Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
peter nap wrote:
Whisky for my men ... and beer for my horses... - Anon
peter nap wrote:
Whisky for my men ... and beer for my horses... - Anon
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
"Gun Toters at City Hall"
- Thread starter T Dubya
- Start date
Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
BTW, what's up with calling us "gun-toters"?
I hate that word tote. Sounds like we're carrying purses or something. Like a "tote bag" from the supermarket.
BTW, what's up with calling us "gun-toters"?
I hate that word tote. Sounds like we're carrying purses or something. Like a "tote bag" from the supermarket.
imported post
Leave it to Sidestreet (who showed up for the OC Breakfast 12/12/09) to recognize the butt on the inside picture.
Sidestreet asked me to make it clear that it was the gun butt he recognized - but given the way he was carrying on I'm not so sure he didn't recognize both butts.:uhoh:
Anyhow, we got autographs from the guy with the butts. Pretty soon those buttsare gonna be famous and I'll sell my autographed picture on EBay.
stay safe.
skidmark
Leave it to Sidestreet (who showed up for the OC Breakfast 12/12/09) to recognize the butt on the inside picture.
Sidestreet asked me to make it clear that it was the gun butt he recognized - but given the way he was carrying on I'm not so sure he didn't recognize both butts.:uhoh:
Anyhow, we got autographs from the guy with the butts. Pretty soon those buttsare gonna be famous and I'll sell my autographed picture on EBay.
stay safe.
skidmark
wylde007
Regular Member
imported post
Hawkflyer wrote:
If that's your argument, then Hitler's occupation of Poland was 100% legitimate until someone else came along and challenged him.
Japan's occupation of China was legitimate until they were successfully challenged.
Great Britain's subjugation of the Colonies was completely justified... until they were successfully challenged, right?
Well, the regime of Lincoln's occupation of our sovereign territory is only legitimate so long as they maintain a political and military superiority. Not a moment longer. Invasion does not settle Constitutionality. That concept reeks of folly. What that tells me is, by your estimation, if ever things got so bad, no matter how bad, corrupt, tyrannical or despotic, we should NEVER be allowed to forge a new government... you know, like they stated in the DoI?
Amazing. And, before anyone else gets all floophy, that is the last I will comment on this topic for now.
<and there was much rejoicing>
Hawkflyer wrote:
Settled by force of arms and military conquest. How legitimate.:?
If that's your argument, then Hitler's occupation of Poland was 100% legitimate until someone else came along and challenged him.
Japan's occupation of China was legitimate until they were successfully challenged.
Great Britain's subjugation of the Colonies was completely justified... until they were successfully challenged, right?
Well, the regime of Lincoln's occupation of our sovereign territory is only legitimate so long as they maintain a political and military superiority. Not a moment longer. Invasion does not settle Constitutionality. That concept reeks of folly. What that tells me is, by your estimation, if ever things got so bad, no matter how bad, corrupt, tyrannical or despotic, we should NEVER be allowed to forge a new government... you know, like they stated in the DoI?
Amazing. And, before anyone else gets all floophy, that is the last I will comment on this topic for now.
<and there was much rejoicing>
richarcm
Regular Member
imported post
Awesome! If we weren't getting a reaction we wouldn't be doing a very good job. :dude:
Awesome! If we weren't getting a reaction we wouldn't be doing a very good job. :dude:
va_tazdad
Regular Member
imported post
“I support the right of people to bear arms to protect themselves,” a still seething Council Vice President Ellen F. Robertson, 6th District, said, “but I see no reason why people have to bring their weapons into an arena where there is no perceived threat.” “It wasn’t appropriate,” said Chris A. Hilbert, 3rd District, who lost his father to gun violence.
Maybe she should explain that to the VA Tech students that had no way to defend themselves in an arena where no threat was perceived!
What planet is she on/from? :banghead:
“I support the right of people to bear arms to protect themselves,” a still seething Council Vice President Ellen F. Robertson, 6th District, said, “but I see no reason why people have to bring their weapons into an arena where there is no perceived threat.” “It wasn’t appropriate,” said Chris A. Hilbert, 3rd District, who lost his father to gun violence.
Maybe she should explain that to the VA Tech students that had no way to defend themselves in an arena where no threat was perceived!
What planet is she on/from? :banghead:
SicSemperTyrannis
Regular Member
imported post
Grapeshot wrote:
You get more of what you want politically by expanding the number of people who agree with you. One way to do that is to make arguments that appeal to people different than yourselves. Face reality: if you think we will get more respect for the gun rights of law abiding citizens in Virginia by increasing the number of Virginians who are white, were born in Virginia, and already support gun rights, you are likely to be disappointed.
I was born and raised here. I know how much fun it can be to call a northerner a "yankee". I know some of the changes in Virginia are directly related to large numbers of folks from New Jersey (and elsewhere) moving here because of our low crime, pro-business laws, low taxes, lack of public corruption, etc. Then the first thing some of them want to do is make us more like the places they fled from.
Still, most people in Richmond may be "minority", but they certainly aren't yankees. They are your fellow Virginians.
Secondly, it is OUR responsibility to make ARGUMENTS as to exactly why and how people that aren't so much like many of us would benefit from better better gun laws. Name-calling will NOT accomplish this. It may even backfire. I'm gay, and I work hard to help other gay folks understand how better gun laws would benefit them. Gun control initially was mostly a racist reaction to freed blacks having firearms. That was a mistake (and a SIN) made by our fellow southerners (and others). Take responsibility for this, and spread that message instead of calling your fellow "minority" Virginians names like "yankee".
Have you heard Condeleeza Rice talk about her father standing on her roof with a shotgun when the Klan came through town (who thenturned and ran like the cowards they were)? Her father couldn't count on the police because some of them were literally under those white sheets*. That's a pro-gun message. That's an argument packed in a soundbite people who aren't especially pro-gun can relate to.
*- Bashing police also is counter-productive. But this isn't bashing here, it's just a sad fact about our history.
Grapeshot wrote:
You get more of what you want politically by expanding the number of people who agree with you. One way to do that is to make arguments that appeal to people different than yourselves. Face reality: if you think we will get more respect for the gun rights of law abiding citizens in Virginia by increasing the number of Virginians who are white, were born in Virginia, and already support gun rights, you are likely to be disappointed.
I was born and raised here. I know how much fun it can be to call a northerner a "yankee". I know some of the changes in Virginia are directly related to large numbers of folks from New Jersey (and elsewhere) moving here because of our low crime, pro-business laws, low taxes, lack of public corruption, etc. Then the first thing some of them want to do is make us more like the places they fled from.
Still, most people in Richmond may be "minority", but they certainly aren't yankees. They are your fellow Virginians.
Secondly, it is OUR responsibility to make ARGUMENTS as to exactly why and how people that aren't so much like many of us would benefit from better better gun laws. Name-calling will NOT accomplish this. It may even backfire. I'm gay, and I work hard to help other gay folks understand how better gun laws would benefit them. Gun control initially was mostly a racist reaction to freed blacks having firearms. That was a mistake (and a SIN) made by our fellow southerners (and others). Take responsibility for this, and spread that message instead of calling your fellow "minority" Virginians names like "yankee".
Have you heard Condeleeza Rice talk about her father standing on her roof with a shotgun when the Klan came through town (who thenturned and ran like the cowards they were)? Her father couldn't count on the police because some of them were literally under those white sheets*. That's a pro-gun message. That's an argument packed in a soundbite people who aren't especially pro-gun can relate to.
*- Bashing police also is counter-productive. But this isn't bashing here, it's just a sad fact about our history.
Jero1987
Regular Member
imported post
http://www.richmondfreepress.com/contact.html
"The Richmond Free Press respects the opinions of its readers. We want to hear from you. We invite you to write the editor."
Why don't we listen to the Richmond Free Press and contact them with our opinion?
I mean for all we know we might be able to teach them a thing or two.
James
http://www.richmondfreepress.com/contact.html
"The Richmond Free Press respects the opinions of its readers. We want to hear from you. We invite you to write the editor."
Why don't we listen to the Richmond Free Press and contact them with our opinion?
I mean for all we know we might be able to teach them a thing or two.
James
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
wylde007 wrote:
With all due respect. Bull hockey!
I have been dealing with these issues all my life. I AM standing up, where the hell are YOU!!
If you think you are going to settle this argument with firepower after the war has been over for 150 years, then you must be of the mindset that there are 75 virgins waiting for you in heaven. Because in case you have not noticed you are outgunned by the government, unless you happen to have a few blackhawks and B1 bombers in your garage you are not telling us about.. The issue of secession WAS settled, it does not matter 150 years later the means. Recognizing that does not make a person less brave, or less willing to resist, it makes them more intelligent. At this point in time intelligence MUST prevail over bravado and posturing before it is too late.
We have to produce a better message. We have to get that message to people who will listen. Not just the choir who post or read these boards, but people who are on the fence or are in the enemy camp. We have to elect people who believe in the constitution and the rights of the individual. Only then can this crap be rolled back.
Shouting names at each other based on where we were born will not cure anything and it is counter productive to the kind of message we MUST have to win. It is unnecessarily divisive and damages the cause. So frankly I do not care what you think I am or am not willing to do in the name of liberty. You have no idea who I am, what I have already done, or what I am willing to do in the future. There may be a time to take arms, but this is not it.
Regards
wylde007 wrote:
With all due respect. Bull hockey!
I have been dealing with these issues all my life. I AM standing up, where the hell are YOU!!
If you think you are going to settle this argument with firepower after the war has been over for 150 years, then you must be of the mindset that there are 75 virgins waiting for you in heaven. Because in case you have not noticed you are outgunned by the government, unless you happen to have a few blackhawks and B1 bombers in your garage you are not telling us about.. The issue of secession WAS settled, it does not matter 150 years later the means. Recognizing that does not make a person less brave, or less willing to resist, it makes them more intelligent. At this point in time intelligence MUST prevail over bravado and posturing before it is too late.
We have to produce a better message. We have to get that message to people who will listen. Not just the choir who post or read these boards, but people who are on the fence or are in the enemy camp. We have to elect people who believe in the constitution and the rights of the individual. Only then can this crap be rolled back.
Shouting names at each other based on where we were born will not cure anything and it is counter productive to the kind of message we MUST have to win. It is unnecessarily divisive and damages the cause. So frankly I do not care what you think I am or am not willing to do in the name of liberty. You have no idea who I am, what I have already done, or what I am willing to do in the future. There may be a time to take arms, but this is not it.
Regards
imported post
Hawkflyer wrote:
While I don't think secession is settled, it is an absolute last resort and even then, to be avoided if at all possible. I don't think most people who spout civil war have any idea what's involved in fighting a gorilla war.
We do need to expand our ranks, vote and make sure all of us become involved in the system. Gunowners won't ever all get along. But if we maintain a voting block, it won't matter.
I was reminded of that about a bill that is certain to be introduced this year. I dislike the bill and hate the person asking it to be introduced...but will support it for the overall good.
Hawkflyer wrote:
As much as I enjoy making yankee jokes and rattling chains, Hawkflyer is correct...to a degree, anyway. I;ve said before, it isn't about property lines, It's about people. As a born Southerner, I'll take Proshooter's company any day, over people like Barely Illegal.
While I don't think secession is settled, it is an absolute last resort and even then, to be avoided if at all possible. I don't think most people who spout civil war have any idea what's involved in fighting a gorilla war.
We do need to expand our ranks, vote and make sure all of us become involved in the system. Gunowners won't ever all get along. But if we maintain a voting block, it won't matter.
I was reminded of that about a bill that is certain to be introduced this year. I dislike the bill and hate the person asking it to be introduced...but will support it for the overall good.
simmonsjoe
Regular Member
imported post
I Don't remember 'glowering' at all. I remember being treated very poorly by the President when asking if I could talk about those items in the conter of their pamphlet and not just the ones on the right hand side. I was polite, and I felt mistreated by an aggressive and arrogant council members.
If any of the council members feel they are unsafe I would be willing to sell a pistol or two out of my private collection for extremely cheap as a sign of good faith. The reason we are polite is because we expect others to be armed as well. Rights are for everyone.
As for feeling uncomfortable around guns, that is half the point. We are trying to normalize gun ownership. You don't feel uncomfortable around your cars, do you council members?? Yet if you were a gun owner, the risks involved are minuscule in comparison to driving a car. The other motorists driving around you are a much greater risk to you than all of the gun owners around you.
I Don't remember 'glowering' at all. I remember being treated very poorly by the President when asking if I could talk about those items in the conter of their pamphlet and not just the ones on the right hand side. I was polite, and I felt mistreated by an aggressive and arrogant council members.
If any of the council members feel they are unsafe I would be willing to sell a pistol or two out of my private collection for extremely cheap as a sign of good faith. The reason we are polite is because we expect others to be armed as well. Rights are for everyone.
As for feeling uncomfortable around guns, that is half the point. We are trying to normalize gun ownership. You don't feel uncomfortable around your cars, do you council members?? Yet if you were a gun owner, the risks involved are minuscule in comparison to driving a car. The other motorists driving around you are a much greater risk to you than all of the gun owners around you.
nuc65
Activist Member
imported post
You can say what you want about the South, but you never hear of anyone retiring and moving north.
You can say what you want about the South, but you never hear of anyone retiring and moving north.
wylde007
Regular Member
imported post
nuc65 wrote:
Hawkflyer wrote:
nuc65 wrote:
Hear, hear.
Hawkflyer wrote:
Nor you I. I told you I was finished and I meant it. You're not worth that kind of time.
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
wylde007 wrote:
Well I know you are not able to keep your word.:celebrate
wylde007 wrote:
Well I know you are not able to keep your word.:celebrate
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Hawkflyer wrote:
As the old timers used tosay, "A man persuaded against his will is of his former opinion still."
I recall no amendment to the constitution after the War of Northern Agression saying the federation was perpetual.
The only thing that got settled was that some men were willing to kill lots of others to enforce their political and economic opinions without legal authority. That question definitely got answered.
But, as far as I know, the question of secession is still open topersuasion, economic bargaining power, and force.
Hawkflyer wrote:
It occurs to me that the issue could not possibly have been settled.
As the old timers used tosay, "A man persuaded against his will is of his former opinion still."
I recall no amendment to the constitution after the War of Northern Agression saying the federation was perpetual.
The only thing that got settled was that some men were willing to kill lots of others to enforce their political and economic opinions without legal authority. That question definitely got answered.
But, as far as I know, the question of secession is still open topersuasion, economic bargaining power, and force.
Hawkflyer
Founder's Club Member
imported post
Citizen wrote:
I am sorry. Refresh my memory, which of the states that lawfully suceded from the union are still independent states?
Now I would agree that a state or a number of states could try it again. Do I think they can do it lawfully? No I do not because it requires a vote. So how long do you think secessionists will last in the face of embargo and armed intervention? Also remember that a lot of people are still asleep and would not support this sort of thing. They will be on the other side. This is not like 250 years ago when most of the people supported these concepts.
You and I have talked long enough for you to know that I am not any happier with current events than you. I am just as willing to resist as you, and I am not afraid to do what I must when I see the elephant. However I am not a kamikaze. Martyrs do not win wars, survivors do.
I have been seeing a lot of people who have no clue what insurrection would actually be like blowing a lot of bravado around. Usually they have not gone to the lengths to settle matters peacefully and lawfully that the founding fathers they like to quote did. In most cases they are letting their little brain overpower their littler brain. I know you are not one of those, but I also know that you know that settled lawfully or not, for all practical purposes the issue is moot.
Regards
Citizen wrote:
I am sorry. Refresh my memory, which of the states that lawfully suceded from the union are still independent states?
Now I would agree that a state or a number of states could try it again. Do I think they can do it lawfully? No I do not because it requires a vote. So how long do you think secessionists will last in the face of embargo and armed intervention? Also remember that a lot of people are still asleep and would not support this sort of thing. They will be on the other side. This is not like 250 years ago when most of the people supported these concepts.
You and I have talked long enough for you to know that I am not any happier with current events than you. I am just as willing to resist as you, and I am not afraid to do what I must when I see the elephant. However I am not a kamikaze. Martyrs do not win wars, survivors do.
I have been seeing a lot of people who have no clue what insurrection would actually be like blowing a lot of bravado around. Usually they have not gone to the lengths to settle matters peacefully and lawfully that the founding fathers they like to quote did. In most cases they are letting their little brain overpower their littler brain. I know you are not one of those, but I also know that you know that settled lawfully or not, for all practical purposes the issue is moot.
Regards