# To those who support anti-gunners wanting mental health checks for your Rights?   Homesickness reason to deny 2nd Amendment Rights...this is why.....



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2022)

Because the anti-gun extremists will do anything to take our guns, we find it hard to support any measure they push...because any measure they push is done with the knowledge they will exploit it to ban and confiscate guns...

When the uninformed pro-2nd Amendment supporters nod their heads in agreement when anti-gun extremists talk about mental health exams before gun ownership is allowed......I have a strong suspicion they don't think being home sick is a mental illness......but the anti-gunners do.......









						Navy sailor denied gun in Hawaii because of homesickness
					

The state of Hawaii is potentially the most beautiful in the nation unless you’re just not into tropical beaches. However, they’ve got some pretty stupid gun laws on the books. We’ve...




					bearingarms.com


----------



## Donald H (Apr 8, 2022)

America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.

What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.

If Hawaii forfeits the safety of people on the streets then their tourism will quickly decline and safer tourist destinations will be chosen by tourists.

If the progun fraternity started to turn Honolulu into another shithole US city. (their description for cities) then Honolulu will become a ghost town overnight!

Logical consequences will come home with the guns and the chickens at the same time for the gunners. Let this one go 2A.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Apr 8, 2022)

It's no use.
They have the Supreme Court right where they want it now.
Turn em all in now or have them taken away forcefully later.

CHOOSE

"All that was required for evil men to prevail and for a black woman to take your guns away was for good men to do nothing"
Biden is beefing up the ATF getting ready.   This is it folks.   Goodbye to your gun rights and your guns   
Remember when Americans could own guns and even posses them ?   Good times they were.
Criminals and cartels will be the only Americans allowed to keep em going forward.


----------



## Ghost1776 (Apr 8, 2022)

Lose the 2nd you lose your 1st amendments. Both go bye bye


----------



## pknopp (Apr 8, 2022)

When cops can shoot you for exercising your 2nd Amendment rights we no longer really have a 2nd Amendment. 

 (as to the issue here, if we still had a 2nd Amendment, Hawaii would be violating his rights)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Because the anti-gun extremists will do anything to take our guns, we find it hard to support any measure they push...because any measure they push is done with the knowledge they will exploit it to ban and confiscate guns...
> 
> When the uninformed pro-2nd Amendment supporters nod their heads in agreement when anti-gun extremists talk about mental health exams before gun ownership is allowed......I have a strong suspicion they don't think being home sick is a mental illness......but the anti-gunners do.......
> 
> ...



Yeah, that sounds a bit dodgy.  Given that _supposedly_ he wasn't diagnosed as being depressed or having any significant mental health issues.

Something tells me there's more to this, but in the end it's a pretty recent court case (April of this year, which is kinda close to NOW), so it'll probably come out alright from Mr. Santucci.

I wouldn't worry too much about it.  Your guns are safe.  Hold them tight and kiss them when you tuck them in tonight but don't be scared.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 8, 2022)

Ghost1776 said:


> Lose the 2nd you lose your 1st amendments. Both go bye bye



Really?  When was the last time the 1st Amendment was secured here in America by the 2nd?  (Genuinely curious.)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 8, 2022)

pknopp said:


> When cops can shoot you for exercising your 2nd Amendment rights we no longer really have a 2nd Amendment.



Philando Castille would like to speak with your manager.



pknopp said:


> (as to the issue here, if we still had a 2nd Amendment, Hawaii would be violating his rights)



"If we still had a 2nd Amendment".  That's some pretty hard-core playing of the victim there.  Kudos!  

We are a nation literally AWASH in guns.  More than 1 gun for every man, woman and child in this nation.  Why do you guys say stupid things like that?  LOL


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 8, 2022)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> It's no use.
> They have the Supreme Court right where they want it now.
> Turn em all in now or have them taken away forcefully later.



LOL.  Clutch them pearls harder!



BasicHumanUnit said:


> "All that was required for evil men to prevail and for a black woman to take your guns away was for good men to do nothing"



And by "do nothing" you mean not brandish their weapons or shoot something?



BasicHumanUnit said:


> Biden is beefing up the ATF getting ready.



LOL!  OOooooo!  Hide!  Hide your precious guns and then hide under the bed so that Joe doesn't see you when he goes out huntin' for your guns!



BasicHumanUnit said:


> This is it folks.   Goodbye to your gun rights and your guns



Sounds pretty scary there in your imagination.



BasicHumanUnit said:


> Remember when Americans could own guns and even posses them ?



Yeah...I call that "today".



BasicHumanUnit said:


> Good times they were.
> Criminals and cartels will be the only Americans allowed to keep em going forward.



LOL.  You have a rich imaginary world.  Enjoy it!  Do they have unicorns in your fantasy land?


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 8, 2022)

PV System said:


> Really?  When was the last time the 1st Amendment was secured here in America by the 2nd?  (Genuinely curious.)




Every day......


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 8, 2022)

Donald H said:


> America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.
> 
> What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.
> 
> ...


If there are people walking around who "can't be trusted" around a weapon, then they shouldn't be walking around. 
End of story.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> When the uninformed pro-2nd Amendment supporters nod their heads in agreement when anti-gun extremists talk about mental health exams before gun ownership is allowed......I have a strong suspicion they don't think being home sick is a mental illness......but the anti-gunners do.......


Don't forget, back in 2016 Obama signed an executive order to have disabled people with phobias and eating disorders considered mentally ill and blocked from having guns.

One of the first thing the Mr. Trump did in 2017 was sign legislation putting a stop to that.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 8, 2022)

Donald H said:


> America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.
> What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.
> If Hawaii forfeits the safety of people on the streets then their tourism will quickly decline and safer tourist destinations will be chosen by tourists.
> If the progun fraternity started to turn Honolulu into another shithole US city. (their description for cities) then Honolulu will become a ghost town overnight!
> Logical consequences will come home with the guns and the chickens at the same time for the gunners. Let this one go 2A.


Hawaii will not be permitted to violate people's civil liberties.  I don't care how much Hawaiians hate America's freedom.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 8, 2022)

PV System said:


> Yeah, that sounds a bit dodgy.


Gun control always does.




PV System said:


> Something tells me there's more to this,


Maybe, but probably not.  This sort of thing is standard operating procedure with gun control.

Barack Obama signed an order having disabled people with phobias and eating disorders declared mentally ill and blocked from having guns.

If Hillary had been elected in 2016, it probably would still be in effect.




PV System said:


> Philando Castille would like to speak with your manager.


When you are reaching for something during a traffic stop, and the police officer repeatedly (with rapidly increasing urgency) tells you to stop reaching for your gun, maybe stop reaching and keep your empty hands visible.

He doesn't know what you are reaching for.


----------



## pknopp (Apr 9, 2022)

PV System said:


> Philando Castille would like to speak with your manager.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



 You did nothing to address what I said. You even point out the problem and still ramble.

 Philandro Castile is a perfect example of that I am saying. Just as Amir Locke is.


----------



## Donald H (Apr 9, 2022)

The majority by far is in favour of arming Hawaiians and so that will most likely happen there too. That will of course cause the shootings statistics to rise dramatically.

Tourism will be hit hard as visitors from other countries will go to safer countries where they can relax and enjoy their holidays with their kids. 
From experience in both Hawaii and Cuba, there's nothing in Hawaii that Cuba can't provide better. And prices in Cuba are much lower.

The majority opinion is definitely in favour of arming Hawaiians but that's the price that has to be paid for  the gun fraternity to be free.
The people's freedom to be safe on the streets will just have to be ignored.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 9, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Barack Obama signed an order having disabled people with phobias and eating disorders declared mentally ill and blocked from having guns.



OK, so put your rhetorical money where your rhetorical mouth is:  what mental illnesses SHOULD have their gun rights limited?

I assume, being a good 2A Defender you will say NONE, but I'm genuinely curious.

Should there be ANY mental illness that keeps people from access to guns?  If so *what are your guidelines?*


----------



## Donald H (Apr 9, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> If there are people walking around who "can't be trusted" around a weapon, then they shouldn't be walking around.
> End of story.


For Hawaii, I would have agreed on that when I went to Hawaii 25 or 30 years ago.

Now, it's none of my business and I would have to agree with the progunners on arming everybody with handguns. Perhaps even enact a law that says everybody must pack heat at all times, tourists included. This has been suggested for other places in America. 2A will be able to verify that.
Guns could be issued at the airport.


----------



## miketx (Apr 9, 2022)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> It's no use.
> They have the Supreme Court right where they want it now.
> Turn em all in now or have them taken away forcefully later.
> 
> ...


Then I guess we'll have to give it them our guns!


----------



## miketx (Apr 9, 2022)

Donald H said:


> but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.


Hey shtstain, nowhere on the 4473 does it ask why you want a gun. Liar.


----------



## Donald H (Apr 9, 2022)

miketx said:


> Hey shtstain, nowhere on the 4473 does it ask why you want a gun. Liar.


You have a good point and it's likely a winning point. It's not my business and certainly not my concern but it does look like most people will be legally carrying guns on Hawaii's streets.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 9, 2022)

PV System said:


> OK, so put your rhetorical money where your rhetorical mouth is:  what mental illnesses SHOULD have their gun rights limited?
> I assume, being a good 2A Defender you will say NONE, but I'm genuinely curious.
> Should there be ANY mental illness that keeps people from access to guns?  If so *what are your guidelines?*


If a court finds that an individual person is a danger to himself or others, that would qualify.  The person should have the right to have a lawyer to defend him in court.

An example would be if someone was schizophrenic and thinks that the president is giving him orders to assassinate people.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 9, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> If a court finds that an individual person is a danger to himself or others, that would qualify.  The person should have the right to have a lawyer to defend him in court.



So are you going to pay a lot more in taxes to cover the thousands upon thousands of new court cases to assess mental illness for gun ownership purposes?

Let's say I suffer from terrible depression.  I may have even been institutionalized a couple of times.  But, of course, no COURT finding is involved.  Should I be able to get a gun or in your world do I have to go before a special "court" to determine my sanity?

How do you plan on working that?



Open Bolt said:


> An example would be if someone was schizophrenic and thinks that the president is giving him orders to assassinate people.



That's an obvious and easy mark.  I'm talking about the much larger, more subtle versions of mental illness that hide something that might be much worse in the making.

You've now proposed an entirely new COURT for that.  We can't even keep up with court cases as they are NOW.

And your proposal would be a serious tax hike for everyone.  

But, OK.


----------



## Donald H (Apr 9, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> If a court finds that an individual person is a danger to himself or others, that would qualify.  The person should have the right to have a lawyer to defend him in court.
> 
> An example would be if someone was schizophrenic and thinks that the president is giving him orders to assassinate people.


You're suggesting that every mentally ill person who desires to carry a gun, would first need to have his/her day in court. 

Hardly practical and certainly an infringement on his/her 2A rights!

The only failsafe solution is to grant every mentally ill person his right to have guns, and then see what he does with them. 

Otherwise mentally ill persons' 2A rights will be stripeed away.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 9, 2022)

PV System said:


> So are you going to pay a lot more in taxes to cover the thousands upon thousands of new court cases to assess mental illness for gun ownership purposes?


Why would there be new court cases?  I don't anticipate any big increases.




PV System said:


> Let's say I suffer from terrible depression.  I may have even been institutionalized a couple of times.  But, of course, no COURT finding is involved.  Should I be able to get a gun or in your world do I have to go before a special "court" to determine my sanity?
> How do you plan on working that?


Normal court will suffice.  If someone feared you were suicidal, you could be ruled a danger to yourself.

I would also like to have a system where suicidal people could _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns for safekeeping until they got better.




PV System said:


> You've now proposed an entirely new COURT for that.  We can't even keep up with court cases as they are NOW.


No.  Existing courts are fine.




PV System said:


> And your proposal would be a serious tax hike for everyone.
> But, OK.


I don't see where the increased expense would come from.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 9, 2022)

Donald H said:


> You're suggesting that every mentally ill person who desires to carry a gun, would first need to have his/her day in court.


No.  They would posses that right already.

It would take a court (with due process) to strip that right from them.


----------



## Donald H (Apr 9, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> No.  They would posses that right already.
> 
> It would take a court (with due process) to strip that right from them.


You stuck your foot in your mouth and got caught. 



> If a court finds that an individual person is a danger to himself or others, that would qualify. The person should have the right to have a lawyer to defend him in court.



No court has a right to decide if a person is entitled to own guns. No court will decide that until the person has demonstrated that he/she shouldn't have been permitted to carry guns.

Don't carelessly relinquish other citizens' 2A rights, based on suspicions of mental illness. 

Blood was spilt to established 2A rights. Blood will need to be spilt to take them away. 

Allowing mentally ill citizens to kill others is a small price to pay for America's vision of what freedom means.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 9, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Why would there be new court cases?  I don't anticipate any big increases.



You said it would have be determined by a court.  That was your response.  



Open Bolt said:


> Normal court will suffice.



LOL.  Not if we are going to put a huge number of people through it, it won't.  We can't keep up with court cases as it is.  



Open Bolt said:


> If someone feared you were suicidal, you could be ruled a danger to yourself.



Again, you go with the low-hanging fruit.

You act as if someone couldn't have a severe mental illness that didn't rise to  the occasion of a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER that anyone can see.  No, that's not how mental illness works all the time.  In fact I bet quite a few of America's best mass-murderer-shooters might have skated for quite some time under the radar of mental health professionals.



Open Bolt said:


> I would also like to have a system where suicidal people could _voluntarily_ and _temporarily_ hand in their guns for safekeeping until they got better.



I'm OK with that.  I don't know why you limit all mental illness to only the most insane or the suicidal.  It's like you think mental illness is all obvious extremes.


Open Bolt said:


> I don't see where the increased expense would come from.



That's because you don't understand that America's courts are overloaded now as it is.  If you want everyone's mental health interpretted based on COURT FINDINGS then you will have to have the money come from somewhere.

I know a lot of Conservatives don't understand that there is no "free lunch", so much is given to them that they get spoiled and they think it's ALL free.

Sorry, that isn't how it works at all.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 9, 2022)

Donald H said:


> Don't carelessly relinquish other citizens' 2A rights, based on suspicions of mental illness.



Indeed!  The mentally ill should have as many guns as they want!  



Donald H said:


> Blood was spilt to established 2A rights. Blood will need to be spilt to take them away.



That sounds like someone with florid fantasies of persecution and paranoia.  Best to arm people with that view.



Donald H said:


> Allowing mentally ill citizens to kill others is a small price to pay for America's vision of what freedom means.



A very small price to pay.  So can we dispense with everyone acting like they feel "sad" when there's been another mass shooting?  "THotz-n-Prayerz" are a joke.  We couldn't care less as a nation.

We as a nation seem to PREFER the shootings.

America loves more mass shootings and the people who die are to be quickly forgotten as more bodies on the alter of the Second Amendment!


----------



## Donald H (Apr 9, 2022)

PV System said:


> Indeed!  The mentally ill should have as many guns as they want!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm trying to find some common ground with the pro-gunners, and compromising on their rights to slaughter each other has no cost to me. 

But really, I'm just saying that everybody has their 2A rights, regardless of whether or not they are severely mentally ill. 
Those people will maintain their rights until they demonstrate in blood that they shouldn't have those rights.

Could we consider instances for which those rights must be curtailed?

If a mentally ill person starts shooting windows out without harming others, should he/she lose those rights? That's not an open and shut case without a court deciding. The police don't have a right to decide, we're told.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 9, 2022)

Donald H said:


> You stuck your foot in your mouth and got caught.


I've not noticed such a thing happening to me.




Donald H said:


> No court has a right to decide if a person is entitled to own guns.


That is incorrect.  Every time a court convicts someone of a felony they strip them of their right to own guns.




Donald H said:


> No court will decide that until the person has demonstrated that he/she shouldn't have been permitted to carry guns.


Of course.




Donald H said:


> Don't carelessly relinquish other citizens' 2A rights, based on suspicions of mental illness.


I won't.




Donald H said:


> Blood was spilt to established 2A rights. Blood will need to be spilt to take them away.


Don't worry.  That will never happen.




Donald H said:


> Allowing mentally ill citizens to kill others is a small price to pay for America's vision of what freedom means.


Freedom doesn't mean permitting dangerous people to have guns.




Donald H said:


> If a mentally ill person starts shooting windows out without harming others, should he/she lose those rights?


Their own windows?  Other people's windows?  Out in the open countryside?  In a city where gunfire might be regarded as disturbing the peace?


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 9, 2022)

PV System said:


> You said it would have be determined by a court.  That was your response.


Yes.




PV System said:


> LOL.  Not if we are going to put a huge number of people through it, it won't.  We can't keep up with court cases as it is.


I do not anticipate any increase in the number of cases.




PV System said:


> Again, you go with the low-hanging fruit.
> You act as if someone couldn't have a severe mental illness that didn't rise to  the occasion of a CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER that anyone can see.  No, that's not how mental illness works all the time.  In fact I bet quite a few of America's best mass-murderer-shooters might have skated for quite some time under the radar of mental health professionals.


If a person is not clearly a danger to himself or others, then he has the right to have guns.




PV System said:


> I'm OK with that.  I don't know why you limit all mental illness to only the most insane or the suicidal.  It's like you think mental illness is all obvious extremes.


It's because you are asking about cases where someone could be legitimately deprived of their rights.




PV System said:


> That's because you don't understand that America's courts are overloaded now as it is.  If you want everyone's mental health interpretted based on COURT FINDINGS then you will have to have the money come from somewhere.


I'm not asking for everyone's mental health to be evaluated by the courts.

If someone is brought to court for an assessment that they are a danger to themselves or others, the court can find that they are and deprive them of their rights.

Most people will never be brought into court for such an assessment.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 9, 2022)

2A/RTKBA purists think ( Illegals ) ( Most Mentally Ill ) ( Islamists/Terrorists  who entered the Country Illegally or Legally (Refugees) (Escaped Convicts ) Prisoners let out of Jail due to Overcrowding or Covid) ( Registered Sex Offenders ) (Drug Abusers)  ... should not have their 2A/RTKBA rights Infringed upon


----------



## miketx (Apr 9, 2022)

Failzero said:


> 2A/RTKBA purists think ( Illegals ) ( Most Mentally Ill ) ( Islamists/Terrorists  who entered the Country Illegally or Legally (Refugees) (Escaped Convicts ) Prisoners let out of Jail due to Overcrowding or Covid) ( Registered Sex Offenders ) (Drug Abusers)  ... should not have their 2A/RTKBA rights Infringed upon


You're a liar like all left scum.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> If a court finds that an individual person is a danger to himself or others, that would qualify.  The person should have the right to have a lawyer to defend him in court.
> 
> An example would be if someone was schizophrenic and thinks that the president is giving him orders to assassinate people.


Then that  person should be institutionalized! I’m so sick of people saying we must give up our constitutional rights while at the same time refusing to lock up the crazies and criminals.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Then that  person should be institutionalized! I’m so sick of people saying we must give up our constitutional rights while at the same time refusing to lock up the crazies and criminals.



Your lack of knowledge of American history is well noted.

The US decided back in the 1960's to shutter and close up the "mental institutions".  It was JFK's dream to move mental health back to a more supportive community-based system.  Only problem was that as time went on America did the "cost savings" part by de-institutionalizing (and ELIMINATING AVAILABLE BEDS) of the mentally ill *but never followed up with putting money into community mental health care initiatives*.

Finally in the 1980's Ronald Reagan helped complete the process and now today America has a massive mental health crisis which we are dealing with by simply turning them loose to fend for themselves in a society that couldn't care less about them.

Thankfully for the mentally ill the NRA decided that they could cry alligator tears over the lack of mental healthcare *as a naked attempt to distract the conversation from guns*.  Meanwhile the NRA and the Gun-Advocates aren't actually interested in FIXING mental healthcare, they just want everyone to know that their precious GUNS don't play a role in the mass shootings.

Given that the mentally ill are actually PEOPLE it would be refreshing if gun-fetishists would stop blathering on with their uninformed and repulsive views of mental health.

Thanks.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Then that  person should be institutionalized! I’m so sick of people saying we must give up our constitutional rights while at the same time refusing to lock up the crazies and criminals.



Oh, yeah, can I just say how wonderful it is to see such nastiness and bile ("crazies") posted over a signature that contains a BIBLE VERSE?

LOL.  So are you quoting the Bible ironically?


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Your lack of knowledge of American history is well noted.
> 
> The US decided back in the 1960's to shutter and close up the "mental institutions".  It was JFK's dream to move mental health back to a more supportive community-based system.  Only problem was that as time went on America did the "cost savings" part by de-institutionalizing (and ELIMINATING AVAILABLE BEDS) of the mentally ill *but never followed up with putting money into community mental health care initiatives*.
> 
> ...


Actually, my grasp of history (particularly of this topic) is EXCELLENT  and nothing in my previous post shows a lack of understanding. I know why thd crazies are in the streets. The leftists determined that crazy could be cured by drugs and so the APA launched a movement to shut down the mental hospitals and treat all the nuts as outpatients. It was a complete and total racket meant to bring them a LOT if money. Except they released the loons and then didn’t pay up. The idea was to create a massive system of outpatient services...and of course the psychiatrists would be paid a lot of money to create and run them. Didn’t happen. That and oh yeah the meds don’t cure crazy, and crazy people wouldn’t  have the sense to consistently take them if they did.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Oh, yeah, can I just say how wonderful it is to see such nastiness and bile ("crazies") posted over a signature that contains a BIBLE VERSE?
> 
> LOL.  So are you quoting the Bible ironically?


Crazy people who want to deny people the ability to defend themselves from violent crazy people always whine about the idea of limiting the freedom of violent crazy people.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Oh, yeah, can I just say how wonderful it is to see such nastiness and bile ("crazies") posted over a signature that contains a BIBLE VERSE?
> 
> LOL.  So are you quoting the Bible ironically?


What kind of leftist double talk babble bullshit is this?


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> What kind of leftist double talk babble bullshit is this?


Just more craziness. They are incapable of anything else. Apparently they think Christians should not be allowed to have the basic human right of self defense against violent criminals that they refuse to restrain.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> What kind of leftist double talk babble bullshit is this?



It's just funny to see someone call the mentally ill "crazies" and then see them quote the Bible.  It's a great demonstration of someone who appears to READ the Bible but not really for CONTEXT.

Hypocrisy is fun, especially the religious variety.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Just more craziness. They are incapable of anything else. Apparently they think Christians should not be allowed to have the basic human right of self defense against violent criminals that they refuse to restrain.



LOL.  Hypocrites think Jesus would approve of them denigrating the mentally ill by calling them "crazies".

That's because for SOME "Christians" Jesus is more or less kind of a joke they use to make themselves feel like better people than they REALLY are.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> It's just funny to see someone call the mentally ill "crazies" and then see them quote the Bible.  It's a great demonstration of someone who appears to READ the Bible but not really for CONTEXT.
> 
> Hypocrisy is fun, especially the religious variety.


Lying leftist hypocrites like you are perfect example why monkeys should not breed with savants.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> LOL.  Hypocrites think Jesus would approve of them denigrating the mentally ill by calling them "crazies".
> 
> That's because for SOME "Christians" Jesus is more or less kind of a joke they use to make themselves feel like better people than they REALLY are.


Again the liar vomits.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Actually, my grasp of history (particularly of this topic) is EXCELLENT  and nothing in my previous post shows a lack of understanding.



You simply want to "institutionalize" when American LONG AGO destroyed that ability.  I'd say your post shows a SEVERE lack of knowledge of history.

How many institutions do you think still exist?  LOL.



koshergrl said:


> I know why thd crazies are in the streets. The leftists determined that crazy could be cured by drugs



Wow.  You really DON'T know this topic at all well!  




koshergrl said:


> and so the APA launched a movement to shut down the mental hospitals



LOLOLOL!  



koshergrl said:


> and treat all the nuts as outpatients. It was a complete and total racket meant to bring them a LOT if money. Except they released the loons and then didn’t pay up.



WHO didn't pay up?  LOL.  Yeah, the communities, states and cities.  They saw shuttering the institutions as a cost savings and they refused to vote in the funds to actually take care of the other part.

The "APA" didn't do this.



koshergrl said:


> That and oh yeah the meds don’t cure crazy, and crazy people wouldn’t  have the sense to consistently take them if they did.



What a heartless and viciously stupid view of a complex problem.  You better go blathering on about JESUS some more, hypocrite.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lying leftist hypocrites like you are perfect example why monkeys should not breed with savants.



C'mon, your folks aren't like that all.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> You simply want to "institutionalize" when American LONG AGO destroyed that ability.  I'd say your post shows a SEVERE lack of knowledge of history.
> 
> How many institutions do you think still exist?  LOL.
> 
> ...


Pukes the leftist liar.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> LOL.  Hypocrites think Jesus would approve of them denigrating the mentally ill by calling them "crazies".
> 
> That's because for SOME "Christians" Jesus is more or less kind of a joke they use to make themselves feel like better people than they REALLY are.


They are crazies. One word is as good as another. Christ sent their demons into pigs, and drowned them. I like how you avoid the subject by obsessing over my faith, which you brought into the convo. It’s kind of like maybe you have a demon or two. Do you object to Christ and the term “crazy” because you are a demon possessed crazy yourself?


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> They are crazies. One word is as good as another. Christ sent their demons into pigs, and drowned them. I like how you avoid the subject by obsessing over my faith, which you brought into the convo. It’s kind of like maybe you have a demon or two. Do you object to Christ and the term “crazy” because you are a demon possessed crazy yourself?


Most leftist vermin are the epitomy of crazy.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Most leftist vermin are the epitomy of crazy.


I know. And they don’t want people to be able to defend themselves or their children from them.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> I know. And they don’t want people to be able to defend themselves or their children from them.


Which is why they should be eliminated.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> You simply want to "institutionalize" when American LONG AGO destroyed that ability.  I'd say your post shows a SEVERE lack of knowledge of history.
> 
> How many institutions do you think still exist?  LOL.
> 
> ...


That’s funny because the researchers who endorsed it admitted this is exactly what happened. They thought they were going to get big money from the feds. And they didn’t. They also admitted they didn’t do enough research before suggesting the closure of mental hospitals, and that they should never have given the go ahead to close hospitals before infrastructure was in place.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> That’s funny because the researchers who endorsed it admitted this is exactly what happened. They thought they were going to get big money from the feds. And they didn’t. They also admitted they didn’t do enough research before suggesting the closure of mental hospitals, and that they should never have given the go ahead to close hospitals before infrastructure was in place.



It's almost as if you didn't read my original post.  LOL.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> It's almost as if you didn't read my original post.  LOL.


Typical leftist babble.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> It's almost as if you didn't read my original post.  LOL.



“''Extravagant claims were made for the benefits of shifting from state hospitals to community clinics,'' Dr. Smith said. ''The professional community made mistakes and was overly optimistic..”
 ''Yes, the doctors were overpromising for the politicians. The doctors did not believe that community care would cure schizophrenia, and we did allow ourselves to be somewhat misrepresented.''








						HOW RELEASE OF MENTAL PATIENTS BEGAN (Published 1984)
					






					www.nytimes.com


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Apr 10, 2022)

Donald H said:


> America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.
> 
> What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.
> 
> ...


Are there any other violent acts that can be used against a person, other than gun


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> They are crazies. One word is as good as another.



Oh, OK.   So I can call you "hypocrite"? 



koshergrl said:


> Christ sent their demons into pigs, and drowned them.



Is that your view of how mental health should be taken care of?




koshergrl said:


> I like how you avoid the subject by obsessing over my faith,



Your faith seems like maybe you don't fully care about it.  Not a lot of the compassion we are told you Jesus floggers have.  Guess when it comes to folks who don't want to "put up again thy sword" you can't heap enough opprobrium on 'em or make up enough nasty words.



koshergrl said:


> which you brought into the convo.



YOU post a sig that is a Bible quote.  I found it ironic that you have such hatred for some who suffer.  Makes you sound like you are the hypocrite who is in the public square so you can be seen by others praying.

Polishing your halo.

_"Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward."_




koshergrl said:


> It’s kind of like maybe you have a demon or two.



Well, to be fair, I'm not advertising Jesus while simultaneously doing things that Jesus would find offensive.



koshergrl said:


> Do you object to Christ and the term “crazy” because you are a demon possessed crazy yourself?



Wow.  You really pulled out all the stops there. 

I know you by the fruit you bear.  You dress as a sheep but inside you are a ravening wolf.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Which is why they should be eliminated.



Ooooh, whatcha gonna do Big Mike?  How you going to "eliminate" people who disagree with you?

Too bad you are locked into "Cancel Culture", but I understand.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> “''Extravagant claims were made for the benefits of shifting from state hospitals to community clinics,'' Dr. Smith said. ''The professional community made mistakes and was overly optimistic..”



And, again, it's like you didn't even read my original post.  LOL.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Typical leftist babble.



Mike, the algorithm is just phoning it in right now.  Might want to check to see if your comment actually bears any resemblance to an actual response.

Good luck!


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Oh, OK.   So I can call you "hypocrite"?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You really don’t have much to offer, do you?


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Ooooh, whatcha gonna do Big Mike?  How you going to "eliminate" people who disagree with you?
> 
> Too bad you are locked into "Cancel Culture", but I understand.


Easy, elect people that actually love this country and round scum like you and throw away the key.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> You really don’t have much to offer, do you?



And you do?  Calling those in pain "crazies"?  That your "witness"?

I know exactly how much YOU have to offer.  

_"Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit."_

I see the fruit you bear.  I know all I need to know about you.

Here's another verse you seem to have missed in your Bible:

_"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise."_

You call people in pain "crazies".  I guess that means you want people to call you "hypocrite".


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Easy, elect people that actually love this country and round scum like you and throw away the key.



Ahhh, so you want to ELECT _OTHER_ people to carry out your vicious fantasies.

So brave!


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 10, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Because the anti-gun extremists will do anything to take our guns, we find it hard to support any measure they push...because any measure they push is done with the knowledge they will exploit it to ban and confiscate guns...
> 
> When the uninformed pro-2nd Amendment supporters nod their heads in agreement when anti-gun extremists talk about mental health exams before gun ownership is allowed......I have a strong suspicion they don't think being home sick is a mental illness......but the anti-gunners do.......
> 
> ...


This is a lie.

No one is ‘anti-gun’; to advocate for firearm regulatory measures consistent with the Second Amendment is not to be ‘anti-gun.’

The Supreme Court has held that it is perfectly Constitutional to prohibit those mentally ill from possessing firearms – the Hawaii measure therefore does not violate the Second Amendment.

The issue concerns whether the sailor was afforded due process in determining him to be a prohibited person – therefore, the conflict involves the Fifth Amendment right to due process, not the Second.

This is yet another example of how dishonest conservatives truly are.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 10, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Don't forget, back in 2016 Obama signed an executive order to have disabled people with phobias and eating disorders considered mentally ill and blocked from having guns.
> 
> One of the first thing the Mr. Trump did in 2017 was sign legislation putting a stop to that.


Another lie from the dishonest right – the 2016 SSA EO authorized no such thing.

Those receiving Social Security benefits were afforded their comprehensive due process rights; no guns were ‘taken away.’


----------



## Batcat (Apr 10, 2022)

Donald H said:


> America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.
> 
> What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.
> 
> ...


In Florida if you have a concealed weapons permit you can carry a concealed firearm in most public places and over 2,000,000 Florida residents have that permit.

However in Florida you can also carry a loaded firearm in your car without a permit if it is securely encased (for example in a glove box.

Tourists still come to Florida. We call them “snowbirds” in the winter.









						Florida Concealed Carry Gun Laws & CWL: USCCA CCW Reciprocity Map
					

Last Updated 05/17/2021. Learn about Florida Gun Laws, Concealed Weapons Licenses (CWL) & View the CCW Reciprocity Map.




					www.usconcealedcarry.com


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> And you do?  Calling those in pain "crazies"?  That your "witness"?
> 
> I know exactly how much YOU have to offer.
> 
> ...


You obsess over the irrelevant so that people won’t notice you have nothing intelligent to add to the convo. Funny how you quit talking about the issue...which is that disarming the population is not a reasonable response to the fact that we are overrun by violent, insane criminals and we have thd right to bear arms to protect ourselves.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Ahhh, so you want to ELECT _OTHER_ people to carry out your vicious fantasies.
> 
> So brave!


Yep, and they can torture filth like you long as they like.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> How you going to "eliminate" people who disagree with you?


Is the answer to call them creationists


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> You obsess over the irrelevant so that people won’t notice you have nothing intelligent to add to the convo.



Well, to be fair, at least I'm not a massive hypocrite.



koshergrl said:


> Funny how you quit talking about the issue...which is that disarming the population



That isn't the issue, that's your paranoia.  I'm just fascinated at people who are religious hypocrites.



koshergrl said:


> is not a reasonable response to the fact that we are overrun by violent, insane criminals and we have thd right to bear arms to protect ourselves.



_"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."_  (I'll give you 5,000 guesses as to who this quote is attributed to.)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Is the answer to call them creationists



YOU were the one who said that the scientists are paid to be wrong.  That's a creationist argument.

Maybe you shouldn't use Creationist arguments if you aren't a creationist.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Your guns are safe.


Why wouldn't they be 


PV System said:


> When was the last time the 1st Amendment was secured here in America by the 2nd?


The deterrent works!!!!!

I have a fire extinguisher I have never used too, but that doesn't mean I ignore the risk.  Do I need to explain risk to you... again?


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> YOU were the one who said that the scientists are paid to be wrong.  That's a creationist argument.
> 
> Maybe you shouldn't use Creationist arguments if you aren't a creationist.


A creationists argument is that the earth is ~6,000 years old, dummy.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> YOU were the one who said that the scientists are paid to be wrong.


Actually I said climate scientists are paid to be wrong.  

They wouldn't have a job unless they trumped up an imaginary crisis.  

Now do you understand?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Why wouldn't they be



Ask your buddies the gun fetishists.  They see threats under their beds and in their closets.



ding said:


> The deterrent works!!!!!



In what world does that logic hold???  LOL.



ding said:


> I have a fire extinguisher I have never used too, but that doesn't mean I ignore the risk.



So you think a gun in the home is similar to a fire extinguisher?  OK.  May I ask how many people you, personally, have shot and killed?  I ask because I assume most people who talk a big game about defending their homes with a gun probably have not shot and killed someone.  Some might be former military, but for the most part I assume you are just another American man-boy who saw one too many John Wayne movies and fancies himself capable of taking a human life.

From what I understand police and even military people often have a great deal of difficulty killing someone.  Apparently it kind of "sticks" with you...even if you did it in self defense.

But, again, I could be wrong about you, Tex.



ding said:


> Do I need to explain risk to you... again?



You never did that I saw.  But by all means knock yerself out.  Make sure it's couched in terms of "business risk".


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Well, to be fair, at least I'm not a massive hypocrite.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you maintain that Christians should allow people to kill them, and not speak against fascism? 
Still not speaking to the topic. How telling.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> A creationists argument is that the earth is ~6,000 years old, dummy.



LOL. So you haven't spoken to any Creationists, eh?

OK, let me explain it to you.  The Creationists ALWAYS claim that the reason evolution is in the science journals and NOT creationism is because Creationists who do really good science work get denied access to publishing or lose their jobs _because they don't toe the Evolution line_.  

They even made an entire documentary called "Expelled:  No Intelligence Allowed" (Mainly around "Intelligent Design Advocates" who are, effectively, just Creationists in disguise.

And of course most of the stories in that "documentary" were bullshit.  But the argument ALWAYS goes that the reason the stupid bad science isn't allowed is because the scientists are paid to lie, even when they know better.

You just made the EXACT SAME ARGUMENT.

If you don't know any of these topics, why do you hold forth on them?


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Ask your buddies the gun fetishists. They see threats under their beds and in their closets.


That probably has to do with people like you making emotional arguments and not being able to take their beliefs to their logical conclusions.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> In what world does that logic hold??? LOL.


In the world where there still risks of wars and tyrannical governments with standing armies.  

Do you even know why the Founders wrote the 2nd?


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> How you going to "eliminate" people who disagree with you?


I never said eliminate who disagree with me, you lying leftist pos!  I refer to traitor scum like you! All of you traitor lying filth.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

Evolution is in the science journals because it is a popular theory. Kind of like the popular scientific theories of a flat earth and tiny little men inside ppl operating their bodily functions and emotions.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> So you think a gun in the home is similar to a fire extinguisher?


I think a gun is a tool just like a fire extinguisher is and it has it's own purpose just as a fire extinguisher does.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> So you maintain that Christians should allow people to kill them, and not speak against fascism?



Just telling you what the Bible says.  You're pretty hot to trot livin' by the sword.   Takin' out the baddies and the crazies.  

"_Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword._" (another 5,000 free guesses who that quote is attributed to.)



koshergrl said:


> Still not speaking to the topic.



It was in direct response to your point.  So I guess, as usual, the hypocrite is finding motes in other eyes and ignoring the beam in their own.



koshergrl said:


> How telling.



I can't help it if I know you by the fruit you bear.  

But don't worry, when you post everyone can see your Bible Signature so everyone knows you are a good person.  

Ever hear of Matthew 7:21?  Yeah, might wanna check that one out.  Just a helpful tip.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> And, again, it's like you didn't even read my original post.  LOL.


Time to put this pos on ignore.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> LOL. So you haven't spoken to any Creationists, eh?


Nope.  I avoid conversing with them.  It would serve no purpose.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Evolution is in the science journals because it is a popular theory. Kind of like the popular scientific theories of a flat earth and tiny little men inside ppl operating their bodily functions and emotions.



Oh, so you are actually a creationist?  Interesting.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Time to put this pos on ignore.



By all means!  Big Mike!  Manly and brave.  Can't bear to see words that might not make him happy!

Bye, Mike!  I'll miss your "insight".


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> OK, let me explain it to you. The Creationists ALWAYS claim that the reason evolution is in the science journals and NOT creationism is because Creationists who do really good science work get denied access to publishing or lose their jobs _because they don't toe the Evolution line_.
> 
> They even made an entire documentary called "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" (Mainly around "Intelligent Design Advocates" who are, effectively, just Creationists in disguise.
> 
> ...


Cool story.  I think if you think that my disagreeing with AGW makes me a creationists you are dumber than I thought.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Nope.  I avoid conversing with them.  It would serve no purpose.



Well, kudos on zeroing in on their arguments in support of your position!


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Cool story.  I think if you think that my disagreeing with AGW makes me a creationists you are dumber than I thought.



No, dimbulb, saying that the scientists are "paid to be wrong" is what makes you a Creationist. 

(I honestly thought you were a bit smarter than this, but it appears I was wrong.)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> I think a gun is a tool just like a fire extinguisher is and it has it's own purpose just as a fire extinguisher does.



I noted you didn't answer the difficult question in that post.  I understand.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> OK. May I ask how many people you, personally, have shot and killed? I ask because I assume most people who talk a big game about defending their homes with a gun probably have not shot and killed someone. Some might be former military, but for the most part I assume you are just another American man-boy who saw one too many John Wayne movies and fancies himself capable of taking a human life.
> 
> From what I understand police and even military people often have a great deal of difficulty killing someone. Apparently it kind of "sticks" with you...even if you did it in self defense.
> 
> But, again, I could be wrong about you, Tex.


Again... I have never had a fire in my home but I still have a fire extinguisher.  If you choose to not mitigate the risks for your family, that's on you.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> No, dimbulb, saying that the scientists are "paid to be wrong" is what makes you a Creationist.
> 
> (I honestly thought you were a bit smarter than this, but it appears I was wrong.)


Actually the two have nothing to do with each other, dummy, but you keep pushing that bad hand.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I noted you didn't answer the difficult question in that post.  I understand.


I did answer it.  Do you believe a hammer is the same as a screwdriver?  

A gun is a tool just like a fire extinguisher is and it has its own purpose just as a fire extinguisher does just as a hammer is a tool like screwdriver and has its own purpose.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Again... I have never had a fire in my home but I still have a fire extinguisher.  If you choose to not mitigate the risks for your family, that's on you.



OK, let's talk risk.  The USA has the highest per capita gun ownership rate in the entire developed world.  AND we have NUMEROUS studies  such as THIS ONE which find:

"*Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.*"

And then there's THIS STUDY which finds:

*" Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%.*"


Basically, the presence of guns is a good predictor of *increased risk of someone in that home being shot or killed or committing suicide successfully.  *

So, DO TELL about risk!









						Living in a house with a gun increases your odds of death
					

It’s an unnecessary risk.




					www.vox.com


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Well, kudos on zeroing in on their arguments in support of your position!


I really have you wound up.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Actually the two have nothing to do with each other, dummy, but you keep pushing that bad hand.



You think scientists lie for money when you don't agree with them.

As I said either you are a creationist or you are someone who lies for money and thinks that's how everyone does it.

I'm actually being KIND in assuming you are a Creationist.  But if you want to fight me on it I can easily change my assumption.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> I really have you wound up.



I don't like people who lie for money.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> OK, let's talk risk.  The USA has the highest per capita gun ownership rate in the entire developed world.  AND we have NUMEROUS studies  such as THIS ONE which find:
> 
> "*Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.*"
> 
> ...


With that logic you should never own a car. 

Comparing the risk of needing a firearm for self defense to owning a firearm for suicide might be the stupidest argument I have ever heard.  It goes something like this... you shouldn't own a gun to defend your possessions and family because you might intentionally kill yourself.  Bravo.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> You think scientists lie for money when you don't agree with them.
> 
> As I said either you are a creationist or you are someone who lies for money and thinks that's how everyone does it.
> 
> I'm actually being KIND in assuming you are a Creationist.  But if you want to fight me on it I can easily change my assumption.


No.  I think climate scientists lie to keep getting paid.  

Your logic is ridiculous.  What's your level of education?


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I don't like people who lie for money.


Whereas I don't like people who lie period.  You know... like you have been doing about me by repeatedly calling me a creationist.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> Time to put this pos on ignore.


He claims he has a PhD in geology.  I've been busting his ass over geology for a week.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> With that logic you should never own a car.



Were cars made specifically to cause greivous bodily injury/death?  Interesting conjecture!



ding said:


> Comparing the risk of needing a firearm for self defense to owning a firearm for suicide might be the stupidest argument I have ever heard.



Well, you seem pretty stupid so I assume you've heard a lot of them.

I'm just providing information on RISK.  You know, the thing someone on here was going to "explain" to me.


----------



## toobfreak (Apr 10, 2022)

2aguy said:


> To those who support anti-gunners wanting mental health checks for your Rights?​



The worst part in all of this is that no one can give anyone a "mental health check" with any degree of certainty.  There isn't a test in the world that can accurately consistently detect people who intend to harm themself or others, and more people than I care to count have been murdered by others who have been certified AOK and mentally fit by the experts.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Were cars made specifically to cause greivous bodily injury/death?  Interesting conjecture!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That you see the purpose of a gun is to cause bodily injury/death just shows how biased you are on guns.  Ask any LEO or soldiers what they use firearms for and they will tell you to make the other guy stop doing what he is doing.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> No.  I think climate scientists lie to keep getting paid.



You find wrong doing in others.  Am I correct in assuming that whatever it is YOU do for a living is made up of people who lie for money?

I guess that's EXACTLY what you are telling me.



ding said:


> Your logic is ridiculous.  What's your level of education?



I'd ask you the same but I honestly couldn't care less.  You seem pretty dim.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Well, you seem pretty stupid so I assume you've heard a lot of them.
> 
> I'm just providing information on RISK. You know, the thing someone on here was going to "explain" to me.


The Right to Bear Arms (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) was seen by our Founding Fathers as the last check against tyranny. They knew that the best line of defense against a standing army was an armed populace.

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"I_f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

The people who wish to preserve liberty and are capable of bearing arms are the militia.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

The Founding Fathers believed that peaceable law abiding citizens should never have their right to bear arms be infringed upon.

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms; …"

Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

The fundamental purpose of the militia is to serve as a check upon a standing army, the words “well regulated” referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia have the level of equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government’s standing army.

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

Well regulated does not mean regulations. When the Constitution specifies regulations it specifically states who and what is being regulated. The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. The fundamental purpose of the militia was to serve as a check upon a standing army, the words “well regulated” referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia have the necessary equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government’s standing army. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it._


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> That you see the purpose of a gun is to cause bodily injury/death just shows how biased you are on guns.



OH DO TELL Why guns were invented!  Please!  I'm waiting with baited breath!




ding said:


> Ask any LEO or soldiers what they use firearms for and they will tell you to make the other guy stop doing what he is doing.



I wonder how guns work then.  Do they put out a piece of paper that suggests alternatives to violence?  

*OR DO THEY CAUSE GRIEVOUS BODILY INJURY AND/OR DEATH?*

LOL.

Do you ever think about your posts?


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> You find wrong doing in others.  Am I correct in assuming that whatever it is YOU do for a living is made up of people who lie for money?
> 
> I guess that's EXACTLY what you are telling me.
> 
> ...


I'm retired.  I never have to work again.  I built things for a living.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> OH DO TELL Why guns were invented!  Please!  I'm waiting with baited breath!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you a woman?  Because you seem really emotional about this.

The Right to Bear Arms (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) was seen by our Founding Fathers as the last check against tyranny. They knew that the best line of defense against a standing army was an armed populace.

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"I_f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

The people who wish to preserve liberty and are capable of bearing arms are the militia.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

The Founding Fathers believed that peaceable law abiding citizens should never have their right to bear arms be infringed upon.

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms; …"

Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

The fundamental purpose of the militia is to serve as a check upon a standing army, the words “well regulated” referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia have the level of equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government’s standing army.

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

Well regulated does not mean regulations. When the Constitution specifies regulations it specifically states who and what is being regulated. The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. The fundamental purpose of the militia was to serve as a check upon a standing army, the words “well regulated” referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia have the necessary equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government’s standing army. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it._


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> The Right to Bear Arms (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) was seen by our Founding Fathers as the last check against tyranny. They knew that the best line of defense against a standing army was an armed populace.



You think you could stand up to the modern US military armed only with what you can buy at Wal Mart?  Good luck!


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> I'm retired.  I never have to work again.  I built things for a living.



 I bet your glad to get out of the business where everyone lies for money!


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> You think you could stand up to the modern US military armed only with what you can buy at Wal Mart?  Good luck!


It's because of the 2nd Amendment that we won't have to. 

The Right to Bear Arms (i.e. the 2nd Amendment) was seen by our Founding Fathers as the last check against tyranny. They knew that the best line of defense against a standing army was an armed populace.

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"I_f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

The people who wish to preserve liberty and are capable of bearing arms are the militia.

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."

- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

The Founding Fathers believed that peaceable law abiding citizens should never have their right to bear arms be infringed upon.

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, WHO ARE PEACEABLE CITIZENS, from keeping their own arms; …"

Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"

The fundamental purpose of the militia is to serve as a check upon a standing army, the words “well regulated” referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia have the level of equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government’s standing army.

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops." - Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

Well regulated does not mean regulations. When the Constitution specifies regulations it specifically states who and what is being regulated. The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. The fundamental purpose of the militia was to serve as a check upon a standing army, the words “well regulated” referred to the necessity that the armed citizens making up the militia have the necessary equipment and training necessary to be an effective and formidable check upon the national government’s standing army. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it._


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I bet your glad to get out of the business where everyone lies for money!


I was never in the climate science business.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> You think you could stand up to the modern US military armed only with what you can buy at Wal Mart?  Good luck!


Yes ( See Afghanistan) and if the A10 Pilots doing the Attack Runs on the Outskirts of Omaha or Dallas know that when they return home from their Missions they could find Their Wife &Twin Toddlers & Mother in law & 2 dogs Dead inside their home that was burned to the ground (By the Folks they were attacking) they might disobey orders


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> That probably has to do with people like you making emotional arguments and not being able to take their beliefs to their logical conclusions.


Good lord what is wrong with him? He just does random association stuff there’s no rhyme or reason to it. There are a few like that at dumb, I always wonder if it’s just the same person.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Yes ( See Afghanistan)



LOL.  Umm, sorry I shouldn't laugh.

Like I said to someone else:  the Afghans have lived in a very brutish and terrible country for decades upon decades.  Many of the folks fighting America live in caves and in such levels of privation and squalor that they could probably last for a very long time.  They also have access to all the left over Soviet and now American weapons.

Meanwhile the brave GRAVY SEALS who attempted to stop a "STOLEN ELECTION" in Washington DC on Jan 6 _*could only hold out one afternoon*_.

Then they went home and had dinner.



Failzero said:


> and if the A10 Pilots doing the Attack Runs on the Outskirts of Omaha or Dallas know that when they return home from their Missions they could find Their Wife &Twin Toddlers & Mother in law & 2 dogs Dead inside their home that was burned to the ground (By the Folks they were attacking) they might disobey orders



Such rich fantasies!  How many times have you read the Turner Diaries?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Are you a woman?  Because you seem really emotional about this.



LOL!  A sexist too!  You probably get ALL the hits on ourtime.com!  

What a catch!  

I noted you couldn't tell the class why guns were invented.  Too bad.  I'd teach you but you wouldn't be able to understand it.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Just telling you what the Bible says.  You're pretty hot to trot livin' by the sword.   Takin' out the baddies and the crazies.
> 
> "_Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword._" (another 5,000 free guesses who that quote is attributed to.)
> 
> ...


What nonsense. I don’t even believe in the death penalty. Unlike the leftist baby killers, I also don’t believe in the forms of murder thd nazis call “euthanasia”, “assisted suicide” and “abortion”. Why aren’t you able to speak to the topic? What does my faith have to do with the fact that mentally ill people who can’t be trusted around weapons shouldn’t be on thd street to begin with?


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Oh, so you are actually a creationist?  Interesting.


I don’t make gods out of men, it is true. Remember reading about when all the scientists were het up over reading head lumps? That was an interesting theory.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> LOL!  A sexist too!  You probably get ALL the hits on ourtime.com!
> 
> What a catch!
> 
> I noted you couldn't tell the class why guns were invented.  Too bad.  I'd teach you but you wouldn't be able to understand it.


There is no end to your irrelevant patter, is there? I want to know...why were guns invented?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> What nonsense. I don’t even believe in the death penalty.



Good for you.



koshergrl said:


> Why aren’t you able to speak to the topic?



I am.  YOU were the one who wanted the "crazies" put away.  I'm just suggesting your supposed "faith" could actually lead you to a rather more nuanced and HELPFUL suggestion.  In fact a good dose of ACTUAL CHRISTIAN FAITH could go a long way to helping those people and maybe making the world a better place.

But you love the "sword" too much.  You love to polish your halo in public (hence the big Bible sig) but when it comes to helpful things for people in pain the best you have is "Get away from my guns, crazies!"




koshergrl said:


> What does my faith have to do with the fact that mentally ill people



You mean "the crazies"?



koshergrl said:


> who can’t be trusted around weapons shouldn’t be on thd street to begin with?



Your "faith" (such as it is) should be more useful to helping those in pain.  Instead you want to lock them up.  You didn't call them "mentally ill", you found a denigrative name for them: "crazies".

What kind of person does that make you?

You are bearing fruit....and we know what kind of rotted and twisted wood makes up your tree.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> LOL!  A sexist too!  You probably get ALL the hits on ourtime.com!
> 
> What a catch!
> 
> I noted you couldn't tell the class why guns were invented.  Too bad.  I'd teach you but you wouldn't be able to understand it.


Not really.  Women tend to be more emotional than men.   I did tell you why guns were invented, dummy.  To make the other guy stop doing what he is doing.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> I want to know...why were guns invented?



They were invented for warfare and/or hunting applications.  They were invented specifically to kill or maim or otherwise cause grievous bodily harm. _BY DEFINITION._

Why do YOU think they were invented?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Not really.  Women tend to be more emotional than men.



Sexist.



ding said:


> I did tell you why guns were invented, dummy.  To make the other guy stop doing what he is doing.



What a facile and stupid word game.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> What nonsense. I don’t even believe in the death penalty. Unlike the leftist baby killers, I also don’t believe in the forms of murder thd nazis call “euthanasia”, “assisted suicide” and “abortion”. Why aren’t you able to speak to the topic? What does my faith have to do with the fact that mentally ill people who can’t be trusted around weapons shouldn’t be on thd street to begin with?


This is a lie.

No one advocates for ‘killing babies’ – the ‘left’ in particular.

Clearly your ‘faith’ has nothing to do with being honest and truthful.

Whether it’s lying about ‘confiscating’ guns or ‘killing babies,’ conservatives are consistent at being dishonest demagogues.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Good for you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





PV System said:


> You mean "the crazies"?
> 
> 
> 
> ...





PV System said:


> You are bearing fruit....and we know what kind of rotted and twisted wood makes up your tree.


Who is “we” and tell me what fruit I have borne lol. I’m dying to be filled in on the whole fantasy.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 10, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This is a lie.
> 
> No one advocates for ‘killing babies’ – the ‘left’ in particular.
> 
> ...


Conservatives are Pro Life & Pro 2A/RTKBA , Democommies are not


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Who is “we” and tell me what fruit I have borne lol. I’m dying to be filled in on the whole fantasy.



Not all who say "lord, lord"....you get the rest.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Not all who say "lord, lord"....you get the rest.


No, I don’t. You keep thinking that everybody knows the details of your fantasy. I certainly don’t but feel free to fill me in! What do I get?


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Failzero said:


> Conservatives are Pro Life & Pro 2A/RTKBA



I honestly cannot get enough of this sentence.  PRO GUNS and PRO LIFE.

It's almost as if this is one giant Poe's Law sentence.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> No, I don’t.



Oh, why do you quote the Bible if you are unfamiliar with it?



koshergrl said:


> You keep thinking that everybody knows the details of your fantasy.



Again, I can't help you.  I just read the Bible.  Maybe some day YOU CAN, TOO.



koshergrl said:


> I certainly don’t but feel free to fill me in! What do I get?



Well, ONE of us posts a Bible Verse as their SIGNATURE.  Seems that it's not the one who actually READ the Bible.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I honestly cannot get enough of this sentence.  PRO GUNS and PRO LIFE.
> 
> It's almost as if this is one giant Poe's Law sentence.


I know I know it’s so not Democommie


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Failzero said:


> I know I know it’s so not Democommie



No!  It's pure gold!  People who claim to be pro-life but ALSO love them some GUNS!


----------



## Failzero (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> No!  It's pure gold!  People who claim to be pro-life but ALSO love them some GUNS!


People who have issues with pedo/ NAMBLA types ?


----------



## Failzero (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> No!  It's pure gold!  People who claim to be pro-life but ALSO love them some GUNS!


Like Democrats who say they are tough on crime or want a secure southern border ?


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Apr 10, 2022)

Donald H said:


> America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.
> 
> What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.
> 
> ...


Crime is rising anyway and these gun control laws are making Hawaii even more dangerous.









						Gun crimes are on the rise on Oahu ― and the trend could be linked to drugs
					

“It’s very dangerous to police when you are dealing with individuals who have weapons or even fake weapons."




					www.hawaiinewsnow.com


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> No!  It's pure gold!  People who claim to be pro-life but ALSO love them some GUNS!


I am pro-life, especially when it comes to protecting me and mine.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> So you think a gun in the home is similar to a fire extinguisher?  OK.  May I ask how many people you, personally, have shot and killed?


How many fires have you, personally, put out with a fire extinguisher?




PV System said:


> OK, let's talk risk.  The USA has the highest per capita gun ownership rate in the entire developed world.  AND we have NUMEROUS studies  such as THIS ONE which find:
> "*Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the U.S., where there are more guns, both men and women are at a higher risk for homicide,*"


Bogus study.  If you remove the guns, the same number of people get murdered, just with different weapons.

Real statistics show that gun availability has little impact on homicide rates.








						Everybody's Lying About the Link Between Gun Ownership and Homicide
					

Revealing how the media lies with graphs to further an anti-gun agenda.




					hwfo.substack.com
				







PV System said:


> "*particularly firearm homicide.*"
> And then there's THIS STUDY which finds:
> *" Gun ownership was a significant predictor of firearm homicide rates (incidence rate ratio = 1.009; 95% confidence interval = 1.004, 1.014). This model indicated that for each percentage point increase in gun ownership, the firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9%.*"


People who are killed with different kinds of weapons are just as dead.




PV System said:


> Basically, the presence of guns is a good predictor of *increased risk of someone in that home being shot or killed or committing suicide successfully.*
> So, DO TELL about risk!
> 
> 
> ...


Having a car dramatically increases your risk of dying in a car accident.

Having a bathtub dramatically increases your risk of drowning in a bathtub.

Having a stairway dramatically increases your risk of fatally falling down a stairway.




PV System said:


> Were cars made specifically to cause greivous bodily injury/death?


How does that matter?  Does it make people killed in car accidents any less dead?


----------



## whitehall (Apr 10, 2022)

Nobody want's "mental health checks" but the problem comes when there are obvious mental health issues involved in the purchase and possession of firearms. The most notorious school shooting in history happened in Va. Tech Blacksburg when a maniac student who was arrested and released by local Police and ordered to attend psychiatric counseling which he violated was able to purchase a firearm. The arrest might have triggered the mania and the court ordered psychiatric counseling did not appear on the state mandated instant name check and the maniac was able to purchase a firearm and subsequently kill about 30 students and faculty. Can we agree that persons who are under a psychiatric court order or voluntarily admit to psychiatric issues should be prevented from purchasing a firearm? Confiscation issues are a different problem.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 10, 2022)

whitehall said:


> Can we agree that persons who are under a psychiatric court order or voluntarily admit to psychiatric issues should be prevented from purchasing a firearm?


Only if the psychiatric issues make them a danger to themselves or others.

People who are afraid of heights (or are feeling homesick) should not be prevented from having guns.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 10, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This is a lie.


No it isn't.  It's the truth.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> No one is ‘anti-gun’;


Most progressives are anti-gun.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> to advocate for firearm regulatory measures consistent with the Second Amendment is not to be ‘anti-gun.’


Progressives do not advocate for firearm regulatory measures consistent with the Second Amendment.

Progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties.  And not for a good reason either, but only because progressives enjoy violating people's civil liberties.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The Supreme Court has held that it is perfectly Constitutional to prohibit those mentally ill from possessing firearms – the Hawaii measure therefore does not violate the Second Amendment.


Yes it does.  Homesickness is not mental illness.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> This is yet another example of how dishonest conservatives truly are.


Except, it's only the progressives who are lying.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Another lie from the dishonest right


The truth is always really inconvenient to progressives, so progressives always say that the truth is a lie.

But progressives are wrong.  The truth is never a lie.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> the 2016 SSA EO authorized no such thing.


Yes it did.




C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Those receiving Social Security benefits were afforded their comprehensive due process rights; no guns were ‘taken away.’


Only because Donald Trump signed legislation killing the executive order before it went into effect.

Obama's executive order would have denied law abiding people their right to have guns if it had been allowed to go into effect.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Again... I have never had a fire in my home but I still have a fire extinguisher.  If you choose to not mitigate the risks for your family, that's on you.


He's just another filthy lying leftist douche.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Failzero said:


> People who have issues with pedo/ NAMBLA types ?



OOPSY!  Someone's dippin' in the Q-sauce now!  LOL


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I honestly cannot get enough of this sentence.  PRO GUNS and PRO LIFE.
> 
> It's almost as if this is one giant Poe's Law sentence.


If you value life, you protect it from goons, ghouls and other left wing monsters.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> I am pro-life, especially when it comes to protecting me and mine.



How do you see your position in light of the religion which no doubt underlies your "pro life" stance?

I'm asking quite seriously. 

I'm actually OK with people defending themselves, but I am always fascinated by people who take Christianity as the basis of their "pro-life" position but then turn around and simply think Jesus was joking in Matthew 5:38-39 and Matthew 26:52.

Seems like maybe a bit of "cherry picking" to suit your needs.  Jesus said a lot of things and apparently the pious are allowed to take it as a "buffet".


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> If you value life, you protect it from goons, ghouls and other left wing monsters.



So how do you square your faith with regards to this?  Specifically *Matthew 5:38-39* and *Matthew 26:52*.

(I'm actually asking seriously here.)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> He's just another filthy lying leftist douche.



Mike, Mike, Mike.  Take a chill pill! It's Sunday afternoon.  I get it.  You hate you some libtards.  Good for you.  It's good to have a hobby.

I don't recall "lying" here but I'm sure in your diseased imagination you can point it out for me.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Oh, why do you quote the Bible if you are unfamiliar with it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Tell


PV System said:


> Oh, why do you quote the Bible if you are unfamiliar with it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


A whole crap ton of completely random association/false narrative there. Yes you are definitely VERY mentally ill. I’m sorry I used the term crazies. I pity you and I pray God gives you some ease.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> How do you see your position in light of the religion which no doubt underlies your "pro life" stance?
> 
> I'm asking quite seriously.
> 
> ...


Because the Bible says nothing about self defense being a sin.  I don't WANT to kill anyone.  I hope I never have to use my carry piece to defend me and my family.  But, I will before I sit back and do nothing while someone harms my family.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> So how do you square your faith with regards to this?  Specifically *Matthew 5:38-39* and *Matthew 26:52*.
> 
> (I'm actually asking seriously here.)


No, you aren’t. Christ told us not to cast pearls before swine. And I don’t.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Yes you are definitely VERY mentally ill.



Actually my family has been touched by this.  I hope you never experience it.  I mean that honestly.  I think you are a hypocrite and I dislike you, but I would never wish this upon you.  




koshergrl said:


> I’m sorry I used the term crazies.



Apology accepted.  You are still a hypocrite and a ravening wolf.  But thanks.




koshergrl said:


> I pity you and I pray God gives you some ease.



I can do without YOUR prayers.  Save it for someone who actually buys the schtick.

"Not every on that saith unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven."  Matthew 7:21


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> No, you aren’t. Christ told us not to cast pearls before swine. And I don’t.



Thou shalt not bear false witness.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Actually my family has been touched by this.  I hope you never experience it.  I mean that honestly.  I think you are a hypocrite and I dislike you, but I would never wish this upon you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Spoken like a true anti Christian bigot.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Because the Bible says nothing about self defense being a sin.



Hmmm.  So you can't read?  OK, I'll read it for you:

"_But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but *whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also*._"

What do you think that means?



Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> I don't WANT to kill anyone.



Good for you.



Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> I hope I never have to use my carry piece to defend me and my family.  But, I will before I sit back and do nothing while someone harms my family.



That sounds like a lot of big talk, Wild Bill.  And with a name like "Wild Bill" I have to ask:  how many people have you had to cap in your lifetime?  I hear it's really hard to do, even in military and self-defense scenarios.  It kind of sticks with someone I hear.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Spoken like a true anti Christian bigot.



Someone who actually knows the Bible threatens you? 

LOL.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Spoken like a true anti Christian bigot.



Well, that actually kind of makes me happy to hear.  You don't seem like the kind of Christian that I want the respect of.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Hmmm.  So you can't read?  OK, I'll read it for you:
> 
> "_But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but *whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also*._"
> 
> ...


Turn the other cheek doesn't mean, "do nothing while someone murders your family".

The Bible also says, " If a thief is taken in the act of forcing his way into a house, and his death is caused by a blow, the owner of the house is not responsible for his blood.". What were you saying about cherry picking?

It does stick with you.  You heard right.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Someone who actually knows the Bible threatens you?
> 
> LOL.


Are you sure you know the Bible, or are you just repeating the same cherry picked verses that anti-gunners parrot ad nauseam?


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Hmmm.  So you can't read?  OK, I'll read it for you:
> 
> "_But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but *whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also*._"
> 
> ...


All the anti Christians  tell us our faith requires us to let them walk all over us. It’s nonsense. Literally demonic. Whether or not each of us personally packs, it is not hypocritical to politically support thd right to bear arms. And the argument that we must remove that right because insane people are on the street is not logical. And all the whining about terminology and signatures doesn’t change that.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Actually my family has been touched by this. I hope you never experience it. I mean that honestly. I think you are a hypocrite and I dislike you, but I would never wish this upon you.


I'll wish every evil on your lying ass.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Turn the other cheek doesn't mean, "do nothing while someone murders your family".



Ummm, well, the words themselves seem pretty clear.  Don't get me wrong, I'm actually OK with folks defending themselves but if one feels that their religious faith renders them incapable of allowing people who are NOT THEM to do with their bodies what they will then I would think that they actually CARE about all the jots and tittles of the faith.



Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> The Bible also says, " If a thief is taken in the act of forcing his way into a house, and his death is caused by a blow, the owner of the house is not responsible for his blood.". What were you saying about cherry picking?
> 
> It does stick with you.  You heard right.



Sounds like it might be an OT quote (can't find it right now, maybe you could share it with me?)

As I said, I don't begrudge anyone the right to defend themselves.  I'm just saying that _in the context of someone who uses their faith to support their position on "pro-life" stands that they would have to cherry pick to get around the verse in Matthew_.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Someone who actually knows the Bible threatens you?
> 
> LOL.


Not at all. I love discussing the Bible...with people who are not anti Christian bigots trying to divert attention from the fact they can’t make a relevant point. I also don’t discuss holy things with foul liars.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> All the anti Christians  tell us our faith requires us to let them walk all over us.



Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.  



koshergrl said:


> It’s nonsense.



If you want to call the Bible "nonsense" that's between you and your God.



koshergrl said:


> Literally demonic.



Oooooh, that's interesting.  I simply quoted Jesus.  




koshergrl said:


> Whether or not each of us personally packs, it is not hypocritical to politically support thd right to bear arms.



I actually expected more from you.  I thought maybe you would whip out Luke 22:36.  You disappointed me.

(You really should become more familiar with the Bible)


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Not at all. I love discussing the Bible...with people who are not anti Christian bigots



I bet you do.  So long as they agree 100% with you perfectly right down the line.




koshergrl said:


> trying to divert attention from the fact they can’t make a relevant point. I also don’t discuss holy things with foul liars.



"Holy things".  LOL.  

I know you by the fruit you bear!  LOL.  Nothin' gonna change that now!

Ravening wolf.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
> 
> *Yep. *
> 
> ...


*More false that has nothing to do with anything. *


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> *More false that has nothing to do with anything. *



As you wish.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Ummm, well, the words themselves seem pretty clear.  Don't get me wrong, I'm actually OK with folks defending themselves but if one feels that their religious faith renders them incapable of allowing people who are NOT THEM to do with their bodies what they will then I would think that they actually CARE about all the jots and tittles of the faith.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It isn't "their body".  It's a baby's body.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> It isn't "their body".  It's a baby's body.



It always saddens me when people don't understand where babies come from.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I bet you do.  So long as they agree 100% with you perfectly right down the line.
> 
> *Not at all, I have had wonderful conversations with people of diverse faiths. *
> 
> ...


👌


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> It always saddens me when people don't understand where babies come from.


Another false narrative.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> As you wish.


You betcha, sparky.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> 👌



Couldn't use the "interlinear" features for the quote responses?

Too bad.

As for the "ravening wolf", again, it saddens me how little you know of your own Bible.

*Matthew 7:15.  Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.*

Honestly, koshergrl, if you want to quote the Bible...TRY READING IT.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Couldn't use the "interlinear" features for the quote responses?
> 
> Too bad.
> *Not at the moment. This works ok and I’m kazy. *
> ...


*And that is relevant to me how? What did I do that makes me a ravening wolf? So far houve just posted nonsense and false narrative.*


PV System said:


> Honestly, koshergrl, if you want to quote the Bible...TRY READING IT.


*more false narrative. *


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Sexist.
> 
> 
> 
> What a facile and stupid word game.


Actually it isn't.   The objective isn't to kill.  The objective is to make the aggressor stop his attack.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> It always saddens me when people don't understand where babies come from.


"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris

"An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again.  The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point."
Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland

“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”  Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> *And that is relevant to me how? What did I do that makes me a ravening wolf? So far houve just posted nonsense and false narrative.*



I'd say someone who touts their Christianity publicly with a NT quote but then denigrates those in pain ("the Crazies") and shows no sign of compassion is acting in a way more in line with the Ravening Wolf than the Prophet.

I honestly do hope you read the Bible some time.  Your faith can be more rounded out.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> "After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris
> 
> "An individual human life begins at conception when a sperm cell from the father fuses with an egg cell from the mother, to form a new cell, the zygote, the first embryonic stage. The zygote grows and divides into two daughter cells, each of which grows and divides into two grand-daughter cells, and this cell growth/division process continues on, over and over again.  The zygote is the start of a biological continuum that automatically grows and develops, passing gradually and sequentially through the stages we call foetus, baby, child, adult, old person and ending eventually in death. The full genetic instructions to guide the development of the continuum, in interaction with its environment, are present in the zygote. Every stage along the continuum is biologically human and each point along the continuum has the full human properties appropriate to that point."
> Dr. William Reville, University College Cork, Ireland
> ...



Well, thank heavens there's not a WOMAN'S BODY that is required for all of this!  

The thing I love about the Pro-Lifers is they invariably demand freedom for themselves but will GLADLY pass any amount of laws to keep others from enjoying that same benefit.

And of course "pro-life" folks often couldn't care less about that "life" once it's born.  That's why they vote constantly to decrease welfare and limit access to healthcare and help.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Actually it isn't.   The objective isn't to kill.  The objective is to make the aggressor stop his attack.



How?

(Hint:  by the promise of or delivery of _grievous bodily harm and/or death_.)

That's it.  That's 100% how it works.

Stop with the infantile word games.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Actually it isn't.   The objective isn't to kill.  The objective is to make the aggressor stop his attack.


And to protect the vulnerable. THAT is what the ghouls find objectionable. Because they feed upon the vulnerable.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> I'd say someone who touts their Christianity publicly with a NT quote but then denigrates those in pain ("the Crazies") and shows no sign of compassion is acting in a way more in line with the Ravening Wolf than the Prophet.
> 
> I honestly do hope you read the Bible some time.  Your faith can be more rounded out.


They are crazy. It was simply an accurate description and there is nothing that infuriates the anti Christian loons more than an accurate description of the people they are exploiting.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> They are crazy.



Yeah, we've established what you think about "the crazies".



koshergrl said:


> It was simply an accurate description and there is nothing that infuriates the anti Christian loons more than an accurate description of the people they are exploiting.



Exploiting?

Well, Kudos anyway for remembering the book of Daniel.  It's refreshing to see you actually reference the Bible once in a while.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Yeah, we've established what you think about "the crazies".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sure. You exploit vulnerable people. Here you are exploiting the insane yo justify the removal of our human right to defend ourselves and our children.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> And to protect the vulnerable. THAT is what the ghouls find objectionable. Because they feed upon the vulnerable.


Yes, inherent to this conversation is a bad guy taking and creating every advantage possible to do ill will.  The more lopsided the better.   Firearms level the playing field and that is why they are such an effective deterrent to men of ill will.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Sure. You exploit vulnerable people. Here you are exploiting the insane yo justify the removal of our human right to defend ourselves and our children.


He's a sick child abuser.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 10, 2022)

I’m a Pro Life Practitioner Of Judaism .


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

miketx said:


> He's a sick child abuser.


They all are.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> How?
> 
> (Hint:  by the promise of or delivery of _grievous bodily harm and/or death_.)
> 
> ...


Maybe that is how you would do it and see it, but it's not how I would do it or see it. 

So, I'm not playing word games.  If you can only think of using a gun to kill people, you probably shouldn't own a gun.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

PV System said:


> Well, thank heavens there's not a WOMAN'S BODY that is required for all of this!
> 
> The thing I love about the Pro-Lifers is they invariably demand freedom for themselves but will GLADLY pass any amount of laws to keep others from enjoying that same benefit.
> 
> And of course "pro-life" folks often couldn't care less about that "life" once it's born.  That's why they vote constantly to decrease welfare and limit access to healthcare and help.


History shows atrocities typically begin with dehumanization and a victim narrative.  But the question SCOTUS is likely to address is when does human life begin, is it a specific person and when should the right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness begin.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)

Hey child abuser, come get my guns.


----------



## miketx (Apr 10, 2022)




----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> Maybe that is how you would do it and see it, but it's not how I would do it or see it.
> 
> So, I'm not playing word games.  If you can only think of using a gun to kill people, you probably shouldn't own a gun.


And if he can’t be trusted around weapons he shouldn’t be walking free.


----------



## ding (Apr 10, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> And if he can’t be trusted around weapons he shouldn’t be walking free.


That's a slippery slope.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 10, 2022)

ding said:


> That's a slippery slope.


my point is that if a person can‘t be trusted around weapons then they are a threat and should be restrained. our enemies turn violent offenders out into the streets then use them to “prove” we need gun control.


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 11, 2022)

PV System said:


> They were invented for warfare and/or hunting applications.  They were invented specifically to kill or maim or otherwise cause grievous bodily harm. _BY DEFINITION._
> Why do YOU think they were invented?


Hunting weapons have the death of a game animal as their specific intended purpose.

Guns designed for shooting sports are meant to strike non-living objects and never cause a bit of harm to a living organism.

Guns designed for self defense do cause grievous harm and even death, but that is not the intended purpose of the guns.  It is only an unfortunate side effect.

A defensive shooting where the bad guy survived to stand trial but was prevented from harming anyone is a successful defense despite no lives being lost.

A defensive shooting where the bad guy was fatally wounded but went on to murder an entire family before succumbing to his wounds is a failed defense despite the bad guy being killed.




PV System said:


> I honestly cannot get enough of this sentence.  PRO GUNS and PRO LIFE.
> It's almost as if this is one giant Poe's Law sentence.


When guns are used to defend people from murderers, guns save lives.

Why do you think police officers carry guns?




PV System said:


> You think you could stand up to the modern US military armed only with what you can buy at Wal Mart?  Good luck!


Who said anything about being limited to what you can buy at Wal Mart?

Militiamen have the right to have grenades and bazookas and full-auto weapons.

Of course, perhaps if the courts one day start enforcing this right, Wal Mart will start selling grenades and bazookas and full-auto weapons.




PV System said:


> The US decided back in the 1960's to shutter and close up the "mental institutions".  It was JFK's dream to move mental health back to a more supportive community-based system.  Only problem was that as time went on America did the "cost savings" part by de-institutionalizing (and ELIMINATING AVAILABLE BEDS) of the mentally ill *but never followed up with putting money into community mental health care initiatives*.
> Finally in the 1980's Ronald Reagan helped complete the process and now today America has a massive mental health crisis which we are dealing with by simply turning them loose to fend for themselves in a society that couldn't care less about them.


While I agree with your assessment that our society is not taking good care of our mentally ill today, those institutions of the past were hardly kind and caring places for the mentally ill to live out their lives.

Our society spent as little on the mentally ill back in the days of mental institutions as we spend on them today.  The only real difference is that back then the mentally ill were kept out of sight so we didn't have to confront the way that we were neglecting them.




PV System said:


> Well, thank heavens there's not a WOMAN'S BODY that is required for all of this!


There are pro-life women too.  It's not just all men.

I think the pro-choice movement would have gotten more support from men if they had ever acknowledged that men do have a vital interest in whether they become a father or not.

The notion that it's none of a man's business whether or not he becomes a father doesn't sit well with some men.

Or, as men who skip out on child support like to say: "No Uterus No Opinion??  No Opinion No Obligation!!"


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 11, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> Sure. You exploit vulnerable people. Here you are exploiting the insane yo justify the removal of our human right to defend ourselves and our children.



Or maybe my family has been touched by mental illness in a way you can never understand.  Maybe some in my family have had more pain than your silly prayers could ever deal with.

Your lack of compassion is noted.  

Remember:  whatsoever you sow you shall reap.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 11, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Hunting weapons have the death of a game animal as their specific intended purpose.



Which is exactly what I said.



Open Bolt said:


> Guns designed for shooting sports are meant to strike non-living objects and never cause a bit of harm to a living organism.



That isn't what guns were initially invented for and arguably "sports shooting" is little more than turning a hunting activity/military activity into a sport....NOT the other way 'round.



Open Bolt said:


> Guns designed for self defense do cause grievous harm and even death, but that is not the intended purpose of the guns.  It is only an unfortunate side effect.



LOL.  No.  That is EXACTLY what they are intended to do.  EVen if they are never fired, *the point is that if they were they would cause grievous harm or death*.

Honestly, just think it through for a second.



Open Bolt said:


> Why do you think police officers carry guns?



For the EXACT REASON I HAVE STATED NUMEROUS TIMES NOW.



Open Bolt said:


> There are pro-life women too.  It's not just all men.



Never said otherwise.



Open Bolt said:


> I think the pro-choice movement would have gotten more support from men if they had ever acknowledged that men do have a vital interest in whether they become a father or not.



Why would the pro-choice movement have to care one WHIT what a man thinks?  I don't recall men's bodies being involved in the gestation and carrying-to-term of the baby.



Open Bolt said:


> The notion that it's none of a man's business whether or not he becomes a father doesn't sit well with some men.



Well, the DO have control of their penises so....



Open Bolt said:


> Or, as men who skip out on child support like to say: "No Uterus No Opinion??  No Opinion No Obligation!!"



Yeah, men's rights groups tend to be loaded with a bunch of whiners and pathetic losers.


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 11, 2022)

PV System said:


> Or maybe my family has been touched by mental illness in a way you can never understand.  Maybe some in my family have had more pain than your silly prayers could ever deal with.
> 
> Your lack of compassion is noted.
> 
> Remember:  whatsoever you sow you shall reap.


You think it’s compassionate to leave the insane on the streets? I’m not concerned sbout what I’m going to reap. You likewise have no idea what my experience is.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 11, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> You think it’s compassionate to leave the insane on the streets?



No



koshergrl said:


> I’m not concerned sbout what I’m going to reap.



Clearly.



koshergrl said:


> You likewise have no idea what my experience is.



I know you lack compassion.  I know you like to advertise your "Faith" and polish your halo in the public square.

Do I need to know more?


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 11, 2022)

PV System said:


> That isn't what guns were initially invented for and arguably "sports shooting" is little more than turning a hunting activity/military activity into a sport....NOT the other way 'round.


Sports competition may not have been the purpose of the first guns, but it is the purpose of some guns now.




PV System said:


> LOL.  No.  That is EXACTLY what they are intended to do.  Even if they are never fired, *the point is that if they were they would cause grievous harm or death*.
> Honestly, just think it through for a second.


That is incorrect.  The purpose of self defense guns is not to inflict harm.  That is just an unfortunate side effect of their use.

The purpose of self defense guns is to prevent harm from being inflicted.




PV System said:


> For the EXACT REASON I HAVE STATED NUMEROUS TIMES NOW.


The job of the police is not to go around inflicting harm on people.

The job of the police is to prevent harm from being inflicted on people.




PV System said:


> Why would the pro-choice movement have to care one WHIT what a man thinks?  I don't recall men's bodies being involved in the gestation and carrying-to-term of the baby.
> Well, the DO have control of their penises so....
> Yeah, men's rights groups tend to be loaded with a bunch of whiners and pathetic losers.


A perfect example of the feminist extremism and intolerance that has inspired the right to topple Roe vs Wade.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 11, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> Sports competition may not have been the purpose of the first guns, but it is the purpose of some guns now.



My point still stands.



Open Bolt said:


> That is incorrect.  The purpose of self defense guns is not to inflict harm.



It is very much the PROMISE of the gun.  I'm actually wondering what you think a potential mugger is thinking when someone points a gun at him.  Do you think he's worried that the gun will pop out a flower that will make his outfit look silly?



Open Bolt said:


> That is just an unfortunate side effect of their use.



No, that is EXACTLY what the gun is there to promise.



Open Bolt said:


> The purpose of self defense guns is to prevent harm from being inflicted.



By promising the much worse HARM to the person wishing to do harm.



Open Bolt said:


> A perfect example of the feminist extremism and intolerance that has inspired the right to topple Roe vs Wade.



Something tells me you have create a rich "incel-world" to inhabit with that phrase.  Good for you.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 11, 2022)

We are arming Ukrainian Militiamen & Women like crazy


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 11, 2022)

Failzero said:


> We are arming Ukrainian Militiamen & Women like crazy



yeah, but not with .22's.


----------



## Failzero (Apr 11, 2022)

PV System said:


> yeah, but not with .22's.


And not Configured legally either lolz


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 11, 2022)

PV System said:


> My point still stands.


What point is that?




PV System said:


> It is very much the PROMISE of the gun.  I'm actually wondering what you think a potential mugger is thinking when someone points a gun at him.  Do you think he's worried that the gun will pop out a flower that will make his outfit look silly?


The reason for that promise is to prevent harm from being inflicted.

Inflicting harm is not the goal.  Rather, the goal is to prevent harm from being inflicted.




PV System said:


> No, that is EXACTLY what the gun is there to promise.


That is incorrect.  The gun is there to prevent harm.




PV System said:


> By promising the much worse HARM to the person wishing to do harm.


Whatever it takes to prevent them from causing harm.




PV System said:


> Something tells me you have create a rich "incel-world" to inhabit with that phrase.  Good for you.


Another example of the extremism and intolerance that provided justification to the movement that is about to topple Roe vs Wade.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (Apr 11, 2022)

Open Bolt said:


> What point is that?



The original purpose of the gun.



Open Bolt said:


> The reason for that promise is to prevent harm from being inflicted.



By promising harm.



Open Bolt said:


> Inflicting harm is not the goal.  Rather, the goal is to prevent harm from being inflicted.



By promising harm.



Open Bolt said:


> That is incorrect.  The gun is there to prevent harm.



And how do you think it does that?


----------



## Open Bolt (Apr 12, 2022)

PV System said:


> The original purpose of the gun.


I'm not clear on what you are saying.

What is the original gun in your view?  I can think of a few candidates throughout history, and am not sure which one you are thinking of.

What significance do you think the "original purpose of the gun" has to the present conversation?




PV System said:


> By promising harm.


Do stun guns cause people grievous harm or death?

What is the purpose of a stun gun?




PV System said:


> And how do you think it does that?


By rapidly incapacitating attackers so that they are no longer able to cause harm.


----------



## Mac-7 (Apr 12, 2022)

Donald H said:


> America's 2nd. amendment can apply in Hawaii still, but relaxing restrictions on high risk individuals who are wishing to have a handgun for suspicious purposes, can't be tolerated.
> 
> What can and must be the rules on gungoonery must be applicable to the majority of people in Hawaii that are not Americans.
> 
> ...


You dont live in hawaai do you donald?

in fact you are not even an American so butt out


----------



## whitehall (Apr 13, 2022)

The terrorist who shot up a subway car in NYC should have been unable to obtain a firearm due to mental conditions.


----------



## 2aguy (Apr 13, 2022)

whitehall said:


> The terrorist who shot up a subway car in NYC should have been unable to obtain a firearm due to mental conditions.




The FBI was on the case though....


----------



## Batcat (Apr 13, 2022)

Donald H said:


> The majority by far is in favour of arming Hawaiians and so that will most likely happen there too. That will of course cause the shootings statistics to rise dramatically.
> 
> Tourism will be hit hard as visitors from other countries will go to safer countries where they can relax and enjoy their holidays with their kids.
> From experience in both Hawaii and Cuba, there's nothing in Hawaii that Cuba can't provide better. And prices in Cuba are much lower.
> ...


Florida has plenty of tourism and also “shall issue” concealed carry. Over two million Florida residents have concealed weapons permits and many carry on a regular basis. Plus you don’t need a license to carry a loaded handgun in your vehicle as long as it is securely encased. 









						Florida Concealed Carry [Updated: 6/29/2022]
					

Find answers to all of your Florida concealed carry and firearm law questions. How to get a Texas Concealed Weapon License and more.




					www.usacarry.com
				




***snip***

_Florida Concealed Carry Quick Stats:

Permit/License: Florida Concealed Weapon License
Shall Issue to Residents and Non-residents
21 years of age minimum
Valid for 7 years
Initial Cost is $97
90-Day Processing Time
35 State Permits Honored
36 States Accept Florida*
*State Population: 22,000,000
[*]License Issued: 2,643,159*









						Florida Gun Laws: Can You Keep a Loaded Gun in Your Car?
					

Florida does not require a concealed carry permit to keep a loaded gun in your car—but there are still rules. Learn more about your rights.




					www.mikeglaw.com
				



_


----------



## whitehall (Apr 22, 2022)

Nobody should have to undergo a check on their mental status to purchase a firearm but somebody with a court documented mental condition should not be permitted to purchase a firearm. The most notorious school shooting in history happened in Va. Tech Blacksburg because a maniac, who was so crazy that faculty was afraid to be alone with him, ordered to psychiatric counseling to avoid prosecution in local court for stalking two female students. The democrat party in power thought that a person's psychiatric history was a private issue and not subject to a name check.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Apr 22, 2022)

koshergrl said:


> my point is that if a person can‘t be trusted around weapons then they are a threat and should be restrained. our enemies turn violent offenders out into the streets then use them to “prove” we need gun control.


Our enemies lie about violent offenders being ‘turned’ out into the streets - it’s known as a strawman fallacy.

Of course, conservatives are infamous for their lies.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Apr 25, 2022)

Donald H said:


> The majority by far is in favour of arming Hawaiians and so that will most likely happen there too. That will of course cause the shootings statistics to rise dramatically.


This is where I ask you to demonstrate you claim to be true, and you respond by tucking your tail and running away.


----------

