Gun remark makes outdoorsman an outcast

know1

onelongsong wrote:

i'm not alone. a famous attorney; catherine cryer i believe; was a strick anti-gun lobbiest. a close friend of hers had someone break into her house and rape her. her friend said she wished she had a gun in her house to protect herself. after a long conversation; catherine now carries a gun. and is a big pro-gun advocate for self defence. some victims have nightmares for years to come. some live in fear. some realize that the police are never at the scene of a crime until the crime is over. police are only for clean up.
when i was held at gunpoint; my gun was in my jeep. but i knew if i had it; i could draw it while dropping to 1 knee and kill the attacker before he knew what was happening.

It's not really an eye for an eye if the criminal let you go without killing you. It sounds like you were a pretty big gun advocate before your unfortunate experience. It also sounds like you're itching to kill someone.

know1

onelongsong wrote:

you don't stand trial for self defence. there's only a trial if there's a question about self defence. when self defence is clear; there is nothing to charge you with.

let me ask you; if you're a victim of a violent crime; and you give up your car, wallet; or whatever; and let the person get away with it; are you not partially responsable for him victimizing the next person? let me put it this way; if i let the guy go when i could have stopped him; am i not somehow responsable if he kills an innocent the next day?
i'm not talking about the city close your eyes mentality. i mean; what happened to one's responsability to the community? and i don't mean vigilanty behavior. i watch out for every kid i see. i watch over everyones house and property. not intentionally; but if i happen to be on your block i'll notice something out of place and try to correct it. if your children are playing in the yard and a suspicious car is about; i'll hang around to make sure the kids are ok. and this has nothing to do with guns. i don't carry a gun in my town. i don't have to beause at least 50% of the residents are carrying so i'm protected. we protect eachother.
that being said; the result has been no violent crime in decades. no ones had the need to even expose a weapon.

You don't kill the person. You work with the authorities to have them arrested and prosecuted in a civil manner.

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

you don't stand trial for self defence. there's only a trial if there's a question about self defence. when self defence is clear; there is nothing to charge you with.

let me ask you; if you're a victim of a violent crime; and you give up your car, wallet; or whatever; and let the person get away with it; are you not partially responsable for him victimizing the next person? let me put it this way; if i let the guy go when i could have stopped him; am i not somehow responsable if he kills an innocent the next day?
i'm not talking about the city close your eyes mentality. i mean; what happened to one's responsability to the community? and i don't mean vigilanty behavior. i watch out for every kid i see. i watch over everyones house and property. not intentionally; but if i happen to be on your block i'll notice something out of place and try to correct it. if your children are playing in the yard and a suspicious car is about; i'll hang around to make sure the kids are ok. and this has nothing to do with guns. i don't carry a gun in my town. i don't have to beause at least 50% of the residents are carrying so i'm protected. we protect eachother.
that being said; the result has been no violent crime in decades. no ones had the need to even expose a weapon.

no, you're not responsible. they're responsible for their actions.

you seem to think im one of the people telling you self-defense is unacceptable. im not. im just a little disturbed by how excited you seem about killing people. it's one thing to engage in necessary self-defense. it's another to sound like you can't wait for someone to pull something so you can pull the trigger and say that you feel no remorse about killing another human being. i think most people would have hoped they didnt have to... whereas you come off here sounding glad that you got the opprtunity. where do you live? im not visiting... you might see a stranger with long hair and gun me down in the streets.

now, answer me a question in return: how many people have you killed in self-defense? and how much did you get off on looking them in the eyes as you killed them?

Scubascott

jeffbr wrote:

I try to be consistent in my distrust of the gov't. I am anti-patriot act and anti-gun banning. I like the ACLU watching out for my liberties -- except the 2nd ammendment. I like the NRA for watching out for that one. I give money to both.

By the same token, I don't get people who are vigilant about our 1st and 4th ammendment rights, but don't give a shit about the 2nd ammendment, as if we should just pick and chose at this point. I'm a big fan of preserving all of my liberties.

This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.

I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.

jeffbr

Scubascott wrote:

This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.

I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.

And every time someone proposes to update it lately, it has involved less personal freedom and more government intervention. Also, since we're a nation of law, not a nation of will, I'll turn to the document that is the basis for the law when there is a question. If you want a nation where you sway with the whims of will, go for. I'm not asking you to change.

Pacomc79

Scubascott wrote:

This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.

I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.

Because every government gets worse and worse over time until it's eventual failure and overthrow. It was as free and liberal as it was going to get back then. The more corrupt the government becomes the more they want to change the ground work to better suit thier retaining more and more power and control over the citizenry.

Strong state and local governments and weak protective national governments provide the citizen with the most amount of representation in society. (provided they care about thier own personal freedom and liberty) Our national government has done what it can to make sure people want thier personal freedoms taken away and dictated by our national government.

onelongsong

jeffbr wrote:

And every time someone proposes to update it lately, it has involved less personal freedom and more government intervention. Also, since we're a nation of law, not a nation of will, I'll turn to the document that is the basis for the law when there is a question. If you want a nation where you sway with the whims of will, go for. I'm not asking you to change.

absolutely right. if we let the constitution be rewritten every time someone got a burr under their saddle we wouldn't have any of the original document left. it would change from fad to fad. generation to generation. and our freedom would change from president to president.
if you don't like the constitution; there's a border to the north and another to the south. don't let the door hit you in the ass.

Collin

Jeanie wrote:

People say things all the time Collin. They are only words. You have to decide if what they are saying is valid or not.

I think he's pretty serious.

Certainly don't need to be getting so upset about them, when it's actions that count in this case.

I'm not really that upset. I'm stating my opinion. I think it's sick, scary and sad that we live in a world where people seem to think that their wallet or car are worth more than a human life. I believe in punishment. I don't believe in the death penalty for stealing a wallet and I certainly don't believe in citizens doing the actual killing.

I wonder how you'd feel about a guy saying he'd rape a woman (I'm not comparing the two, by the way). Would you say, no need to get upset, they're only words. Or would you think a mindset or a society that accepts these ideas and words is going downhill?

And this world is not fucked up and twisted.

It's not?

People do what they can to get through each day.

Funny. I know a guy, a good guy. His parents kicked him out because they didn't approve of his ideas. Anyway, he had some bad luck and fucked up. He suffered for his mistakes. And tried to change his life, unfortunately this not fucked up and twisted society doesn't accept guys like him so he had to take the lowest fucking job available. He could barely pay rent. He started stealing (even returned the wallets, just took the money) and bought food with it. Just doing what he could to get through, society pushed him in that position.
He started dealing drugs until he could buy and old, shabby place. And stopped dealing and stealing. With government aid he got a higher education and now he has a good nice job. He does tons of charity work because he feels he stole from society and needs to pay society back now. This guy is a friend. It's the kind of guy you want to have as a friend and when he tells his story, you don't believe it.
And then I hear guys like onelongsong saying he'd have no problem killing him over his wallet (even though onelongsong is very wealthy or comes from a very wealthy family). He wouldn't even wound him, he'd kill him, mercilessly because he believes in "an eye for an eye", the appropriate punishment for theft is death and he has the nerve to call it self defense.

And you tell me life is peachy.

Given the way the world is, I think if you look, you'll find many fine examples as to why this world is not fucked up or twisted. Depends on how you look at it.

It certainly depends on how you look at it. I just hoped that from every perspective killing someone over a wallet would seem absurb and wrong. I guess I was wrong.

I realise that you said he was your teacher, but you also said he was a priest. I was simply trying not to offend you by not referring to him correctly.
Seems I've managed that anyway.

I wasn't offended. I'm sorry if I came over a bit rude.

edit: edited for all the spelling mistakes I made.

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

absolutely right. if we let the constitution be rewritten every time someone got a burr under their saddle we wouldn't have any of the original document left. it would change from fad to fad. generation to generation. and our freedom would change from president to president.
if you don't like the constitution; there's a border to the north and another to the south. don't let the door hit you in the ass.

suppose you're going to ignore my query?

onelongsong

soulsinging wrote:

no, you're not responsible. they're responsible for their actions.

you seem to think im one of the people telling you self-defense is unacceptable. im not. im just a little disturbed by how excited you seem about killing people. it's one thing to engage in necessary self-defense. it's another to sound like you can't wait for someone to pull something so you can pull the trigger and say that you feel no remorse about killing another human being. i think most people would have hoped they didnt have to... whereas you come off here sounding glad that you got the opprtunity. where do you live? im not visiting... you might see a stranger with long hair and gun me down in the streets.

now, answer me a question in return: how many people have you killed in self-defense? and how much did you get off on looking them in the eyes as you killed them?

i don't look for trouble. i rarely leave the ranch. but there's people like me everywhere. a couple years back florida passed a self defence law. kentucky is currently passing legislation to allow the shooting of carjackers. you seem more concerned about the criminals than you do the victims.

i'll answer your question by saying not as many as people say.
try walking through a VA hospital asking the same question. let me know how far you get.

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

i don't look for trouble. i rarely leave the ranch. but there's people like me everywhere. a couple years back florida passed a self defence law. kentucky is currently passing legislation to allow the shooting of carjackers. you seem more concerned about the criminals than you do the victims.

i'll answer your question by saying not as many as people say.
try walking through a VA hospital asking the same question. let me know how far you get.

no, im more concerned about homicidal maniacs. and if you are eager to kill someone, that makes you a homicidal maniac and i dont care who you're killing. if you enjoy killing people, the fact that you're out there looking for bad people to kill doesn't make you better than a murderer. it makes you a psychotic vigilante.

VA? is that veteran? if you did your killing in a war that's a wee bit different my friend. you made it sound like you've singlehandedly sent a dozen would-be pickpockets to their maker early. i should've guessed from your blowhard testosterone bullshit that you were just trying to sound like a tough guy.

so what is it and why do you keep dodging the question? did we catch you in a tall tale?

onelongsong

soulsinging wrote:

no, im more concerned about homicidal maniacs. and if you are eager to kill someone, that makes you a homicidal maniac and i dont care who you're killing. if you enjoy killing people, the fact that you're out there looking for bad people to kill doesn't make you better than a murderer. it makes you a psychotic vigilante.

VA? is that veteran? if you did your killing in a war that's a wee bit different my friend. you made it sound like you've singlehandedly sent a dozen would-be pickpockets to their maker early. i should've guessed from your blowhard testosterone bullshit that you were just trying to sound like a tough guy.

so what is it and why do you keep dodging the question? did we catch you in a tall tale?

i'm not responsable for the way you interpret things. i don't recall saying anything about enjoying anything. i don't recall saying anything about being out "looking" for anyone. i never mentioned a dozen of anything nor did i mention pickpockets. the way you interpret things is not my problem

your question is inappropriate. let me ask you how often you masterbate. answer that in this public forum. i tried to get you to ask a vet or cop the same question. you'll then know how inappropriate it is.
so; would you like to tell the world how often you masterbate?

hippiemom

onelongsong wrote:

i'm not responsable for the way you interpret things. i don't recall saying anything about enjoying anything. i don't recall saying anything about being out "looking" for anyone. i never mentioned a dozen of anything nor did i mention pickpockets. the way you interpret things is not my problem

your question is inappropriate. let me ask you how often you masterbate. answer that in this public forum. i tried to get you to ask a vet or cop the same question. you'll then know how inappropriate it is.
so; would you like to tell the world how often you masterbate?

Hahahahaha .... you blew it on this one, definitely the wrong question to ask ... everyone on the AET knows how often he masturbates!

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

i'm not responsable for the way you interpret things. i don't recall saying anything about enjoying anything. i don't recall saying anything about being out "looking" for anyone. i never mentioned a dozen of anything nor did i mention pickpockets. the way you interpret things is not my problem

your question is inappropriate. let me ask you how often you masterbate. answer that in this public forum. i tried to get you to ask a vet or cop the same question. you'll then know how inappropriate it is.
so; would you like to tell the world how often you masterbate?

usually 5 times a week. less lately cos ive been sick. i have no qualms admitting that, even though it has no social significance.

i never asked you to recount your wartime experiences. if the only killing you ever did was in war, say so and i will let it be and question no further. if you are a police officer who has been forced to shoot on duty, again, i will say no more. but your implication has been that you're a private citizen who likes to take justice into his own hands (as you've also mentioned pansy courts turning criminals loose... funny how you're all for the 2nd amendment but the 4th can be damned eh?).

what i asked was how many people you have shot in america in the act of committing a crime in self-defense. cos you made it sound like it was a lot and that's frightening. that is not an inappropriate question, becos if there are a bunch of yahoos who think a gun gives them the right to play john wayne, i might have to rethink my stances on gun control. if you're gunning down multiple people in "self-defense", im sorry but but the odds of one person being "forced" to defend their lives with killing force on multiple occasions are slim and it implies you're pretty unhinged. i've no desire to return us to the vigilante wild west you seem hellbent on. thus, the militia stockpiles of weapons you have alluded to and the high number of "self-defense" fatalities you claim were justified make me seriously question just how rational gun ownership is.

also, you are not responsible for my reaction, but you are responsible for your words and the fact that i am not the only person who has gotten the impression you seemed eager about killing (collin and know1 both asked similar questions to mine) shows you're saying some disturbing things.

soulsinging

hippiemom wrote:

Hahahahaha .... you blew it on this one, definitely the wrong question to ask ... everyone on the AET knows how often he masturbates!

and now everyone on the moving train as well

onelongsong

soulsinging wrote:

usually 5 times a week. less lately cos ive been sick. i have no qualms admitting that, even though it has no social significance.

i never asked you to recount your wartime experiences. if the only killing you ever did was in war, say so and i will let it be and question no further. if you are a police officer who has been forced to shoot on duty, again, i will say no more. but your implication has been that you're a private citizen who likes to take justice into his own hands (as you've also mentioned pansy courts turning criminals loose... funny how you're all for the 2nd amendment but the 4th can be damned eh?).

what i asked was how many people you have shot in america in the act of committing a crime in self-defense. cos you made it sound like it was a lot and that's frightening. that is not an inappropriate question, becos if there are a bunch of yahoos who think a gun gives them the right to play john wayne, i might have to rethink my stances on gun control. if you're gunning down multiple people in "self-defense", im sorry but but the odds of one person being "forced" to defend their lives with killing force on multiple occasions are slim and it implies you're pretty unhinged. i've no desire to return us to the vigilante wild west you seem hellbent on. thus, the militia stockpiles of weapons you have alluded to and the high number of "self-defense" fatalities you claim were justified make me seriously question just how rational gun ownership is.

also, you are not responsible for my reaction, but you are responsible for your words and the fact that i am not the only person who has gotten the impression you seemed eager about killing (collin and know1 both asked similar questions to mine) shows you're saying some disturbing things.

fair enough. 1 dead; i wounded. i got an award for it too. and because my gun was held for the trial; the city gave me money to buy another.
does that answer your question sufficiently?

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

fair enough. 1 dead; i wounded. i got an award for it too. and because my gun was held for the trial; the city gave me money to buy another.
does that answer your question sufficiently?

mostly. do you wish you that you had not had to do it?

onelongsong

soulsinging wrote:

usually 5 times a week. less lately cos ive been sick. i have no qualms admitting that, even though it has no social significance.

i never asked you to recount your wartime experiences. if the only killing you ever did was in war, say so and i will let it be and question no further. if you are a police officer who has been forced to shoot on duty, again, i will say no more. but your implication has been that you're a private citizen who likes to take justice into his own hands (as you've also mentioned pansy courts turning criminals loose... funny how you're all for the 2nd amendment but the 4th can be damned eh?).

what i asked was how many people you have shot in america in the act of committing a crime in self-defense. cos you made it sound like it was a lot and that's frightening. that is not an inappropriate question, becos if there are a bunch of yahoos who think a gun gives them the right to play john wayne, i might have to rethink my stances on gun control. if you're gunning down multiple people in "self-defense", im sorry but but the odds of one person being "forced" to defend their lives with killing force on multiple occasions are slim and it implies you're pretty unhinged. i've no desire to return us to the vigilante wild west you seem hellbent on. thus, the militia stockpiles of weapons you have alluded to and the high number of "self-defense" fatalities you claim were justified make me seriously question just how rational gun ownership is.

also, you are not responsible for my reaction, but you are responsible for your words and the fact that i am not the only person who has gotten the impression you seemed eager about killing (collin and know1 both asked similar questions to mine) shows you're saying some disturbing things.

a word about gun control.
if guns were completely banned; i don't know anyone that would give up their guns. if someone came knocking on my door i'd tell them i heard about the ban and sold them. they won't dig up hundreds of acres trying to find them.
let's not forget black powder weapons. they cannot be regulated and can be mailed. (check out cabalas) i enjoy shooting my black powder weapons and would not have a problem carrying those. you cannot take away a persons right to defend themselves.

soulsinging

onelongsong wrote:

a word about gun control.
if guns were completely banned; i don't know anyone that would give up their guns. if someone came knocking on my door i'd tell them i heard about the ban and sold them. they won't dig up hundreds of acres trying to find them.
let's not forget black powder weapons. they cannot be regulated and can be mailed. (check out cabalas) i enjoy shooting my black powder weapons and would not have a problem carrying those. you cannot take away a persons right to defend themselves.

it's done in many countries without any problems. i have no problem with people defending themselves though. i do have problems with people who think they are above the law and would go looking for criminals to shoot thinking they're doing justice. we have police, courts, and jails for a reason (and they were also provided for in the constitution). that is the impression i got from some of your posts. i hope i was off the mark.

onelongsong

soulsinging wrote:

mostly. do you wish you that you had not had to do it?

yes. but a cop was ambushed by a couple gangbangers and i saved his life. thus the award. i saved at least 4 other lives shooting rattlesnakes when i used to have people coming to visit the ranch. i scared off a mountain lion after it ripped the face off a neighbors horse. guns are tools. and a necessity on the open range.