23Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Worthwhile thoughts for consideration:
This is a discussion on Pass this Timothy McVeigh photo/stats to others within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Worthwhile thoughts for consideration:...
Worthwhile thoughts for consideration:
Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME.
Array
With all respect, and understanding your intentions are good, I'm not sure is particular pictorial is the best way to fight this fight right now. I know I may be in the minority on this, but I'm not really a fan of the "why don't we ban _____ too, look how many deaths they cause" angle. Just too simplistic, and doesn't speak to the truly important points 2A supporters should be stressing.
Just my $.02
Array
Using Timothy McVeigh as an example is not quite bright IMO. Here is why: The debate is about guns.
McVeigh could have used guns if he wanted. He wanted to kill more people than guns could accomplish. He picked a weapon of choice that would accomplish his goal.
His actions have nothing to do with the debate
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
Isaiah 6:8
Array
I agree 100%Originally Posted by ChrisMia
I see what you're saying.
My point is that we may be in for the grandest fight for 2A in my lifetime. Too much of the focus right now is about "blaming the gun", and demonizing it during this emotional time. This picture represents the fact that gun ban's don't necessarily eliminate a problem, it also exposes the hyposcrisy of the gun control crowd. Of course we here at DC clearly know that, but I'd say it is could be beneficial to sway some of the fence-setter crowd to our way of thinking. Just as making comments of banning baseball bats, knives, propane, etc.
Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME.
Array
Respectfully, those arguements don't sway any intelligent person I know. It is mush better to argue from a strict Constitutional point of view. If you can't articulate that to someone on the fence then we are in trouble.
Use of poor analogies have not swayed anyone I know.
Timmy McVeigh was evil. Evil exists and will kill regardless of what tool they use.
NRA Life Member
"But if they don't exist, how can a man see them?"
"You may think I'm pompous, but actually I'm pedantic... let me explain the difference."
"Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything."
Array
I agree with this picture. Some may say this is bad timing or in bad taste. Why? It's the point.
The point is guns don't kill people. People do. Take away one tool and you have another tool to use.
Drunk drivers kill a bus load or a car load of kids. Do you hear people screaming and demanding that cars be banned? No. Do you hear alcohol be banned? No. So why do guns need to be?
Haven't statistics of increased crime in countries that have banned guns say anything? Are you people that closed minded? You will never eliminate guns. But you can start to fix the problem. Start at the root of it. People! Stop ignoring the root problem. Stop turning the other cheek or looking away.
If nothing else identify the problem and bring it to someone's attention.
Stop blaming somebody or something else. Put the blame where it lies. Then black out the government run media.
Dean
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk 2
Array
And what are those points?
Array
If you try to use that "lets just ban cars" argument your going to hear that the difference is your car is traceable, and a fertilizer bomb takes planning. I dont buy the argument anyway, but ven if you do you have to be careful about the points you make. Maybe how you make them too
Array
I totally agree. The point of this argument is that it is the CRAZIES committing these crimes, not the GUNS. If the problem is to be addressed intelligently rather than emotionally, the focus has to be on this root cause, not an inanimate object.
Array
There's the problem with your statemenet "those arguements don't sway any intelligent person". You're assuming all parties involved in the argument are going to be Intelligent. As with foods not everyone likes Brussel sprouts but some eat them yup. These arguments will still sway the thoughts of some and inspire critical thinking into the debate. The biggest hurdle is that critical thinking is lacking in this country these days.
"The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution."
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States
Array
But the issue is the 2A..not how guns are good or bad, or how drunk drivers can do xyz, or what the suicide rate is with depressed penguins in Antartica by gun. When we start going down that road everybody loses the fact it is a 2A issue.
The ACLU even sides with the NRA when it come to the Constitution.
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
Isaiah 6:8
Now THAT is flat out BS.
"I don't know who invented Yoga and I don't know who invented pants. But I do know that I'd like to shake the hand of the man who put those two ideas together."
Array
ACLu sides with 2A, again. Interesting case out of 5th Appeals Court
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
Isaiah 6:8
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
