imported post
BobCav wrote:
David, thanks for the reply. I understood what you were saying. Often we get a lot of fence-sitters and compromisers, as well as the occasional anti-gun or anti-OC trolls,that hop on here to spout their "manifesto" for their first post and then leave. Glad you're not one of them!
I agree, the impassionedargument is often the only one that will stir the soul of another, motivating and inspiringthose who would listento find thatgreatness that lies deep within. It is far more effective thanhard statistical data and it is my style of choice. It's also a very effective and efficientsorting tool!
"There are only two forces in the world, the sword and the spirit. In the long run the sword will always be conquered by the spirit." - Napoleon Bonaparte
I grew up in the northern provinces of the DPRNJ myself (Bergen Kounty - Demokratic Peoples Republik of New Jersey) and only escaped to join the Navy in 84. I only go back visit my family on "VisitingDays" and bringcare packages from the outside world.
It's funny you mentioned OSHA. I can certainly understand safety as it was paramount in the Navy and saved my ass many times. Enginerooms are inherently deadly places andthere's no pointin being careless.My last job was a Quality Manager (ISO 9000-2001 Certified Internal Auditor) andDivisional Safety Officer (OSHA 30 hr. Certified). I always HATED the Safety Guy and now I was he! Having been through the OSHA course withmy head in that damn book all the time, I soon realized that thoughsomeof it does make sense in an industrial environment, there is so much more that is just plain RIDICULOUS! It seemed to me to be nothing more than the intentional and methodical micromanagement and legislation of common sense andgovernmental interference withDarwinian natural selection!
I say remove all the safety devices and warning labels from EVERYTHING and let the problem take care of itself!
A retired New York Lawyer, huh? Always good to have a friend inside the "occupied territory"!I'd be very interested in reading that paper you wrote. Would you post it here for all to read?
What is your take of Lord Bloomberg's political ambitions and his Coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns?
My pleasure, Bob. I will be eager to join in Napoleon 's observation. I see no room for compromise in the 2A. As someone put it: if you have a yard sale, you can negotiate and compromise on the price ofold furniture, but not on whether your mother or your child is for sale. Your choice of argument depends upon to whom it is addressed, whether it is a court of law or an informal group of laymen.
Incidentally, tho I have not been to Reno,
I LOVE Las Vegas ! I 've had very joyful times there; the air is rife with
FREEDOM ! To MY mind, the only thing wrong with it is that I don 't go there enuf.
As to OSHA, I believe that we shud all Occupy our time with being Safe and Healthy with all necessary emergency equipment at hand. As someone put it: " its better to
HAVE a gun and not
NEED it, than to
NEED a gun and not
HAVE it. " I love your vu on industrial Darwinism !
I 'll be very happy to post my paper here, but I saw some notation of a limit on the number of available characters (if I remember correctly); is there room for 8 pages of single spaced print ?
As to the occupied territory, I am hopeful that with the aid of the USSC, the Supreme Law of the Land will be applied as the Founders intended, wiping out all interference with civilian possession of defensiveguns. On the Aristotelian Square Of Logical Opposition, the 2A is a "universal negative" proposition: "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED " [emphasis added] Therefore, if it
IS infringed in any degree, however slight, then the Supreme Law of the Land has been
violated. The USSC has made it clear that any law inconsistent with the Constitution is null and void.
I 'm sure that Bloomberg wishes to aggregate as much political power as he can. I don 't see much of a future for him, politically. I don 't believe that he 'll run for the presidency. If he did, he 'd be the antithesis of Ross Perot, splitting the anti-freedom electorate.
David
