to get the country back on the right path.
Accepting his personal flaws by voting for him shows you how desperate the people were for change in Washington. I would have bet back then that he would not have made it to the Republican convention....I was wrong.
And let's be a little fair. Mr. Trump inherited the inadequate ICE facilities and resources - among other neglected issues. Better facilities should have been in the planning stage by prior administrations (plural). Congress has been negligent in its responsibilities for decades. I don't remember all that many bills vetoed by the past few presidents against the will of congress. Let's not forget who is supposed to control spending and create legislation. It is not the President according to the constitution you are referring to.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 20, 2019, 08:58:36 am
32 trillion dollars plus interest borrowed from our friends in China.  A debt I am not sure we will ever get out of.  Blatantly stealing money from the military budget after being denied appropriations from congress.  That is unconstitutionally stealing power and destroying democracy.  Makes you wonder if he will actually leave when he gets voted out.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 20, 2019, 09:36:44 am
Ace,
He asked Congress to fund the wall to protect our country. They refused. His primary job is to protect the United States Of American. He is the Commander In Chief. That means he is the head of the military. The money was earmarked for the military so he can decide where to use it.
But you already knew this, right.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 20, 2019, 09:49:33 am
Acebird,
A quick internet search says the deficit is currently $1 trillion dollars.
So you are blaming Trump for the $32 trillion dollars debt (your statement - not verified) accumulated over decades?
The deficit is my number one worry for this country. It is not sustainable. To make my point, I thank the younger generation for paying for the stuff I am getting that they will pay for. It gets their attention.

Edited to add.We need to wean ourselves off of this spending merry go round. The problem with that is all the unemployed government workers and contractors. Sequester was a great thing. What ever happened. Oh yeah, neither party liked losing votes.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 20, 2019, 12:57:27 pm
Quote
Blatantly stealing money from the military budget after being denied appropriations from congress.  That is unconstitutionally stealing power and destroying democracy.

this was challenged in court.  The court gave it a pass.  It is a matter of national security.  Now taking money out of Medicare to pay for Obama care....Did you have a problem with that?  I forget.

Overspending is, and has been, a problem for a long time.  Our debt nearly doubled under Obama.  However, I am not sure where you are getting your numbers.  Our national debt is 22+ trillion and China is not our highest lender, we are.  the majority of our debt is held by the US by way of treasury and liabilities. 

If you want to reduce debt, you have to address liabilities.  No one wants to touch those. 

https://www.thebalance.com/who-owns-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124

Who is in charge of money/budget/taxes?  Hint:  Not the president.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Hops Brewster on August 20, 2019, 04:48:32 pm
I wish the perpetrators in El Paso and Ohio just had knives.  Or maybe we should regulate only the white people and let the brown people have guns.  That might change the number of terrorist shootings.
Trying to control the tools of violence only results in a difference in the number of victims.  It does not change the perpetrator carrying out his/hers motivation or cause.  Take away the guns, they use knives.  Or poison gas.  Or bombs.  Or cars.  Or aircraft.  Take away the knives, they use clubs.  Take away clubs, they use rocks. 
Taking away the tool does absolutely nothing to solve the cause of the problem.  It only masks it!
But no, you're too busy crying about the numbers (relatively miniscule compared to the world population) to do anything to actually solve the problem.
And that is a very big part of the problem!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 20, 2019, 05:53:48 pm

Who is in charge of money/budget/taxes?  Hint:  Not the president.
Correct that is why trump stole money and the ACA was voted on by congress, not stolen.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 20, 2019, 06:25:31 pm
Quote
Correct that is why trump stole money and the ACA was voted on by congress, not stolen.

the SCOTUS disagrees with you.  My point is that taking money from one program for another is not a new thing.  If you were not upset by one, you should not be upset by another.  The mission of the military is national defense.  Securing the border is national defense.  ACA was voted on by congress, challenged, and supported by the SCOTUS. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 20, 2019, 06:29:58 pm
First, there is NO military budget. It is the DEFENSE budget. He was spending it on national defense.

Second,  The U.S. debt to China is $1.12 trillion as of March 2019. That's 28% of the $4.07 trillion in Treasury bills, notes, and bonds held by foreign countries. The rest of the $22 trillion national debt is owned by either the American people or by the U.S. government itself.

Sorry, Ace, you are wrong, as usual.

""My point is that taking money from one program for another is not a new thing.""

No, Kathy, it wasn't, in this case. It went from the defense budget to defend, as was meant.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 21, 2019, 11:54:49 am
Quote
No, Kathy, it wasn't, in this case. It went from the defense budget to defend, as was meant.

Fair enough, but I don't think the border is listed under the defense dept.  While it is a matter of defense, the money was moved from one department to another and the court blessed it. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 22, 2019, 07:50:15 am
The monkey court.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on August 22, 2019, 08:06:01 am
Ace,
It has been in the past, thankfully we have a little more that half of the court doing their job of interpreting the constitution as it was written. Way too many times, they have been purely political and made decisions based on what they want the laws to be, instead of weather it was constitutional.
Obama careless being one. There is no place in the constitution that says the federal government has the right to force you to buy something just because you live here.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 22, 2019, 10:16:59 am
The monkey court.

Ace. Clarence Thomas IS a man of color and the Senior member of the Supreme Court but that does not qualify the court as a monkey court. Where is your liberal tolerance? Does the liberal leaning left such as you have shown to have such leanings, only show tolerance when it suits the liberal agenda? According to the left, and right, using the word monkey, when referring to a black person, is a racial slur. I?ve never known you to throw out racial slurs before.  Perhaps you did not mean it in this way?  Please clarify. Justice Thomas, irregardless of his color has shown to be a proponent for The Constitution in most cases. He should be considered a champion from the left as well as the right because of his Constitutional stance?

DescriptionClarence Thomas is an American judge, lawyer, and government official who currently serves as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He is currently the most senior associate justice on the Court following the retirement of Anthony Kennedy. Wikipedia
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on August 22, 2019, 10:58:55 am
Ben,
I cannot decide if I should chastise you or applaud your well played sarcastic reply using a leftist tactic.   :happy:
Even a monkey should be able to surmise that Acebird was referring to the court as fools in his post and not in a racially insensitive manner.



Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Hops Brewster on August 22, 2019, 10:59:49 am
To the left, a person only belongs to a specific "protected" group only if they submit to the left's doctrine.  Because Clarence Thomas, Thomas Sowell, and other black conservatives and libertarians that have become self-made are seen by the left as just more Privileged Whites that need to be destroyed.
so much for liberal "tolerance".  They only tolerate those that mirror themselves.
My question is; what makes left wing bigotry and hatred superior to right wing bigotry and hatred? 
My answer; Nothing,  It is political expediency, or political correctness.
My retort; hatred is hatred, and the left is just as wrong as the right, if not more so.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 22, 2019, 11:14:30 am
Ben,
I cannot decide if I should chastise you or applaud your well played sarcastic reply using a leftist tactic.   :happy:
Even a monkey should be able to surmise that Acebird was referring to the court as fools in his post and not in a racially insensitive manner.

 :wink:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 22, 2019, 11:36:52 am
@ Hops
Hops the definition of right and left pretty well, and much, sums it up.


left
/left/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
   2. relating to a person or group favoring liberal, socialist, or radical views."Left politics"

right
/rīt/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
   1   1. 
morally good, justified, or acceptable."I hope we're doing the right thing"
   2   synonyms:
   3   just, fair, equitable, good, upright, righteous, virtuous, proper, moral, morally justified, ethical, honorable, honest, principled; More
   5   2. 
true or correct as a fact."I'm not sure I know the right answer"
   6   synonyms:
   7   correct, accurate, without error, unerring, exact, precise;
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 22, 2019, 12:31:57 pm
Quote
The monkey court.

You realize that it was one the "conservative" Justice that gave you ACA?  While he had two choices in how he ruled and I was not happy with the one he made, as a strict matter of interpreting the constitution he was within bounds to make the decision he made. 

You seem fine with the SCOTUS as long as it is ruling your way!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 22, 2019, 02:18:27 pm
Instead of each Americans own political interest, every Real American should hope each ruling by the Supreme Court would always be determined on the Constitution. The Constitution should be the legal magnet that draws all Americans together, uniting each citizen at least on that matter, strengthening again the formula of United Stated of America as it should be. The constitution, a common ground that serves to enforce to each citizen, the Right to Life Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness..
Phillip
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 22, 2019, 04:24:13 pm
Quote
The Constitution should be the legal magnet that draws all Americans together

especially since it is the law.

One of the things that disturbs me most is the left wanting SCOTUS Justices that do not consider the Constitution to be the law.  They want to use the courts as a substitute for legislation or the vote of the people.  Because they believe their causes to be righteous, they also believe their causes should be forced on others. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Anonimo22 on August 24, 2019, 10:28:26 am
Well in Europe certain political groups were using box trucks to kill people since they couldn't get guns.

If you outlaw one device, they'll just move on to the next one.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 25, 2019, 09:28:43 am
In countries that outlawed guns or have them restricted have very low numbers of killings.  Certainly there are many ways to kill people intentionally but the numbers show a clear relationship to unrestricted gun ownership.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 25, 2019, 10:40:30 am
""In countries that outlawed guns or have them restricted have very low numbers of killings."""

That is BS. Countries that outlawed guns have more killings than the USA, just fewer per instance in the headlined ones. To me, total killings are the more important statistic.

When counting killings, be sure you include those done by the governments.Those folks are just as dead.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 25, 2019, 01:37:13 pm
Ace - I read a statistic recently that stated [paraphrased] "in the last 120 years, more people have been killed by their communist/socialist governments after being totally disarmed (complete gun control) - than all of the people killed in all of the worlds previous wars combined!"

I think your statement leaves these people who have died as a result of gun control/government-run-amuck as "un-accounted for".   
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 25, 2019, 03:53:23 pm
Quote
Certainly there are many ways to kill people intentionally but the numbers show a clear relationship to unrestricted gun ownership.

https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Violent-crime/Murder-rate

60% of our gun deaths are suicide.  of the others, 80% are gang related either in gang wars or the commission of other crimes.  Of those gang deaths, most occur in a handful of cities.

The "mass shootings" make a big news splash, but as a cause of death even in school-age kids, they are very low.  Accident of one kind or another is the primary cause of death. 

I just picked a cause at random

http://www.enddrowningnow.org/stats-2/

Should we ban swimming?

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 26, 2019, 02:16:02 am
Thank you Kathy for pulling down the statistics.

Here's some thoughtful points ...

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 26, 2019, 02:25:05 am
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Anonimo22 on August 26, 2019, 05:57:07 am
Quote
Its about the culture iddee if you feel the need for 300m guns you need to accept the collateral damage.

I am going to kind of agree with you for a change  :wink:  You missed one thing that I will add, and that is that it is about rights.

Our culture is very different from yours.  In spite of our leftist friends wishing to make us a dependant society, most of us reject this change in whole or in part.  This is a cultural difference from much of the once ruled European world.  We do not wish to be subjects and fought a whole war (in fact, more than one) to keep that from happening. 

Your "rights" are given and taken by your government.  Ours are understood to be natural rights. We, and they, are protected from our government. 

And so yes, we accept that there are people who will abuse any right and we do accept that collateral damage. 

The gun control issue has never been about saving lives.  There are a million ways that lives could be saved with restrictions and new laws about all kinds of things other than guns.  You could ban backyard pools and/or raise the driving age to 21.  1000s of lives would be saved.

I have to agree with Kathy. There is a huge cultural difference between America and Europe. And quite frankly it can be a bit frightening.

We don't want to be put into sugjection and bondage. We want to be free (responsibly free, and be good). We want to be at peace with others also, despite what a few nuts are trying to do to make people think otherwise. Europe and much of Asia also reject God entirely for the most part to the point of near Atheism. Europe embraces being in bondage. If you want an example of this look at, the European Economic Community (which became the European Union). Its leaders were basically Nazi bankers. And you can look it up. Herman Goring, and Walter Funk, also Walter Hallstein (EU and EEC leaders...look them up). (And when you add rejecting God into the mix (not to mention how all the churches in Europe have become museums...) you see a picture where with no foundation of trying to do & be good, you can be led astray down dark roads easily.)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-nazis-created-basic-plan-for-the-european-union-ukip-mep-gerard-batten-says-a7032221.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Hallstein

https://www.thetrumpet.com/17602-the-dark-history-of-the-european-union

Now we just had a Godless villain for a president for 8 years, but he wasn't the only one (And yes our government is imperfect now also). A lot of the stuff Obama did is coming out. And he tried to put us in bondage in many many ways. A lot of people mistook his immorality and cleverness for being good. A lot of the push back is to undo him trying to put us into bondage. (This may spill out into some ways that could be painful for people.)

A lot of the world doesn't understand this and then they go villainize the current president, who is imperfect. I'm not saying the current president is perfect but you can't expect that there wouldn't be some kind of pushback after all the crazy schemes that Obama and the Clintons did could you? (People have become highly interested in all the foreign money that came into the Clinton Foundation, and how that money has been shown by Judicial Watch to have gone into the democratic party and corrupt them by putting them into heavy vices. People have also become interested in 'The Clinton Body Count' in the last two years.)

My understanding also is that very few people even try to study these issues out. They just rationalize going with what's popular. But good and evil, is always going to end up with good outnumbered by the numbers of who wants to be bad. Then they go villainize Trump for trying to fix some things that shouldn't be happening.

When you look up things that Obama and the Clintons did, you can see why there's pushback to correct where things went wrong. Obama's 'Fast & the Furious' operation (he armed drugdealers on the border and they killed people), NAFTA & GATT also basically gave foreigners and corporations the right to dissolve the middle class and eat it up, the rise of robber barons again in the land (new poor, and disappearance of the middle class), foreign financial and cultural invasion into the US, the putting us in foreign wars, Iran Nuclear controversy (few look this up, past US & European leaders caused this and were secretly letting Iran buy nuclear technology through political bribery), unfair foreign business practices (that individual non-corporations can't fight against in trying to be self sufficient, the disappearance of self sufficiency, the socialism movement in the schools & linked to teacher hiring in the US in the last 20 years, and the list goes on.

The last president we had basically did so many crazy things that it put the US on a collision course with all these other issues. It was like the gun was fired and the bullet left the gun, but in slow motion in such a way as to it not causing impacts until the current president got into office. Now those issues are coming to a head after being in play, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop them from creating some chaos. So they blame Trump (and I hope he doesn't turn into a villain, but he could use his agency poorly before the end too). People fail to study this out or realize it. Then they brand the current president as a bad guy and crazy.

Study the issues out and where they came from. The current president may be a bit loud but look at where the issues are coming from. Look at why he's upset. When you actually look at it, of course people are going to be upset and want it fixed. A lot of these issues are coming out very similar to why Hong Kong is erupting. These people were growing up in a society that had a future for them, and then a bunch of rich elites came along and pulled the rug out from under them and now everyone is riled up.

You can't expect that people wouldn't be mad when they would find out that tarrif imbalances, foreigners, foreign currency & leaders bribing their elected officials & corporations to steal their livelihoods and impoverish them wouldn't get them riled up. And its not entirely their fault, but they should have woken up about it sooner.

The tariff imbalances by not just China, but EUROPE against the US did create a wealth drain. Many of these were heavy imbalances. If we exported a certain product to China AND Europe in many cases because of political bribes the very same product was getting a 10% or even 20% higher tax to export to Europe than to export to the states.

So to clarify, we're all getting along and none of us are upset with each other. All of us are brothers and sisters and should care about each other. And no one here is angry at anyone. But you have a recipe for societal collapse in play right now. But just blaming the current US president doesn't do any good. These issues were already in play for years. And people weren't happy that they were being cheated and lied to.

What's also interesting about this gun rights thing...the same week the Dayton Ohion shooting and El Paso shootings happened there was a third killing spree within just a couple days of each of those in California. But they left that one out of the news because it was a 2 hour Knife killer rampage. He killed 4 people and seriously wounded 2 others. But people wanting to strip away gun rights didn't want this one in the news.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 26, 2019, 08:56:02 am
But they left that one out of the news because it was a 2 hour Knife killer rampage. He killed 4 people and seriously wounded 2 others. But people wanting to strip away gun rights didn't want this one in the news.

It is not the left per say, it is educated people who can make sense of numbers.  With a knife 4 people were killed in 2 hours.  With a gun 29 people were killed in 2 min or less.  The purpose of gun control is to cut down the rate of killing.  No one believes it will stop killing.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on August 26, 2019, 09:14:57 am
No, gun control is to make people feel like something is being done to help, when in fact, it is doing more harm than good. Remove the multiple killings in gun free zones and then publish the results.  I DARE YOU!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 26, 2019, 01:29:53 pm
Quote
The purpose of gun control is to cut down the rate of killing.  No one believes it will stop killing.

That has never been the political point.  It is the emotional argument made by some of the political class to get the population to go along with them.  Regardless of the issue, the call is the same "OMG WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!"

Pick the issue that is embraced by the left and it has two things in common.  1. we are all going to die if we don't do X and 2. the net result is more power to the political class. 

Yes, it is shocking if 29 people die in a shooting.  Is it less shocking if 29 people die in any other way? 

In every shooting except Las Vegas the person could have been dealt with if existing laws had been followed, or if we had a way for mental health professionals and the public to work with law enforcement to get to crazy people before they did something crazy.  While I am not a fan of the idea of Red Flag Laws, I do recognize that most of these nuts are known before they kill and there does need to be a way to interdict before they have a chance to kill people.  This should apply to all the nuts, not just those who have guns.  We have people going around knocking people in the heads with hammers, going to jail, being let out only to knock someone in the head with a hammer again. 

What needs to be recognized and dealt with is that we have a problem in our society.  You can take the tools of killing away until all people have is plastic spoons, but if we do not deal with the underlying issues, nuts will sharpen plastic spoons and kill with them. 

Doing something for the sake of doing something is not a plan.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on August 26, 2019, 02:57:21 pm
Quick newsflash - criminals don't follow laws.

True story - I worked with a guy some (many) years ago. He wasn't "my kind" of person - which is to say, he lived more on the dark side of the law in his off-time. One day he says to me, "my buddy has a gun for sale". I knew that "their type" can, and do, move guns all the time without much concern - so I guessed that this gun must be "different" somehow. ... so (with some trepidation) I agreed to check it out.

What I found, was a full-auto FN-FAL made in Switzerland - arguably one of the finest Battle Weapons ever created by man. This gun has never been allowed to be imported into the US (that I am aware of). I didn't want to be caught anywhere near this thing.

Buuut I had some question for "them" ... "where did you get it?" And "how did it get into the USA"?

They answered, "all drug shipments come with the guns needed to protect them" .... boy was I in the WRONG place!!! ... they went on ... "we get stuff like this all the time"! .... I took the earliest exit possible - just not my thing I guess.

Here's the deal - Illegal Drugs are ... Illegal. Der! ... and there's plenty of them floating around, it seems. The drugs are shipped into the US ... Illegally, and daily. Der! ... and those shipments also contain Illegal guns. ...

.... SOOOOooo - gun control would have NO Impact on criminals obtaining guns ... as I have (unfortunately) witnessed 1st-hand. The only possible impact that gun control would have, is to dis-arm law abiding citizens. Period.

Here's a question - if the law abiding citizens of this country were disarmed, would the total daily body count go down? ... or up?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 26, 2019, 03:17:41 pm
 
Quote
SOOOOooo - gun control would have NO Impact on criminals obtaining guns .

I would have added the word more.   :wink:  We already have gun control.  We have laws about what we can own, when and where we can carry, and who can buy them.  Some states have magazine capacity laws, or ID for ammo laws.  There are now states that require a weapon to be locked up when not in use.  There are states where you can not transit your weapons if you are going from one place to another. 

States have wide latitude in passing these laws.  That means people have choices.  If folks want to live in a place that is virtually gun free, or severely limits your use and ownership of weapons, you are free to move there.  Of course, it is highly doubtful, and we have evidence of the fact, that those wishing to do harm are following those laws.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on August 26, 2019, 06:15:12 pm
>In countries that outlawed guns or have them restricted have very low numbers of killings.

Not true at all.  They may have less "gun deaths" but if actually if you look at the number of guns per capita and the number of murders there is no correlation between the number of guns and the number of murders worldwide.  Within a given culture you may affect some change or another, but most likely murders will just be done with the most convenient weapon.  Golf clubs and baseball bats and tire irons are very effective weapons.

Now if you care about saving LIVES instead of posturing... 480,000 people die every year in the US from smoking.  World wide smoking kills 5.4 MILLION people each year.  Drinking kills 88,000 people per year in the US and 3.3 million deaths worldwide each year.  Between drinking and smoking that is significantly MORE than half a million people a year in the US alone (568K).  Let's outlaw drinking!!!!  Oh... we tried that didn't we....
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 26, 2019, 10:38:11 pm
No, gun control is to make people feel like something is being done to help, when in fact, it is doing more harm than good. Remove the multiple killings in gun free zones and then publish the results.  I DARE YOU!

CORRECT.   
 


Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 27, 2019, 08:28:11 am
Mike it is not the number of guns per capita.  Most people that have a gun have many.  If a sane person has 100 guns it is the same as having one.  IMO gun control is not banning guns it is controlling what kind of person that will be allowed to have them or have access to them.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Anonimo22 on August 27, 2019, 10:29:11 am
CoolBees at the end of his comment said; Here's a question - if the law abiding citizens of this country were disarmed, would the total daily body count go down? ... or up?


I can respond a bit. (Also liked his neat story).

One of the jobs I worked at, there was a gal there who was married to a Brazilian guy. She was a real nice conservative person, and so nice to children.

One day the topic came up, hey how come you don't move to Brazil? You are are always talking about it and how much you like it there.

And she said they do both like Brazil more as a couple, partly because they can sink the dollar conversion rate really high down there. And she said they can get really nice big big houses from the salary conversion on trips. But she said that its terrible to live there because everyone's always getting robbed, and tons of crime doesn't go reported.

And she said basically most people know it, and it comes down to one thing; the criminals all have guns (predators). The normal law abiding people don't (Prey), and both sides know it. And its bad enough that even the police have trouble dealing with the predators.

Hope that helps.

This isn't offensive or bias to anyone, but just trying to describe cause and effect.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on August 27, 2019, 11:31:25 am
Mike it is not the number of guns per capita.  Most people that have a gun have many.  If a sane person has 100 guns it is the same as having one.  IMO gun control is not banning guns it is controlling what kind of person that will be allowed to have them or have access to them.

That seems to make sense on the surface, Brian, but the sticky point is who decides what kind of people will be allowed to have guns.  In my opinion, the old argument against "Saturday night specials" was racially charged under a facade of being against criminals having guns.  Even at that time, criminals had no problem securing high-quality firearms, but poor people, including a lot of blacks, couldn't afford better kinds of guns and were not about to go around stealing them in burglaries. 

Even poor people and those with most kinds of mental illnesses are protected by the Second Amendment.  They have as much right to defend themselves and their families, homes and possessions as any citizen.  The mentally ill are included in that protection. It's only when an individual steps over the line and becomes a threat to the rights of others that their freedomsbshould be limited. 

I have amrelative who is bipolar.  Under most conditions, he is no threat to anyone, but occasionally he has gone off his meds and become unpredictable.  Should he be permanently denied the protection of the Second Amendment?  What about his other rights under the Constitution?   If he loses the right to possess a gun, does he also forfeit the rights guaranteed elsewhere in the Constitution?

Nothing is as simple as those advocating limits on gun rights and other issues would like, I'm afraid.  People screaming for the government to "DO SOMETHING" might get their way, and what the government does in response just might (probably will) be the wrong thing.  Be careful what you ask for.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 27, 2019, 03:36:05 pm
Quote
I have amrelative who is bipolar.  Under most conditions, he is no threat to anyone, but occasionally he has gone off his meds and become unpredictable.  Should he be permanently denied the protection of the Second Amendment?  What about his other rights under the Constitution?   If he loses the right to possess a gun, does he also forfeit the rights guaranteed elsewhere in the Constitution?

This is where I get hung up.  We have a problem with loose nuts.  We don't have a mechanism for containing them, or forcing them to stay on meds.  Both have been deemed unconstitutional except in extreme cases.  Most of the people who have done the shootings, and have exhibited other violent behaviors, were known to someone.  They were known to law enforcement, mental health professionals, or friends/family.  In most cases, their "rights" came before the public safety or the officials did not do their jobs in the first place (Parkland).

At what point can we/should we, suspend their rights to protect ours? 

I don't have an answer short of forced lockup or forced medications.  If we keep waiting for people to actually hurt someone before we interfere all of us are going to lose our rights.  We remove the rights of felons to have weapons, and we have laws to deal with domestic abusers and weapons. 

A little OT, but one of the results of not locking up the mentally ill is that we have more mental illness.  There is evidence that some of it runs in families, and certainly being raised in a family with a mentally ill member is damaging.  I know one family that has 3 generations of Bipolar and BPD.  In the name of rights and kindness, what have we foisted on society for the long term?


Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 27, 2019, 04:10:05 pm
''At what point can we/should we, suspend their rights to protect ours?''

We don't, we continue to be strong in the rights to fully defend ourselves along with defending other good law abiding  citizens, and hope we never have to use the right to do so.  At lest our founding fathers had enough insight to see these things clearly, even in their day.  The problem is, our rights to defend ourselves, have been chiseled away a chip at a time by pansies, until no one is safe, leaving us where we are are now, with a open door to the predator evil which exist, which leaves the good law abiding citizens as sitting ducks to such evil minded people. Even a person who has a mean mental tendency does not want to be disposed of, at least until they think they have accomplished their evil minded schemes and plots of hurting others.  For those of us who wish no harm to anyone, but good to all, would never want to faced with the the challenge to defend ourself, but we should CERTAINLY have that option if ever faced with such a tragic event.  We Americans should NEVER go along with being disarmed by others who tremble in fear, who have not the courage to defend themselves, and same said, have NO right to disarming citizens who do.

 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.''
 Benjamin Franklin.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 27, 2019, 05:58:14 pm
Quote
We don't, we continue to be strong in the rights to fully defend ourselves along with defending other good law abiding  citizens, and hope we never have to use the right to do so.

I don't disagree, but as a practical matter, it isn't going to work that way.  I think we can already see that.  Also, as a matter of livability, we need to figure out the mental health thing.  I can't go to Portland without walking by people who are dropping their pants for no reason, talking to lamp posts, etc.  Not dangerous, until they are.  A few weeks ago one of them walked up to a lady and bashed her in the head for no reason. 

I am not in favor of going back to the days of locking people up for excessive novel reading, but there has to be a way to protect society from those who can't or won't be helped.  There has to be a way to get at those who are IDed by people as dangerous, but are untouchable until they actually do something bad.  There has to be a way to get those who won't stay on meds to stay on them or be institutionalized. 

As I said, I don't know the answer, but if one is not found pretty quickly we are going to lose the battle to keep our rights legally.  It is really bad on the west coast.  Our politics play a part in it, but even if we had people with the will to clean up the mess, the courts would protect the rights of the nuts over my right not to have to worry about going into town. 

IDK if I posted this before but this is what we are dealing with.  Seattle is not the only place that has this problem.  It is as bad here and worse in CA. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAi70WWBlw
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on August 28, 2019, 02:38:58 pm
Real statistics on mass shootings:
https://bottomlesscoffee007.com/2018/12/14/media-hype-questionable-gun-control-study-john-stossel/

This was on Youtube but it got deleted within a short time.  After you watch it, you end up on youtube with a bunch of anti gun propoganda...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: jvalentour on August 28, 2019, 03:10:25 pm
I just picked up this thread on page 7, forgive me if someone has posted previously.

Wiki seems to have a odd way of defining mass shootings, see link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on August 28, 2019, 10:41:36 pm
That seems to make sense on the surface, Brian, but the sticky point is who decides what kind of people will be allowed to have guns.
Same as everything else, lawmakers.  Unfortunately most lawmakers are also politicians and that is where common sense gets thrown out the window.  Clearly the problem in Seattle that Kathy speaks of is due to politicians.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 28, 2019, 11:30:45 pm
That seems to make sense on the surface, Brian, but the sticky point is who decides what kind of people will be allowed to have guns.
Unfortunately most lawmakers are also politicians and that is where common sense gets thrown out the window.  Clearly the problem in Seattle that Kathy speaks of is due to politicians.

Good points Ace
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 28, 2019, 11:31:43 pm
I just picked up this thread on page 7, forgive me if someone has posted previously.

Wiki seems to have a odd way of defining mass shootings, see link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States

Good point jvalentour.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on August 29, 2019, 10:52:48 am
It's strange how the question of guns and mental health have somehow gotten muddled together in this string and in the public mind.  I doubt that the shooter who opens fire in a school or other crowded "gun free" place is mentally ill in the sense of having a treatable mental illness.  Sociopaths or psychopaths (I'm not sure of the distinction between the two terms) have personality disorders that may not be treatable, so the situation in Seattle, Portland, etc., may not be in any way comparable to the ones involved in the mass murders.  Not being a shrink, I'm really not qualified to say much more. 

Great video on Seattle, Kathy.  Interesting how the mentally ill are still smart enough to go where they think they can get a lot of free stuff, and the politicians of Seattle have gone out of their way to accomodate them, to the detriment of the voters, who seem good at wringing their hands and deploring the situation, but act helpless and unable to vote those idiots out and replace them with some grownups.  It's going to take some "brutal" action to restore sanity to that kind of situation.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on August 29, 2019, 11:25:15 am
Quote
It's strange how the question of guns and mental health have somehow gotten muddled together in this string and in the public mind.

It's not strange in 2 ways.  First that anyone who would do something like a school shooting is unhinged in a way that the public recognizes even if the mental health community would classify them so other way and second, that we find out later that many of these folks have had interaction with the mental health community in the past.  Mentally stable people don't walk into a school and kill kids.

Quote
and the politicians of Seattle have gone out of their way to accomodate them

It is the same here in Portland, and in CA.  San Fran and LA have huge problems.  When I was in San Pedro last year the tents were visible from the hotel and went as far as we could see.  There are places not far from me that are public trails and parks and have become clogged with trash, crap, needles, and nuts.  People are attacked hiking urban trails.  I took the train from here to the zoo a few weeks ago and they are under every overpass and on every patch of green.  Like Seattle, they are accommodated and millions spend MONTHLY cleaning up after them.



Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 29, 2019, 12:43:10 pm
?Great video on Seattle, Kathy.  Interesting how the mentally ill are still smart enough to go where they think they can get a lot of free stuff, and the politicians of Seattle have gone out of their way to accomodate them, to the detriment of the voters, who seem good at wringing their hands and deploring the situation, but act helpless and unable to vote those idiots out and replace them with some grownups.  It's going to take some "brutal" action to restore sanity to that kind of situation.?

Zombieland  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on August 29, 2019, 02:30:31 pm
Quote:It's not strange in 2 ways.  First that anyone who would do something like a school shooting is unhinged in a way that the public recognizes even if the mental health community would classify them so other way and second, that we find out later that many of these folks have had interaction with the mental health community in the past.  Mentally stable people don't walk into a school and kill kids.

I would argue that a real narcistic sociopath is not mentally unstable, but has a brain that's wired from the outset to devalue anyone else and no amount of treatment is going to correct their condition.  Unlike someone with a mental illness, they are like a grizzly bear -- it's their nature to be the way they are.  Like Africanized bees, maybe?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on August 29, 2019, 03:30:04 pm
?I would argue that a real narcistic sociopath is not mentally unstable, but has a brain that's wired from the outset to devalue anyone else and no amount of treatment is going to correct their condition.  Unlike someone with a mental illness, they are like a grizzly bear -- it's their nature to be the way they are.  Like Africanized bees, maybe??

I tend to agree.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 01, 2019, 05:31:37 am
Here's the problem with red flag laws. If you aren't total liberal, you are targeted.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-marines-weapons-seized-under-oregons-red-flag-law-after-remarks-about-antifa-report
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 01, 2019, 08:44:55 am
Here's the problem with red flag laws. If you aren't total liberal, you are targeted.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/former-marines-weapons-seized-under-oregons-red-flag-law-after-remarks-about-antifa-report

Please explain the problem.  He was committed to a hospital.  Not for nothing we train our young to be killers in wars we don't belong and then walk away from their mental disorders when they return to the US.  Even as reported on fake news it looks to me to be a good call.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 01, 2019, 10:42:55 am
""it looks to me to be a good call.""

I guess you don't see too well, or not at all. He said he would only act in self defense, which just happens to be legal, but since it was directed at the terrorists antifa, he was forcefully admitted to a mental hospital, had his personal property seized without trial or cause, and you see it as OK? You must want to live in Russia or Iran.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 01, 2019, 11:01:29 am
""it looks to me to be a good call.""

I guess you don't see too well, or not at all. He said he would only act in self defense, which just happens to be legal, but since it was directed at the terrorists antifa, he was forcefully admitted to a mental hospital, had his personal property seized without trial or cause, and you see it as OK? You must want to live in Russia or Iran.

Yea, and treating him this way, after he sacrificed this time, and put his life on the line to VOLUNTARILY serve in the Military, after being expected to swear, by our very own Government, and accepting that requirement, being sworn-in to DEFEND The Constitution against all Enemies both foreign and Domestic, which multiplies the badness of this bad judgement situation. A good lawyer should tear this case up!!  Again; Maybe its time to call Dallas out of retirement!!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 02, 2019, 08:53:55 am
""it looks to me to be a good call.""

I guess you don't see too well, or not at all. He said he would only act in self defense, which just happens to be legal, but since it was directed at the terrorists antifa, he was forcefully admitted to a mental hospital, had his personal property seized without trial or cause,...

I see fine.  Maybe you do too.  What has happened to many republicans is they don't understand what is written.  What a person says doesn't matter it is how they act.  This is why you can't comprehend the evil of Trump.  There was cause, and the seizure is temporary.  His actions are the only thing that will make it permanent.  To volunteer to go kill people in another land that has absolutely nothing to do with the safety or protections of american citizens is the first sign of mental illness.  The military only fueled his sickness.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on September 02, 2019, 10:15:39 am
Brian,
I cannot believe said that.
Your favorite President sent him over there, put him in harms way and you blame it on him.
Wake up Brian to the real world.
😡
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 02, 2019, 02:45:32 pm
""it looks to me to be a good call.""

I guess you don't see too well, or not at all. He said he would only act in self defense, which just happens to be legal, but since it was directed at the terrorists antifa, he was forcefully admitted to a mental hospital, had his personal property seized without trial or cause,...

I see fine.  Maybe you do too.  What has happened to many republicans is they don't understand what is written.  What a person says doesn't matter it is how they act.  This is why you can't comprehend the evil of Trump.  There was cause, and the seizure is temporary.  His actions are the only thing that will make it permanent.  To volunteer to go kill people in another land that has absolutely nothing to do with the safety or protections of american citizens is the first sign of mental illness.  The military only fueled his sickness.

Brian,
I cannot believe said that.
Your favorite President sent him over there, put him in harms way and you blame it on him.
Wake up Brian to the real world.
😡
Jim Altmiller

(Quoting Brian)
?What a person says doesn't matter it is how they act. This is why you can't comprehend the evil of Trump. ?

Brian, Help me comprehend the evil of Trump that you see 👀 so clearly. He seems, (so far), to be a pretty straight shooter. Now I do clearly see the wrongness of JAMES Comey, Clearly trying to form, or at least conspire, a coup d??tat  to oust our, your, President. And falsely may I add.
Phillip
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 02, 2019, 03:57:23 pm
FBI agents are trained to be suspicious.  Comey took notes because of the suspicion.  The suspicion was right.  Trump is a gangster with all the corruptions of the swamp.  He came from corruptions, born and bred that way.
Ben a straight shooter tells it like it is but without lying.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 02, 2019, 04:30:23 pm
You have to enjoy trolling for attention. You can't possibly believe that garbage.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 02, 2019, 05:35:22 pm
FBI agents are trained to be suspicious.  Comey took notes because of the suspicion.  The suspicion was right.  Trump is a gangster with all the corruptions of the swamp.  He came from corruptions, born and bred that way.
Ben a straight shooter tells it like it is but without lying.
You have to enjoy trolling for attention. You can't possibly believe that garbage.

 
I do not know iddee.  There may be something funny going on here!  Brian is a New Yorker himself which just so happens to have recently moved to the big State of Florida. The funny thing is, until this hurricane, I did not realize he was once again such close neighbors with Mr Trump.  Mar-a-Lago  is just a rock throw from ACE. Brian may be secretly working for PT and trolling to keep the public no more the wiser just for fun! 
 :shocked:  :cheesy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 02, 2019, 05:46:07 pm
You may be on to something there. He does seem to go past the possible sometimes. Maybe he is working for Trump and just trying to keep it secret.   :cool:  :cheesy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on September 02, 2019, 06:26:05 pm
 :happy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 03, 2019, 05:08:30 am
Hey, Ace, 7 each killed in Texas and Chicago. 10 more wounded in Chicago, tho. Better gun control laws in Chicago gets a higher count.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-labor-day-weekend-35-shot-7-killed

If gun control worked, Chicago wouldn't have these numbers repeated weekly.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 03, 2019, 09:47:25 am
Walley think of it like alcohol.  If one state or county has laws against it it is hard to control when the other state or county doesn't.  That is why the laws should be constant for each state meaning federal control.
When you do your statistical analysis you should compare countries that have gun control to countries that don't not by city, town or state.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 03, 2019, 10:39:58 am
NO, Ace, dry counties don't have 20 times the drunks as wet counties. It's not a comparison. It's a fact. Many more shootings done in gun control areas than in gun available areas, whether cities or just buildings. Many more shootings in buildings that do not allow guns than in ones that do. Many more shootings in cities that don't allow guns than in those that do. Any way you look at it, removing the danger from the shooter makes him more apt to shoot. That's just common logic.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 04, 2019, 02:18:48 am
NO, Ace, dry counties don't have 20 times the drunks as wet counties. It's not a comparison. It's a fact. Many more shootings done in gun control areas than in gun available areas, whether cities or just buildings. Many more shootings in buildings that do not allow guns than in ones that do. Many more shootings in cities that don't allow guns than in those that do. Any way you look at it, removing the danger from the shooter makes him more apt to shoot. That's just common logic.

Yep, they do not like being shot back at. That brings to mind the shooter in Texas a few months ago which shot up the church. When an ARMED CITIZEN shot back at him he bugged out! But too late that particular time! An armed citizen had had enough even to the point of hot pursuit and put the killers lights out with his personal, right to own, AR 15.  They KNOW the dangers of an armed HONEST citizen...  So does the communist infiltrators who seek gun control.
Quoting Mao
(All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The communist party must command all the guns, that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.)
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 05, 2019, 08:37:00 am
Any way you look at it, removing the danger from the shooter makes him more apt to shoot. That's just common logic.
Doesn't seem to be working in FL and TX.  A whack job abandoned by the military has no fear of someone else with a gun.  It is in their training.  All most all mass shooters expect to die in the end and some make sure by doing it themselves.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 05, 2019, 08:42:37 am
""All most all mass shooters expect to die in the end and some make sure by doing it themselves.""

After admitting that, how can you possibly blame it on the gun??

That's exactly why you gun controllers don't make sense.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 05, 2019, 12:14:56 pm
We have lots of licencing and registration requirements for driving.  We have laws about how we drive and under what conditions we drive. Even so, we have people who ignore those laws and kill people by not following those laws.

Are all auto drivers to blame for those who break the law?  Should we take cars from all because some break the law?  Should we impose more restrictions on those who do not break the law, because some do and those few kill people? 

Sometimes auto accidents are just accidents.  A moment of distraction or a lack of skill.  Many of those accidents happen to kids between the ages of 15 and 21.  1000s of lives lost and damaged in that driving age group.  Should we change the driving age to 21?  It would save more lives than would be saved by gun control.

This is not and never has been, about saving lives.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 05, 2019, 05:20:46 pm
""All most all mass shooters expect to die in the end and some make sure by doing it themselves.""

After admitting that, how can you possibly blame it on the gun??

That's exactly why you gun controllers don't make sense.

Good Point Iddee
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 06, 2019, 12:12:58 pm
This video has some good points on the topic.

https://youtu.be/F6XTVuUP0Ho
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 07, 2019, 12:34:39 am
This video has some good points on the topic.

https://youtu.be/F6XTVuUP0Ho

Great video Alan
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 07, 2019, 08:33:47 am
After admitting that, how can you possibly blame it on the gun??
Personally I don't blame it on the gun.  I blame it on the gun getting in the wrong hands.  Can you deny that guns are getting in the wrong hands?  So the question is what to do about it besides burying your head in the sand.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 07, 2019, 08:55:42 am
This video has some good points on the topic.

He is right on a lot of points so again, how do you turn it around?  Funny he didn't mention the morality of a country going into another country for 17 years killing people who did nothing to us and do nothing to a country who directly attacked our election process and continues.  How about a president that tells nothing but lies and a segment of the population that says he is doing a good job.  He mentions porn!  And a president that openly admits to his porn addiction.  Yeah, morality you betcha.
Yeah, whole heartily agree that government should not raise children.  Neither should anyone else that is not the parent unless there is no parent.  But today that is not possible when the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 07, 2019, 12:21:24 pm
Quote
Funny he didn't mention the morality of a country going into another country for 17 years killing people who did nothing to us and do nothing to a country who directly attacked our election process and continues.  How about a president that tells nothing but lies and a segment of the population that says he is doing a good job.  He mentions porn!  And a president that openly admits to his porn addiction.  Yeah, morality you betcha.

Or the one who lied repeatedly about his medical plan, and weaponized our intel and other government agencies.  How about the one accused of rape and assault, then doing the intern under the desk? 

Even if your opinion of the current president is correct, we should not have seen any problems before him if he was the issue.

Quote
Funny he didn't mention the morality of a country going into another country for 17 years killing people who did nothing to us and do nothing to a country who directly attacked our election process and continues.

I am not sure which country you are talking about, but if it is Afghanistan I will agree with you that we should have been out of there long ago.  I do not agree that there should have been no repercussions for their allowing terrorist training camps.  They were given a choice and they chose wrong.  I still maintain that Iraq was a good move poorly executed, and then throw away by Obama.

Do you think we should attack Russia?  They have been messing in our elections for many decades.  They will continue to do so, as will other countries.  We do the same.  The only thing that is different about this last election is that the left woke up to it.  If it had been important to them earlier, Obama would have done something since this last time happened on his watch.

We might be asking the wrong questions about gun crime.  What makes people commit crimes in the first place.  What keeps people from committing crimes?  What legal and societal controls are we now missing? 

Do we actually have a problem as a % of our population and will any of the proposed new restrictions make a difference?  For instance, if most gun crimes are committed with handguns, why ban types of long guns?

To what extent does the 24/7 press influence both the shooters and our perception of shootings? 

If we don't ask the right questions, we don't get the right answers.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/16/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/



Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 07, 2019, 12:35:06 pm
""So the question is what to do about it besides burying your head in the sand.""

The exact same thing we do about drunk drivers and street racers, which needs to be done first by a long shot.

""Funny he didn't mention the morality of a country going into another country for 17 years killing people who did nothing to us and do nothing to a country who directly attacked our election process and continues.""

Sounds just like a liberal. Blame a 17 year war on a "less than" 3 year president.  If a bit more common sense was shown, maybe this president could get something done besides create another ISIS or such, as the last one did.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 07, 2019, 04:15:10 pm
This young lady may not agree with the gun grabbers. Reminds me of the old saying, better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

https://youtu.be/R624n6b4piE
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 08, 2019, 10:06:50 am
create another ISIS or such, as the last one did.

If anyone created an ISIS it would be Bush.  How quickly we forget.  We the US attacked a foreign country and over through its leader, unprovoked.  No war crimes trials were ever initiated.  Amazing how that happened.  Now just suppose the US was a tiny country and China came over and obliterated our capital and replaced our leader.  What sort of underground organizing do you think would occur to get back at China?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 08, 2019, 10:12:14 am

Do you think we should attack Russia?
We shouldn't be denying our own intelligence and playing footsy with its leadere.  We should be doing what we did before.  Financially bankrupting the country until the leader gets replaced.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 08, 2019, 10:26:23 am
That absolutely has to be trolling. NOBODY could possibly blame Bush for that one. Democrat congress OK'ed the invasion and Bush set up a democracy there. Them O'bummer removed all support and handed the country to ISIS. NO. Ace, I happen to know you are WAY too smart to believe that.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on September 08, 2019, 05:59:56 pm
That absolutely has to be trolling. NOBODY could possibly blame Bush for that one. Democrat congress OK'ed the invasion and Bush set up a democracy there. Them O'bummer removed all support and handed the country to ISIS. NO. Ace, I happen to know you are WAY too smart to believe that.
Same here.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 08, 2019, 11:52:50 pm
create another ISIS or such, as the last one did.

If anyone created an ISIS it would be Bush.  How quickly we forget.  We the US attacked a foreign country and over through its leader, unprovoked.  No war crimes trials were ever initiated.  Amazing how that happened.  Now just suppose the US was a tiny country and China came over and obliterated our capital and replaced our leader.  What sort of underground organizing do you think would occur to get back at China?

I will give you this Ace. the guards who were in charge of guarding Saddam Hussein,  after his capture, pending his trial, said that they had conversations with him and were quoted as saying, Saddam said Ronald Regan was a good man and admired Mr Regan. Bush the father was no good. Bush the son was no good. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 09, 2019, 04:18:57 pm
>Walley, think of it like alcohol.

Back when I was a kid they used to say that the difference between Tennessee (where liquor was legal) and Mississippi (which at the time was dry) was that you could buy liquor (illegally of course) on Sunday in Mississippi.

They did not go to Tennessee where it was legal
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 09, 2019, 09:52:25 pm
Bush the father was no good. Bush the son was no good.

I just saw a program today where Clinton and Bush the son were buddy buddy.  Both agreed that the country is polarized and it is hurting the country.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 10, 2019, 12:34:31 am
Bush the father was no good. Bush the son was no good.

I just saw a program today where Clinton and Bush the son were buddy buddy.  Both agreed that the country is polarized and it is hurting the country.

Yea, these Bushes and Clintons (at least Bill) have been chummy for quite some time. A lot of it is explained in Roger Stones book, The Clinton Crime Family. One of the reasons the left is trying to shut Roger down. I agree that the country has been polarized, and I would venture that Mr Trump would agree also?  At least President Trump, is doing something about it. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 13, 2019, 03:53:38 pm
Quote
If anyone created an ISIS it would be Bush.  How quickly we forget.  We the US attacked a foreign country and over through its leader, unprovoked.  No war crimes trials were ever initiated.

Yes how quickly we forget.  You can argue whether or not doing Iraq and Afganistan at the same time was a good idea.  You can argue the technique.  What you can't make, is your argument. 

Gulf 1 ended in a cease fire and Saddam agreed to certain things.  He never kept up his end of the agreement, he attacked his own people, and he sponsored terrorism.  Clinton tried to tamp him down with a couple of attacks because of his WMD, and he did the no fly zone.  What he should have done is bomb the living crap out of Saddams properties and labs, but he didn't have the balls to do that, just as he didn't have the balls to take out UBL. 

As a matter of geography, Iraq was a better place to invade than Afghanistan.  Unfortunately, we didn't execute or follow on well.  ISIS came out of Syria and it was gun-running to the rebels (ISIS) that was the reason no one in the Obama admin wanted to save the folks in Lybia.  Obama and Clinton female, made a mess of Syria, Lybia, and Iraq and gave ISIS the room to expand and set up territory. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 14, 2019, 08:14:21 am
We don't own Iraq, Afganistan or Iceland.  We are not the police of the world except certain leaders think we are.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 14, 2019, 09:42:27 am
We don't own Iraq, Afganistan or Iceland.  We are not the police of the world except certain leaders think we are.

For U.S. foreign policy, it?s time to look again at the founding fathers? ?Great Rule?
George Washington
Douglas Martenson applies a patina to a bronze statue of George Washington near the Philadelphia Museum of Art on May 25.(Matt Rourke / Associated Press)
BY ELIZABETH COBBS
JULY 4, 2016
4:51 AM
LinkedIn
Email
People who don?t get heard have a tendency to shout. Eventually they get mad. For too long, foreign policy experts have stuck their fingers in their ears when confronted by citizens ambivalent about playing global police officer.

Republican Donald Trump is channeling their voices through his electric bullhorn, whipping up the crowd and questioning the validity of institutions like NATO. Regardless of whether one likes the messenger, it?s time to listen as we honor the nation?s 240th birthday.

Trump is right when he claims that a policy that looks out for ?America first? is based on a ?timeless principle.? When George Washington penned his famous Farewell Address of 1796, he asked his Revolutionary War comrade Alexander Hamilton to edit the speech. Hamilton crystallized the president?s sentiment against foreign entanglements ? then shared by most ? into the ?Great Rule.?

?Interweaving our destiny? with others, Washington and Hamilton argued, would ?entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice.? America should therefore pursue economic integration with the world, but maintain strict neutrality in its feuds.

John Quincy Adams reiterated this principle on July 4, 1821, when he reminded Congress that America ?goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.?

At the start of the Cold War, President Harry Truman proposed a new great rule to replace the old. Like Washington, Truman had public opinion behind him. Following a vigorous debate, the U.S. Congress accepted Truman?s contention that it was imperative ?to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.?

Citizens agreed that it was the United States? job to defend the so-called Free World ? alone, if necessary. Anything less was deemed un-American. Decision-makers stoked this sentiment to forestall isolationism. They encouraged Manichean thinking to ?scare the hell out of the American people,? as Sen. Arthur Vandenberg put it.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 14, 2019, 02:44:21 pm
"We don't own Iraq, Afganistan or Iceland."
We have paid them enough in foreign aid to buy them several times. If we don't own them, we should at least have a say in how""our"" money is spent.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 15, 2019, 06:56:49 pm
Quote
We don't own Iraq, Afganistan or Iceland.  We are not the police of the world except certain leaders think we are.

You are correct, but we didn't own France, England, or Germany.  We tried staying out of that and how'd that work out for us?  We didn't own Japan or China and we tried staying out of that.  How'd that work out?  Because we did not interfere in Afganistan and what was going on, we got attacked.  Didn't work out to well...

We didn't own Tripoli.  We don't own lots of things and we can try ignoring it all yet again and hope for a different outcome.  Guess we can see how that works out.

I do think we get involved in things we should not.  There was no reason to get into gun-running to Syria, or taking out Gaddafi.  Once into Iraq and having it more or less stable, there was no reason to pull out and turn it over to Iran and ISIS. 

We should pick our fights carefully, and then win them decisively.  That is why I make a distinction between the decision to do a thing and the execution.  We have not executed well for a long time and it is simply because we are afraid to kill "innocent" people.  If that fear means we can't do the job, we should not take the job. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 16, 2019, 09:06:21 am
?You are correct, but we didn't own France, England, or Germany.  We tried staying out of that and how'd that work out for us??

No but one of our bankers here in America, Prescott Bush, was a NAZI sympathizer  and helped finance the NAZI war machine. George?s daddy. How did that work out? Just another reason our founding fathers warned us about becoming involved in foreign entanglements. 

?We didn't own Japan or China and we tried staying out of that.  How'd that work out??

No? We was up to ore eyeballs in China, we secretly had  ?Advisers? right in the middle of that. Along with England, which  up until a point,  had control of Parts of China including Taiwan.
When we cut off Japan?s oil supply, war was Inevitable.  Cut off our oil supply and see what happens. President Roosevelts? speech saying Japan attacked Pearl Harbor unprovoked, was not exactly true. Just another reason our founding fathers warned us,about  becoming involved in foreign entanglements. 

?Because we did not interfere in Afganistan and what was going on, we got attacked.  Didn't work out to well...  ?

Are you sure Afghanistan was behind the attack? Most of the hijackers were Saudis. And Osama Bin Laden was a Saudi.  But Afghanistan  was and is, home of the Poppy fields, where the biggest majority of heroine is coming from even TODAY. and what is Prescott Bushs son George Herbert Walker Bush nickname? Poppy of corse.    Hum
Just another reason our founding fathers warned us, and advised us, to select good moral leadership, and shy away from becoming involved in foreign entanglements.

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Hops Brewster on September 16, 2019, 11:05:59 am
What really bothers me is that the gun grabbers think nothing of taking away the personal property and civil rights of thousands law abiding citizens just to keep a gun away from just 1 scum bag or wacko.  What's the ratio of good guy to bad guy.. 2000:1?  Greater?
All the talk the leftists spew about civil rights, it's only a smoke screen to take rights away from those who are willing to actually stand for their own rights.  :angry:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 16, 2019, 11:20:41 am
What really bothers me is that the gun grabbers think nothing of taking away the personal property and civil rights of thousands law abiding citizens just to keep a gun away from just 1 scum bag or wacko.  What's the ratio of good guy to bad guy.. 2000:1?  Greater?
All the talk the leftists spew about civil rights, it's only a smoke screen to take rights away from those who are willing to actually stand for their own rights.  :angry:

You are right Hops, it is just a smoke screen. Could it be the left has a bigger purpose in mind?;   You Bet!!  Instead of placing the blame where it belongs, to the shooters, they want to blame you, me, and every other honest, hardworking, freeborn America citizen, and place the blame at our feet, for the bad things that this person would do. No different from the liberal thinking teachers in schools today. For example, When one kid in class will do something wrong and disrupt the whole class, instead of the teacher snatching that kid up, taking him and the board of education to the hall way and introducing him to the board of education,  (Paddling),  these teachers would rather blame the whole class and punish the whole class for what one kid will do. Usually missing recess. When a good ass whipping will quickly and effectively take care of the problem. Along with a lesson learned by the other students of why not to disrupt the class. PS The disruptive child had his punishment, let him go out side and play also.
😁
Shame. On this modern, backward way thinking! Has the world lost all common scene, have we lost our way?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 16, 2019, 12:25:31 pm
Quote
No but one of our bankers here in America, Prescott Bush, was a NAZI sympathizer  and helped finance the NAZI war machine. George?s daddy. How did that work out? Just another reason our founding fathers warned us about becoming involved in foreign entanglements.

You are correct.  There were various reasons for that support.  For most, it was because they saw it as a choice against Communism.  The idea was already spreading in this country and was certainly a threat to their business and lifestyle.  For others, like Henry Ford, it was an ideological melding.  He was quite the Jew-hater. 

Thomas Jefferson was one who did not want foreign entanglements, but he had to put that aside when our interests were attacked and the Europeans were unwilling to act. 

Quote
No? We was up to ore eyeballs in China, we secretly had  ?Advisers? right in the middle of that. Along with England, which  up until a point,  had control of Parts of China including Taiwan.
When we cut off Japan?s oil supply, war was Inevitable.  Cut off our oil supply and see what happens. President Roosevelts? speech saying Japan attacked Pearl Harbor unprovoked, was not exactly true. Just another reason our founding fathers warned us,about  becoming involved in foreign entanglements.

Correct again, but sanctions are something we still use as a way to impact a country without going to war.  Japan was allied with Germany and the reason for that can be found win Willson and his behavior post WW1.  We had investments in China and had a desire to protect those without going to war.  We were also helping the Europeans in the hope we would not become entangled in that war. 

It is also worth noting that the laws about supplying countries and investing in them were different then.  For better or worse, the government has since stepped in and regulated much of what was not regulated at the time. 

Quote
Are you sure Afghanistan was behind the attack?

They were not and no one ever said they were.  They gave safe haven to UBL and his bunch.  They were given a choice to expel AQ and not be attacked.  They did not choose well. 
This goes back to action and execution.  If we had gone in jets screaming and done the job in one swoop, there would have been no reason to hang out there.  There is not now a reason to hang out there.  It should have been a one and done.

We have business interestest all over the world.  Far more now than when TJ had to go after the Muslim pirates.  Those interests require a measure of protection.  That protection comes in the form of diplomacy, intel, and hopefully as a last resort, our military.  In spite of founders intentions, isolationism was never an option. 

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 16, 2019, 01:09:28 pm
Quote
No but one of our bankers here in America, Prescott Bush, was a NAZI sympathizer  and helped finance the NAZI war machine. George?s daddy. How did that work out? Just another reason our founding fathers warned us about becoming involved in foreign entanglements.

You are correct.  There were various reasons for that support.  For most, it was because they saw it as a choice against Communism.  The idea was already spreading in this country and was certainly a threat to their business and lifestyle.  For others, like Henry Ford, it was an ideological melding.  He was quite the Jew-hater. 

Thomas Jefferson was one who did not want foreign entanglements, but he had to put that aside when our interests were attacked and the Europeans were unwilling to act. 

Quote
No? We was up to ore eyeballs in China, we secretly had  ?Advisers? right in the middle of that. Along with England, which  up until a point,  had control of Parts of China including Taiwan.
When we cut off Japan?s oil supply, war was Inevitable.  Cut off our oil supply and see what happens. President Roosevelts? speech saying Japan attacked Pearl Harbor unprovoked, was not exactly true. Just another reason our founding fathers warned us,about  becoming involved in foreign entanglements.

Correct again, but sanctions are something we still use as a way to impact a country without going to war.  Japan was allied with Germany and the reason for that can be found win Willson and his behavior post WW1.  We had investments in China and had a desire to protect those without going to war.  We were also helping the Europeans in the hope we would not become entangled in that war. 

It is also worth noting that the laws about supplying countries and investing in them were different then.  For better or worse, the government has since stepped in and regulated much of what was not regulated at the time. 

Quote
Are you sure Afghanistan was behind the attack?

They were not and no one ever said they were.  They gave safe haven to UBL and his bunch.  They were given a choice to expel AQ and not be attacked.  They did not choose well. 
This goes back to action and execution.  If we had gone in jets screaming and done the job in one swoop, there would have been no reason to hang out there.  There is not now a reason to hang out there.  It should have been a one and done.

We have business interestest all over the world.  Far more now than when TJ had to go after the Muslim pirates.  Those interests require a measure of protection.  That protection comes in the form of diplomacy, intel, and hopefully as a last resort, our military.  In spite of founders intentions, isolationism was never an option.

''We have business interests all over the world.''
Yes we do and that is a good thing, I am all for business any where we can do business. As long as it does not undermine the security and best interest of our own country. The problem in investing in other countries is, we do not control other countries, nor should we, and with most all other countries, we are not equally yoked in our thinking culture, habits, religion, or rules and regulations. If we want to do business in another country fine. But If things go sour there, we should not expect our your people to go to war because a private business deal goes sour abroad.  Before investing our money as private citizens and private business, we should weigh the risk before we invest abroad, take the responsibility of that investment on ourselves, and if it goes sour, oh well we loose our money. Maybe we should have invested here in the good ole USA in the first place. George Washingtons farewell speech was vivid and clear, especially on foreign entanglements. We should heed to the words of wisdom of the past. And not blame other, including foreign countries for our own bad business decisions.

  ''If we had gone in jets screaming and done the job in one swoop, there would have been no reason to hang out there.  There is not now a reason to hang out there.  It should have been a one and done.''

I agree Kathy,  It should have been a one and done. We had the strength to accomplish this. The cocaine trade was ruined by that time as Bush and Clintons ''Little Mena''  operation had been shut down by now and they no longer had the ''luxury'' of using  the Contras as an excuse to bring all that cocaine. Ask the question, who really started the communist deal in South America in the first place? Let me ask you, who was head of the CIA before he was vice-president?
Now we have a heroine epidemic.. And where does most of this heroine come from? Yes ma'am, Afghanistan, last I've heard.  I really hope Mr Trump is a good guy and trying to do the right thing. What do you think Kathy?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 16, 2019, 03:01:13 pm
Quote
If we want to do business in another country fine. But If things go sour there, we should not expect our your people to go to war because a private business deal goes sour abroad.  Before investing our money as private citizens and private business, we should weigh the risk before we invest abroad, take the responsibility of that investment on ourselves, and if it goes sour, oh well we loose our money. Maybe we should have invested here in the good ole USA in the first place. George Washingtons farewell speech was vivid and clear, especially on foreign entanglements. We should heed to the words of wisdom of the past. And not blame other, including foreign countries for our own bad business decisions.

Well,  yes and no.  Yes, if you choose to make autos in a 3rd world country you should assume the risk, but

Take oil, as an example:  Before we were oil independent with our new tech, most oil was found in 3rd world countries or unstable countries.    Everyone needs oil.  Protecting the oil fields and the investments made by the 1st world oil countries was crucial to the survival of life as we know it.  It was not about protecting the companies, but about protecting everyone.

Shipping is the same.  Goods move by sea.  The shipping routes need to be protected.  This is why TJ found that he could not follow the good advice of GW.  The pirates gave him no choice. 

And I will repeat what I have said before which is that there can be no leadership vacuum.  Someone will step in and lead.  There are not many choices.  China, Russia, or the US.  OR some rogue country will do something like close a critical shipping lane, or blow up critical supplies and infrastructure (Iran) and we end up having to go in to fix something that we should have prevented in the first place. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 16, 2019, 03:05:17 pm
Quote
I agree Kathy,  It should have been a one and done. We had the strength to accomplish this. The cocaine trade was ruined by that time as Bush and Clintons ''Little Mena''  operation had been shut down by now and they no longer had the ''luxury'' of using  the Contras as an excuse to bring all that cocaine. Ask the question, who really started the communist deal in South America in the first place? Let me ask you, who was head of the CIA before he was vice-president?
Now we have a heroine epidemic.. And where does most of this heroine come from? Yes ma'am, Afghanistan, last I've heard.  I really hope Mr Trump is a good guy and trying to do the right thing. What do you think Kathy?

I think that there are things that are done in every admin that we might not like of we know about them.  As for drugs, people use drugs.  They will always use drugs and as long as they do someone will bring drugs to them. 
Drugs are a currency.  To that extent, it does not surprise me that we would use it as a currency in some places.  Right, wrong, good idea?  Most things are judged by outcome rather than the moral right or wrong of it.  History writes those stories.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 16, 2019, 03:32:03 pm
Quote
I agree Kathy,  It should have been a one and done. We had the strength to accomplish this. The cocaine trade was ruined by that time as Bush and Clintons ''Little Mena''  operation had been shut down by now and they no longer had the ''luxury'' of using  the Contras as an excuse to bring all that cocaine. Ask the question, who really started the communist deal in South America in the first place? Let me ask you, who was head of the CIA before he was vice-president?
Now we have a heroine epidemic.. And where does most of this heroine come from? Yes ma'am, Afghanistan, last I've heard.  I really hope Mr Trump is a good guy and trying to do the right thing. What do you think Kathy?

I think that there are things that are done in every admin that we might not like of we know about them.  As for drugs, people use drugs.  They will always use drugs and as long as they do someone will bring drugs to them. 
Drugs are a currency.  To that extent, it does not surprise me that we would use it as a currency in some places.  Right, wrong, good idea?  Most things are judged by outcome rather than the moral right or wrong of it.  History writes those stories.

Unfortunately you are right in that a certain segment or percent of people will use drugs. It becomes a pitiful state of affairs if our own government or some rogue segments in our government, become the dealer. Even so, our very own George Washington made a mint off of whisky, I suppose the drug of the day. And on top of that turned around later, and kicked the ladder down behind himself as he reached the roof.  This made many mad at the time. I don?t want to tell it wrong and will stop there. We are all human and fall short or the Glory of God. God is the real judge at least the one which counts, and will judge each of us accordingly. We all fall short in one way or another.  Thanks for you replies Kathy. I always enjoy reading your posts and thoughts... you are a gracious debater.
Phillip

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 16, 2019, 04:32:53 pm
Quote
Unfortunately you are right in that a certain segment or percent of people will use drugs. It becomes a pitiful state of affairs if our own government or some rogue segments in our government, become the dealer.

It's a Chicken and egg thing in all drug use.  I happen to think that the demand is there, or the sales can't happen.  There is a great deal of controversy about what we were doing and where.  There is no doubt the CIA did some drug running in other countries, but there is a lot of shadow about how much of that impacted the US.  At any rate,  it is a currency that we used all the way back to the 40s, so it's not new to our more recent history.

Personally, I'd get the government out of deeming certain drugs illegal and punish behaviors, not use.  We do that with alcohol and now pot.  Users are going to use.  Addicts are going to get drugs.  Drug use has had both a workforce use and religious use historically.  Mark Twain was impressed with the use of coca leaf as a workforce motivator.  He wanted to import it. 

Do drugs destroy lives?  Yes.  so does alcohol.  It is the behavior that is the issue.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 16, 2019, 06:00:53 pm
Quote
Unfortunately you are right in that a certain segment or percent of people will use drugs. It becomes a pitiful state of affairs if our own government or some rogue segments in our government, become the dealer.

It's a Chicken and egg thing in all drug use.  I happen to think that the demand is there, or the sales can't happen.  There is a great deal of controversy about what we were doing and where.  There is no doubt the CIA did some drug running in other countries, but there is a lot of shadow about how much of that impacted the US.  At any rate,  it is a currency that we used all the way back to the 40s, so it's not new to our more recent history.

Personally, I'd get the government out of deeming certain drugs illegal and punish behaviors, not use.  We do that with alcohol and now pot.  Users are going to use.  Addicts are going to get drugs.  Drug use has had both a workforce use and religious use historically.  Mark Twain was impressed with the use of coca leaf as a workforce motivator.  He wanted to import it. 

Do drugs destroy lives?  Yes.  so does alcohol.  It is the behavior that is the issue.

Yes, I believe one should have the Liberty to use drugs if they wish. God gives us the right to make our own decisions, to have a good productive life or destroy or own if we wish. I am in agreement with Ron Paul on this as long as the dope, drug users stay home and hurt no one while doped up. Restraining from infringing on their fellow citizens rights, liberties and do not disturb the peace.  However, since it IS illegal and off limits and punishable to ''certain'' dealers and not punishable to others, It is certainly wrong and inconsistent to allow the big men, the big dogs, to import, distribute and profit from drugs, while arresting, indating and throwing into prison others who are not hooked up in the system regardless of the reasons or end results of the motives of the powerful. the big men, the big dogs.  Is this thinking no more, than the same double standard that we now are seeing unfold with Roger Stone and Jim Comey?  Or Paul Manafort and Hillary Clinton? Look at who really did what and who the real crooks are. No ma'am it's time to drain the swamp, all the way to dry ground and dig a little deeper just to make sure none are hiding beneath the surface. Time for the swamp monsters, irregardless of who they are, or who their mama and daddy is or was, did or didn't do, to be held accountable. Am I one of the last few Americans, who believe this? Are there others? Are we in America so lost and dizzy headed that we have dropped and broken our moral compasses? Are there others who believe in balanced and fair justice, that lady justice, holding the scale is blindfolded, never peaking, blind to who is who, only seaking Liberty and Justice for all? Are there still Americans that believe right is right and know the difference in right and wrong? Who also know wrong is wrong according to our Constitution, who understand our original laws and wishes of our founding fathers and agree with such?  I certainly hope not but I am beginning to wonder.
:shocked:
Phillip
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 16, 2019, 06:44:41 pm
Quote
Are there still Americans that believe right is right and know the difference in right and wrong? Who also know wrong is wrong according to our Constitution, who understand our original laws and wishes of our founding fathers and agree with such?  I certainly hope not but I am beginning to wonder.

They are a declining number.  We now have a few generations that have been convinced that if there is a problem the government should solve it.  Interesting that many of the same people who believe the feds should control everything also applaud states ignoring federal law and legalizing pot   :cheesy:  The inconsistency of thought confounds me sometimes. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 16, 2019, 06:49:15 pm
Quote
Are there still Americans that believe right is right and know the difference in right and wrong? Who also know wrong is wrong according to our Constitution, who understand our original laws and wishes of our founding fathers and agree with such?  I certainly hope not but I am beginning to wonder.

They are a declining number.  We now have a few generations that have been convinced that if there is a problem the government should solve it.  Interesting that many of the same people who believe the feds should control everything also applaud states ignoring federal law and legalizing pot   :cheesy:  The inconsistency of thought confounds me sometimes.

Yes ma'am me too... 😊 Thank you Kathy.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 16, 2019, 10:51:50 pm
I read once about cocaine in New Orleans about 1900 having been used by 6 per cent of the population and a study showed that number remaining at about 6 per cent of the population at the time the book was published (I think about 1990). I am not saying that percentage were regular users, just that that many had at least tried it. 

I think a certain percentage of the population will do almost anything stupid that you can think of and that percentage has probably remained pretty constant throughout history.  Why get all excited to find that a small number of people are doing something we would not do?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 17, 2019, 07:54:51 am
I read once about cocaine in New Orleans about 1900 having been used by 6 per cent of the population and a study showed that number remaining at about 6 per cent of the population at the time the book was published (I think about 1990). I am not saying that percentage were regular users, just that that many had at least tried it. 

I think a certain percentage of the population will do almost anything stupid that you can think of and that percentage has probably remained pretty constant throughout history.  Why get all excited to find that a small number of people are doing something we would not do?

?Why get all excited to find that a small number of people are doing something we would not do??
I am not Dallas, in order to understand,  start at reply 167.  The meat and potato quotes were left out and attention was diverted to drug users.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 17, 2019, 12:11:54 pm
Quote
I think a certain percentage of the population will do almost anything stupid that you can think of and that percentage has probably remained pretty constant throughout history.  Why get all excited to find that a small number of people are doing something we would not do?

Because if you can attach the word "crisis" to something you can demand a solution.  The everyday person can't provide the solution so it is up to the government to fix the crisis.  Poverty is a good example I think.  The poverty level % has stayed about the same throughout modern history.  This, in spite of many government programs and frequent adjustments to the definition of poverty.  Is it a crisis?  I think not, and even if it is, the government is obviously not the solution since they have not budged the % with all of their taxpayer-funded programs. 

The only thing we might have done with our trillions spent on programs is to make people comfortable in their poverty. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Fusion_power on September 17, 2019, 12:52:13 pm
Given the money spent on the drug war, we could have had free medical care for every American.

I'm in the camp that believes mentally unstable people should not have guns.  The 64 million dollar question is, "how do we determine who is unstable?"
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 17, 2019, 01:30:06 pm
""I'm in the camp that believes mentally unstable people should not have guns.""

So am I. I think mentally unstable people should be locked up and cared for. All that are not locked up should be allowed to have guns. If they are too far gone to own a gun, they should not be allowed loose in the public.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 17, 2019, 03:24:13 pm
Quote
The 64 million dollar question is, "how do we determine who is unstable?"

Maybe not how, but who? Who would determine who is unstable?  According to the last admin, as a veteran and conservative, I might be unstable. 
 Most of the news making shooters have a history known to the mental health community and/or the police.  Many of them were already ineligible to legally buy a weapon.  Some should have been, but because of leftist policy, were never on record.  Parkrose shooter. 

I am not a fan of red flag laws in general but I do think that in many cases the criminal has already made a threat or signaled that they were thinking of doing violence.  In those cases, there needs to be a way to interdict.  Domestic violence cases also need to be closely examined to make sure the abuser does not have access or tools to further abuse. 

The thing I keep coming back to is that all the actions taken by the nut or the criminal are already illegal.  Which new laws would make it SO illegal that they would rethink their actions?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 17, 2019, 05:48:43 pm
>If they are too far gone to own a gun, they should not be allowed loose in the public.

If they are too far gone to own a gun, they certainly should not be driving a car or allowed to own a baseball bat, or a ktchen knife...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 18, 2019, 12:19:29 pm
>If they are too far gone to own a gun, they should not be allowed loose in the public.

If they are too far gone to own a gun, they certainly should not be driving a car or allowed to own a baseball bat, or a ktchen knife...

 ... Or fly airplanes.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 18, 2019, 10:12:56 pm
>If they are too far gone to own a gun, they should not be allowed loose in the public.

If they are too far gone to own a gun, they certainly should not be driving a car or allowed to own a baseball bat, or a ktchen knife...

 ... Or fly airplanes.

You are both right!! Lets add a sling blade to the list; remember the movie with Billy Bob Thornton? :wink:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 21, 2019, 11:06:53 am
Which new laws would make it SO illegal that they would rethink their actions?

Unfortunately, and I keep saying this banning the tool is the easy way in most peoples minds that are not pro gun.  The NRA is causing the problem because they stonewall any logical thinking ... it is us against them.  And I said this before, the us's are going to loose eventually and when all is said and done you can thank the NRA.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 21, 2019, 11:57:07 am
Quote
The NRA is causing the problem because they stonewall any logical thinking ... it is us against them.  And I said this before, the us's are going to loose eventually and when all is said and done you can thank the NRA.

Let me ask you two questions and I hope you will answer this time.

1. Please give some examples of the NRA blocking logical thinking?

2.  If we did not have a group to lobby for us, where do you think we would be right now on gun ownership?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 21, 2019, 12:34:42 pm
""banning the tool is the easy way in most peoples minds ""

Is this what you would call a "logical way of thinking"?  If so, you definitely need help. Personally, I think it's just more of your trolling. I don't believe you really feel that way.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 21, 2019, 01:09:20 pm
Quote
The NRA is causing the problem because they stonewall any logical thinking ... it is us against them.  And I said this before, the us's are going to loose eventually and when all is said and done you can thank the NRA.

Let me ask you two questions and I hope you will answer this time.

1. Please give some examples of the NRA blocking logical thinking?

2.  If we did not have a group to lobby for us, where do you think we would be right now on gun ownership?

The basic question in my opinion Is this; Do or do we not believe the 2nd Amendment is for our protection, or our harm? I say not only is it for our protection as individuals, but for the protection of our American Way of Life; To protect our very Republic of the United States, and its Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Let me ask the question, what if we were to have a rogue segment infiltrate our government and decide to do away with our more perfect union from the inside? How would we as common everyday citizens unite and defend our homeland, our Constitution, our America way of life against the obvious traders, if each citizen was un-armed? Is this not the main purpose of the Second Amendment in the first place? It was not placed there for squirrel hunting! I will venture to say, without the second amendment, this would most likely have already taken place, (the destruction of our Constitution). I will go on to say that the American way of life that we have known for the past Two-hundred and forty-six years would have already perished if it were not for the Security of the Second Amendment. I also believe that the opposing forces (of the freedom and rights that we now and know and enjoy) realize this and are doing everything in their power to water down, or completely drown the Second Amendment. Remember why we broke away for England in the first place? I know its just a movie but watch the Patriot.
My fellow Americans, Be Observant , be Aware, and be wise as serpents, yet harmless as doves!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 21, 2019, 01:24:09 pm
Pro gun?  I have a number of guns, but I doubt that makes me pro gun.   I also own a number of hammers, but that doesn?t make me pro hammer.  I also own several each of pliers, screw drivers, wrenches and knives.  If someone wanted to ban hammers because hammers have been used to kill people, I would be ready to fight for my right to own hammers. 

Sure, guns are singled out for protection  in our founding document.  That must be because the founders sensed that some people would seek to disarm the population.  They did not have that same sense about hammers, pliers, wrenches, screw drivers and knives, maybe because none of those things are very effective in defending us from people with tyrannical intentions.

I am pro Second Amendment, but I am also pro First Amendment and pro all the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.  Which amendments would you like to see abolished? 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 21, 2019, 01:33:56 pm
Quote
The NRA is causing the problem because they stonewall any logical thinking ... it is us against them.  And I said this before, the us's are going to loose eventually and when all is said and done you can thank the NRA.

Let me ask you two questions and I hope you will answer this time.

1. Please give some examples of the NRA blocking logical thinking?

2.  If we did not have a group to lobby for us, where do you think we would be right now on gun ownership?

The basic question in my opinion Is this; Do or do we not believe the 2nd Amendment is for our protection, or our harm? I say not only is it for our protection as individuals, but for the protection of our American Way of Life; To protect our very Republic of the United States, and its Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Let me ask the question, what if we were to have a rogue segment infiltrate our government and decide to do away with our more perfect union from the inside? How would we as common everyday citizens unite and defend our homeland, our Constitution, our America way of life against the obvious traders, if each citizen was un-armed? Is this not the main purpose of the Second Amendment in the first place? It was not placed there for squirrel hunting! I will venture to say, without the second amendment, this would most likely have already taken place, (the destruction of our Constitution). I will go on to say that the American way of life that we have known for the past Two-hundred and forty-six years would have already perished if it were not for the Security of the Second Amendment. I also believe that the opposing forces (of the freedom and rights that we now and know and enjoy) realize this and are doing everything in their power to water down, or completely drown the Second Amendment. Remember why we broke away for England in the first place? I know its just a movie but watch the Patriot.
My fellow Americans, Be Observant , be Aware, and be wise as serpents, yet harmless as doves!

Pro gun?  I have a number of guns, but I doubt that makes me pro gun.   I also own a number of hammers, but that doesn?t make me pro hammer.  I also own several each of pliers, screw drivers, wrenches and knives.  If someone wanted to ban hammers because hammers have been used to kill people, I would be ready to fight for my right to own hammers. 

Sure, guns are singled out for protection  in our founding document.  That must be because the founders sensed that some people would seek to disarm the population.  They did not have that same sense about hammers, pliers, wrenches, screw drivers and knives, maybe because none of those things are very effective in defending us from people with tyrannical intentions.

I am pro Second Amendment, but I am also pro First Amendment and pro all the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.  Which amendments would you like to see abolished? 

No not ONE Dallas, you said that very well!
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: salvo on September 21, 2019, 04:14:02 pm
Make no mistake about it folks.

Once they have our guns,... they'll be coming for our Bibles!

Sal
Just another Bitter Clinger
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 21, 2019, 06:03:49 pm
Make no mistake about it folks.

Once they have our guns,... they'll be coming for our Bibles!

Sal
Just another Bitter Clinger


Ain't that the truth. Amen.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 21, 2019, 09:04:01 pm
Make no mistake about it folks.

Once they have our guns,... they'll be coming for our Bibles!

Sal
Just another Bitter Clinger


Ain't that the truth. Amen.

Most likely so. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 22, 2019, 10:07:44 am
Quote
The NRA is causing the problem because they stonewall any logical thinking ... it is us against them.  And I said this before, the us's are going to loose eventually and when all is said and done you can thank the NRA.

Let me ask you two questions and I hope you will answer this time.

1. Please give some examples of the NRA blocking logical thinking?

2.  If we did not have a group to lobby for us, where do you think we would be right now on gun ownership?

1 Registration, red flag, prosecution for laws that exist.
2 Far better off because you are going to lose some privileges to own certain fire arms.  That is how it goes with all or nothing.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 22, 2019, 11:09:39 am
"Registration,"   Of persons, yes, of each gun, no.
 "red flag," so if your teenage daughter gets mad at you for not allowing her out after midnight, you would be all right with her claiming you are acting violent and them taking all your guns??  NO THANK YOU
 "prosecution for laws that exist."  Links, please??  Are you referring to laws that are being challenged as unconstitutional?

""2 Far better off because you are going to lose some privileges to own certain fire arms.""  Better known as one bite at a time, until all are gone.

"That is how it goes with all or nothing.  That's right. We say NONE, they say ALL. They will never be happy with part way. We won't either, as the constitution doesn't say part way.It says  "Right to bear arms."
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 22, 2019, 11:27:09 am
The NRA is opposed to registration because that always leads to confiscation.

I don't know if the NRA has taken a position on Red Flag laws.  I think that is a mixed bag.  Depends on how the law is written and what raises the red flag.

The NRA is all for enforcing existing laws.  It's the politicians and US attorneys who refuse to tuck people in jail who sell guns illegally, for example, like the Obama administration did in selling guns to Mexican drug cartels and illigally exporting them to Mexico.

And what Iddee says X2.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 22, 2019, 11:33:10 am
Quoting iddee
"That is how it goes with all or nothing.  That's right. We say NONE, they say ALL. They will never be happy with part way. We won't either, as the constitution doesn't say part way.It says  "Right to bear arms."

I am with you on this iddee and so was our Founding, Patriot Fathers. You know, I have noticed that  ''most''  of the proponents of breaking The
Constitution are not far back generation, rooted fellow Citizens. Check them out. The biggest majority are recent immigrants or from family's of recent immigrants , only two or three generations back. These newer citizens, opposing and disregarding our Constitution,  just don't seem to have the love for this Land, (or the appreciation of the sacrifices and wisdom that our founding fathers possessed), and our Constitution as our long time, many generation, deep rooted citizens. Even though we have welcomed them here with open outstretched arms!! Is seems they do not want to just join us, but ruin a good thing which is for All Citizens, both older and newer. If our Constitution has a flaw, I would think this may have been the biggest one. I don't know, what are your thoughts?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 22, 2019, 12:24:47 pm
Quote
1 Registration, red flag, prosecution for laws that exist.
2 Far better off because you are going to lose some privileges to own certain fire arms.  That is how it goes with all or nothing.

The only thing I have heard anyone say is what has been said here.  How red flag laws are written and enforced is the question.  So far, I have not seen a draft of any proposed laws.  While I think most of us are in favor of keeping dangerous people from getting weapons, we need to be sure they narrowly define what a dangerous person is.

We have already lost the ability to own certain weapons.  We also have well-funded groups like Any Town who advocate for disarming the public, and politicians openly talking about confiscation...so I ask again:  If there is no one to lobby for our protection under the 2nd, what do you think eventually happens to private ownership of weapons?

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 22, 2019, 01:16:52 pm
When the human element is involved, there is no perfect solution. The founding fathers had it as close to perfect as could be expected. Stick to the Constitution and let that be that, to try to improve it will more than likely mess it up. Nuts are nothing new. The Founding Fathers was well aware of this segment of human faults and falls.  Love, be kind, curious, and all good things, but in the case of the nuts, be as iddee; be ready to defend yourselves and your fellow citizens in the case of an emergency.   
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 22, 2019, 01:22:03 pm
... the constitution doesn't say part way.It says  "Right to bear arms."

I thank God every day that I've have been allowed to live in a country where I can be a free citizen - and no group or individual is willing to try to take those freedoms away by force, because they are afraid that I/we would sand up and say "I don't think so!" ... and we can make that stick. This is the true freedom the 2nd amendment brings. Because I have a rifle locked in a safe - there is peace. Because I can say "No" - there is no need to open the safe.

I most definitely pray that the day will never come that I need to open that safe. (Except for the occasional Elk Steak of course  :cool:)
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 22, 2019, 01:33:14 pm
...so I ask again:  If there is no one to lobby for our protection under the 2nd, what do you think eventually happens to private ownership of weapons?

Kathy - the answer is: We would have to use them if we wanted to keep them - at that point. ... I certainly hope that day never comes.

Some here may remember that I take a dim view of the NRA - but make no mistake, I'm eternally thankful for the job they are (trying) to do.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 22, 2019, 02:01:48 pm
...so I ask again:  If there is no one to lobby for our protection under the 2nd, what do you think eventually happens to private ownership of weapons?

Kathy - the answer is: We would have to use them if we wanted to keep them - at that point. ... I certainly hope that day never comes.

Some here may remember that I take a dim view of the NRA - but make no mistake, I'm eternally thankful for the job they are (trying) to do.

I would never, ever,  want to be put in a position that I would have to use a weapon, any weapon to hurt someone although it be in defense, I agree Alan, I hope that day never comes.  We are so blessed here, I only wish the blinders would be removed that all of our citizens could clearly see, in a good way, just how blessed we Americans really are. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 23, 2019, 08:59:03 am
If there is no one to lobby for our protection under the 2nd, what do you think eventually happens to private ownership of weapons?
As long as the owners act in a responsible way the second amendment will not be revoked.  The NRA is not acting in a responsible way so that representation puts the 2nd at risk of being changed.  There are many responsible gun owners in this country.  They are not all republicans or a member of the NRA.  The NRA will drive gun ownership away exactly as the labor unions drove jobs away.  All or nothing doesn't work too well in a democracy.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 23, 2019, 09:15:20 am
The NRA is opposed to registration because that always leads to confiscation.

Interesting conclusion ... Your car is registered and millions are killed by cars so how come they aren't banned and confiscated?  The fact of the matter is if "they" come to confiscate all your weapons just give them all to "them".  Use your car to run over "them".  The end result will be the same.  You will kill more of "them" and stand a chance of temporarily getting away.
Dallas, the point is to confiscate weapons from people who should not have them even if it is only temporary.  Are you responsible?  Then what is your worry?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 23, 2019, 09:22:35 am
That's right. We say NONE, they say ALL.

Yupp, there are two minority groups.  The purpose of a democracy is so the minority groups do not run the country.  Lobbyist screw up a democracy.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 23, 2019, 10:12:05 am
The NRA is opposed to registration because that always leads to confiscation.

Interesting conclusion ... Your car is registered and millions are killed by cars so how come they aren't banned and confiscated?  The fact of the matter is if "they" come to confiscate all your weapons just give them all to "them".  Use your car to run over "them".  The end result will be the same.  You will kill more of "them" and stand a chance of temporarily getting away.
Dallas, the point is to confiscate weapons from people who should not have them even if it is only temporary.  Are you responsible?  Then what is your worry?


Gee, it?s so simple the way you explain it, Ace.  Why didn?t the people the Nazis deprived of guns think of that?  Or the ones that fell under Soviet or Communist Chinese, or the Cambodians?  I guess they were all just stupid.

Confiscation only occurs when the people have something the people in power want or want the population not to have.  Like the farms the Kulaks had in Russia, or the three-bedroom apartments a lot of Russians had ? the Bolsheviks very wisely saw those apartments were large enough for six or more families, so they confiscated the surplus space and gave it it the homeless.  In the case of the Kulaks, the Bolsheviks just killed the farmers and their families and turned the farms into collectives, to be run by committees, most of which knew nothing about farming.  But, hey, they were good party members, which is what really counts.

If automobiles started being used as weapons, they would be be banned instantly, and since there?s no way to easily conceal them, the confiscation would be accomplished quickly.  The steel in them would be turned into munitions for the state and you would be allowed to ride your bicycle to work at the munitions factory, provided your political commissar approved your job application. 

When will you wake up and try living in the real world, my friend? 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 23, 2019, 11:06:42 am
The NRA is opposed to registration because that always leads to confiscation.

Dallas, the point is to confiscate weapons from people who should not have them even if it is only temporary.  Are you responsible?  Then what is your worry?

I would like nothing better than to deny access to guns to those who either temporarily or permanently exhibit a danger to others.  In my legal practice, I lost eight clients murdered by spouses who were unable to cope with the fact that their marriage was over.  I have seen several people with mental illnesses that should have been grounds for removing guns from their reach, but because law enforcement was ineffective, they still had access to guns.  In one case, I had a client who was clinically depressed.  He actually had a rifle taped to his torso with the muzzle under his chin and was threatening to pull the trigger.  He was a danger to himself, sure, but I could not see any threat to anyone else.  Nevertheless, a young cop was telling him to put the gun down (how, with it taped to him?) and pointed his weapon at my client.  I placed myself between the cop and the client to (hopefully) keep the cop from shooting, talked to the client a while, calmed him and the cop both down and got the rifle from under the client?s chin.  He did pull the trigger, but the bullet went into the air past his head.  Just so I don?t appear to be bragging too much, or make myself out as brave (since the rifle was no threat to me) and  the cop?s sergeant (who knew me) and the client?s father came during all this and helped a great deal in defusing the situation.  My real point is that I understand about needing to keep guns from people who should not have them, but I have a lot of trouble with who makes the decision and what you mean by ?temporary?. Once the police in some places have your guns in their hands they quickly consider them their guns.  It?s a lot like any property seizure.  I?ve had to get court orders to force police to return vehicles after acquittals.  They really, really wanted to keep those nice wheels so they could use them or turn them into cash for their departments. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 23, 2019, 01:26:56 pm
Quote
The NRA is not acting in a responsible way so that representation puts the 2nd at risk of being changed. 

Examples please.  If you make a statement like this you need to be able to back it up with specifics.

Quote
Interesting conclusion ... Your car is registered and millions are killed by cars so how come they aren't banned and confiscated?  The fact of the matter is if "they" come to confiscate all your weapons just give them all to "them".  Use your car to run over "them".  The end result will be the same.  You will kill more of "them" and stand a chance of temporarily getting away.
Dallas, the point is to confiscate weapons from people who should not have them even if it is only temporary.  Are you responsible?  Then what is your worry?

Car registration and licencing is about collecting money.  It is also a state matter. 
The potential problem with red flag laws is in how they are written and how they might be implemented.  We have a woman here who was undergoing cancer treatment and staying in one of those places that are offered close to the hospital.  One of the nurses overheard her talking about her pro-life stance and made a report to CPS about how she was abusing one of her kids.  The family was kicked out of the residence because there was an open CPS case.  Even though all the other hospital staff, including her doctor, backed the family she now has to fight a CPS case because someone didn't like the fact that she was pro-life.

Deciding someone is not responsible can be a pretty subjective call.  The last admin warned that people like me who are conservative, former military, etc. were potential crazy people who needed to be watched.  Who determines and how, which of us are "responsible"?

Quote
Yupp, there are two minority groups.  The purpose of a democracy is so the minority groups do not run the country.  Lobbyist screw up a democracy.

No, the purpose of democracy is to make sure the minority has no voice.  It is mob rule.  That works as long as you agree with the mob.  What happens when you don't and have no voice?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 23, 2019, 03:04:12 pm
The only reason anyone thinks the NRA is acting irresponsibly is because they have not bothered to understand why they take a stand on something.  The news media makes any stand they take seem wrong and extreme.  I had a friend who was going off about the NRA one day saying it was stupid that the NRA was opposing a law that would require a saftey on every gun.  I tried to explain that the design of a gun determines if a saftey is useful or not.  A DA revolver has no need of a safety.  A modern lever action rifle with a hammer has no need of a saftey.  You just leave the hammer at halfcock.  A SA revolver has no need of a safety.  A single shot falling block rifle with a hammer has no need of a safety.  I refuse to own any of those if they do put a safety on them (which they usually don't, but my son got a lever action with a safety once...).  Even a Glock does not have a saftey catch.  The only guns I own that have a safety are hammerless so you can't just uncock the hammer...  If you know anything about guns the NRA makes sense on this matter.  If you know nothing about guns it sounds crazy to you.  The NRA did not fight background checks.  They fought every proposed background check plan until the current one because all of them would have created a list of gun owners and a list of gun owners is the first step to confiscation.  You can argue that it isn't all you want but history says otherwise.  If you bother to see WHY the NRA apposes a given proposed law you will see they have a reason.  If you don't bother to find out the reason and take the media's view as reasonable then you will think they are unreasonable.  I have not seen any instance where they were unreasonable.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 23, 2019, 08:09:18 pm
The NRA is opposed to registration because that always leads to confiscation.

Dallas, the point is to confiscate weapons from people who should not have them even if it is only temporary.  Are you responsible?  Then what is your worry?

I would like nothing better than to deny access to guns to those who either temporarily or permanently exhibit a danger to others.  In my legal practice, I lost eight clients murdered by spouses who were unable to cope with the fact that their marriage was over.  I have seen several people with mental illnesses that should have been grounds for removing guns from their reach, but because law enforcement was ineffective, they still had access to guns.  In one case, I had a client who was clinically depressed.  He actually had a rifle taped to his torso with the muzzle under his chin and was threatening to pull the trigger.  He was a danger to himself, sure, but I could not see any threat to anyone else.  Nevertheless, a young cop was telling him to put the gun down (how, with it taped to him?) and pointed his weapon at my client.  I placed myself between the cop and the client to (hopefully) keep the cop from shooting, talked to the client a while, calmed him and the cop both down and got the rifle from under the client?s chin.  He did pull the trigger, but the bullet went into the air past his head.  Just so I don?t appear to be bragging too much, or make myself out as brave (since the rifle was no threat to me) and  the cop?s sergeant (who knew me) and the client?s father came during all this and helped a great deal in defusing the situation.  My real point is that I understand about needing to keep guns from people who should not have them, but I have a lot of trouble with who makes the decision and what you mean by ?temporary?. Once the police in some places have your guns in their hands they quickly consider them their guns.  It?s a lot like any property seizure.  I?ve had to get court orders to force police to return vehicles after acquittals.  They really, really wanted to keep those nice wheels so they could use them or turn them into cash for their departments.

Thanks for posting this Dallas and giving us a first hand view.
Phillip

PS Really you are a Hero! Thanks
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 23, 2019, 10:53:41 pm
...  All or nothing doesn't work too well in a democracy.

For the record Ace - we, in America, have never been a Democracy, and never will be - Thankfully.

Democracy is "Mob Rule" - i.e., 51% of the vote rules - period. Rome was a Democracy.

We are a Constitutional Republic.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin - "a Democracy is 2 Wolves and a Lamb voting on what's for dinner. A Constitutional Republic is a Well-Armed Lamb contesting the vote".

In a Constitutional Republic, 1 individual has rights that outweigh the Mobs vote. Case in point - Proposition 8 here in California (a few yrs ago) - Prop 8 defined marriage as between 1 Man and 1 Woman. It passed by a wide margin. Then it was challenged in court on the basis that the law violated the rights of a small group of people (gays & others). Their case was upheld and the Law was overturned. This is an example of how America is NOT a Democracy - never was, and never will be. Individuals have rights.

In America - I have rights, as defined by our Constitution, such as life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speach, freedom of religion, freedom from slavery, the right to vote, & the right to Bear Arms. My rights are NOT SUBJECT TO THE WHIMS OF THE MASSES!!!!!!!! (I.e. - they are not subject to Mob Rule).
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on September 24, 2019, 08:03:11 am
Good post Coolbees.
Jim Altmiller
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 24, 2019, 08:31:17 am

If automobiles started being used as weapons, they would be be banned instantly, and since there?s no way to easily conceal them, the confiscation would be accomplished quickly.  The steel in them would be turned into munitions for the state and you would be allowed to ride your bicycle to work at the munitions factory, provided your political commissar approved your job application. 


Wow Dallas, that is quite a tale.  Cars have been used intentionally for killing since their existence.  But I think you missed my point.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 24, 2019, 08:36:48 am
If you bother to see WHY the NRA apposes a given proposed law you will see they have a reason.
Of course they do.  It is called membership which equates to dollars, dollars that can be pilfered, stolen or misused.  The problem is it is not sustainable just like the union bosses.  They don't care.  They walk away with millions while the membership gets screwed in the end.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 24, 2019, 08:59:51 am

In America - I have rights, as defined by our Constitution, such as life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speach, freedom of religion, freedom from slavery, the right to vote, & the right to Bear Arms. My rights are NOT SUBJECT TO THE WHIMS OF THE MASSES!!!!!!!! (I.e. - they are not subject to Mob Rule).
I don't know what bubble you live in but they certainly are subject to the masses.  The constitution is a piece of paper.  All these freedoms have been ignored throughout its existence.  And it will continue.  What we have (some of us) is a right to vote to try and influence what direction the country moves in.  It doesn't always work as intended.  In a sense we are in mob rule.  The "mob" is money.  Money is a direct equivalent to power.  This mob over rules anything written in the constitution.  What representation and influence would the NRA have if they didn't have money?

In America the citizens have some voting rights (not all) but money rules.  Nothing will change that.  If you want to have the greatest amount of influence in a country become wealthy.  It doesn't matter what form of government the country has or what rights the citizens think they have.  People who think their rights are protected by a constitution are fools.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 24, 2019, 10:08:57 am
...  All or nothing doesn't work too well in a democracy.

For the record Ace - we, in America, have never been a Democracy, and never will be - Thankfully.

Democracy is "Mob Rule" - i.e., 51% of the vote rules - period. Rome was a Democracy.

We are a Constitutional Republic.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin - "a Democracy is 2 Wolves and a Lamb voting on what's for dinner. A Constitutional Republic is a Well-Armed Lamb contesting the vote".

In a Constitutional Republic, 1 individual has rights that outweigh the Mobs vote. Case in point - Proposition 8 here in California (a few yrs ago) - Prop 8 defined marriage as between 1 Man and 1 Woman. It passed by a wide margin. Then it was challenged in court on the basis that the law violated the rights of a small group of people (gays & others). Their case was upheld and the Law was overturned. This is an example of how America is NOT a Democracy - never was, and never will be. Individuals have rights.

In America - I have rights, as defined by our Constitution, such as life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speach, freedom of religion, freedom from slavery, the right to vote, & the right to Bear Arms. My rights are NOT SUBJECT TO THE WHIMS OF THE MASSES!!!!!!!! (I.e. - they are not subject to Mob Rule).

Good post Coolbees.
Jim Altmiller

Yes Jim I agree, excellent post. Actually a Masterpiece!!

If you bother to see WHY the NRA apposes a given proposed law you will see they have a reason.
Of course they do.  It is called membership which equates to dollars, dollars that can be pilfered, stolen or misused.  The problem is it is not sustainable just like the union bosses.  They don't care.  They walk away with millions while the membership gets screwed in the end.

It is very possible Ace, that the NRA has moles from the left.  I do not know if the NRA has been completely infiltrated yet. If not, you can bet they are doing their dangest!; trying to infiltrate like the Unions were infiltrated by the left and all the bad things they did as you described! It seems the left mishandles and ruins everything it touches, full of detest, despise, dislike, abhor, execrate and down right hate, for America, as it is obviously trying to ruin our Government! They seek no true justice, if they did Comey, Hillary, Clapper, ETC would be be behind bars! That hate filled drive never quits, never gives up, can not clearly see, the good things that are in this country, and the good things now, happening in this country, (thanks to the voters decision to elect a real leader who does profess to love this country and its Constitution). That hate is SPEWED out daily, just as Cool described a Democracy. Look at Seattle, just ONE example, crul, violent, misguided, hateful people on the left! MY opinion of the left, I have learned from CNN and other leftist sources. All of the above is my opinion. I hope I am wrong.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Hops Brewster on September 24, 2019, 11:47:48 am

In America - I have rights, as defined by our Constitution, such as life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speach, freedom of religion, freedom from slavery, the right to vote, & the right to Bear Arms. My rights are NOT SUBJECT TO THE WHIMS OF THE MASSES!!!!!!!! (I.e. - they are not subject to Mob Rule).
I don't know what bubble you live in but they certainly are subject to the masses.  The constitution is a piece of paper.  All these freedoms have been ignored throughout its existence.  And it will continue.  What we have (some of us) is a right to vote to try and influence what direction the country moves in.  It doesn't always work as intended.  In a sense we are in mob rule.  The "mob" is money.  Money is a direct equivalent to power.  This mob over rules anything written in the constitution.  What representation and influence would the NRA have if they didn't have money?

In America the citizens have some voting rights (not all) but money rules.  Nothing will change that.  If you want to have the greatest amount of influence in a country become wealthy.  It doesn't matter what form of government the country has or what rights the citizens think they have.  People who think their rights are protected by a constitution are fools.
We are a country of laws.  The Constitution is the document that lays out the fundamental laws which are the foundation upon which ALL other laws of this nation are based.  Without this Constitution, there is no basis for law. 

Without a strong foundation, any construction, whether a building, a ship, a piece of software, a scientific theory or what have you, will collapse sooner rather than later. 

Why else would you think the leftists are so anti-Constitutional?  They know without this foundation our nation would collapse and they would be able to claim their tyranny.

The 2nd Amendment is the eternal guardian that protects the foundation of our nation.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 24, 2019, 11:47:49 am
>I hope I am wrong.

I wish you were...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 24, 2019, 12:16:49 pm
Quote
It is called membership which equates to dollars, dollars that can be pilfered, stolen or misused.  The problem is it is not sustainable just like the union bosses.  They don't care.  They walk away with millions while the membership gets screwed in the end.

Again, you make a statement and offer no evidence.  Yes they have money and we give them that money to do just what they do.  yes, it takes money to lobby, in addition to the other things the NRA does.

If you want to sway someone to your way of thinking, then please present facts.  Repeating left-wing hyperbole will not do it. 

The constitution is the law.  This seems to be a fact that escapes the left.  It is true that we have not always lived up to it, but that does not mean we should not try.  Consider all the personal freedom you would have it the federal government stayed in its constitutional box.  Why do they not?  Because the masses have decided they would rather have stuff than freedom and the money people you scream about know that giving stuff means they have control and power. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 24, 2019, 01:37:29 pm
I would venture to guess that the left spends more seeking to subvert our Constitutional rights than the right spends to protect them.

Where does this money come from?  Some, of course, comes from voluntary contributions, but the left seems particularly fond of diverting compulsory dues of union members To causes those members may or may not favor, for one example. 

Ace and others of his ilk rail against the moneyed class as if they all came by their wealth by doing great evil things to him and his like.  I submit that people get wealthy by providing to Ace and the masses goods or services that are of value.  I agree the it is difficult to reconcile the huge piles of cash that some people accumulate with the value of products or services they produce, but it is not for me to decide that it is fair or unjust for a person who cannot write a coherent sentence or balance his checkbook should be paid $40 million to play a sport I will never watch, or that a man or woman should receive $20 million to appear in a movie that I will never see.  So why does the left so viciously attack the CEO who leads a corporation that manufactures a product they do not care to buy? 

I do wonder about the wisdom of a board of a corporation that pays a huge sum to a departing CEO who has all but destroyed the value of his company, but maybe -- just maybe-- the board members have knowledge or wisdom I do not possess.

More later, but I think I'll wait and see Brian's response to what I have written so far, and any comments from others.


Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 24, 2019, 02:28:04 pm
...
The 2nd Amendment is the eternal guardian that protects the foundation of our nation.

Very well said Hops.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 24, 2019, 02:52:46 pm
>I hope I am wrong.

I wish you were...

Thanks Mr Bush, I wish  I were too.... Sad isn?t it.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 24, 2019, 09:41:21 pm
I would venture to guess that the left spends more seeking to subvert our Constitutional rights than the right spends to protect them.

Where does this money come from?  Some, of course, comes from voluntary contributions, but the left seems particularly fond of diverting compulsory dues of union members To causes those members may or may not favor, for one example. 

Ace and others of his ilk rail against the moneyed class as if they all came by their wealth by doing great evil things to him and his like.  I submit that people get wealthy by providing to Ace and the masses goods or services that are of value.  I agree the it is difficult to reconcile the huge piles of cash that some people accumulate with the value of products or services they produce, but it is not for me to decide that it is fair or unjust for a person who cannot write a coherent sentence or balance his checkbook should be paid $40 million to play a sport I will never watch, or that a man or woman should receive $20 million to appear in a movie that I will never see.  So why does the left so viciously attack the CEO who leads a corporation that manufactures a product they do not care to buy? 

I do wonder about the wisdom of a board of a corporation that pays a huge sum to a departing CEO who has all but destroyed the value of his company, but maybe -- just maybe-- the board members have knowledge or wisdom I do not possess.

More later, but I think I'll wait and see Brian's response to what I have written so far, and any comments from others.

I would venture that you are right Dallas.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 24, 2019, 10:33:58 pm

I do wonder about the wisdom of a board of a corporation that pays a huge sum to a departing CEO who has all but destroyed the value of his company, but maybe -- just maybe-- the board members have knowledge or wisdom I do not possess.

Supply and demand. The compensation is typically earned under some type of deferred compensation plan - earned over many years and paid at a later date. Termination (retirement or otherwise) sometimes triggers the payment.
CEO's rarely make monumental decisions that are not debated at the board level. At least not twice.  :wink:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 25, 2019, 08:02:44 am
There are many conservative people in the unions because they have to join the union to do the job they want to do.  Their dues are spent on leftest agendas and they have no say so in how their money gets spent.  Unless, of course, the mob agrees with them...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 25, 2019, 09:23:10 am
I think I'll wait and see Brian's response to what I have written so far

What is the point?  You are blind to the fact that Trump defies the constitution.  You are blind to the fact that the NRA is suffering from greed and corruption that is present in most labor unions.  This is caused by the left????  It requires logical thinking to debate any subject.  It is hopeless to rebuttal your nonsense.

CEO's are not the smartest people in the world, far from it.  The absolute must requirement for a CEO is the ability to walk on or over someone else to acquire the position.  Typically they take credit for work they did not do.  They just aren't that smart.  They have a greed within them that when it goes too far they get caught in a scandal and it ends their reign.  Some get their wealth or maintain their wealth using gangster tactics.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 25, 2019, 09:32:28 am
There are many conservative people in the unions because they have to join the union to do the job they want to do.
No one has to join a union unless it is a government monopoly.  The above average income (in some cases double the average) is the draw to join a union or seek a union job.  If you are making twice what you should you don't mind paying dues.  When your job goes overseas you wake up too late.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Dallasbeek on September 25, 2019, 09:39:27 am
Ever heard of a closed shop? 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 25, 2019, 10:04:03 am
You are blind to the fact that dems defy the constitution.  You are blind to the fact that the union leaders are suffering from greed and corruption that is present in most labor unions.  This is caused by the left!  It requires logical thinking to debate any subject.  It is hopeless to rebuttal your nonsense.

Closed shop? According to Ace, you don't have to work there. Just apply for welfare instead.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 25, 2019, 10:04:17 am
>No one has to join a union...

Simply not true in many places.  Some states have a "right to work" law that the Unions can't make you join, but most states do not.  At least they didn't used to.  I don't keep up.  You are correct about the jobs going overseas and the Union being the cause.  The Unions started for a reason, but they should have transitioned from the antoganistic relationship to management into a cooperative one.  No one here comes out ahead when the company goes broke or goes overseas...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 10:15:08 am
I think I'll wait and see Brian's response to what I have written so far

What is the point?  You are blind to the fact that Trump defies the constitution.  You are blind to the fact that the NRA is suffering from greed and corruption that is present in most labor unions.  This is caused by the left????  It requires logical thinking to debate any subject.  It is hopeless to rebuttal your nonsense.

CEO's are not the smartest people in the world, far from it.  The absolute must requirement for a CEO is the ability to walk on or over someone else to acquire the position.  Typically they take credit for work they did not do.  They just aren't that smart.  They have a greed within them that when it goes too far they get caught in a scandal and it ends their reign.  Some get their wealth or maintain their wealth using gangster tactics.

I suppose you are right about Trump defying the constitution, his Attorney General certainly did so letting Clinton, Comey, Clapper, etc walk. Beside that what is your beef with President Trump. I would have thought the left would have embraced him after that?

Everyone knows that the corruption spun by the labor unions was a direct result from the protection of the thugs which infiltrated the unions, by the left. Why do you think unions ALWAYS support the Democrats? And is now seen as the thug party , The Democracy Party. It is a good possibility  that leftist moles are doing everything in their power to infiltrate the NRA, and to a point have, along with any other good organization. The left ruins everything they touch. Including doing their best to ruin the Constitution. Obama even downed the Constitution!!

Iddee and Mr Busch?s previous post I agree with.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 10:24:59 am
.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 25, 2019, 11:22:30 am
Quote
You are blind to the fact that Trump defies the constitution.  You are blind to the fact that the NRA is suffering from greed and corruption that is present in most labor unions.  This is caused by the left????  It requires logical thinking to debate any subject.  It is hopeless to rebuttal your nonsense.

Debate requires that you support your position.  You have yet to do that.

Quote
CEO's are not the smartest people in the world, far from it.  The absolute must requirement for a CEO is the ability to walk on or over someone else to acquire the position.  Typically they take credit for work they did not do.  They just aren't that smart.  They have a greed within them that when it goes too far they get caught in a scandal and it ends their reign.  Some get their wealth or maintain their wealth using gangster tactics.

Again, supporting facts?  CEOs do not walk into a company and say "Make me the CEO".  They are put into the position for a reason.  There are some exceptions, as in a company that is owned and operated privately, but even in that, there is usually a board of directors.  The decisions on pay are made by a variety of people and for a variety of reasons. 

If you don't like the way a company runs, don't use the company.

Quote
No one has to join a union unless it is a government monopoly.  The above average income (in some cases double the average) is the draw to join a union or seek a union job.  If you are making twice what you should you don't mind paying dues.  When your job goes overseas you wake up too late.

this is untrue.  Depending on the state, you have no choice when you take a job.  Oregon is one of those states.  If you go to work in a union place, you must join the union.  I chose NOT to work in union run places because I found them to be more efficient.  People actually worked when the union wasn't telling them "It's not your job, don't do it" .

When jobs go overseas it is because it has become too expensive to do business here.  The highest cost for most businesses is labor, so unions have priced themselves out of work in many places.   And yes, strange as it may seem, a business is supposed to make money.
Did you ever have an issue with union bosses and the obscene amount they are paid...and for what?



Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 12:38:11 pm
>No one has to join a union...

Simply not true in many places.  Some states have a "right to work" law that the Unions can't make you join, but most states do not.  At least they didn't used to.  I don't keep up.  You are correct about the jobs going overseas and the Union being the cause.  The Unions started for a reason, but they should have transitioned from the antoganistic relationship to management into a cooperative one.  No one here comes out ahead when the company goes broke or goes overseas...


This is true, Many years ago, while many from the Northern States such as Michigan with the auto manufacturing jobs for instance, whose  families were enjoying the Happy Days life as demonstrated by the TV show. While Folks in the South were scratching and struggling to get by, doing the same type jobs and with much less pay. Right to work states did not have the strength to muster a strong union in many occupations here in the south. Even still many type manufacturing companies went to China anyway, in all type of manufacturing situations.  I have been told this trend picked up steam during the Clinton era? About the time Sam Walton quit the Made in USA theme.  Hum  just another reason I am happy to have  President Trump instead of Mitt Romney, John McCain, Obama, or Clinton. No brainer for the average hard working American.  I will Say again,  HARD WORKING AMERICANS. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 25, 2019, 01:54:22 pm
>About the time Sam Walton quit the Made in USA theme.

I think that happened when Sam died.  Up until then if a US company made it, that's what Sam stocked.

>You are blind to the fact that Trump defies the constitution.

So far, less than most recent presidents... but yes, as usual.

>You are blind to the fact that the NRA is suffering from greed and corruption that is present in most labor unions.

I have seen no evidence of that and you have presented none.

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 02:55:12 pm
That is right Mr Bush, 1992. The year Clinton defeated read my lips George HW Bush. If President Bush was you kn I mean no offense to you. I should have said Wal-Mart not Sam. Sam seemed to always put America First as that was his theme. Made is the USA .
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 25, 2019, 06:01:51 pm
If you go to work in a union place, you must join the union.  I chose NOT to work in union run places because I found them to be more efficient.

Duh, what I said.  No one is forced to take a union job unless it is a government job that is unionized.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 06:05:48 pm
If you go to work in a union place, you must join the union.  I chose NOT to work in union run places because I found them to be more efficient.

Duh, what I said.  No one is forced to take a union job unless it is a government job that is unionized.

 :wink:   Ah haa Haa Haaaa  Ace, that was funny!!! Thanks for the smile..... 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 25, 2019, 06:07:25 pm
another reason I am happy to have  President Trump instead of Mitt Romney, John McCain, Obama, or Clinton. No brainer for the average hard working American. 

I have yet to see where Trump has helped the american worker unless you are talking about a family member.  I have seen many who he hurt.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 06:09:57 pm
another reason I am happy to have  President Trump instead of Mitt Romney, John McCain, Obama, or Clinton. No brainer for the average hard working American. 

I have yet to see where Trump has helped the american worker unless you are talking about a family member.  I have seen many who he hurt.

Well Fox News says different...  :shocked:  :grin:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 25, 2019, 06:11:36 pm
Debate requires that you support your position.
When it is not common knowledge.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 25, 2019, 06:13:11 pm
Well Fox News says different...  :shocked:

LMAO that is a laugh.

Kathy, is this the kind of support you are looking for? :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 06:13:41 pm
Well Fox News says different...  :shocked:

LMAO that is a laugh.

 :grin: :wink:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 25, 2019, 06:21:36 pm
Well Fox News says different...  :shocked:

LMAO that is a laugh.

Kathy, is this the kind of support you are looking for? :rolleyes:

 :grin: :grin: :grin:  I figured you would like that Ace....  I am glad to see you finally put your reading glasses on, perhaps it will help you see things more clearly. If only we could convince you to wear your hearing aids to help you hear the truth clearly, and go ahead and clear your nose and smell the roses...   :cheesy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: CoolBees on September 25, 2019, 06:34:45 pm

I have yet to see where Trump has helped the american worker ...  I have seen many who he hurt.

I have not seen a single American Worker that Trump has hurt - but I've seen 10's of 1,000's that he's helped immensely. Business is finally coming back (after the Bush/Clinton/Bush/O-Bummer disasters). Quality of life is improving everywhere I look. Jobs and Business are picking up. We are finally getting some serious Hope & Change that we have needed so badly - - that's the view from the people I meet every day ... I'm really not sure what circles you walk in Ace, to have such a dim view of his achievements - the Media mayhaps?  :cheesy:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 25, 2019, 06:35:22 pm
Quote
When it is not common knowledge.

Nope.  You have made statements.  You are required to back them with something if you want to call it a debate.  There are all kinds of things that have been "common knowlege" and have been wrong.  CW is often wrong.

If you can't support your position, then it's not debate, it's just an argument and that's a waste of time.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 26, 2019, 08:35:36 am
Quality of life is improving everywhere I look.
https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.jsp
Super!!! Thirteenth place.  I thought the babbling fool said America first.  Although Trump is not the only one who is the cause for Americas demise in quality of life he certainly is a main contributor.  The actual cause is the drain of our revenue for the military budget trying to be the police force for the world.  We are still fighting ground wars that don't work.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 26, 2019, 08:43:37 am
Quote
When it is not common knowledge.

You are required to back them with something if you want to call it a debate.

Forget where you are this a BS forum.  What a credible source is to you is not to me.  I couldn't convince you you are wrong if I had a signed decree from the Pope.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 26, 2019, 11:09:53 am
Quote
Thirteenth place.

According to?  And we take their word why? On what do they base their ranking?

Quote
Forget where you are this a BS forum.  What a credible source is to you is not to me.  I couldn't convince you you are wrong if I had a signed decree from the Pope.

Well, you could try, but instead, you make declarations and make no attempt to back them.  I would respect the attempt even if you used BS sources. 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 26, 2019, 11:15:43 am
For those who think the world is on a downhill slide:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/25/here-are-a-bunch-of-charts-that-prove-the-world-is-better-than-ever/
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 27, 2019, 10:45:57 am
For those who think the world is on a downhill slide:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/25/here-are-a-bunch-of-charts-that-prove-the-world-is-better-than-ever/

This is an excellent article. Every American should see this and it should be exposed in every school. I would go even further in suggesting your post being placed in the white section above, right under,  Welcome to the Second Amendment heading posted in white perhaps under a new heading title of your choice. Thanks for posting.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 28, 2019, 08:57:54 am
According to?  And we take their word why? On what do they base their ranking?

Like I said you don't want any supporting documents you want to argue.  Which is OKay I can play along. :smile:
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 28, 2019, 09:03:10 am
For those who think the world is on a downhill slide:
If the charts were published by an extremely left magazine would they look the same using the same data?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 28, 2019, 10:01:02 am
It looks, from your link, it started dropping in2014, and was down to 13th in 2016.n Then in 2017, Trump brought it up to 9th until the dems took the house in 2018. Then it started back down and hit 13th when all the witch hunts hit top speed.

Good link, Ace.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 28, 2019, 11:17:16 am
The actual cause is the drain of our revenue for the military budget trying to be the police force for the world.
https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_2009_2029USp_30t
According to this website, military spending as a % of GDP has decreased but is expected to increase but not as high as is was in 2010. (Ranging from approximately 4% to 5.5% of GDP)

Unfortunately , the United States is addicted to its government, representing 36% of GDP according to the website.

So a significant cut in government spending will increase unemployment until those workers are absorbed into the rest of the economy. I refer to government spending as workfare.
Go back to your economics text books and reread about the multiplier effect. Workfare (to a point) is good for the economy. That is one of the benefits of NASA.
And so there is no confusion, I would prefer a much smaller central government - some day. It will be painful getting there.

The bigger problem IMHO is perpetual deficit spending. It is immoral for us to ask our children and grandchildren to pay for the stuff we are getting today.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 28, 2019, 11:30:36 am
What really boggles my mind is why one half of our country is so eager to blame decades of stupidity and inaction by congress and prior presidents on the current incumbent in the white house - no matter what party he or she represents.

Our problems originated long before his inauguration.

We have seen our failing system work. The President is not a dictator. Certain unpopular efforts of the President have been stymied. I support some of those efforts and reject some others, but that is not the point.

What the leftist lunatics need to realize is that the pendulum of US policy on any one issue will swing wildly from side to side, but hopefully will someday settle in the middle where it belongs.


Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 28, 2019, 12:07:06 pm
Quote
If the charts were published by an extremely left magazine would they look the same using the same data?

If the charts were MADE by that web site you might have a point.  Did you look at the chart sources?

We spend about 2% more of our GDP than we expect our NATO alies to spend on defense.  While I agree with you that we do not need to have our fingers in every pie around the world there are some very important things that only we can do at this point.

Where we really are over the barrel is on mandatory spending and the majority of that is on "Benefits" of some kind.  They include Medicare, Medicaid, Foodstamps, SSI, Government job and retirement costs, and the various other things that our federal government spends on with no constitutional mandate.

We don't have a revenue problem.  Revenue is up.  What do you do in your family when spending exceeds income?  Why should our government do otherwise?
How do you see it working out with the promises of more stuff given to people?  The entire military budget would not cover what we owe now, and who pays for what they are promising?

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 28, 2019, 12:21:24 pm
....and who pays for what they are promising?
Someone else, I already pay too much.  :wink:

Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 28, 2019, 12:41:27 pm
Quote
Someone else, I already pay too much.

Lol.  Good luck with that.  I don't think a choice is given.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 29, 2019, 09:05:18 am

The bigger problem IMHO is perpetual deficit spending. It is immoral for us to ask our children and grandchildren to pay for the stuff we are getting today.
I couldn't agree more.  So where was the conservatives when Trump handed the top 1% 32 billion dollars that added to this deficit?
Kathyp:
Quote
who pays for what they are promising?
IF, and this is a big one... american companies were taxed for hiring labor outside the country and producing goods outside the country equal to the costs of the loss of revenue that this practice causes we wouldn't have such a deficit and most likely would have better jobs.  Higher paying jobs and more people working not only increases revenue but decreases the need for Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and SSI.
I keep hearing how socialism is ruining our country... What is your answer for China?  China is growing by leaps and bounds investing in their infrastructure.  They are also investing in foreign countries infrastructure gaining influence without wasting one bullet.  Number one, how do they do it?  Number 2, where do you think "make america great" falls into this plan?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 29, 2019, 09:31:19 am
I couldn't agree more.  So where was the conservatives when Trump handed the top 1% 32 billion dollars that added to this deficit?
So lets take the 50,000 foot overview. Do not focus on the last action.

Our progressive tax structure needs an overhaul. The middle class, the class with the most people in it, should be paying the majority of the tax bill. Everyone should have more skin in the game. Then each decision to dole out money would be more carefully scrutinized. The poor should pay something. Too many people pay nothing, so its all free to them.


That was my point from a few posts ago. Everyone thinks someone else should pay for what we are all getting.


IMHO even the 1% as some point should have paid enough and there should be a cap on income tax.

Take a look at the distribution on who pays taxes. Do your own research. The government publishes the data. Here is the first link I saw. Let us assume that the information is accurate enough.  https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/who-pays-taxes (https://www.pgpf.org/budget-basics/who-pays-taxes1%)
1% of the population should not be paying 30% of the taxes. 50% of the population should be paying 50% of the taxes.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: iddee on September 29, 2019, 10:00:41 am
""IF, and this is a big one... american companies were taxed for hiring labor outside the country and producing goods outside the country equal to the costs of the loss of revenue that this practice causes we wouldn't have such a deficit and most likely would have better jobs.""


That is just another name for import tariffs, which you vehemently oppose.

Yes, if you are willing to work for 10 cent an hour and let the government have all the rest, we can be like China. As long as you want your kids to grow up before working 10 hours a day for pennies, you better take another look.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 29, 2019, 10:02:40 am

IF, and this is a big one... american companies were taxed for hiring labor outside the country and producing goods outside the country equal to the costs of the loss of revenue that this practice causes we wouldn't have such a deficit and most likely would have better jobs.  Higher paying jobs and more people working not only increases revenue but decreases the need for Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and SSI.
I keep hearing how socialism is ruining our country... What is your answer for China?  China is growing by leaps and bounds investing in their infrastructure.  They are also investing in foreign countries infrastructure gaining influence without wasting one bullet.  Number one, how do they do it?  Number 2, where do you think "make america great" falls into this plan?

You and I will never agree on this.

The welfare of the masses should not be based on extortion from the producers.

How many government scandals and debacles do you need to witness before you lose faith in politicians' ability to fairly govern? I hit my limit.


Why do you trust politicians to fairly draw artificial lines on how things should work?

Cruel capitalism works in allocating resources.

If American companies were taxed in the manner you describe, and they deemed it detrimental to themselves, at some point they would no longer be American companies. They would reorganize somewhere else and we would have less revenue. The parasite (the government) cannot kill the host (the companies). There is more to the story and some of it is posturing but look at Harley Davidson moving some production overseas due to government meddling. https://fortune.com/2018/06/26/harley-davidson-moving-production-overseas/ (https://fortune.com/2018/06/26/harley-davidson-moving-production-overseas/)


I have traveled extensively around the world (including China). I have seen examples of the standard of living most of the world exists in (including China). There are plenty of people willing to work for a lot less than the American worker. Don't those human beings deserve to make a better living for themselves? Or does fairness and goodwill to all end at our borders?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 29, 2019, 10:04:07 am
oops.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 29, 2019, 10:04:59 am
oops again.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: sawdstmakr on September 29, 2019, 10:22:04 am
Brian,
So you want to tax big companies more because they move their manufacturing overseas, even if they don?t leave the US, who do you think really pays those taxes. You and I do. Why do you think everything costs so much more than it used to. Most of it is due to taxes which in turn causes more inflation.  That on top of that the government keeps printing more money to pay for their give away policies.
Jim
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Ben Framed on September 29, 2019, 11:30:07 am
Brian,
So you want to tax big companies more because they move their manufacturing overseas, even if they don?t leave the US, who do you think really pays those taxes. You and I do. Why do you think everything costs so much more than it used to. Most of it is due to taxes which in turn causes more inflation.  That on top of that the government keeps printing more money to pay for their give away policies.
Jim

Printing more money (through) the federal reserve, not the government, which charges interest on each dollar they print!! 
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 29, 2019, 11:33:46 am
I keep hearing how socialism is ruining our country... What is your answer for China?  China is growing by leaps and bounds investing in their infrastructure.  They are also investing in foreign countries infrastructure gaining influence without wasting one bullet.  Number one, how do they do it?
Not through economic socialism.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2019/07/08/chinas-economic-success-proves-the-power-of-capitalism/#5da7d40f3b9d (https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2019/07/08/chinas-economic-success-proves-the-power-of-capitalism/#5da7d40f3b9d)
China's Economic Success Proves the Power of Capitalism
Between 1958 and 1962, 45 million people starved to death in China as the result of the largest socialist experiment in history. Mao called this experiment the ?Great Leap Forward,? but for China it was a disaster.
Today, China is the world's leading export nation, ahead of the United States and Germany. Above all, never before in history have so many people escaped poverty in such a short time as in the past decades in China. According to official World Bank figures, the percentage of extremely poor people in China in 1981 stood at 88.3%. By 2015 only 0.7% of the Chinese population was living in extreme poverty. In this period, the number of poor people in China fell from 878 million to less than ten million.
The Problem With Prevailing Explanations Of China?s Success
It is widely believed that China?s success is based on a uniquely Chinese ?third way,? a political and economic model that occupies the ground between capitalism and socialism. According to this interpretation, China is successful because the state continues to play an important role in the Chinese economy. But this interpretation is wrong.
 
In fact, China?s success provides clear evidence of the power of capitalism. Under Mao, the state had an omnipotent grip over China?s economy. What has happened over the past few decades can be summed up in a few sentences: China has progressively embraced the tenets of free-market economics, introduced private ownership, and gradually reduced the influence of the once all-powerful state over the Chinese economy. That the state still plays a major role today is simply because China is in the midst of a transformation process that began with complete state dominance of the economy.
   However, as the Chinese economist Zhang Weiying stresses, China?s success in recent years has ?not been because of the state, but in spite of the state.? Here are some facts: Impressed By The Success Of SingaporeFor leading Chinese politicians and economists, 1978 marked the beginning of a busy period of foreign travel to bring back valuable economic insights and apply them at home. Chinese delegations made over 20 trips to more than 50 countries including Japan, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, the United States, Canada, France, Germany and Switzerland. The Chinese were especially impressed by the economic successes of other Asian countries. Although barely acknowledged, the economic dynamism of China?s neighboring countries in particular was seen as a role model.
On his visit to Singapore, Deng was impressed by the local economy, which was far more dynamic than the Chinese economy. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore?s founding father and long-time prime minister, remembers: ?I had told Deng over dinner in 1978 in Singapore that we, the Singapore Chinese, were the descendants of illiterate landless peasants from Guandong and Fujian in South China ? There was nothing that Singapore had done that China could not do, and do better. He stayed silent then. When I read that he had told the Chinese people to do better than Singapore, I knew he had taken up the challenge I quietly tossed to him that night fourteen years earlier.?
However, this newfound enthusiasm for other countries? economic models did not lead to an instant conversion to capitalism, nor did China immediately ditch its planned economy in favor of a free-market economy. Instead, there was a slow process of transition, starting with tentative efforts to grant public enterprises greater autonomy, that took years, even decades, to mature and relied on bottom-up initiatives as much as on top-down, party-led reforms.
More Private Property, More Liberalized Markets
Long before the official ban on private farming was lifted in 1982, peasant-led initiatives to reintroduce private ownership against socialist doctrine sprang up across China. The outcome was extremely successful: people were no longer starving and agricultural productivity increased rapidly. By 1983, the process of de-collectivizing Chinese agriculture was almost complete. Mao?s great socialist experiment, which had cost so many millions of lives, was over.
Initially, the growth in private ownership across China was driven by increasing numbers of small-scale entrepreneurs setting up businesses, which were only allowed to employ a maximum of seven people. The increasing erosion of this socialist system that exclusively permitted public ownership under the management of a state-run economic planning authority was accelerated by the creation of Special Economic Areas. These were areas where the socialist economic system was suspended and capitalist experiments were permitted. The official proclamation of the market economy at the Fourteenth Congress of the Chinese Communist Party in October 1992?a step that would have been unthinkable only a few years before?proved a milestone on the road to capitalism.
To understand the dynamics of the Chinese reforms, it is crucial to note that the extent to which they were initiated ?from above? was only one part of the picture. Many contributing factors happened spontaneously ? a triumph of market forces over government policy. Key institutional innovations were instigated, not in the offices of the Politburo, but by countless anonymous agents acting on a local level, and in many cases against the rules.
China?s development in recent decades demonstrates that rising economic growth?even when accompanied by rising inequality?benefits the majority of the population. Hundreds of millions of people in China are far better off today as a direct result of Deng?s motto ?let some people get rich first.?
Which Path Will China Take Now?
For all the positive developments China has seen in recent decades, a lot still remains to be done. Although its economic growth was accompanied by an increase in economic freedom, there are still deficits in many areas. China has both a strong need for further reforms and great potential for further improvement and growth. Zhang?who, as well as being an astute analyst of the Chinese economy, has himself contributed significantly to its development?stresses: ?China?s reform started with an all-powerful government under the planned economy. The reason China could have sustained economic growth during the process of reform was that the government managed less and the proportion of state-owned enterprises decreased, not the other way around. It was precisely the relaxation of government control that brought about market prices, sole proprietorships, town and village enterprises, private enterprises, foreign enterprises, and other non-state-owned entities.? Taken together, all of this formed the basis for China?s unprecedented economic rise.
As Zhang emphasizes, this process of transformation is far from complete: ?Government control over large amounts of resources and excessive intervention into the economy are the direct cause of cronyism between officials and businessmen, are a breeding ground for official corruption, seriously corrupt commercial culture, and damage the market?s rules of the game.? Accordingly, he sees a strong need for further reforms toward marketization, reduction of government control over resources and intervention into the economy, and the establishment of a true rule-of-law society.
Whether or not China will go down that road remains to be seen. The process of reform has never been a smooth and consistent one?rather, it has been marred by frequent setbacks, especially in recent years, when instances of governmental intervention in the economy have set back the reform process. The greatest danger for China is that the Chinese themselves will start to believe what many people in the West already think?that the country has discovered a special ?third way? between capitalism and socialism and that economic success has been achieved not in spite of, but because of, the great influence of the state.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Michael Bush on September 30, 2019, 08:28:25 am
>That is just another name for import tariffs, which you vehemently oppose.

They are certainly connected.  Let's say you raise the taxes on US companies that are using foreign labor and moving their facories.  What would they do?  They would move their headquarters and be a Brazillian company importing goods into the US and the only way to head that off then is tariffs...
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 30, 2019, 08:38:34 am
They would move their headquarters and be a Brazillian company importing goods into the US and the only way to head that off then is tariffs...
There is another way, balance of trade.  Imports must equal exports, no tariffs.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: Acebird on September 30, 2019, 09:15:38 am

China's Economic Success Proves the Power of Capitalism

Makes a nice article but the fact remains that the party controls everything.  The population does not decide what direction the party takes and of course there are objections.  China is about as socialistic as you can get.  If individuals actually own the companies that they run then they could take their assets and move it to another country.  Not much hope for that.
The only check that China faces is pollution.  It can't continue what it is doing because it will kill its population and put it in economic stress due to medical costs.  They recognize the problem and they have invested in non fossil energy such that they are the number one producer of solar and wind energy in the world.  Another one of those "make america great" but we ain't.  We are second fiddle.
The US was always the economic leader of the world having a balance of capitalism and socialism.  China is learning the ropes gaining at an enormous rate while we are declining.  You don't have to be that smart to predict what is going to happen in the future.
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: incognito on September 30, 2019, 10:33:43 am
You don't have to be that smart to predict what is going to happen in the future.
Does that upset you? The inevitable will happen. With its larger population, resources and human desire to have what others have, China will have the largest and strongest economy. They have the manufacturing capacity to fulfill its population's demands. But China has its own internal problems.

I am not sure what your message is. Are you bothered that the US is not number one in every category? Should that be our goal?
Title: Re: Cider's ?safer? gun free home.
Post by: kathyp on September 30, 2019, 12:18:44 pm
Quote
I couldn't agree more.  So where was the conservatives when Trump handed the top 1% 32 billion dollars that added to this deficit?
Kathyp:

Since revenue is up, the problem must be spending, right? 

Quote
You don't have to be that smart to predict what is going to happen in the future.

No you don't, but there is a comparison that should be watched.  China and India.  India has embraced capitalism and done things to make their workers and industry possibilities attractive.  They have a way to go to improve lives in that country, but they are making great strides.

China, on paper has an expanding economy, but the lives of the average person are not much improved in comparison.  They use their people as slave labor, and control wages and just about everything else.

The one economic bright spot in China is Hong Kong.  You note that even though the protests have been going on for a couple of months, the government has been careful to not stomp on it.  They aren't even making that many arrests.  There are a number of reasons, and among them, they do not want the massive mainland population to do the same.  They would have no way to stop it if the uprising became a popular movement on the mainland.

Yes, you can have a thriving economy if you have slave labor.  We did the same in the South.  You can also have a thriving economy if you embrace free trade and markets and make sure your people have the skills to participate.  You don't get "eqality" the second way because participation depends on the will of the people to participate.  You do get opportunity for those who wish to advance.