Another Shooting, Nashville

[tinkerdorabelle]

.

 

[cabanafrau]

Because some of just plain stupid like yours.

I must confess, I'm not completely sure of the exact meaning of your comment, but I do get the overall gist.

ETA Ironically that's not at all a minority opinion here either.

 

[cabanafrau]

It has nothing to do with that, You put on that post on to me accusing me that I was trying to silence other's opinions or views by giving my opposing view, which is off the wall and insane, by your doing that that is trying to silence ME. Get it. First off, it is an absolute lie and so off the wall as I am a minority on this thread and was giving view as why we need stricter gun control as there was another shooting which is what this original thread was about. The only reason you see a lot of my posts as I want to end this is, is I am only responding to the gang of gun people on here who are endlessly replying to me and quoting me or misinterpreting what I said. Me giving my opinion with real FACTS is not trying to silence ANYONE, as I am a total minority on this thread. DO NOT ACCUSE ME OF SUCH A TOTAL COMPLETE LIE. My giving my opinion which is opposite of yours seems to be what you don't like and what you are accusing me of is what YOU ARE DOING by saying such a thing to me. It is a roundabout way to silence ME. I have a right to an opposing opinion and have given real facts showing why I believe this. Yes, I believe all need to be able to speak and give opinions and that includes me.

Since you've edited this comment I will respond to your newest response. If I was so intent on silencing you, why would I not have responded to your self described minority opinions? I've not said a word about guns on the entire thread. I'm not interested in discussing that here.

I was interested in a comment you made about the idea of discussion and/or discourse overall. I disagree strongly with what you had to say about that, and how you go about it in general. I chose to comment on that. Not surprisingly you don't care for my thoughts and choose to label me a hypocrite, a propagandist, part of a gang and overall stupid in general. You're entitled to your opinions. I still disagree with telling others they are out of line to discuss on a discussion board while simultaneously stating that your comments are the ones offering the valid information.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

I must confess, I'm not completely sure of the exact meaning of your comment, but I do get the overall gist.

ETA Ironically that's not at all a minority opinion here either.

Well that's good to know. Peace, outta here. Have a nice day.

 

[luvsJack]

You see what I mean, lol, you actually just made my point. Yes I believe many watch Fox which is obvious bc they endlessly quote Fox and others. And to make it clear to you, I believe gun owners that don't want regulations or stronger regulations, many, a great majority watch those shows, and that is my own personal experience also. I said I was a victim, really? SMH. I was saying "gang" half tongue in cheek but yes it is happening lol. I said that people on here are twisting or diverting bc frankly, they don't like the facts or are losing the argument. The reason we have more violence is a complex one but has a lot to do with social media also, the opinion news stations, and all the other crazy things, fear mongering and misinformation their heads are filled with every day, "WE NEVER HAD THAT IN THE PAST not when I was growing up, including violence on tv movies, games, etc. and dissatisfaction with their life, our society, family issues, money issues, a lack of healthy connections, etc. and bombardment with misinformation from special interests in power who are just interested in one thing, making money. I do long for the world I grew up in watching Disney every Sunday night with the family, playing outside, no social media, no opinion news stations but just news.

Where did I quote Fox or anyone? If I did, it wasn't a quote, maybe we have the same views. It is entirely possible to have a viewpoint different from yours that isn't made by "propaganda". There was no misinformation in my statement. There was MY opinion and the facts of how things were IN THIS AREA for years and to some extent even now. I form my opinions by my experience but those of you who want to believe that its impossible for someone to think for themselves (other than themself of course), decide that its "propaganda" not experiences.

No one is losing any arguments. They are trying to tell you that your statements about a gun are incorrect and you seem incapable of accepting that. And now you have called someone's opinions "just plain stupid". That sounds like the typical losing an argument kind of response. See it everyday on any posted news article. Can't argue the point, start calling names.

And don't even start blaming TV shows and games. Millions of kids have grown up playing violent video games and they don't go shooting up restaurants. No one is shooting up a Waffle House because they watched Die Hard or played Call of Duty or listened to Ice Cube. (forgive me I don't know what the popular rappers and video games are today). If anyone thinks the violent rapper or rocker or the video game is "telling" them to go do these things then the song or game or whatever isn't the problem, mental health is.

Social media, perhaps. But there would have to be some mental instability at the beginning for it to happen. Fear mongering might make the shootings seem worse than they are but it isn't causing them. Misinformation about gun control isn't likely to make someone shoot up Waffle House or a high school. (and only you seem to be focusing on that "misinformation" anyway)

Maybe a decline in family, that makes sense for some. Especially the boy that shot up the school in Florida.

So, ok, let's just say the problem is the decline in the family unit and oh, just for giggles, we will say violent video games are a culprit. How is doing anything with an AR15 going to help that? Spoiler alert: Its not.

 

[LongLiveRafiki]

And yes, look into your own words don't bring facts into it because it kills the agenda, that is for you all. You don't like the facts so you dismiss them. Most of the country would disagree with you Gumbo. So here is another FACT, just because you don't like my facts, they are still FACTS. I'll make it clearer to you. You were never intended to be able to have any gun you want when you cite the constitution, that was for soldiers a militia of men who were trained to be soldiers to defend the country as there was no large standing army as there is now. So that is the fact. So if you want to go round and round about what an AR 15 is or is not, and no it is NOT intended to hunt with.
These are the facts and Jefferson was afraid that a standing army would be used against the people, not the way you stated to me in your private post. So again - James Madison: In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.

Madison also noted that never-ending war tends to destroy both liberty and prosperity:

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied: and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

The fact is, it is difficult for anyone to know what the exact intentions of our founding fathers were in regards to the 2nd amendment. All we can do it look at the other things that were said by our founding fathers and others during the time period.

Jefferson quoted and agreed with this quote in his book, Commonplace Book: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

Jefferson: " No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."

Samuel Adams: "The said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of the conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

Richard Henry Lee: "To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms... The mind that aims at a select militia must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle."

Alexander Hamilton: "If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens... who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens."

Thomas Paine: "Arms discourage, and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue we're the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

When discussing the right of the people to bear their own arms, Patrick Henry said, "Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"

William Rawle, appointed as US District Atty in 1791 wrote in his book, A View of the Constitution: "No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of constriction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people."
And keep in mind, by this point, the US Army, Marine Corps, and Navy had already been established, so by people he clearly means those not in the military.

Edited simply for an important typo in one of the quotes.

 

[Domo]

I wonder... bearing in mind one of the 10 most basic of laws of laws, "Thou shalt not kill", where do guns fit into society? Arming people is in my eyes like giving people cars and telling them not to drive.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I wonder... bearing in mind one of the 10 most basic of laws of laws, "Thou shalt not kill", where do guns fit into society? Arming people is in my eyes like giving people cars and telling them not to drive.

Respectfully, the bolded is not a most basic law of laws. It is part of a particular religion. As such..perhaps let's not stray into that rabbit hole.

 

[robinb]

Respectfully, the bolded is not a most basic law of laws. It is part of a particular religion. As such..perhaps let's not stray into that rabbit hole.

While we’re hopping down the bunny trail .

 

[JaneBanks]

Tinkerdorablle, it's not worth it. You will get nowhere. A classroom full of babies being gunned down doesn't even do it.

 

[robinb]

Actually, I think that the prohibition against killing other humans predates the religious top ten list. Lol.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Actually, I think that the prohibition against killing other humans predates the religious top ten list. Lol.

The exact wording was what I was referring to.

 

[Hikergirl]

Actually every single thing I have put on here is based on facts and I have been anything but silent lol. I honestly wish I would stop getting the responses from the gang of gun people on here.

Of course you wish you would stop getting responses. The "gang of gun people" are posting facts that you know you can't dispute.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

Of course you wish you would stop getting responses. The "gang of gun people" are posting facts that you know you can't dispute.

No ganging up is not done with intelligent facts, people at the bottom resort to that, because they are so defeated and have no intelligent responses but to twist and bald face lie. Sad and pathetic. But the good news is people are po'd at the gun killing and aren't going to sit back any longer.

 

[UncleMike101]

Of course you wish you would stop getting responses. The "gang of gun people" are posting facts that you know you can't dispute.

How dare you interject facts and logic into a discussion.
Such actions have been know to make uninformed, illogical, emotion based people's heads explode.
Now aren't you ashamed of yourself?

 

[luvsJack]

No ganging up is not done with intelligent facts, people at the bottom resort to that, because they are so defeated and have no intelligent responses but to twist and bald face lie. Sad and pathetic. But the good news is people are po'd at the gun killing and aren't going to sit back any longer.

Are we even close to reading the same thread? First off, no one was "ganging" up on you. Secondly, lol who do you see as defeated and not giving intelligent responses? Do you really see yourself as that far above others?

Not sure what "people" you are talking about but yes, everyone is tired of the killing. That doesn't mean everyone agrees on what to do about it. Maybe you should stop listening to propaganda that is trying to tell you a lie about what everybody thinks.

 

[Hikergirl]

No ganging up is not done with intelligent facts, people at the bottom resort to that, because they are so defeated and have no intelligent responses.

So let me get this straight, you came on to this thread and your very first post managed to insult gun owners with your "tough guy" comment.
When gun supporters respond to you we are ganging up on you?
The fact that you can't even admit that "the gang" has actually posted intelligent facts in response to everything you have claimed says a ton about the kind of person you are. You don't want to know any facts, you want what you think to be the truth. Well it isn't.

 

[LongLiveRafiki]

I have to respond. I never said anything about being upset about people responding to me, that is absolutely totally completely untrue. You told me that I was trying to silence opposing views, not true, I never said I didn't want anyone to reply or was upset by their replies and told you you were doing that by saying such a thing to me. Anywhere, did I say that. Are you so defeated in having an intelligent discussion on this subject that you resort to complete total lies, not even twisting things but actually bald face lying. Again the norm in the propaganda world. I resort to caps when people are so twisting what I have said or have such little reading comprehension skills that I thought larger letters might help, maybe they can't see well lol. And actually this blog is not set up for one sided commentary without any opposing viewpoint. I gave my viewpoint, others have, and I gave intelligent fact filled opposing views. What I did say tongue in cheek that there are bullying tactics going on on this thread that was after the fact. I never did not welcome their comments as long as they are on topic and are not twisting or lying to try to win their point.

What you said below is that you wish you would stop getting responses from the "gun people," ie. those with a different view point than you.

Actually every single thing I have put on here is based on facts and I have been anything but silent lol. I honestly wish I would stop getting the responses from the gang of gun people on here.

So don't be accusing @cabanafrau of lying, when you flat out said you wished we were not responding to you.

Secondly, us explaining to you how weapons work is not a lie, whether or not you care to believe it is one thing. But opinion does not change how weapons are designed mechanically or how they fire and that is what we have been trying to explain to you.

Third, to accuse those who have different view points than you as having little reading comprehension skills or poor vision is insulting and not going to get your point across.

 

[tinkerdorabelle]

The fact is, it is difficult for anyone to know what the exact intentions of our founding fathers were in regards to the 2nd amendment. All we can do it look at the other things that were said by our founding fathers and others during the time period.

Jefferson quoted and agreed with this quote in his book, Commonplace Book: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

Jefferson: " No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."

Samuel Adams: "The said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of the conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

Richard Henry Lee: "To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms... The mind that aims at a select militia must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle."

Alexander Hamilton: "If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens... who stand ready to defend their rights and those of their fellow citizens."

Thomas Paine: "Arms discourage, and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property... Horrid mischief would ensue we're the law-abiding deprived of the use of them."

When discussing the right of the people to bear their own arms, Patrick Henry said, "Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"

William Rawle, appointed as US District Atty in 1791 wrote in his book, A View of the Constitution: "No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of constriction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people."
And keep in mind, by this point, the US Army, Marine Corps, and Navy had already been established, so by people he clearly means those not in the military.

Edited simply for an important typo in one of the quotes.

You are taking that out of the context of the times. My point still stands. Yes but they believed in people being armed to defend the country against foreign invaders, as soldiers in a well regulated militia as they did not want a standing army or a large gov army and as Jefferson added the navy and we had larger standing armies, still the militias served as armed soldiers to aid them. And Jefferson was very very strong on this, he believed that a standing gov military could be used against the people and did not want that, and like Madison and our other FF believed that a standing army would not always be used for the people's best interest. Madison if you see what I put on above that he said, would be rolling over in his grave if he saw how much we spend on our military and the wars we go into.