Another Charlton Heston speech (tremble liberals)

[Sandman]

Originally posted by 10Bears
[bThe Democrats went waaay to far on this gun control crap.  lost voters. Sure it probably lowers crime but hey... we’re Americans. Y’all better rethink all this gun control with John Ashcroft coming down your driveway.

No kidding... Ashcroft is the best reason I can think of for owning a large calibre weapon.

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Sabre
Thanks for sharing those, Hortlund.  I enjoyed the read very much.  It is sad there aren't more celebrities willing to espouse views deemed "incorrect" by the PC police...or just more ordinary citizens.

Sabre

P.S. The difference is, the gay person is applauded when he/she annunciates that pride in public, while the other fellow is mocked at best and savagely attacked at worst, and held up as the epitomy of evil, if he does the same.

Can't remember the last time some anti-PC conservative was KILLED for speaking out can you?

[Kieran]

10Bears-

Actually, that was directed at one particular person.

In reality, I don't see a great need for the private citizen to own guns. OTOH, I do believe the Constitution is clear about it. If a person wants to own guns, barring some disqualifying reason (such as felony arrest, armed robbery, etc.) they should be allowed to.

I am a bit torn, though. This 9/11 business makes one consider how difficult a job it is to get a handle on preventing internal terrorism in our country. How do you keep the guns out of the hands of the wackos? Somehow waiting for them to take out 15 or 20 kids in the schoolyard doesn't seem all that palatable to me.

Dunno what the answer is, but I do know what the rules say as of now.

[Karnak]

My, my, my.  More idiotic anti-Liberal crap.

I am a Liberal.

I support gun ownership.

Boy, that sure took a lot of courage.  I'm going to get persecuted any moment now, I can just feel it.


I think people who make Liberals out to be some kind of bogeyman evil are seriously unhinged and whacked.  They lack any real sense of what Liberals stand for, and in place of that believe the propaganda garbage spewed by their TVs and radios.  Their convictions of what a Liberal is are so distorted and flot out wrong that no argument can be offered against their "points".  T be able to argue against their anti-Liberal "points" would require those points to, in at least some faint way, resemble the actual Liberal agenda.

[Sandman]

It's okay Karnak... Just breath...

Way to take one for the team...

[GRUNHERZ]

For the lefties...  

I think people who make Conservatives out to be some kind of bogeyman evil are seriously unhinged and whacked. They lack any real sense of what Conservatives stand for, and in place of that believe the propaganda garbage spewed by their TVs and radios. Their convictions of what a Conservative is are so distorted and flot out wrong that no argument can be offered against their "points". To be able to argue against their anti-Conservative "points" would require those points to, in at least some faint way, resemble the actual Conservative agenda.

[SirLoin]

Damn dirty Rednecks!!!

[easymo]

Y’all better rethink all this gun control with John Ashcroft coming down your driveway.


That was a disturbingly logical statement for a lefty.

[Karnak]

GRUNHERZ,

Really?

What I think is that Conservatives and Liberals have mostly the same goals, but different ideas on how to get there.  I don't demonize Conservatives.

The kind of garbage you and others state in the OC indicates that you think we want the destruction of the USA.  That's bullcrap.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Karnak
The kind of garbage you and others state in the OC indicates that you think we want the destruction of the USA.  That's bullcrap.

Well, the problem is that most liberals are more part of the problem than the solution when it comes to battling terrorism for example. The right to dissent is not the true mark of patriotism, even though many of you may want to believe so.

During World War II, George Orwell said of England's pacifists: "Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively, the pacifist is pro-Nazi."

Example:
Arabic males are the predominant ethnical group when it comes to islamic terrorists seeking the destruction of the western civilization. Police needs to do ethnical profiling. Liberals throw a fit. Attorney General John Ashcroft is held up to be the  Constitution's "main enemy." (Apparently Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein come in as a close second). Ethnical profiling is forbidden, and it gets harder for police to catch bad guys.

[Voss]

Just imagine, for a moment, the effect of concealed weapons as a legal right. 9/11 comes around, three guys pull out box-cutters, two-hundred passengers pull out 10mm Glocks.

Yeah, guns have no place on an aircraft (today), but things could have been much different if, as Heston says, people hadn't held their tongues when the issue of gun control was first raised.

Research the days of John Dillinger, Baby-Faced Nelson, and the like. Not all of them were gunned down by law enforcement. Citizens were armed and quite often shot back. Times have changed. Americans today are repressed by wackos of many descriptions. The smaller the number the louder their voice (just count the atheists to see what I mean).

It'll shock you to hear it, but it's my opinion that we truly screwed up when we gave women the right to vote. Since then, it's been a steady ride downhill.

[Karnak]

Hortland,

You mistake pacifists for Liberals.  The two are not synonomous.  Further you asign far, far more threat value to terrorism than is warranted.  By grossly over estimating the danger presented you run the risk of over reacting.  Keep in mind that Governments are generally much more interested in gathering power than in relinquishing it.

Transportation Secretary Mineta is against racial profiling.  I don't know how practical that is though.  I know that I would watch Arab men on a flight I was on more closely than I would, say, Japanese men or Kenyan men.  However, I don't think we need laws for this, we can simply use common sense in our security.  Obviously ederly women from Kansas City don't need the same level of scrutiny applied to them as do young men from Riyahd.

Voss,

You make a classic pro-gun idiot argument.  If guns were allowed to be carried onto aircraft the terrorists certainly would not have been using box cutters.  Personally I'd rather fight terrorists armed with box cutters with my fists than terrorists armed with guns with my gun on an aircraft.

I'm not saying that the right to bear arms is something I am against.  I am simply saying that I find nearly all of the arguments coming from the pro and anti gun people to be highly specious and quite silly.

[Voss]

No, Karnak, I make the argument of the many out-weighing the few. There hasn't been one single gun law that deterred bad guys from getting guns. It can't be done. They don't give a rats bellybutton what the law is, that's why they are criminals.

[popeye]

"There hasn't been one single gun law that deterred bad guys from getting guns. It can't be done."

How about a "War on Guns"...    And we won't rest until the last bad guy's gun has been confiscated...no matter how long it takes, or how much it costs!!!

That should produce some results!

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Hortlund


Well, the problem is that most liberals are more part of the problem than the solution when it comes to battling terrorism for example. The right to dissent is not the true mark of patriotism, even though many of you may want to believe so.

During World War II, George Orwell said of England's pacifists: "Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively, the pacifist is pro-Nazi."

Since when are Liberals pacifists? More importantly, which of the protagonists in WW2 allowed more internal dissent? Which of the Protagonists won the frikin war? I'm guessing internal dissent wasn't a major deterent to success. Additionaly, Orwell's logic is kinda screwy. "Since pacifists have more freedom in a democracy, they can work more effectively FOR it too."


Voss, I feel sorry for your wife dude. You obviously have little regard for the intelligence of women.