Whats going wrong with the world? More shootings
Comments
-
JonnyPistachio wrote:pandora wrote:I said personally I do not own a gun but that does not mean I am unprotected ...
I also told you for me to defend the second amendment I do not need to be a gun owner.
That might be you and many here.... "everyone do as I do" syndrome
I will not presume because I don't own a gun that none should or
disregard the need, the right to defend one's life.
Are you saying that there is a gun in your house? If there is, would you use it to shoot someone if your husband wasnt home and someone broke in and you felt threatened?
I have never held a gun... I'd go for the switchblade myselfI do target practice with those
My fear is someone will hurt my dogs, I'm ready to leave this world but not at the expense
their heavenly loyalty.0 -
pandora wrote:I was also thinking about the abortion debate...
I will start by saying I am pro choice as with the gun debate.
Many gun opponents speak of the children lost to accidents,
why they want stricter laws or banning of guns entirely.
We have made abortion a right with the passing of a law....
a right to take a human life.
The number of abortions is staggering per year, lives that would have been children.
As I said I am pro choice but I would like additional restrictions put on abortion,
to spare lives.
That would be removing some rights... effecting choice.
I won't change this to an abortion debate ...
I think I made my point though.
I would not infringe on the choice nor the rights of others because I myself think
abortion is a choice way over used in the world, resulting in a horrific loss of life.
Call me stupid, but I do not see what you are getting at here. What exactly is the point you are trying to make as it relates to the right to bear arms?
You say you are pro choice. You say you would like to see some changes. Then you say, "I would not infringe on the choice nor the rights of others because I myself think abortion is a choice way over used in the world, resulting in a horrific loss of life."
So in summary... you are pro choice, but you want to see some changes, but maybe you don't because that would be infringing on people's rights?
I cannot have read this correctly. Please clarify!"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
comebackgirl wrote:There are stricter regulations in place to make sure someone under 18 doesn't buy nicotine. I went to buy a bottle of wine the other day and I had to show 2 forms of ID. These loopholes are dangerous.
The same for alcohol leading to DUI's and teen pregnancy and drug use...
something responsible gun possession does not do.
Some are assuming underage kids are buying weapons without their parents knowing...
how? Unless, of course they are doing so on the street. Which we all know criminals are doing,
whatever age. But we can not punish the law abiding thoughtful for the thoughtless
with criminal intentions.
Parents would be very negligent to not monitor their credit cards or bank accounts
their children use.
So again enforce the laws we have, punish adults who are providing
and allowing gun possession
through irresponsible parenting and irresponsible selling.
There are vastly more responsible young hunters and target shooters
owning a rifle with their parents knowledge who are safety trained
then any escaping through the cracks.0 -
comebackgirl wrote:Jason P wrote:Guns don't kill people, people kill people ... so maybe we shouldn't give guns to people ... :think:"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:pandora wrote:I was also thinking about the abortion debate...
I will start by saying I am pro choice as with the gun debate.
Many gun opponents speak of the children lost to accidents,
why they want stricter laws or banning of guns entirely.
We have made abortion a right with the passing of a law....
a right to take a human life.
The number of abortions is staggering per year, lives that would have been children.
As I said I am pro choice but I would like additional restrictions put on abortion,
to spare lives.
That would be removing some rights... effecting choice.
I won't change this to an abortion debate ...
I think I made my point though.
I would not infringe on the choice nor the rights of others because I myself think
abortion is a choice way over used in the world, resulting in a horrific loss of life.
Call me stupid, but I do not see what you are getting at here. What exactly is the point you are trying to make as it relates to the right to bear arms?
You say you are pro choice. You say you would like to see some changes. Then you say, "I would not infringe on the choice nor the rights of others because I myself think abortion is a choice way over used in the world, resulting in a horrific loss of life."
So in summary... you are pro choice, but you want to see some changes, but maybe you don't because that would be infringing on people's rights?
I cannot have read this correctly. Please clarify!
hard to believe huh?0 -
pandora wrote:JonnyPistachio wrote:pandora wrote:I said personally I do not own a gun but that does not mean I am unprotected ...
I also told you for me to defend the second amendment I do not need to be a gun owner.
That might be you and many here.... "everyone do as I do" syndrome
I will not presume because I don't own a gun that none should or
disregard the need, the right to defend one's life.
Are you saying that there is a gun in your house? If there is, would you use it to shoot someone if your husband wasnt home and someone broke in and you felt threatened?
I have never held a gun... I'd go for the switchblade myselfI do target practice with those
My fear is someone will hurt my dogs, I'm ready to leave this world but not at the expense
their heavenly loyalty.
Let's stop beating about the bush and avoiding giving a straight answer... you may have never held a gun but is there a gun in your house that others may use for 'protection'? Yes/No. I think that's what jonny is trying to get at.Post edited by redrock on0 -
pandora wrote:PJ_Soul wrote:It's also pretty scary that a cop could be that twitchy!
Another good reason to be prepared not only the ridiculous response times,
allowing crimes to be committed and criminals to get away to victimize again,
but now we have a problem with not being able to depend on some officers.
A beloved family dog, a golden retriever, was shot dead on the front lawn of our neighbors
by an officer who shot before they thought.
What are you saying here? Is it that guns are important to defend dogs or that guns are important to get the upper hand on a cop who appears to be twitchy?
Being a cop is a lot tougher than spouting rhetoric from a keyboard. I'll begin by saying I hate dogs. After one neighbour's 'family dog' attacked my son in our yard- leaving him to be treated in a hospital- I have very little patience for them. Stopping there, I would think that cops have several encounters with dogs while trying to do their dangerous work. I would think that dogs can pose a significant threat to them as they work their way on to and through a scene. If a dog appears hostile in the slightest, sorry, but I am all for them erring on the side of caution."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:What exactly is the point you are trying to make as it relates to the right to bear arms?
No relation to the right to bear arms and gun ownership. Furthermore, abortion is an ethical debate, gun ownership is not. Also, is abortion mentioned in the constitution? Hmm..... Diversion.0 -
redrock wrote:pandora wrote:JonnyPistachio wrote:
Are you saying that there is a gun in your house? If there is, would you use it to shoot someone if your husband wasnt home and someone broke in and you felt threatened?
I have never held a gun... I'd go for the switchblade myselfI do target practice with those
My fear is someone will hurt my dogs, I'm ready to leave this world but not at the expense
their heavenly loyalty.
Let's stop beating about the bush and avoiding giving a straight answer... you may have never held a gun but is there a gun in your house that others may use for 'protection'? Yes/No. I think that's what jonny is trying to get at.
I have answered that question for those who are smart enough to put two and two together,
not responsible for the others
I think Jonny's question was the heart of the matter, could be wrong,
but I think he wanted to know if I would ever resort to using it.
My answer was no unless I get safety trained first, common sense yes?0 -
pandora wrote:I have answered that question for those who are smart enough to put two and two together,
not responsible for the others
ooOOoo... catty!OK.. no straight answer. You don't personally own a gun, the legal owner is then the husband. Sorted.
An I think your answer to jonny was 'I never held a gun...'0 -
pandora wrote:I have answered that question for those who are smart enough to put two and two together,
not responsible for the others
Frankly, I don't care about the semantics...just amazed that you have the gall to call others condescending.
We're all on the same level here.
No?0 -
hedonist wrote:We're all on the same level here.
No?
It's much easier to have a discussion when one knows where one stands and when one is upfront (and not pussy foot about) when it come to things that have an impact on said discussioni. Being a gun 'owner' would naturally give some biais to a discussion the same as one says not being a gun owner makes one a victim, waiting for something to happen or enabling others to be victims.Post edited by redrock on0 -
redrock wrote:Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:What exactly is the point you are trying to make as it relates to the right to bear arms?
No relation to the right to bear arms and gun ownership. Furthermore, abortion is an ethical debate, gun ownership is not. Also, is abortion mentioned in the constitution? Hmm..... Diversion.
in fact you have said all important to you ...
yes?
How about the millions that have been extinguished?
no chance to come to term and live?
If we put just a fraction of those tiny bodies laid out how disgusting would that be?
How come the gun opponents can not see this?
I believe it is very much connected but not in favor of your side of the debate.
Matters not ethical or otherwise ... dead is dead.
Again that is how it is connected but lets not get too far off topic.0 -
pandora wrote:redrock wrote:Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:What exactly is the point you are trying to make as it relates to the right to bear arms?
No relation to the right to bear arms and gun ownership. Furthermore, abortion is an ethical debate, gun ownership is not. Also, is abortion mentioned in the constitution? Hmm..... Diversion.
in fact you have said all important to you ...
yes?
How about the millions that have been extinguished?
no chance to come to term and live?
If we put just a fraction of those tiny bodies laid out how disgusting would that be?
How come the gun opponents can not see this?
I believe it is very much connected but not in favor of your side of the debate.
Matters not ethical or otherwise ... dead is dead.
Again that is how it is connected but lets not get too far off topic.
:? :fp:Post edited by redrock on0 -
hedonist wrote:pandora wrote:I have answered that question for those who are smart enough to put two and two together,
not responsible for the others
Frankly, I don't care about the semantics...just amazed that you have the gall to call others condescending.
We're all on the same level here.
No?
good lord that is one of the most unsafe things to do :fp:
in my opinion.
It has nothing to do with condescending...
just really thought people could put that together guess not...
and I have said I lived with same man for 32 years sooooo.....0 -
pandora wrote:
and I have said I lived with same man for 32 years sooooo.....
And? I lived with the same one for 25.... sooooooooooooooooooo? Is our sex life still good? Yeah... Do we have arguments? Not really...... Do we still hold hands and cuddle?.... :oops: Sorry... I thought his was a relationship thread. My bad....0 -
pandora wrote:hedonist wrote:pandora wrote:I have answered that question for those who are smart enough to put two and two together,
not responsible for the others
Frankly, I don't care about the semantics...just amazed that you have the gall to call others condescending.
We're all on the same level here.
No?
good lord that is one of the most unsafe things to do :fp:
in my opinion.
It has nothing to do with condescending...
just really thought people could put that together guess not...
and I have said I lived with same man for 32 years sooooo.....
So...only the "smart" criminals who read or post here - rampant, I'm sure, and aware of who you are and where you live - could do the math and note to themselves to keep away from you and yours...from here...on a Pearl Jam messageboard.
OK. Not condescending at all; my bad.0 -
redrock wrote:pandora wrote:I have answered that question for those who are smart enough to put two and two together,
not responsible for the others
OK...back on topic...You've never held a gun and wouldn't shoot it because you don't have training. Good judgment, but unless your husband is always home with you, doesn't that leave you unprotected? (Aside from the switchblade, because in one of your earlier posts about victims you referred to their choice to be unprotected if they don't own a gun).
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"0 -
off to lunch peeps back in a bit!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help