Porforis
15 years ago

Guns are bad, trust me.

Not the guns, themselves, mind you...

The discussion about guns.

You have the anti-gun industry vs. the pro-gun industry.

It takes more than some wisdom to discern truth, from either side.

There is a far greater supply of guns in this country than wisdom.

Those are the facts, and beyond that, good luck convincing anyone on either side of the issues how they should stand on those issues.

"dfosterf" wrote:



+1 for truth
15 years ago
I've gone to college and grad school with a focus in public health and epidemiology, so it would be easy for me to take that angle when it comes to the gun rights argument. However, I think that's the wrong mentality. It's not about what the numbers say, whether they swing one way or another. What it comes down to is a personal right to defend oneself with the power of a lethal weapon. It is a selfish (minus the negative connotation to that word) decision that we are given the right to make in this country. In other countries, different laws may and do work better. In Sweden, there are far fewer guns - both legal and illegal - in circulation, so stricter gun laws only make sense. In the U.S., there are simply far too many unregistered/illegal guns around for the government to render law abiding citizens impotent by outlawing their firearms.

Times have changed, so I don't think the context in which the 2nd Amendment was written is still as applicable today as it was then. If the purpose is to enable a militia to arm themselves against a corrupt government, then every type of modern weapon should be legal to own. I think, in today's America, it more comes down to allowing us to make the personal choice for life protection, regardless of the possible consequences it may have on us or others which the statistics reflect.
UserPostedImage
Dulak
15 years ago
- little input -

ok I get the fact that guns are not itself bad but they are made with 1 purpose to hurt or kill. Ok so its the people that use the guns in a bad way that are bad ...

I saw the swiss video ... how many f'ed up people do you think live in switzerland? probably not many ...

turn on the news ... in kenosha you can see chicago and milwaukee news ... gun crime going on all the time. Heck I remember when I was a kid someone went into mickey D's in kenosha and took a machine gun? rifle of some sort and hand guns and just opened fire.

I hear horror stories of the violence in south africa (from ex-pats what live in england) ... now there is a place I wouldnt want to live.

Again I dont know how I would address the situation if I had the power; but I would take something away from living in a country where their isnt rampant guns (hardly any). But I would do away with their (excuse the word) pussy punishment system and lax crime prevention.
Heck the cops here in england might as well handcuff themselves and walk around - I feel sorry for them. In the states I tended to fear them.

- to tell you the truth; If I was living in the states and had a family I might even consider owning a gun for protection cuz I dont know what nut job might break in some nite and cause a problem ... to be honest Id rather not have to think that way.

just my 2 cents ...
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago

I've gone to college and grad school with a focus in public health and epidemiology, so it would be easy for me to take that angle when it comes to the gun rights argument. However, I think that's the wrong mentality. It's not about what the numbers say, whether they swing one way or another. What it comes down to is a personal right to defend oneself with the power of a lethal weapon. It is a selfish (minus the negative connotation to that word) decision that we are given the right to make in this country. In other countries, different laws may and do work better. In Sweden, there are far fewer guns - both legal and illegal - in circulation, so stricter gun laws only make sense. In the U.S., there are simply far too many unregistered/illegal guns around for the government to render law abiding citizens impotent by outlawing their firearms.

Times have changed, so I don't think the context in which the 2nd Amendment was written is still as applicable today as it was then. If the purpose is to enable a militia to arm themselves against a corrupt government, then every type of modern weapon should be legal to own. I think, in today's America, it more comes down to allowing us to make the personal choice for life protection, regardless of the possible consequences it may have on us or others which the statistics reflect.

"MassPackersFan" wrote:



Good post. +1 (even though I disagree 🙂 )

The bolded part is why I started my earlier post with the claim that we are under-armed. Yes, we have an incredible number of guns lying around. And, unfortunately, much of that dangerous shortage of wisdom Foster talks about lies in those holding those guns.

And yes, MassPackersFan is correct that today our public discussion is centered around the question of "personal choice for life protection." IMO that is exactly where we have gone wrong. That should *not* be the question.

Oh, to be sure, that Fox video on gun-free zones points out the flawed expectations of gun-control advocates when it comes to the protection issue. But that's merely a political debate, not a constitutional one. If you want that kind of gun control, you vote for politicians who will try to legislate it. If you don't want that kind of gun control, you vote for those politicians who will oppose such legislation. You write letters to the editors decrying legislation or lauding it. You run for political office and all the rest.

But the Second Amendment is not reducible to a political question. The Second Amendemnt is a constitutional question. And in particular, it is a Bill of Rights question. And I don't care what the Supremes have been forgetting since the Earl Warren days, Bill of Rights questions are supposed to be about protections against the state. NOT about protections against each other.

Now if people want to change what the Bill of Rights is about, if they want to make it about protection against each other, then they ought to go the route that Madison, et al, set forth: by amending the Constitution. If people think we need a right to bear arms against robbers and bandits that supersedes the criminal law, then they ought to amend the Constitution to say so. If people think we need to disarm ourselves to protect ourselves against accidents and terrorists and drug dealers, then they ought to amend the Constitution to do so.

If, and this is in the end where I disagree most fundamentally with you, MassPackersFan, if people think the context has changed from the days of Madison and company and the original reason for the Second Amendment doesn't apply, then it is *their* obligation to change the Consitution to reflect that changing context. And to change it in the way that the framers set forth, not by judicial or legislative or executive fiat. Not by appeal to vague platitudes about an "organic document," but by doing the hard work of playing by the rules of constitutional amendment.

Rules that were made difficult on purpose. Rules that were made difficult because the founders knew that politics, and its malleability due to the "needs" of changing "historical context" and the expediency of the moment, would make it too easy to reduce constitutional questions to mere politics.

IMO, as it stands right now, what the Constitution *does* say is that we are free to arm ourselves against the possibility of a corrupt state. And, yes, that means far more than a right to own a handgun or a hunting rifle.

Yes, the idea of automatic weapons or grenades or .50 caliber Rambo guns in the hands of some of my neighbors scares the crap out of me. But, and this is what legislatures (and those who elect them) and courts (and those who litigate in them) have forgotten: we don't get to ignore the Consitution just because its use in one way or another might scare the crap out of us.

The Constitution is either the supreme law of the land, or it binds us not at all. We don't get to have it both ways.

That's what "we, the people" have forgotten.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
zombieslayer
15 years ago
Wade said this:

But the Second Amendment is not reducible to a political question. The Second Amendemnt is a constitutional question. And in particular, it is a Bill of Rights question. And I don't care what the Supremes have been forgetting since the Earl Warren days, Bill of Rights questions are supposed to be about protections against the state. NOT about protections against each other.



+1. You get it.

So the Constitution says it. If you want to change the law, you gotta change the Constitution. I really wish the Supreme Court would finally figure this out once and for all and get rid of 99% of gun laws in the country.

Now that we're talking Constitution, let's give another example so our European friends (some of whom are very intelligent folks but just don't know how American Rights operate) can understand it better.

We also have Free Speech in this country, something for example Germany doesn't have. For instance in Germany, you can't walk around saying "I love me Nazis and I want to start up a local chapter of the Nazi party." You also can't say "The Nazi Holocaust never happened." You can't do that. That will get you thrown in jail.

You can do that here, because it's a Protected Right. The ONLY limits to Free Speech here are slander, copyright violations, privacy violations, and direct personal threats. You can say "Wow, I hate white people. I wish they were all dead and the world would be a better place." You cannot say "Jim Neighbor, I'm going to shoot your punk ass in the head because you're white." If you do, Jim Neighbor has the Right to defend himself, which includes reaching for his gun and pulling the trigger, especially if you're in Jim Neighbor's private property.

You can say "Barack Obama is an idiot and I hope he gets AIDS and dies." You can't say "this is Barack Obama's credit card number - XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX." You also can't take a poem Barack Obama wrote and copyrighted then claim it's yours and sell it.

I am glad for our Rights and I will gladly defend one's Right to be an idiot any day of the week. I'd much rather have my own Choices, something Europe doesn't have, nor doesn't seem to want.

Is this a slam on Europe? Not necessarily. You have your ways, we have ours. I simply prefer ours and wish Europhiles in this country will all move over there. Now the Swiss, that's the exception. The Swiss get it. I could move there in a heartbeat.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Dulak
15 years ago

Wade said this:

But the Second Amendment is not reducible to a political question. The Second Amendemnt is a constitutional question. And in particular, it is a Bill of Rights question. And I don't care what the Supremes have been forgetting since the Earl Warren days, Bill of Rights questions are supposed to be about protections against the state. NOT about protections against each other.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



+1. You get it.

So the Constitution says it. If you want to change the law, you gotta change the Constitution. I really wish the Supreme Court would finally figure this out once and for all and get rid of 99% of gun laws in the country.

Now that we're talking Constitution, let's give another example so our European friends (some of whom are very intelligent folks but just don't know how American Rights operate) can understand it better.

We also have Free Speech in this country, something for example Germany doesn't have. For instance in Germany, you can't walk around saying "I love me Nazis and I want to start up a local chapter of the Nazi party." You also can't say "The Nazi Holocaust never happened." You can't do that. That will get you thrown in jail.

You can do that here, because it's a Protected Right. The ONLY limits to Free Speech here are slander, copyright violations, privacy violations, and direct personal threats. You can say "Wow, I hate white people. I wish they were all dead and the world would be a better place." You cannot say "Jim Neighbor, I'm going to shoot your punk ass in the head because you're white." If you do, Jim Neighbor has the Right to defend himself, which includes reaching for his gun and pulling the trigger, especially if you're in Jim Neighbor's private property.

You can say "Barack Obama is an idiot and I hope he gets AIDS and dies." You can't say "this is Barack Obama's credit card number - XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX." You also can't take a poem Barack Obama wrote and copyrighted then claim it's yours and sell it.

I am glad for our Rights and I will gladly defend one's Right to be an idiot any day of the week. I'd much rather have my own Choices, something Europe doesn't have, nor doesn't seem to want.

Is this a slam on Europe? Not necessarily. You have your ways, we have ours. I simply prefer ours and wish Europhiles in this country will all move over there. Now the Swiss, that's the exception. The Swiss get it. I could move there in a heartbeat.



enjoyed what you wrote ...

here is the thing zombie and this is again after living in london for 2.5 years ... Ive been a widwest boy for 35 years. Lived either in wisconsin, quad cities, or northern illinois during that time ...

people here in london always ask me what I think about it here or even back home. I always tell em this "both countries have their pluses and minuses"

IMO there are some good things about the laws here and some bad same with the states ... doesnt mean you cant have stricter gun control and still have freedom of speech. Or better public transport and still cheap gasoline tax or more secure borders (although who needs em when the whole EU and ex-commonwealth countries live here now ... joke aside (hey they let me in ;)) ... oh I almost forgot my friend used to call wisconsin the wellfare state ... he obviously hasnt been to the UK ...

just some examples ...

Im going out tonite in the biggest city in the UK on new years - and I have little fear someones going to pull a gun on me. If they pull a knife well least I got a chance. In the states if I went out in chicago and had to take public transport from the club to home well I might not feel as comfortable ...

enjoy your new year ...
Porforis
15 years ago
Dumb question, but why would you live in Chicago?
Dulak
15 years ago

Dumb question, but why would you live in Chicago?

"Porforis" wrote:



I agree ... some punk football team resides there I heard ;)

sometimes jobs/family/house arrest/parole/moon gravitational pull/financial situations/pets dictate where people live 😉
zombieslayer
15 years ago



enjoyed what you wrote ...

here is the thing zombie and this is again after living in london for 2.5 years ... Ive been a widwest boy for 35 years. Lived either in wisconsin, quad cities, or northern illinois during that time ...

people here in london always ask me what I think about it here or even back home. I always tell em this "both countries have their pluses and minuses"

IMO there are some good things about the laws here and some bad same with the states ... doesnt mean you cant have stricter gun control and still have freedom of speech. Or better public transport and still cheap gasoline tax or more secure borders (although who needs em when the whole EU and ex-commonwealth countries live here now ... joke aside (hey they let me in ;)) ... oh I almost forgot my friend used to call wisconsin the wellfare state ... he obviously hasnt been to the UK ...

just some examples ...

Im going out tonite in the biggest city in the UK on new years - and I have little fear someones going to pull a gun on me. If they pull a knife well least I got a chance. In the states if I went out in chicago and had to take public transport from the club to home well I might not feel as comfortable ...

enjoy your new year ...

"Dulak" wrote:



Dulak - Most crime in the USA is in "bad areas." You avoid the bad areas and your risk for being a victim of crime is very, very small.

The media loves to report scare stories. They sell.

America is very safe. If I'm going to die before I hit 90-something, it will be in a car accident.

I've partied as hard as anyone. Never once been mugged. I've lived in Houston, San Francisco, Seattle, and Los Angleles, plus a multitude of smaller cities.

The English love to believe America is big and bad and scary. England seriously has envy issues. Behind closed doors, you see it. The English are envious of us and will use any angle they can find to "prove" they're "better" than we are. I see it all the time with their views on guns. It's more a personal attack than it is a logical attack.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
dfosterf
15 years ago
Everyone is bringing up some very good points, including our European members.


The absolute polarization of both sides of the gun control debate create such an incredibly bad set of circumstances to even begin to objectively preserve 2nd amendment rights for all and at once protect certain segments of the citizenry from one another.

Everything is a threat to my liberties, says one side.

What do you need [insert weapon here] that for? Says one side.

In the meantime you got snot-nosed little thugs running around in their hoodies playing macho-man with one-another, not wantin' to get disrespected, so the best solution is, "gonna put a cap in someone's ass."

I would imagine that if I lived in the neighborhood of those young turks I wouldn't be too terribly concerned about our founding father's intentions with respect to the drafting of our bill of rights, or the threat of an all-controlling government...I think it fair to say I might have some bigger fish to fry.

That polarization isn't going to change. Our liberties are not without some serious costs, and I'm not going to argue with anyone about their rights, but don't get confused...our society pays a pretty heavy toll for them, and some of it is just too damned expensive, imo. And both sides are equally at fault--the anti-gun zealots scare the shit out of the gun zealots, and vice-versa.

Maybe pretty cheap in the big scheme of things in the white-bread world of Wisconsin, Iowa...wherever... And maybe I didn't like the laws in D.C. that got "us" a win---But if you ever walked down to 14th and U and it's environs on a warm Friday evening, you just might habla where the motivations for such "draconian" measures might come from.

And I am a "gun guy". I can't believe I'm even bothering to comment.
Fan Shout
dfosterf (22h) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup
dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw
dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.
Zero2Cool (11-Jun) : He's been sporting a ring for a while now. It's probably Madonna.
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : We only do the tea before whoopee, it relaxes me.
wpr (10-Jun) : That's awesome Martha.
Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : How's the ayahuasca tea he makes, Martha?
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : Turns out he like older women
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : I wasn't supposed to say anything, but yes the word is out and we are happy 😂😂😂
Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : I might be late on this but Aaron Rodgers is now married
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Jun / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

16-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

15-Jun / Random Babble / Martha Careful

14-Jun / Around The NFL / beast

14-Jun / Community Welcome! / dfosterf

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