CPAC. The gun free zone where you complain about gun free zones

[The Derp]

You need to meet some real people instead of these cartoons you believe in. If you knew how many guns were around you, not harming you, at any given moment, you'd probably wet yourself.

I am only judging you by your posts.

Here's the sum of your posts:

Any gun control will result in a slippery slope of mass confiscation <--- Paranoia
Everyone needs to be armed because of the threats posed by criminals armed with guns stolen from people who got them <---Fear
An armed teacher just shot up a school in Georgia today, yet you want to arm teachers <---Confusion

 

[martybegan]

I have re-iterated my points over and over, that you do not accept them, or can't understand them isn't my issue.

Re-iterated, but not articulated. You're just restating what you said before, using the same generalized words that allow for maximum goalpost shifting. When I ask you to articulate what you mean, that means exactly what it means; articulate it. You are re-iterating you have a "strict interpretation of the Second Amendment", but you don't say what that strict interpretation actually entails. That's when details get fuzzy and when you start using generalized words. Does it mean a literal interpretation? Does it mean a biased one? Does it mean anything? Or is it just something you say to make yourself sound smart?

I have explained strict interpretation many times as well, again if you can't understand, I can't help you.

No you haven't. In your own words you have just "re-iterated" it, which isn't the same thing as articulating it. HOW are you strictly interpreting the Second Amendment?

No, you just want people to go through hoops via your incessant yammering and inability to understand or willful ignorance.

I already explained it several times, you just don't like or don't understand the answer.

Already explained, and example given.

 

[martybegan]

They are not complete exaggerations, 3-6 months has a 6 month max.

So that's not what you said before. So you moved the goalposts. You went right for an exaggerated claim at first, and have now spent the last few posts walking that shit back. Each time you walk it back or "clarify" it dings your credibility each time, and changes what it was you claimed. Your original claim is a lot different than the claim you're making now.

$500 dollars or so is close to $600. The main fee alone is $340, half of that, plus the printing and any other document work you have to do.

None of which is an actual infringement because none of which prevents you from getting a gun. Inconvenience is not infringement. If you're gonna whine about NYC gun laws, at least have the common decency to know what you're talking about instead of pulling shit from your ass, which you're doing here.

$480 is still way too much, so you are arguing over a leaking faucet when the Titanic is sinking.

"Way too much" according to an arbitrary standard you just established right now. A subjective, arbitrary standard. I would argue $480 isn't enough, and that the fee should be higher. And I come to that conclusion by establishing my own subjective standard right now for the benefit of this debate, just like you did. So now we have two competing standards, one of which has changed a couple times, the other of which is one that I just made up on the spot. See...I can play your game just as well, if not better than you.

Order of magnitude would mean the fee would be in reality $60 dollars, not $480. math, learn it.

By what standard are you saying the fee should be $60? By a standard you just made up this second. So you do that frequently; you invent standards then apply those invented standards to the debate, then you make exceptions and excuses for the standard you just set, allowing yourself to redefine those parameters. You do this for no other reason than your ego.

I linked to a website that linked to other sites that had the rules.BULLSHIT on the processing period. I work as a consultant for a government agency, and I KNOW things sit on desks for months if the powers that be want the process to be slowed. You know better, but you choose to lie about it.

1. If the other sites had more accurate info, why didn't you link to those? Did you just rush your way through a sloppy job? Because that's what it seems like.

2. I don't believe anything you claim about yourself here, and it seems like you're exaggerating or inventing a personal circumstance you know cannot be verified, to lend your garbage argument credibility it doesn't otherwise have.

3. To make up bullshit personal circumstances as a means to establish credibility in your argument is to admit that your argument is bullshit and can only be valid if we apply imaginary circumstances and unverifiable anecdotes to it.

It's punitive as it makes the process so difficult few people want to try. THAT is the infringement.

Punitive and inconvenience are not the same thing. I wouldn't even argue it's inconvenient because the process seems pretty straightforward. Explain how a 6-month processing period is punitive and an infringement when, after the period, you get the gun?

Order of magnitude is not a made up standard, it's an actual concept, $600 is an order of magnitude greater than $60, and $6,000 is an order of magnitude greater than $600.

And your nitpicking doesn't add anything to the conversation. When you have something new to bring to the table I'll respond in more detail

For the rest I already answered most of your circular typing.

Why can't I get my gun now?

Why force people to wait for no reason?

 

[martybegan]

If you don;t understand, google it and figure it out.

No. You explain your own garbage position. I'm not doing your fucking thinking for you, you lazy asshole. If you cannot articulate your position beyond platitudes and generalities, then it's not a position you should even have.

Being inconvenienced because the government just feels like it is being infringed on.

They "just feel like it"? So now you're a mind-reader of institutions. I think you just feel like being an asshole, so you invent these standards and then change those standards based on how badly your argument is faring.

You are either incapable of thinking or just trolling hoping I will get tired of it.

You not getting the answer you want does not equate to me not explaining my position in sufficient detail.

It's obvious the only reason they enforce the wait period and the fees is to discourage gun ownership. To deny that simple fact is to either agree with wanting to deny people the RKBA, or ignorance.

 

[hadit]

You need to meet some real people instead of these cartoons you believe in. If you knew how many guns were around you, not harming you, at any given moment, you'd probably wet yourself.

I am only judging you by your posts.

Here's the sum of your posts:

Any gun control will result in a slippery slope of mass confiscation <--- Paranoia
Everyone needs to be armed because of the threats posed by criminals armed with guns stolen from people who got them <---Fear
An armed teacher just shot up a school in Georgia today, yet you want to arm teachers <---Confusion

I can understand why you are confused, because apparently you are reading someone else's posts, or perhaps you're incapable of understanding anything beyond the starkest of contrasts.

Mass confiscation is the end result desired by many of the most vocal gun critics out here. I've posed a question that anti gun nuts won't touch. Here it is: We successfully ban the AR-15. Are kids any safer in schools? If you cannot honestly answer yes, why have we banned the gun? They don't want to touch it, so in the absence of contrary evidence, I deduce that their goal is to continue banning more and more guns as each step proves to be ineffective.

If you can find where I said everyone must be armed, please post it. Otherwise, you're wishing I said it. I myself do not own a gun, but I don't want a potential assailant to know that.

I've always distinguished between ARMING teachers and allowing teachers who are already armed, already have a carry permit, and are willing to go through additional training to carry a weapon. You seem to be unable to grasp that.

I cannot take seriously someone who does not communicate at even that basic level.

 

[Jarlaxle]

right wing phonies . Blaming gun free zones is a favorite diversion of the gun nuts .

Yet CPAC was gun free! Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Trump trashes gun-free schools at CPAC 2018 -- where people aren't allowed to bring in guns

Nor can the goons bring guns to an NRA convention


5 places Republicans have no problems banning guns

Which is due to the rules of the venue (which is generally rented) and/or local ordinances. Concealed weapons are allowed in the NRA headquarters.

Do you have an authoritative source that says the NRA allows visitors to conceal carry? Just curious.

Directly from someone who worked there: anyone with a valid permit (Virginia, a shall-issue CCW state) can carry in the HQ. Also note: there is (at least, there was a few years ago-it may be closed now) a public range attached to the same building.

 

[emilynghiem]

At CPAC they use metal detectors before people can enter, and thus create a secure zone where NO ONE can bring in a gun. I'm also sure they spring for armed security in case some lefty nutter tries to shoot up the place.

Most gun free schools don't actually do anything to create a true secure space, nor do they have any real response plan set up involving onsite armed responders.

Nice try though.

Bend yourself into a pretzel much?

“They have metal detectors ...” please . Bunch of two faced phonies railing against gun free zones .

No bending at all. They created a secure zone, with controlled access, just like a court, or an airport. A secure zone means I can reasonably assume no one else except authorized security is armed within the zone.

What do schools do to create secure zones out of their campuses?

Isn't it safest if everyone is armed?

Dear idb Conservatives come armed with knowledge of the laws.

That's the common factor with effective law enforcement and lawful use of right to bear arms:
Commitment to uphold, enforce and defend Constitutional laws.

So yes, it is the safest deterrent against crime and abuse
if everyone is equally armed in this way. Exactly!

Back to the original question then. Why is CPAC a gun free?

Dear Timmy it was NOT gun free.
the place was swarming with armed security.

Why aren't you counting the security detail
as having guns? They had to scout the whole place
inside and out, and yes they were armed and trained.

 

[emilynghiem]

right wing phonies . Blaming gun free zones is a favorite diversion of the gun nuts .

Yet CPAC was gun free! Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Trump trashes gun-free schools at CPAC 2018 -- where people aren't allowed to bring in guns

Dear Timmy: The Conference was screened for people who agree to assemble peacefully and lawfully.

Not so with public schools where Christian and Constitutional laws are not taught or enforced.

That is the best enforcement against criminals with any intent to cause disruption or violence.

And yes, once you have a consensus among a community, you can freely choose
to have a certain gun policy which everyone agrees to.

If the CPAC ran on a continuing basis like schools do, no this would not be wise or enforceable.
There would be too many opportunities for criminals to plan and plot ways to attack such an
ongoing site if it were advertised as having that many people with no guns allowed.

But for a short one time event, where the cost and revenue can afford proper security
for 3 days, yes you can make it secure for that time period.

Sort of like when the President planned his appearance, of course security had to be heightened.
But that would not work over a long period of time. You'd have to set up a regular system of
security if it was ongoing.

Why the public school distinction? Are private schools armed ??? Nuns packing heat under their habits ??

Timmy
Public schools are where the liberal biased secular polices
were passed to make "gun free zones" and to
remove teaching of respect for God and Christian prayer
to keep people in collective agreement and peace.

So the public schools are what became targets
of politics and political attacks as well.

And yes, private schools such as Rice are free to
hire their own police patrols and enforce their own policies.

It makes a huge difference in respect for community
when you don't abuse a collective institution to go around
"banning" things to make political statements or push agenda.
When people feel a sense of equal OWNERSHIP
and responsibility for their community,
they tend to contribute and not vandalize or destroy
what they identify with.

When participants at private venues whether CPAC or private
schools CHOOSE to be there and AGREE to follow rules,
it makes for a safer easier to police environment.

The public schools and govt institutions lose this
connection and unity when divisive politics and
agenda are injected.

When schools and events HAVE that unified
respect for community and values, this tends
to attract positive interaction and thwart negative energy
and attacks.

That's why I'm glad to see Darrell Scott participate
in Trump's forum at the White House, representing
Rachel's Challenge. Scott, the father of Columbine
shooting victim Rachel Scott, advocated for
CONNECTEDNESS as the key to thwarting
bullying and violence in schools by creating
a positive CULTURE. See the links:

Darrell Scott, Father Of A Columbine Victim, Calls For 'Culture Of Connectedness'
Trump hears from parents of shooting victims in Florida, Columbine and elsewhere during White House listening session – The Denver Post

Timmy you can nitpick day and night
over what causes, attracts or triggers these violent attacks.

The one thing I know that works to detect, correct and prevent this sickness
from escalating into worse damage, harm, tragedy death or other destruction
is the spiritual healing of mental illness, addictions, abuse and disorders
and even healing of relationships by Christian healing prayer therapy.

When people are healed internally and have healed relations externally,
of course they do not go around hurting other people to cry out for attention and help.
They are already receiving it, so there is no need to either hide or express the symptoms.

The most dangerous unpredictable cause of violence, abuses and addictions
is the occult influence and dark energy of witchcraft, voodoo and other sorcery
that clashes with positive healing life energy and erupts in destructive tragedy and/or death.

The only way I have found to counter and remove this demonic dangerous energy
is Christian spiritual healing, the deepest application of it used in deliverance or exorcism in extreme
cases of total obsession where someone's mind is completely out of normal control and can't be helped.

The beauty in applying the counseling and therapy in spiritual healing
is that it heals not only the mind and body of the person afflicted with ills,
but it heals the people around them, including personal and community relations.

Everyone benefits when this healing process is implemented
because the healing multiplies and affects the whole community in turn.

Rachel's Challenge is one program that teaches this "ripple effect"
in a secular way that all audiences and school communities can experience.

Once we restore that connectedness and community wholeness,Timmy then you
can figure out the rest of the problems that otherwise manifest as abuse or violence.

Not all cases have the same causes or cures,
it probably takes a combination of them and every
community is going to have different problems and solutions.

The common key is to work together in unity
instead of being divided by fear or politics or shame and blame.
Anything negative is not helping, but distracting from solving
the root problems. When people are divided and distracted,
that's when negative influences can take advantage and target that weakness or divide.

That's another way that public schools have become a target.
When programs are run by unified agreement by free choice,
not by force, when people share in ownership instead of feeling
controlled or oppressed by others, then there is no need to rebel
out of retribution. Where people feel represented, we can share
and resolve problems together instead of taking sides and bullying.

 

[emilynghiem]

right wing phonies . Blaming gun free zones is a favorite diversion of the gun nuts .

Yet CPAC was gun free! Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Trump trashes gun-free schools at CPAC 2018 -- where people aren't allowed to bring in guns

Dear Timmy: The Conference was screened for people who agree to assemble peacefully and lawfully.

Not so with public schools where Christian and Constitutional laws are not taught or enforced.

That is the best enforcement against criminals with any intent to cause disruption or violence.

And yes, once you have a consensus among a community, you can freely choose
to have a certain gun policy which everyone agrees to.

If the CPAC ran on a continuing basis like schools do, no this would not be wise or enforceable.
There would be too many opportunities for criminals to plan and plot ways to attack such an
ongoing site if it were advertised as having that many people with no guns allowed.

But for a short one time event, where the cost and revenue can afford proper security
for 3 days, yes you can make it secure for that time period.

Sort of like when the President planned his appearance, of course security had to be heightened.
But that would not work over a long period of time. You'd have to set up a regular system of
security if it was ongoing.

NOTE to C_Clayton_Jones
Not sure which part you found funny, ironic or ridiculous.

As for Constitutional enforcement, you yourself cite the Constitution
to defend your viewpoints and arguments.

Do you agree that Constitutional education and enforcement
is the best deterrent and means of checking against abuses?

 

[ChrisL]

Bend yourself into a pretzel much?

“They have metal detectors ...” please . Bunch of two faced phonies railing against gun free zones .

No bending at all. They created a secure zone, with controlled access, just like a court, or an airport. A secure zone means I can reasonably assume no one else except authorized security is armed within the zone.

What do schools do to create secure zones out of their campuses?

Isn't it safest if everyone is armed?

Dear idb Conservatives come armed with knowledge of the laws.

That's the common factor with effective law enforcement and lawful use of right to bear arms:
Commitment to uphold, enforce and defend Constitutional laws.

So yes, it is the safest deterrent against crime and abuse
if everyone is equally armed in this way. Exactly!

Back to the original question then. Why is CPAC a gun free?

Dear Timmy it was NOT gun free.
the place was swarming with armed security.

Why aren't you counting the security detail
as having guns? They had to scout the whole place
inside and out, and yes they were armed and trained.

They think the cops are superheroes unless it comes to handling black hero. Then they are racist murdering scum. Lol! They are very confused people from all the mixed messages their handlers give them.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

LOLGOP @LOLGOP
White privilege is eight years of pretending Obama is a tyrant who is going to take your guns and then doing nothing when Trump says he's a tyrant who'd just take your guns. https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/970121782630977536 …

9:29 PM - Mar 3, 2018

 

[HappyJoy]

right wing phonies . Blaming gun free zones is a favorite diversion of the gun nuts .

Yet CPAC was gun free! Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Trump trashes gun-free schools at CPAC 2018 -- where people aren't allowed to bring in guns

Nor can the goons bring guns to an NRA convention


5 places Republicans have no problems banning guns

Which is due to the rules of the venue (which is generally rented) and/or local ordinances. Concealed weapons are allowed in the NRA headquarters.

Do you have an authoritative source that says the NRA allows visitors to conceal carry? Just curious.

Directly from someone who worked there: anyone with a valid permit (Virginia, a shall-issue CCW state) can carry in the HQ. Also note: there is (at least, there was a few years ago-it may be closed now) a public range attached to the same building.

I'll ask that again. Prove it. Yes there is a range and you can carry there, but I'm specifically talking about visitors going to the offices of the NRA.

 

[Jarlaxle]

right wing phonies . Blaming gun free zones is a favorite diversion of the gun nuts .

Yet CPAC was gun free! Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Trump trashes gun-free schools at CPAC 2018 -- where people aren't allowed to bring in guns

Nor can the goons bring guns to an NRA convention


5 places Republicans have no problems banning guns

Which is due to the rules of the venue (which is generally rented) and/or local ordinances. Concealed weapons are allowed in the NRA headquarters.

Do you have an authoritative source that says the NRA allows visitors to conceal carry? Just curious.

Directly from someone who worked there: anyone with a valid permit (Virginia, a shall-issue CCW state) can carry in the HQ. Also note: there is (at least, there was a few years ago-it may be closed now) a public range attached to the same building.

I'll ask that again. Prove it.

Directly from NRA public relations: anyone with a valid CCW permit can carry in the NRA headquarters. Call them yourself and ask.

Or check the website: NRA Explore | FAQs

 

[ChrisL]

You can deem any area you want a gun free zone. The point IS that it is not going to deter a MADMAN from entering it with a gun and killing you.

 

[ChrisL]

 

[ChrisL]

 

[HappyJoy]

Nor can the goons bring guns to an NRA convention


5 places Republicans have no problems banning guns

Which is due to the rules of the venue (which is generally rented) and/or local ordinances. Concealed weapons are allowed in the NRA headquarters.

Do you have an authoritative source that says the NRA allows visitors to conceal carry? Just curious.

Directly from someone who worked there: anyone with a valid permit (Virginia, a shall-issue CCW state) can carry in the HQ. Also note: there is (at least, there was a few years ago-it may be closed now) a public range attached to the same building.

I'll ask that again. Prove it.

Directly from NRA public relations: anyone with a valid CCW permit can carry in the NRA headquarters. Call them yourself and ask.

Or check the website: NRA Explore | FAQs

I'll explain it to you again. Does the NRA allow visitors to CCW into their offices? Not the range.

OK, go...

 

[Timmy]

CPAC is a gun free zone because they don’t allow “law abiding gun owners” to carry at the convention .

You can try and bend reality all you want . A banana is a banana .

 

[Jarlaxle]

Which is due to the rules of the venue (which is generally rented) and/or local ordinances. Concealed weapons are allowed in the NRA headquarters.

Do you have an authoritative source that says the NRA allows visitors to conceal carry? Just curious.

Directly from someone who worked there: anyone with a valid permit (Virginia, a shall-issue CCW state) can carry in the HQ. Also note: there is (at least, there was a few years ago-it may be closed now) a public range attached to the same building.

I'll ask that again. Prove it.

Directly from NRA public relations: anyone with a valid CCW permit can carry in the NRA headquarters. Call them yourself and ask.

Or check the website: NRA Explore | FAQs

I'll explain it to you again. Does the NRA allow visitors to CCW into their offices? Not the range.

OK, go...

Reading is fundamental. One more time for the slow kid: Directly from NRA public relations: anyone with a valid CCW permit can carry in the NRA headquarters. Call them yourself and ask.

 

[whitehall]

Another cheap cliche by the desperate left. It isn't even worth arguing.