Cheesey
  • Cheesey
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
5 years ago
So, Barfarn, according to your line of thinking, if a gun is stolen from a law abiding citizen, that citizen should have to pay for it.
Ok, then by that line of thinking. Do you own a car? If some punk steals it and kills someone while driving YOUR stolen car, YOU should have to pay for it?
There are drunk drivers killing people every day. So I guess we should outlaw cars.
People have killed people with knives, baseball bats and many other things. I guess we should outlaw those too.
You have the typical liberal taught thinking. Blame the instrument instead of the criminal.
We have “the right to keep and bear arms”. That is a right as an American.
There will always be guns. No law will remove all of them. It will only remove them from good people, not from the crooks. Why can’t you understand that? It’s pretty easy to understand.
We already have thousands of laws in the books reguarding robbing places, murder, drive bys, and so on. Do those laws work? Nope. Why? Because there are evil people. No “law” will ever stop them. The ONLY way to stop them is through fitting punishment. There are crimes committed which a criminal should NEVER get paroled from, yet they get back out on the streets and commit even worse crimes. Prison is a revolving door. Until we stop that, no one is safe.
Guns are NOT the problem. Families without dads, no punishment for young offenders, or at best a slap on the wrist, and no serious consequences for their actions. THAT is the problem.
If you are not taught morals and respect for others at home when you are young, what do you expect from these people?
It’s no longer “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, it’s “ME FIRST, and who the hell cares about you”. That is the problem in this country today.



KRK
  • KRK
  • Veteran Member
5 years ago
Barfarn: I always enjoy reading your arguments, even though I disagree with many of your positions. You put alot of thought into your positions and I appreciate it.

I disagree with anything that is mandatory, because when the government get involved with mandatory things, they invariably add strings which screw things up.

My basic disagreement in your position is that the Constitution clearly states that every citizen shall have the right to bear arms.

It is clear from the one of the framers of our constitution, the second amendment contemplated:[list]
  • All citizens would/could be armed
  • They would be armed a manner and to a level to intimidate the federal government of overreach (i.e. to use armed force against a government which chose to abrogate citizens’ rights)
  • Nowhere in the discussion is being armed for home defense, self-defense or hunting [/list]
  • Those politicians who would confiscate weapons or force buybacks are violating our constitutional rights…and if successful, tyranny will follow, as it has (or will happen) every other country where citizens are disarmed.Federalist 46 James Madison aka Publius wrote on Tuesday, January 29, 1788

    To the People of the State of New York:

    RESUMING the subject of the last paper, I proceed to inquire whether the federal government or the State governments will have the advantage with regard to the predilection and support of the people. Notwithstanding the different modes in which they are appointed, we must consider both of them as substantially dependent on the great body of the citizens of the United States. I assume this position here as it respects the first, reserving the proofs for another place. The federal and State governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers, and designed for different purposes. The adversaries of the Constitution seem to have lost sight of the people altogether in their reasonings on this subject; and to have viewed these different establishments, not only as mutual rivals and enemies, but as uncontrolled by any common superior in their efforts to usurp the authorities of each other. These gentlemen must here be reminded of their error. They must be told that the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone, and that it will not depend merely on the comparative ambition or address of the different governments, whether either, or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdiction at the expense of the other. Truth, no less than decency, requires that the event in every case should be supposed to depend on the sentiments and sanction of their common constituents...

    Were it admitted, however, that the Federal government may feel an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the latter would still have the advantage in the means of defeating such encroachments. If an act of a particular State, though unfriendly to the national government, be generally popular in that State and should not too grossly violate the oaths of the State officers, it is executed immediately and, of course, by means on the spot and depending on the State alone. The opposition of the federal government, or the interposition of federal officers, would but inflame the zeal of all parties on the side of the State, and the evil could not be prevented or repaired, if at all, without the employment of means which must always be resorted to with reluctance and difficulty....

    The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens (krk insertion...that roughly all male population) with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. ...

    PUBLIUS

    μολων λαβε, KRK
    In Luce tua Videmus Lucem KRK
    dhazer
    5 years ago
    Criminals for gun control 


    Don't remember how to link a video


    Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
    isocleas2
    5 years ago
    I love Barfan sometimes, this was turning into a NRA meeting and then he busts through the wall like the koolaid man.

    As someone who thinks we need alot more gun control I think you're seeing stores stepping in to regulate because government is inept at doing so. The vast majority of Americans (including gun owning republicans) want to see some common sense legislation, everyone can get behind background checks that keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. Close loopholes in private seller sales etc. So when government won't do their job and govern you leave it to private companies to regulate and they have few options besides ban them all.

    I too would like to see responsible gun owners have their guns on them in stores. However if you cant determine who the good actors are from the bad then everyone gets treated the same.
    Cheesey
    • Cheesey
    • Preferred Member Topic Starter
    5 years ago
    We don’t need more gun control. We need CRIMINAL control.
    We have hundreds of gun laws already. Making more useless laws only affects law abiding citizens.
    They already don’t obey the laws. Do you really think making more laws (that they will ignore) will make any difference?
    I don’t understand why that’s so difficult for people to comprehend.
    More gun control laws are just useless feel good things. It makes people feel good, feel like they did something to combat crime, but accomplished nothing.
    We need to build more prisons, and seriously punish those that commit violent crimes.
    Until they get serious on this, nothing will get better.

    isocleas2
    5 years ago
    The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and your idea is to lock up even more people. Tough on crime, weak on facts arguments won't work.

    Plenty of countries have gun control laws that work perfectly fine. You want an example? Check out Australia, they have plenty of guns even after regulation. Infact gun owning enthusiasts are buying and registering more guns than ever before. You know what they have less of? Mass shootings. Something we lead the world in and its not even close (and increasing).

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-44105129 
    Cheesey
    • Cheesey
    • Preferred Member Topic Starter
    5 years ago

    The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world, and your idea is to lock up even more people. Tough on crime, weak on facts arguments won't work.

    Plenty of countries have gun control laws that work perfectly fine. You want an example? Check out Australia, they have plenty of guns even after regulation. Infact gun owning enthusiasts are buying and registering more guns than ever before. You know what they have less of? Mass shootings. Something we lead the world in and its not even close (and increasing).

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-44105129 

    Originally Posted by: isocleas2 


    Really? Because I saw on tv where Australia took away guns from law abiding citizens, and the crooks were still armed.
    So we have the highest incarceration. Why? Because we have too many criminals. So what are we supposed to do? What we HAVE been doing for too long? Letting dangerous criminals back on the street? How has that worked out? I’d rather they keep building prisons and putting the animals behind bars where they’d belong and where they aren’t allowed to make more victims.
    Doesn’t that make more sense?
    I see on the news where felons, who aren’t supposed to have guns are shooting people. Bad guys that want to use a gun can always have access to them.
    Mass shootings are done by evil self centered people. We had more guns in this country 50 years ago. Teenagers would go to school, have their guns in their cars and go out hunting after class. Now we have schools with “no guns” , and yet we have mass shootings.
    Again, it has more to do with how kids are raised, not the guns. Kids are taught they have “rights” and not responsibilities. It’s more “how DARE you DIS me!” Then they shoot a bunch of people.
    A guy gets fired from his job, and figures he has a valid reason to kill people. Where does this line of thinking come from?
    This country has turned their collective backs on God. That means there are no absolutes. Whatever feels good to YOU is all that matters.
    When it’s been made legal to kill unborn children, what can you expect the country to do? It goes downhill.
    I was bullied really bad in school, yet I never even considered taking one of my Dad’s guns and killing my tormentors. I don’t even remember anyone else doing that.
    Guns are not the problem. Bad people, that’s what we have to go after.


    earthquake
    5 years ago
    Honestly, if you can't handle a trip to the drug store without a firearm, you probably need therapy.

    In any case, the statistics on this are very clear on this, the "good guy with a gun" theory is complete and utter bullshit. The "good guy" is far more likely to be unable to operate their firearm is a stressful situation, injure themselves, or injure an innocent bystander. It's obvious why Walgreens wants you to keep it at home.
    blank
    Barfarn
    5 years ago
    Cheesy address the issue don’t deflect or use false equivalence. It is guys like you that create the greatest supply of guns to bad guys. You need to come to grips with this. If you lose a gun or do something that allows one to fall into someone’s hands do you think you should be free of responsibility?

    If you are careless with whom you allow to drive your car there can be both civil and criminal liability. Though when people start taking cars and killing; then more drastic measures must be instituted.

    There needs to be a deterrent for the “good people” with guns that let criminals gain access to them. A true conservative believes you play, you pay. This concept should not be ignored when it’s not convenient for you. That’s the me first stuff you rail about. Your "more laws don’t work" argument is destroyed; because my proposed laws will alter behavior of all like you.

    FACT: removing guns will lower the crime rate [some wont commit crimes with only a knife or a bat] and lower the amount damage inflicted when crimes occur. A criminal is a bad thing; a criminal with a gun is a real bad thing; a criminal with body armor and assault weapons is a really really really bad thing. How can you not see the difference?

    Personally, I think possessing guns is an important privilege just like flying or driving; but if any of these become too dangerous for society, something needs to be done.

    KRK [And Cheesey too] I think you’re a good man and intelligent. But, gotta give you the [Facepalm] sorry! You’re bogged down under MOUNTAINS of propaganda!!!!

    First, gun rights are not in the Constitution; they’re in the Bill of Rights [I know you know this]. But, the BOR was not created until FOUR YEARS AFTER the Federalist papers were written.

    Second, The Federalist Papers do not contain the true thoughts of the writers…THIS WAS PROPAGANDA designed to combat the Anti-Federalist papers to induce states to ratify the Constitution and to encourage those already ratified not to “unratify.” You highlighted, “ultimate authority resides in the people alone…;” Madison is an effing LIAR. The Koch Bros spent gazillions to promote the Federalist papers. Any media outlet you engage that speaks of the Federalist Papers as anything other than toilet paper must be ignored. Its like quoting Goebbels’s diary to support the virtues of the Third Reich.

    Third, Madison was a total piece of shit. Another shattered BS indoctrinated myth of my youth. This asshole in the later years of his life doctored some of his letters and actually forged Jefferson’s handwriting to try to buoy his legacy. Madison bragged that he makes $257/yr off a Negro and only needs to spend $12-13 for their upkeep. If this exploitative 5'4" little prick is a founding father, I’ll say I’m adopted.

    Fourth, the best source of figuring out what these guys were thinking is the floor debates. Most of these notes were kept by Madison; but now a new book by Mary Sarah Bilder argues that Madison doctored the Convention notes too. READ THAT BOOK!!! So what the hell; we simply cant trust ANYTHING we were taught.

    Here’s Madison’s initial proposal for what became the 2nd Amendment: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.”

    Madison is saying if you dont want to carry a gun; you cant be compelled to be in a militia. It is impossible to argue that the right to possess weapons is not contingent on being in the militia.

    All gun loving propaganda ignores the militia clause from Amendment #2 to get it to say what they want it to say. But, the reality is that it is there. Gun ownership is simply not nor has ever been a Constitutional right and the legacy of Scalia and the other 4 goofs that rendered Heller is forever tarnished.
    Zero2Cool
    5 years ago

    Cheesy address the issue don’t deflect or use false equivalence. It is guys like you that create the greatest supply of guns to bad guys.

    Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



    What the hell? Why can't you make your point without this targeting bullshit? It's guys like you?

    Focus on the topic, not one another. This isn't rocket science. It's called not being a douche.
    Fan Shout
    wpr (4h) : 7 days
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
    Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
    dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
    Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
    dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
    dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
    dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
    dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
    dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
    Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
    Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
    Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately
    Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.
    dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.
    Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not
    Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.
    Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?
    Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?
    Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb
    wpr (9-Apr) : yay
    Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland
    Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'
    Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
    Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
    Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    Recent Topics
    2h / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    15-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

    11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

    2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

    28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.