SkyPiggie

I find it ironic that instead of worrying about the general nature of these growing programs of intrusion into our private lives, instead, everyone seems to devolve into childish taunts, like; "Oh yeah, well your country started it first", or; "Oh yeah, well your country does it worse". or; "Those darned conservatives are a bunch of blind kool-aid drinking idiots." And so it goes. While the masses are nit-picking and going at each other's throats with the childish "my country is better than yours" insults, the government, meanwhile, continues their intrusions because no one has the spare time to stop them.

"Today, as President of the American Hunters and Shooters Association (AHSA), I announced our endorsement of Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States... "As a gun rights organization we have not come to this decision lightly. We were formed two years ago because our research shows that millions of gun owners wanted a change... "Senator Obama has clearly demonstrated his commitment to the 2nd Amendment..." http://www.huntersandshooters.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=71

And you want to make that problem even worse by awarding them to every pansy-ass who claims "mental stress"? I never once mentioned the color of the berets, so your attempt to criticize me for mis-labeling special forces is incorrect. The point is, that ordinary soldiers shouldn't get to wear the same beret that was hard-earned by more well-trained soldiers. Do you disagree with that? Likewise, someone who suffers from mental stress, shouldn't get the same Purple Heart as a soldier who lost a limb. You say Ranger berets are black. Okay, so if you give every recruit a black beret right out of boot camp, then the black beret no longer signifies someone who is an exceptionally elite soldier. i.e. the beret would no longer mean anything. Doing THAT, is what would be total bullshit. So you ARE in favor of giving every first jump student a gold wings award? i.e. Gold Wings no longer mean anything? Or is that total bullshit? Since you have no idea who I am or what my military experience is, once again, your attempts at criticism are misplaced. Oh my, aren't you getting nasty! Didn't you fight to defend the 1st Amendment, you big war hero you? Has it? Are you saying that no veterans from previous wars have had to struggle for the rest of their lives, some with more success than others, with PTSD, or, perhaps more accurately, shell shock? You think that giving them a Purple Heart is going to alleviate their symptoms, and allow them to live happily ever after, in a house by a lake, with rainbow-filled skies and a field full of fuzzy bunnies? George Carlin is a dope-smoking pussy. Since when did comedians become experts on war wounds?

Then you'll probably be arrested for refusing to behave like a frickin sheep with no rights. Baaaa! That's what gulag's are for. Don't you Brits worry about "profiling" over there. Heck, America is so sensitive to that stupid crap that instead of just searching the people that actually look like criminals, we also search little old grandmas. Of course, that pisses off the innocent grandma's, but it's supposed to make the real criminals feel so much better to know that they aren't being singled out for this unconstitutional treatment. And it's of utmost importance not to hurt the feelings of criminals. So grandma and all the other honest people can just go screw themselves! But hell, at least in the U.S. they ain't accosting the grandma's out on the streets yet.

Not only "no", but "hell no!". If those pansies want an award for mental stress, then give them a new medal specifically designed for them: a yellow heart. The yellow symbolizes their cowardice under fire. They can wear it with pride in front of all the people whose lives they jeopardized by not performing properly under stress. If you have some freakin point to make, then make it. Do you think that everybody who has ever been shot at in anger deserves a freakin medal? As ridiculous as your posts are, you actually, probably accidentally, hit upon a good point here. Kind of like a blind squirrel finding a nut. Anyways, the Purple Heart should continue to be awarded as originally intended. Period. We shouldn't go giving them out like candy to any Tom, Dick and Harry that claims mental stress. If you do that, then you render the honor of the award meaningless. It's like those berets that used to signify that a soldier had undergone extraordinary training to belong to the special forces, and then they went and gave a beret to everybody, because somebody's feelings were hurt. Oh boo freakin hoo. The beret should mean something special. Now it means nothing. So now they want to do the same thing with Purple Hearts? Hell, just give every recruit a Silver Star when they graduate from boot camp, and be done with it. While we're at it, give every first jump student a 1000-jump Gold Wings award to show how cool they are. This army is turning into a bunch of namby pamby cry-babies. Suck it up, cupcakes. Combat is stressful - everyone gets that. You don't deserve an award for it. You deserve to be proud of your service, and deserve the admiration and respect of the civilian population. That should be enough for you. It's worked just fine for all the generations before you.

So whats a homeowner to do when he finds an intruder inside his home?"Pardon me, bloke, but I'd like to ask: are you here just to trespass and burgle me, or do you intend me bodily harm? The reason I ask, you see, is that I need to find out if I'm allowed to shoot you or not. If youse just want my telly, well then, go right ahead and take it, and I wont stop you. So, which is it? Oh, so that big knife in your hand is just to cut the cables then? Okay, I guess that's allright then - go right ahead.Yeah, that'll work really well...

Um, then why did gun crime continue to increase AFTER the gun ban? Youse guys just can't get it into youse heads that there is NO correlation between gun ownership rates and crime, can you! This seems to be something that is just beyond the comprehension of the anti-gunnies. Yo anti-gunnies cling to those invalid beliefs the way Obama thinks that frustrated white people cling to their religion and guns.

Um, yes, it was a focus. All law-abiding handgun owners had their handguns confiscated by the government. So you can't claim that it wasn't a focus. When your private property is confiscated for no good reason, that's a darned big focus.

Yeah, but maybe those were all downhill miles.

Congratulations on your enlightenment. But it's so much easier just to blame guns!

Yeah, that gun ban in Chicago is working wonders! News: http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=6093374"Chicago police received dozens of 911 calls about the gun violence around the city this weekend. They acknowledge that 37 shootings is a big number for a three-day period..."So I suppose that means, in your mind, that the Chicago gun ban is a success?

I want to know what that great liberal-led democratic House is planning on doing about the gas crises. I haven't heard nary a peep out of them on the subject. They like to blame George Bush for everything, but when are they going to grow some balls and DO something?

Ding ding ding! Yep, some people have such huge egos that they just cannot bring themselves ever to admit that something they said was wrong. So they keep inventing different nuances to try and explain away their mistake. Or they just claim that everyone else is stupid for not understanding what they meant. And so it goes... Such people get little serious attention from me.

If being in that parking lot with a gun in your car is a FELONY according to the law of that jurisdiction, then YES, I am in favor of someone who violates that law being charged with a felony. So you don't stop to think about whether or not the law is just plain stupid and punishes someone severely who hasn't actually done anything to harm anyone or anything. The only thing that matters to you is that some legislators made it illegal, and therefore all violators ought to pay. Thanks for that brilliant open-minded, critical, professional mind and thinking. So, based upon this philosophy, I guess you think that all illegal immigrants should be rounded up and deported immediately, right? Or does this philosophy only apply to those darned gun owners? Now that's funny, because you just contradicted yourself once again. First you say we must obey ALL laws (capitalization is yours) to be law-abiding, but then you decided to dismiss misdemeanors and include only felonies in your definition. But felonies-only does not constitute ALL the law. And then to further confuse your statement, you decided that misdemeanors should count also for scofflaws, but only if they're committed repeatedly. So your "ALL the law" has morphed and evolved from; 1) "ALL" laws, to; 2) only felonies, to; 3) felonies and repeated misdemeanors, and now you're; 4) back to "ALL" laws. Sheesh, I wish you could make up your mind and stick to something. And you accuse US of having difficulty trying to keep up with you. Ha! You can't even keep up with yourself. Thanks for the entertainment.

So if someone's only "crime" in their entire life is that they once jay-walked across the street outside the marked cross-walk zones, then you would not describe that person as "law-abiding"? Weren't you discussing FELONIES? (Hint: read your own post). However, someone who is an habitual scofflaw with regard to traffic laws can hardly be described as "law abiding". So when you refer to "ALL the law", you weren't including misdemeanors? Therefore, someone can commit a few misdemeanors and still be "law abiding", as long as they don't cross the line into felonies. You sure have some funny and convenient definitions to fit your statements. As usual, just more of the kallend games. So you're okay with someone being charged with a felony for simply driving their car into a parking lot while they have a gun in their car? Try and give a simple answer, like a "yes" or a "no".

So if someone's only "crime" in their entire life is that they once jay-walked across the street outside the marked cross-walk zones, then you would not describe that person as "law-abiding"?

So you think the solution is to assassinate government leaders? (Note to readers: An "SMLE" is a British rifle, called a short-magazine-Lee-Enfield.)

So every gun owner who doesn't have a concealed weapon permit should be considered dangerous? Gosh, that's about 99% of all gun owners. About 80 million of them. If they were all a problem, I think we would already know it, because there wouldn't be anyone else remaining. And since there are still plenty of non-gun owners around who haven't been murdered by those dastardly non-CWP gun owners, I think there's something wrong with your theory. Do you have a concealed weapon permit, to prove that you're safe to own your shotgun?

Being a law-abiding citizen and having a legal gun in your car, and then turning into a parking lot, should not suddenly turn you into a felon. You're still the same law-abiding person with no ill intent. Just because someone draws an imaginary line on the ground and says "no guns", doesn't change the character of the person. It is wrong to turn people into felons in this manner. This is a good example of a stupid gun law. In order to be a felon, you should actually have to do something to threaten or harm someone. Turning into a parking lot and violating a technicality, should not suffice to destroy your life with that kind of a conviction. It inhibits her self defense rights if she doesn't have a concealed handgun permit and therefore doesn't have a gun with which to defend herself. I suppose she could try and scratch out her attackers eyes with her fingernails, but I think a gun would be a more effective deterrent.

If you have to smoke pot daily to feel normal, then you're already a basket case.

The Army ought to let him serve out his remaining 6 months to qualify for benefits in a non-combat role stateside. Simple solution. Doh!

Neither good nor bad. It just is. Those willing to comply with the letter of the law might be motivated to get one so that their gun is technically legal in their work parking lot. Those that think it's a stupid law will just drive into the parking lot with their gun anyway. That's what was already being done before this law was passed, and no harm is done by that. We already have that, and it hasn't been a problem. Every criminal that wants a gun has one, so why shouldn't the law-abiding "necks" be allowed to have one too? Do you want women working a second or third-shift, driving late at night, to be defenseless against attack while they commute?

Personal responsibility, integrity and pride are no longer taught in public schools by the fucking teachers. Instead, the little shits learn to do as little as possible to get by, and anything that goes wrong is always someone else's fault.

Quote: "The bill says businesses cannot prohibit employees or customers from keeping a legally owned gun locked inside their cars, as long as the owner has a permit to carry a concealed weapon." The problem is, it doesn't go quite far enough. It's legal in Florida to have a gun in your car without a special concealed weapon permit. Therefore, having a gun in your car in a business parking lot should be no different. It shouldn't be restricted to just those who have concealed carry permits. So, as is, there are still plenty of Florida residents who keep a gun in their car, without a permit, who will be considered law-breakers if they park their car at work without leaving their gun at home. And that will still leave them unsafe should someone attack them while traveling to and fro from work. It might encourage more people to get a concealed carry license.

I don't think I ever posted about Molson Didn't say you did. The reference was to your debate techniques.