26625 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 1:39pm
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5481
31509

And there it is...

Teachers with guns are very scary, horrible people. That didn't take long.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-28/teacher-custody-after-shots-fi...

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 2:14pm
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10728
64130

The pure evil of bowing to authority

In this essay, is explained how people Will commit hideous atrocities, for absolutely no reason other than that they were told to.

Why?

The belief in the morality of subservience to authority figures is deadly.

It's a religious thing. Part of your mind fucking indoctrination.

The problem is, damn near no one realizes it.

THE “EXPERIMENTER”: UNDERSTANDING WHY S*IT HAPPENS AND HOW CONFORMITY KILLS

FEBRUARY 28, 2018 | DOUG "UNCOLA" LYNN | THETOLLONLINE.COM | 447 VIEWS

During inclement weather days, late nights, lazy weekends, and when one’s eyes tire of small print or words and images levitating in digital ether, Netflix offers a video library of sorts allowing the viewer to recline, and imbibe knowledge in a relatively easy way. Many of Netflix’s films consist of documentaries, nonfiction stories originating from books, historical retellings, or fictionalized narratives derived from actual circumstances and people. Two such films, recently viewed by the author of this post, are historical accounts, originated from books, and retold from the perspective of the actual persons who lived the events recounted therein. These two films, currently showing on Netflix, include: “First They Killed My Father” (2017) and “Experimenter” (2015).

Keep reading: https://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-experimenter-understanding-why-sit-h...

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 2:37pm (Reply to #19981)
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10728
64130

That didn't take long...

And now ladies and gentlemen, it has been announced that public enemy number one, his teachers with guns.

So who's going to defend the children from teachers with guns?

Children with guns. wink

The narrative of evil guns has been brought to you by your evil overlords.

The right to defend yourself is under assault, the right to free speech is under assault,

And human freedom is under assault, oh wait, humanity gave that up a long time ago. cheeky

Is there a change coming? - David Icke answers questions from Polish media
"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 2:49pm (Reply to #19978)
ancientmoney
Offline
-
Madison, WI
Joined: Jun 19, 2012
4340
29319

GL on unconstitutional things...

"There are 100's of unconstitutional things being done on a daily basis in DC. 

Talking about your Constitutional Gun rights when there isn't obedience to the Constitution. I'll say more on this later."

--------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed. 

As Fix and I (and others) said several times, what we argue for is a right of self defense. The constitution doesn't protect us; natural law does not protect us; we protect ourselves. All laws, regardless of their origin, are constructs, or interpretations of how we should conduct ourselves. 

Just like police don't and most of the time can't protect us, laws cannot do the job.

Laws are being created, changed, massaged, and ignored almost continuously. By ordinary people. By criminals. By politicians (but I repeat myself).

As you stated so eloquently, and it is a well-known phrase on the streets, "don't bring a knife to a gunfight."

Not everyone owns, or uses guns. Or bazookas. Or even their fists.

But some do; many criminals do use guns, and some of them have fully automatic Uzi's or other such "machine guns." They were gotten illegally. So, trying to create laws that keep guns out of criminals' hands is a fool's errand.

Sure we can keep guns out of law-abiding people's hands--by definition. But then only criminals will have guns.

So, I agree with Fix; no restrictions--because whatever you restrict will become the sole domain of criminals and murderers.

Now, I want you to argue the complete ban of all guns/weapons, how it can be done, to assure no criminal can ever get one. I already know what you are going to say.

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 4:41pm
ancientmoney
Offline
-
Madison, WI
Joined: Jun 19, 2012
4340
29319

Trump on gun control..

More persuasion?

Sounds like he's in favor of raising the age of gun ownership from 18 to 21.

Sounds reasonable, right? I guess then, we can't allow people to enlist in the military until age 21, as having a gun would break the law.

How about the 14-17 year old gangbangers who have guns now? Will they decide to turn in their guns when the law says age 21 is the lower limit? Well, they don't really own them, as they are too young. If they are stolen, then somebody else still owns them, so I guess they're good...

Laws, laws...meant to be broken I guess.

Politicians want to make "feel-good" laws, which results in simply creating more (otherwise law-abiding) criminals, rather than doing something to stop the real ones. 

Of course, the FBI seems to groom the mentally challenged as patsies, so their own criminals don't take the heat.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-28/take-guns-first-trump-breaks-republicans-over-gun-control-plan

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 10:12pm (Reply to #19984)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

ancientmoney wrote: Now, I

ancientmoney wrote:

Now, I want you to argue the complete ban of all guns/weapons, how it can be done, to assure no criminal can ever get one. I already know what you are going to say.

Why would I do that? Why would a person who supports the second amendment, make a case for the complete ban on all guns? IS that the impression you're getting from my arguments? It's the wrong one.

I don't embrace either absolute stance because one is Hitlers Germany, and the other is Anarchy which my stance is that it is not plausible reality. It's too idealist. 

Second, your stance might be hard to support from a historical perspective, because it didn't happen in Colonial America, Early America, the Wild Wild West, in Common Law Britain or in Ancient Greece. All these times and places that were used common law, based on their understanding of natural law didn't have unfettered access with no regulatory process, or total open carry. There is alot on the regulations of early America in various states and gun rules in the wild wild west. Even the wording in the Constitution says "REGULATED militia" And that deserves digging of how they saw it being regulated. You have none because you have asserted it won't work. Probably not all the time.

 So whether you are right or wrong, we're never going there. It's a dream, but I think you know that. From a persuasive arguement, it won't win. So yes, Trump is probably being persuasive in that he is telling the NRA back off, and catering to his next election. Adams did a video on it. I didn't find this particular one insightful because there is no verdict yet.

His previous posts on the subject are insightful and bring forth realities that most people don't consider.

So, trying to create laws that keep guns out of criminals' hands is a fool's errand.

But your absolute unfettered access to anything, gives guns to anybody despite mental condition, past history (which is usually prologue to future behaviors). Probably because you are asserting that they will get it anyway.

So yes, laws do not guarantee people won't break it and gun control is no different. And guns do not guarantee people won't die from violence. But even hard core gun owners that I've been reading on the gun forums acknowledge the paper work introduces some friction. And you are ascerting the more guns in the hands of good people (and you have no system to tell the difference) it will effect violence. Well, I need to see the statistics and the correlations. The problem is that Detroit is not Paris and what works in one place, might not be truth in the other place. 

I'd also have to alot of checking on cycles of violence, nationwide, and locally, and there is definitely a planetary cycle involved here that correlates with the gun conversation which I checked a little into but have to do more research before I'm willing to reach the final conclusions that you've reached without sharing the data. 

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 10:27pm
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 10:49pm (Reply to #19987)
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10728
64130

Membership

I'm pretty sure you can do it on this site with a credit card.

It's how I got here. surprise

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 10:49pm
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 10:54pm (Reply to #19988)
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Wed, Feb 28, 2018 - 11:01pm (Reply to #19989)
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Re:Outlaw Guns

Not even on the table or relevant. It's the extreme absolute under tyranny. We're not there yet. 

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 12:03am
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Fix, I lost my post to you.

Fix, I lost my post to you. Gonna give it a second stab. Funny how it's hard to duplicate your thoughts so they look the same. 

Part of your posts echo's what I said, gun's get no special treatment under natural law. They are no different than fire hydrants, railroad bridges or toothpicks. The right to own a gun comes from your right to defend yourself. Survival is the prime directive. Obviously.

Your three assertions:

Humans can't follow the golden rule. Human do not understand natural law. Humans, all of them, should have unfettered access to any weapon of choice by anybody without regulation is inconsistent with your first 2 assertions. Sounds like, let stupid people have weapons. I don't even see that sentiment on the gun forums. You also choose the absolute and decided not to fill in any of the blank space between the two absolutes. There's a great jazz song called "All Or Nothing at All" I think Frank Sinatra sang it also.

As I thought, but wanted to confirm, your philosophy on guns is informed by your absolute belief in anarchy.

I just want to be clear on your position. It makes the discussion easier when you know what you are discussing with the other person.

You have put out a position that has no analogy in American History. Not even during the summer of liberation from England. You have put out a position that has no analogy by other civilizations that practiced common law derived from Natural Law. 

The second amendment doesn't support your view on supply or regulation. The founders believed that anarchy was the faster way to tyranny even over a Constitutional government. I know, I know. You're gonna hate the founders even more. They seemed to like Plato a little bit. Me too. 

https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch11s10.html

All the colonies had a well regulated military except Pennsylvania. All men were required to register their guns and participate in training. You would have bitched about all the bureaucratic red tape.

https://www.chronicle.com/article/All-Guns-Are-Not-Created-Equal/136805

Yep, couldn't own or carry without government knowing about it. 

https://books.google.com/books?id=qoY2AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA424&dq=militia+musket&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjw59L6-vLWAhUIQiYKHSesBLEQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=accoutrements&f=false

Even after the Revolutionary War, we were still using English Common Law which prohibited concealed carry. And those who could travel with concealed weapons were under tight regulations. 

https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendIIs1.html

Defending yourself is a broad category. I know we are talking about mass shootings and it is under this umbrella that we were are discussing gun rights. The only right action when groups of people are being shot at is deadly force in return. Everything else is not cut and dry. Deadly force was NOT considered appropriate if you could retreat. NATURAL LAW

Guns had to be kept unloaded like in Switzerland where service and training is compulsatory. 

All the quotes that Ancient Money is throwing out seem to come from strong gun rights activist groups that are supported by a big MONEY organization. Just saying. And does not provide a balanced view of the Founders views on gun rights.

None of those websites acknowledge that the Founders engaged in mob controls, and large scale disarmament. If you are not with us, you are against us. Lay down your arms. 

https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/01-03-02-0016-0075

 Colonies, who are notoriously disaffected to the cause of America, or who have not associated, and shall refuse to associate to defend by Arms these united Colonies, against the hostile Attempts of the British Fleets and Armies, and to apply the Arms taken from such Persons in each respective Colony, in the first place, to the Arming the continental Troops raised in said Colony, in the next, to the arming such Troops as are raised by the Colony for its own defence, and the Residue to be applied to the arming the Associators; that the Arms when taken be appraised by indifferent Persons, and such as are applied to the Arming the Continental Troops, be paid for by the Congress and the Residue by the respective Assemblies, Conventions, or Councils or Committees of Safety.

Like I've been telling you guys, this debate on gun control didn't happen yesterday. It's been going on since the beginning. YAWN!

Some cities you had to have your guns kept unloaded. 

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4021&context=flr

Now the Supreme Court has recognized your right to bear arms. Not quite sure why there keeps being suggestions that there is a movement to take away all the guns, absolutely. That's reading into the motivation of the mass shootings before you have all the evidence. 

The court said the state and federal government must observe this right, but it didn't say you had the right to shoot at the government. And you would defend that idea by a quote like this by Thomas Jefferson: 

When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

FAke quote. Like untold dozens floating round that somebody wrote. Not the founders.

The NRA has actually expanded gun "rights" well beyond the founders original intentions. 

The Constitution actually defines taking up arms against the government to be treason. It's why I told Ancient Money to cut back his argument. I thought I was helping.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

The argument against having Muslims come into this country is that embedded in their religious doctrine, they want to overthrow the government of the United States. Well, I wouldn't invoke that argument as a reason to have a gun if I wanted to be persuasive.

Now that's alot of reading. Alot of education on past history of the United States. So if we are going to quote the founders, let's put it all out there for balance.

I'd be interested in seeing those statistics of correlations between decreasing violence with rising gun ownership and the correlation between tightly regulated ownership and reduced crime like in Switzerland. They aren't taking guns from people, they are giving them out. But it comes with a strict code of responsibility. Sort of a golden rule of guns.

And if we are going to keep citing natural law, let's refer to the experts in history. I posted this guy several times Sir William Blackstone. The second amendment comes from him.

Sir William Blackstone wrote in the 18th century that the right to have arms was auxiliary to the "natural right of resistance and self-preservation" subject to suitability and allowance by law. ... In the 19th and 20th centuries, firearms came to the forefront of the concept of the right to keep and bear arms.

https://www.historytoday.com/stephen-cooper/gun-control-right-bear-arms

As for your absolute ascertion under natural law that a man can own a tank or a nuclear weapon, John Locke was also an expert on natural law and ascerted your right to bear arms, also said. 

“You can not privately own a nuclear weapon just because you happen to think that it’s good for your own self preservation. Thus, gun-control is justified to the extent that it’s for the good of the public.”

I shouldnt' have to say this but it looks like I do.

What I've posted on the past ways our society has determined gun rights, doesn't mean I am suggesting those work today. But if you are going to argue absolutes, like full access and no government and no laws, I'm going to show you that you are taking the idealist path that doesn't have a chance in hell of ever coming to fruition and while you think that you are interpreting natural law accurately, other experts long time before Mark Passio say you're not. There is no analogy for your views in this country.

What I also know for myself is that I have no final decision on what's going on in this country. What cycles are at hand with the gun issues, and mass violence and fully understanding the correlations. But I'm certain, I wouldn't gravitate toward either extreme on the issue of guns especially before I feel I've full grasp and understanding of teh trend of mass shootings since Columbine.

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 8:57am (Reply to #19992)
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10728
64130

Green Lantern, I didn't lose my post. Here it is....

Speaking of absolutes,

I fully recognize that I have a minority opinion, that's not the issue.

It's not about gun control, you're correct with that.

I also seem to be one of the very, very few people alive that believes that truth is singular and absolute.

This tends to remove public opinion from my assertions, because it's irrelevant.

Lots of people believe a lot of shit that simply isn't true. You seem to think that if Public opinion is heavily weighted towards an untruth, it must be codified into law.

You are a propagandist wet dream.

Any argument based on the constitution, I also consider invalid, because although they are loosely based on natural laws, sprinkled in them, are terms like "well regulated”, giving an entity we call government the final word on whether or not your natural born rights will be allowed, or will not be.

Governments have this nasty little habit of stealing your natural rights, and then selling them back to you as a privilege.

Licenses and permits are just a euphemism for theft. A human being exercising a basic human right is none of the governments or anyone else's fucking business.

Making it the government's business is exactly what's gotten us into this never ending circle jerk of what is, and is not allowed.

Yes, my viewpoint can be clearly defined as anarchist, and I fully reject the notion that just because someone calls themselves government, that they are immune from the consequences of violating natural laws.

If I chose to defend myself against some government thugs, who believe they have the right to steal with impunity, then by definition, that is treason.

I'm okay with that. Just call me a treasonous heretic. These are mere labels invented by those who enslave you.

Applying laws to each and every human being equally, is my ultimate argument.

When laws are equally applied across the board, then evil people with guns simply don't live very long.

Good people with guns make them largely irrelevant.

Ultimately, we would have a lot less evil people to contend with.

What we have, is the evilest amongst us dictating what our rights are. They call themselves government, and as long as everybody believes that they have some kind of moral exemption from the consequences of blatantly immoral behavior, they will destroy an entire civilization.

"Well-regulated" is a poison pill scribbled onto a piece of parchment we call our constitution. It doesn't give us any rights, it takes them away.

If you want to defend the right of a group of Satanic megalomaniacal pieces of shit dictating what our rights are, I'll be happy to have that argument, but be forewarned, you will quickly be put into the position of defending blatant immorality, and human enslavement.

Go for it. 

Here, I'll give you an example of a highly immoral argument, which you accepted.

“You can not privately own a nuclear weapon just because you happen to think that it’s good for your own self preservation. Thus, gun-control is justified to the extent that it’s for the good of the public.”

Do you see what he did there?

Individual rights are abandoned for an imagined "public good”. "Public good" is a euphemism for government, which is a euphemism for human enslavement.

Sure, you can argue until Hell freezes over that my opinion is idealistic, but that doesn't make it wrong.

You can also argue that my idealism doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell. That still does not make it wrong.

Just because popular opinion believes a bunch of bullshit, isn't going to sway my argument.

Do you really think I take an opinion poll to determine what I think about things?

Is the majority opinion always the correct one?

Since that seems to be the basis of your argument, I reject it.

I don't give a shit what “everyone” thinks, when they are wrong.

Debate that. cheeky

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 9:04am
ag1969
Offline
Joined: May 10, 2012
5481
31509

LOL

We Have a Winner!

I can't help but love watching the democrats implode. Their Russia BS has reached the point of ludicrous. I just hope this does not come to an end without picking off the republicans too.

Fix, do you remember years ago we discussed the end is nigh when they all turn on each other. Comical.

I know you guys are going to thrash me for paying attention to the narratives, but I love a good comedy. Adam Schiff alone is a comedy show. What a fucking retard that guy(?) is. I still hold the position that a whole lot of people are waking up, it is amazing. I kid you not, I just watched a video on Google censoring the conservatives on youtube, and I saw a comment there from my 13 year old niece bashing the criminals whom stole her future. I have never talked to her about this stuff and her parents (My Brother) are devout catholics. All his kids are rebelling against his satantic psycho-babble, and he has five kids! Everyone picks on today's kids, but they are way more awake than we give them credit for.

After years of watching these baby fucking maggots smash silver and all of the other rampant criminality, it is sure nice to see some of the pedophile scum squirm. Not holding my breath, but I would love a mass public hanging of the criminal scum that my ignorant fellow Americans keep voting for.

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 9:26am
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10728
64130

AG 1969

I would never thrash you for paying attention.

I agree with you, this is turning into an epic comedy. I also agree that the youngest amongst us seem to see a lot clearer then there parents. 

The Satanic empire of lies seems to have overstepped their grasp on mind control, by taking it too far, too fast.

Children come into this world with clearer vision than their parents. It's always been like that.

Turning a clear thinking child into an indoctrinated pile of mush takes time and finesse, and the powers that be are now trying to go too far, too fast, and there lies are fully exposed as such.

I think it's somewhat similar to my own childhood, where the bullshit was just so thick, it was left completely exposed.

Changes are coming. angel 

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 10:16am
gold way p
Offline
-
north olmsted, OH
Joined: Apr 18, 2014
144
632

Guns

I like the idealistic balanced equilibrium brought about by everyone having guns and outnumbering and intimidating bad intent with overwhelming good. Not realistic in a world where evil intent works in whispers and shadows looking for weakness and chink in the armor. It really is a battle between good and evil and it seems evil has the upper hand. Anyone can say stuff that sounds good but they can lie just to soften you up, right before they go in for the kill. You can even lie to yourself and believe you are right for god sakes. Wake up we are only using a small percentage of our mental capabilities for a reason. I believe it is to make humanity malleable, possibly after eons of survival of the strongest and fittest the majority of people have been pounded into submission. I only know something is very wrong and its getting worse. 

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 10:40am
Offline
Joined: Jun 15, 2011
8170
47854

Putin just tested a super

Putin just tested a super sophisticated nuclear missile and told the US that it could pierce US defenses like marshmallows. Can't touch what you can't see. 

Any idea's for Donald Trump on counter persuading Putin high road technique

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 12:17pm
AGXIIK
Offline
-
reno, NV
Joined: Jun 11, 2012
2412
18216

Sometimes certain things need to be said---loudly

I thank everyone for weighing in on the conversation about gun control. On this page it's a conversation, drills down into some important topics that are never discussed elsewhere. It's refreshing.

 Elsewhere else it's a caca-phony. It's painful to listen to people out in the world talk about this subject when 96.45% have not a clue what they are talking about. It like listening to an untuned violin played by a ape. Painful on the ears.

 A bit of history and something within me that ascribes to natural law, as I see it. BTW I knew close to jack shit about natural law before reading about it here but everything about it appeals to me. My mother and father raised me in a different fashion of most kids. The best description would be a Free Range Human. Maybe they knew something about natural law, either by training or intuitively.

Few restrictions were placed on me when I was young. Few ever worked for long. They must have figured that anything of that sort would be useless so I mostly got to do my thing without someone watching over my shoulder. A lot of times it was a painful experience because without siblings I had to figure stuff out without getting seriously killed. All my friends were pretty like minded so they ended up being good role models in their own crazy way. We survived without the Nanny State watching over us. We watched out for each other

Gravity was not my friend. It took me a long time to learn that law. Kerosene, explosives, black powder and other kinetics left marks. Guns had minds of their own if not managed so that was one thing we were very careful of. My parents engrained in me the laws of shooting, safety and gun handling. We were a family of hunters and shooters. I didn't hunt but shooting was a passion. Anything that went bang was a good thing. Provided I didn't shoot anything or anyone in my adventures it was ok with the big people.

 In my vicinity, carrying a gun usually meant a rifle or shotgun over the shoulder or pistol in the belt. Boone Earp Dillon and others were my heroes, they were bad ass and maybe even a bit of role models. Something deep in me, maybe my Viking, Pict or native heritage told me at a visceral level that a man without a weapon; gun, knife or other was just a two legged meat sack. This all took place in the 1950's Canada, a land of 'nice' people who wouldn't say shit if they had a mouthful. But we were well armed nice people who gave no thought as to whether guns were a good thing or not. No one voiced an opinion on the subject. We'd be more likely to talk about what's on the dark side of the moon. We all owned guns. Even the kids. Even if it was a toy cap gun. We traveled heavy. 

Then everything changed. Divorce ended the family home. Mom and I moved to the US. We left pretty much everything but a few suitcases of clothes and our box of guns. For reasons I don't recall, we kept the guns hidden away after we arrived. No one, parents or otherwise, talked about guns, carried them around with them, put them on their bikes or in their cars. Yes, we lived in a small town suburb area so target shooting was not an option. A few miles travel to the boonies gave us a chance to fire off some rounds. That condition existed for a while but it made me uncomfortable because there was some sort of unspoken condition in our area that was not conducive to having guns around. Even thought this was Southern California in the mid '60's so it might explain things.

Moving forward to around 1968 or so, I worked at an eatery, cook and bottle washer, had my first car, job and a nice bit of extra cash. For a few dollars more I added to my small stack of blasters. Still living at home, my mother was unconcerned with these things. She was as strong an advocate of her version of natural law as any person alive so my natural inclinations were parallel hers.

The first time I got a wake up call about gun laws, fucking licenses including one that allowed me to drive, was my attempt to get a carry permit, around age 18, maybe a year plus or minus. LEO eyed me like I was some weird bug when I asked about carry permits. He asked me if I owned any guns; alerting me to the fact that maybe I was below the age of consent. 'No, massa, I'sa done own no guns'.

If it was possible, the sheriff was even more useless bag of shit. He said there was no way in hell he issued carry permits to ANYONE. The mayor of San Diego could not get a carry permit. I knew that runty little cocksucker through another venue and if there was someone who needed a 38 cal vasectomy it was this worthless POS. 

I thought this was so fucking stupid that even the dumbest fucking thing I every did in my previous years could not possibly rise to that level of stupidity. No carry permit for you motherfucker sez Barney Fife!! Wow, I am getting worked up writing this!! What I was able to do as a 6 year old was denied to me at 18.

With that unpleasant experience firmly embedded in my psyche, scarring me for the rest of my lifewink I decided to say 'fuck this shit' and carry everywhere. Tell me I can't do something is a great recipe for me doing exactly the opposite. And for the next 40 years I carried my blaster, illegal as hell, in holster, briefcase, car or fanny pack. It helped that I looked like a CPA or cop. That got me out of some serious situations when dealing with LEO. Being invisible when everyone else is getting rousted, shaken down and hooked up is helpful in certain situations.

Fast forward 40 years to the time we fled California with nothing more than the clothes on our back (and a UHaul full of furniture) to a state that I've grown to like a lot; Nevada. Battle Born. A foreign country where people could open carry if they liked, concealed with a permit (yeah, same old shit--I train people for that license) WOP* guns bought and sold for cash, no limits on how many guns or how much ammo Average Joe or Jane can own, it's as close to heaven for me as anything that I can think of. Not that I have a great imagination but this sort of environment suits me.

It does chap my ass that buying a private sale gun for cash requires showing a NV DL. The sheriff has to approve Carry licenses but I've not seen anyone have trouble with that function even though it sucks ass and swallows that one of these dumbfucks has some say over that process. There are a lot of licenses needed to live in and do things in NV but far less than CA And no bullet buttons or mag limits etc. You can own and shoot full auto rifles (with ATF) stamp. Bump St.? Uh, reply hazy; ask later. Everyone has their panties in a wad over bumps.

Funny thing about NV. In my vicinity no one cares a fig about how many of this and that a person owns. We banter on the range about how the Kultursmog of gun bans etc has reached the level we hear today. The Calicucks are oozing over the hill, setting up their libtard bivouacs, trying to wrest control of the conversation down the road in Carson City, state capital of NV. At the gun shows, like the one last week in Reno, everyone has a big grin on their face. We could walk and talk the line about guns, ammo and the epic idiocy of the people who've convinced themselves that they will MOLON LABE these things we hold near and dear.

I'm not sure if what I've noted here is meaningful to anyone but me. But if there is something I can say or do is meaningful to me, in whatever small portion of life's work I might stake claim to, it's a fierce determination to pass on my convictions about the natural right of gun ownership, either through training or a discussion of our 'rights' It should not even be discussed as a 'right' No one told my Viking ancestor if he could carry a knife, sword or other weapon. He'd say No Knife; No Life. What an incredibly simple and complete observation on everything that is important to a man or woman.

On a final note.

No woman should ever debate with herself or anyone else for that matter whether she should own and carry a gun. That should never cross her mind. If she wants to even the odds, a good pistol is a totally boss option. Every woman should be armed. Armed and trained in the use of a good quality pistol (and rifle) Plain, simple and obvious.

I take great pleasure in showing a woman the benefits of being able to shoot a pistol; with accuracy and confidence. In as little as two hours either my buddy or I can do that and have a woman, or man, competent in the draw stroke, sight acquisition and trigger control, able to deliver two rounds in less than two second, with accuracy.

 Even a woman who has never shot a gun before; might be afraid to try that exercise, has always come away from the experience with a huge smile and the desire to get more training. We loooove to train the ladies.

And the next question? Where can I buy one of these?

'Ma'am, I say, I'm glad you asked me that question and will help you in that direction'

*WOP guns Without papers.

When Bloomberg donated $1,000,000 to get a law passed that prohibited private guns sales in NV we basically said

'Shut the fuck up you sawed off little cocking suck shit meister. Thus far the state AG and FBI refused to task anyone to handle the paperwork.

HAHAHAHAHAHA Take your laws and shove it.

Cheers

AGXIIK

AGXIIK

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 1:10pm
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Thu, Mar 1, 2018 - 1:15pm
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Notice: If you do not see your new comment immediately, do not be alarmed. We are currently refreshing new comments approximately every 2 minutes to better manage performance while working on other issues. Thank you for your patience.