Journey into the mind of a Sheep....
This is a discussion on Journey into the mind of a Sheep.... within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; un-edited look into the mindset of a sheep...
It contantly amazes me how easily people are willing to give up basic rights and regurgitate this ...
Post By gunslingergirl
December 21st, 2012 10:43 AM
Journey into the mind of a Sheep....
un-edited look into the mindset of a sheep...
It contantly amazes me how easily people are willing to give up basic rights and regurgitate this garbage...
Here is a conversation I had with a relative, basically all day yesterday. I just dont get it.... How can you discard the constitution as a whole as a "Old out of date document" ?
Is it old? absolutely! however it is absolutely the most relevant document ever written right now.
Here is un edited (other than name changes obviously), discussion. Note I have known this person for a very long time and we would never get in the mud of name calling and such. this is a proper discussion with real answers and thoughts.
Absolutely baffles me....
Wednesday at 1:04am
I had a conversation today with someone who adamantly objected to banning assault weapons. I said, "Why do private citizens have any need for assault weapons?" Answer: "Because, they're fun to shoot. Target practice and stuff."
20 First grade students = 40 mothers and fathers and 80 Grandparents. That's 120 people (and countless brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, and friends) grieving the loss of innocent children.
I challenge you to sit in a room with those 120 grieving people and explain how "fun" assault weapons are, and how important they are in your life. If you could do that with a clear conscience, then you, my friend, may go **** yourself. And that's all I will say about this situation.
Like Unfollow Post
Sheeple 1 I highly doubt any one of those grieving people wouldn't object to banning assault weapons. Most states do allow AR 15's for hunting besides target practice. Personally, I do not own a fire arm and there should be some kind of way to limit the selling of them. I think people should have to go through a psych evaluation before being able to buy a fire arm. But, that still doesn't stop the crazies from stealing someone else's or stabbing someone to death, or catching someone on fire, or running someone over with a car, and any other way of causing people harm.
Wednesday at 1:35am Like
Sheeple 2 The situation is terrible and my heart goes out to all the families and friends of everyone that had died. I also think it was nice of Dick's Sporting Goods and Walmart to suspend to selling of guns at this time.
Wednesday at 1:47am Edited Like 1
Supporter 1 Fact is, we need to be able to defend our selves. Possibly from a military style attack. Those guns didn't belong to the shooter. They belong to his mother. At which, she new her son was nuts and didn't properly stow away her guns. Civilian arms should match that of law enforcement. The problem there, law enforcement is starting to act like military. Let's ban government drones since they have killed 100's innocent children. Oh wait, that's not important, they weren't American.
Wednesday at 5:40am via mobile Like
2nd amendment supporter Those are not assault rifles. They are semi automatic rifles that are meant to look like assault rifles.
The bottom line is it could have been any rifle or handgun. Heck it could have been a shotgun. The argument does not change.
Wednesday at 6:38am via mobile Like 1
Supporter 2 I agree with Mark, but one thing for sure, we may not always agree, but you will always remain a friend. That's another freedom I enjoy. Freedom of speech and having your own opinions.
Wednesday at 7:27am via mobile Like 2
Sheeple 2 Constitution was written by men several yrs ago, in a completely different era, whom were building a country based on anti-British rule. God given rights? Who says? A bunch of holier-than-thou men? What about the god given rights of the natives or spaniards that were around long before the European run-aways? Not that I'm trying to bash the constitution... but I think people that preach about our "god given rights" are silly. What about the god given right of those 20 children to live a full and happy life? I'm not a very religious person, but I think the 10 commandments are morally stronger than than the Constitution. And I don't know what the best answer on gun control is. I just know that humans, by nature, are careless and selfish and typically (as a whole) only behave while under the influence of accountability. You don't bounce a check to avoid the fees charged by the bank. You avoid war because of the impact it'll have on your allies. You filter what you post on fb because of the "friends" that might see it and get offended. Everyone responds to accountability all the time. If our government decides that the best way to hold most Americans accountable is to do so with gun control... so be it. I'm a parent of 3 kids... and if any of my kids were hurt because of someone else's negligence and lack of accountability (be it guns, drugs, alcohol, texting while driving, etc), you can bet your ass I'd be pushin' for more of it!
Wednesday at 8:12am Like 2
Sheeple 1 This isn't a debate, just a convo. LOL. But I never said to abolish the 2nd amendment. I clearly said, "I don't know what the best answer on gun control is." I, too, am from a family of redneck hunters and gun-lovers. I DO believe that people are the problem, not the guns. I'm simply saying that as a group, humans will not always do what's right (thanks to our god-given free will)... regardless of the amt of control... regardless of what the founding fathers of America wrote. *And I hope Ron doesn't unfriend you for having an opinion, to each his own.
Wednesday at 9:16am Like 1
Supporter 3 The reason we have guns in the first place is to protect ourselves agains a foreign government or our own if it ever gets out of hand, and if its our own we will need those guns.
Wednesday at 9:33am via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support The Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms as such arms existed at the ratification.
Arms in 1791
Let's look at arms specifically, guns as they existed at the time of the ratification.
Guns in 1791 WOULD
...be made by a gunsmith.
...have rudimentary rifling.
...be single-shot weapons.
...be loaded through the muzzle.
...fire by means of a flintlock.
Guns in 1791 WOULD NOT
...have interchangeable parts. (Popularized in 1798)
...be revolvers. (Invented in 1835)
...be breachloaded. (Popularized in 1810)
...use smokeless powder. (Invented in 1885)
...use a percussion cap, necessary for modern cartridged bullets. (Invented in 1842)
...load bullets from a clip. (Invented in 1890)
Wednesday at 11:40am Like
Anti-Gun Support God given right Mark?!? Come on buddy. Would Jesus be carrying around heat? I'm pretty sure Jesus preached peace, so I don't see him being strapped.
Wednesday at 11:42am Like 1
Anti-Gun Support And I do respect all your opinions, no matter how wrong you are.
Wednesday at 11:42am Like 1
Sheeple 2 bahaha... your point on the amendment year... supports my point about the constitution. It was a different time!
Wednesday at 11:51am Like
Anti-Gun Support Fact is, I don't own a gun. I don't want to. I don't need to. I've lived to be 34 years old without one. Therefore, I won't fight for the right to keep one. That's on gun owners. PS, just because you say "The bottom line is..." doesn't mean thats the bottom line. In my opinion, we are a country of paranoid gun loving fear mongers. My question to you gun lovers...Do you own a gun? Has it ever saved your life? Have you ever saved anyone else's life with it? To me, "just in case" isn't a good enough reason to have 20 dead kids.
Wednesday at 11:52am Like 1
Sheeple 2 The hubs and I were talking about this last night, actually... and he says he has nothing against gun owners, and we don't own one... but honestly, if someone were to break into our house that was armed, odds are they're gonna be quicker on the trigger finger than we will after being woke from a deep sleep. and most burglars don't pack heat, either - they're just punks lookin' for quick swag... so a pellet or paintball gun shot at their face would work just as well. LOL. We'd both rather pay for a kick ass security system to keep the "simple burglars" away. The crazies... well... there's no protection from them, really... they'll find a way.
Wednesday at 11:57am Like 1
Sheeple 3: well said son!
Wednesday at 7:12pm Like 1
Sheeple 4 I completely agree with Ron. The Constitution is one of the greatest pieces of legislature ever written, but I do believe that the founding fathers never imagined a world like today. I bet they are looking down on us and conversating about how they can't believe we haven't "amended" the 2nd amendment! The "arms" of 1791 were nothing like the "arms" of 2012! I'm sure those great men did not want a civilian to be able to have access to the same weaponry our military uses!
22 hours ago via mobile Like
2nd amendment supporter I agree they are looking down on us... in shame. They are shameful that we so easily allow our government to remove the rights they fought and died to earn and defend.
20 hours ago via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support I'm not picking on you Thomas, but since you have been one of the strongest defenders of the 2nd here, I'd like to bring the discussion full circle. Would you feel comfortable making these arguments for "semi" automatic weaponry to the families who just lost children ( not much older than your own) to senseless acts of gun violence?
19 hours ago Like
2nd amendment supporter Yes. Unfortunately I would. Would I like it? No. But the fact is if you legislate the law abiding public out of the right to defend themselves all you accomplish is inviting more crime. By the same logic we should outlaw motor vehicles and switch back to horse and buggies. Look how many people are killed by motorcycles and cars. If we all had horse and buggies we could not go any faster than 20 mph. We would all be so much safer. It's not the car or the motor cycle. It's the operator. Someone who either has no business driving at that time ( drunk, high, mentally ill, etc) or a general accident. You even have people who run someone over on purpose. Do they blame the car? No they blame the person. If those 20 kids were in a field playing soccer and the same maniac drove through a fence and ran them all over no one would call for the banning of cars. It's politicians exploiting the unfortunate circumstances to forward an agenda based on fear mongering and false assumptions. I have spent most of my life in gun free zones. NYC and Chicago banning firearms only makes the problem worse. Sick people will find a way to cause harm. It is simply a question of what the medium will be. I am fine with making the back ground check process more restrictive and requiring permits and training. I am totally against Chicago or NYC style gun laws because they only effect the people you do not need to worry about. The mother of this young man knew he was sick and did not take the proper steps to secure her firearms. I completely agree with that. If YOU get caught driving drunk no one is going to take MY drivers license away.
19 hours ago via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support While I disagree with 90% of what you said, I admire the fact you had the balls to answer that. It's silly to me to compare guns to cars, or drugs, or rocks, for the simple fact that guns were created for one purpose, plain and simple. To kill. No 2 ways around that. Cars were not. Drugs were not. Alcohol was not. I enjoyed the discussion, thank you all, but I must stop here. (PS, I know someone who is getting a lump of coal in their stocking this year.) Merry Christmas and God bless our gun-nut filled violent country.
18 hours ago Like
2nd amendment supporter Unfortunately we live in a reality where it is necessary to defend ourselves against harm with deadly force sometimes. That is a fact of life. If someone breaks into your home with the intent to cause serious bodily harm or death there is a real need to meet that threat with equal or superior force. I do agree that we should not have automatic weapons in our homes. however rifles and handguns are not military grade automatic weapons. I hope you are never put in a situation where you literally have to fight for your life. Contrary to what some have said bad guys are armed and dangerous. To work under the assumption that someone who has the mental disposition to break into your home would not bring protection with them is naive and incorrect. If you disarm the law abiding public you have done nothing but decrease that groups chance for survival in the afore mentioned situations. Criminals do not follow the laws even if they pertain to guns. You cannot legislate this problem away. I too have enjoyed this conversation. Ps. You asked if my gun has ever saved my life. My answer is no however I carry every day. If I am ever put in the situation where I am in threat of death or serious bodily injury. I have an option. What would you do?
15 hours ago via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support Our generation is beyond repair . I just pray that kids today remember these events and make better decisions than we did.
14 hours ago via mobile Like
2nd amendment supporter I agree. I do want to point out one thing before we close this conversation. Australia already followed your example above. Basically allowing people to only keep simple firearms for hunting purposes. Essentially one step above what would be found when the second amendment was written as you suggested. No semi auto guns. Bolt action rifles and single shot guns only. The hard numbers are simple to understand. Armed robbery increased 69%, assault with a gun increased 28%, murder increased 19% and home invasion went up 21%. This is not fear mongering. This is record keeping. So I have a question for you. In your original post you asked if we could address the families of the 20 children who were killed last Friday. Could you honestly tell the families of the people included in the numbers above that they are safer following the plan you suggested above?
Other countries that have outright banned complex firearms have followed the same trend. As much as I respect your opinion, you have to comprehend that every nation that has gone down this road has seen a complete shift in liberty imposed by their government.
The second amendment aside by removing my right to properly defend myself and my family, they are potentially removing my right to life. That is what it is about to me. I have a responsibility to defend myself and my family, I just hope I continue to have the right to do so.
9 hours ago via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support So, you're trying to blame the removal of automatic weapons on increased gun assualts... I see the numbers have gone up, that is obvious. But how do you explain the correlation? How does taking a gun from 1 person make another person use one? It doesn't make sense, any way you slice it. The increase is there, but look at crime stats ANYWHERE in the world, and more often than not, they are increasing.
8 hours ago Like
2nd amendment supporter All weapons that are not bolt action. Not automatic. Semi auto or pump action. That includes revolvers semi auto handguns semi auto rifles shot guns. Etc. not automatic weapons.
8 hours ago via mobile Like
2nd amendment supporter Seriously? You cannot correlate the concept that simple risk analysis from the point of view of someone looking to exploit you. one way or another the decision to commit a crime is significantly affected by the chance of self preservation in the event.
Lets put this into perspective. You are broke. You have the moral disposition of your average criminal. You see house number 1 with the lights on. People are inside moving around. House number 2 is dark. There is 2 weeks worth of mail in the mailbox. Which house do you rob? The same argument can be applied to the chance of being confronted with significant risk of injury. If you have less chance of a target being armed you are more likely to present a disparity of force by using a knife or a gun to rob someone. This is simple. The bad people out there have a better chance of getting away with the crime therefore they are more likely to commit said crime.
A man makes his living the easiest way he knows how.
8 hours ago via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support I'd say that's a bit of a stretch. I understand what you're saying, I just think you're over-simplifiying the data. You're making the assumption that said criminal knows ahead of time that a family is unarmed. I just don't think that's the case most of the time. As you said, not all firearms are banned. There's just as much of a chance that they ARE armed as there was before, just not with the same style of weapon.
Look, I have never stated ALL guns should be banned. That's obviously not going to happen or work. I just think there needs to be a line drawn somewhere, or it's going to get WAY out of control.
What I mean by over-simplifying is, you have to take other factors into consideration when looking at those increased numbers. Political, social, economic.... all these things can also lead to increases in numbers of crimes.
7 hours ago Like
2nd amendment supporter If you are walking down the street and see a person without a rifle on his shoulder he is unarmed OR he is a criminal. I don't understand where the assumption is on that scenario. They are only allowed bolt action rifles. That means no handguns. Outside of the home they are not allowed to have guns. There is no assumption at all in that instance. None. 0. Nada. Zilch.
7 hours ago via mobile Like
Anti-Gun Support Ok, so we're talking about robberies and acts of violence outside the home... Let's just agree to disagree
December 21st, 2012 10:43 AM
December 21st, 2012 10:57 AM
"When those who are governed do too little, those who govern can, and will, do too much." Ronald Reagan
Do what you can; then do what you must
December 21st, 2012 10:59 AM
The old axium.......................The Masses Are Asses.
December 21st, 2012 01:30 PM
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
I think the above comment pretty much takes care of whether the founding Father felt the People should own military weapons or not.
December 21st, 2012 01:42 PM
Originally Posted by gunslingergirl
several sources i googled say that Washington never said or wrote those words. he DID make a statement that begins in a similar fashion, but he is talking about the need to have firearm "manufacturies".
Thomas Jefferson DID recommend "the gun" as a good way to build character and self-reliance.
December 22nd, 2012 12:05 AM
As for what Jesus would want, Luke 22:36 "if you have a cloak and no sword, sell your cloak and buy a sword" - or close to it.
Just wait until these people are shocked into reality when psyco's start picking up larger caliber rifles and explosives.
December 22nd, 2012 12:45 AM
This says it all.
We'd both rather pay for a kick ass security system to keep the "simple burglars" away. The crazies... well... there's no protection from them, really... they'll find a way.
"A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013
December 22nd, 2012 09:22 AM
Actually if you look at the Commandments, the Jewish version and Protestant versions read: Thou shall not murder. The Catholic version is the one that reads :"Thou shall not kill".
Originally Posted by RightsEroding
My guess would be that the Jewish version is correct, since it outdates the Catholic version.
Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.
NRA Life Member
December 22nd, 2012 09:56 AM
The issue as so many of my forum brethren already know is that today's society is full of the woosified individuals that were never allowed to keep score at a ballgame because someone may feel uncomfortable if they lost. They were never taught the John Smith adage of no work = no eat. They have been taught in public schools where revisionist history is taught by many who themselves are socialistic in their world views. The out spoken populace today waits for and wants government to take care of them. They wait for opportunity instead of seeking it out. They believe that the constitution is a living document and therefore needs to change to conform to today's moraless societal views. They have no idea why the 2nd amendment was added to the Constitution. These people are now in the majority in this country (see US presidential election). They feel that if kids are given the choice to pray during school that somehow the kids of atheists will be offended. They are for choice as long as you aren't talking about the choice of life. Shall I go on? Where's the mystery?
We should not forget that the spark which ignited the American Revolution was caused by the British attempt to confiscate the firearms of the colonists. -
December 22nd, 2012 10:00 AM
so a pellet or paintball gun shot at their face would work just as well.
WOW! If that statement doesn't show the ignorance we are up against, I don't know what does. Holy smokes! a paintball gun to defend your family!!!?????
December 24th, 2012 02:09 AM
We should should just use the home Alone tactics. Fire crackers and paint cans. That will keep us safe.
Search tags for this page
america woosified offended
assault weapons look like assault rifles
mindset of a sheep
the mind of a sheep
the reality of australian gun laws 2012 armed robberies up 69%
understanding the mind of a sheep
Click on a term to search for related topics.