Do you trust your neighbor to own a sword?

[Garscale]

I'm in Texas and have dug 12ft in a front yard before!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Tesorodeoro]

Reading a news story about the Texas airport shooting incident.

The potential mass shooter was in his 40’s, previously known to police, and had a history of mental illness.
Was stopped quickly after engaging a veteran police officer.

Slightly off topic....I’ve read articles about shamans in remote jungle villages treating people by dosing them with powerful natural psychedelic drugs. They walk out of the jungle a different person after their 24 hour “trip”. Mind and personality slightly altered. Makes me wonder if someday we might come full circle.

I know there is a lot of research into this type of stuff. Mental illnesses are a horrible thing.

 

[releventchair]

Georgivs:

Look up the history of open carry in California some time. Huey Newton researched the law - then the Black Panthers went from Oakland to Sacramento with rifles and shotguns.

It didn't take the Reagan Administration long to change the law.

Some people have suggested the most rapid path to "gun control" is for Black citizens to start forming "militias."

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

Nothing wrong with law abiding citizens being armed...
Around 36 percent of whites own a gun , vs around 24 percent of blacks.
It may be more than demographics causing the difference. Place to shoot/practice. Use against predators committing depredations in rural settings , access to hunting land , ect..

I'd caution blacks to reconsider militias as a title. Due to nationwide public displeasure with militia's of late. If they (those promoting a militia idea) want federal attention , that'll do it. But a negative attention.

https://blackgunownersassociation.org/

 

[crashbandicoot]

I give up!Without meaning it as an insult, trying to get anything concrete out of bookaroo is like trying to nail jello to a wall.This guy is as slick as a greased pig at a county fair!It,s truly admirable how he manages to use up so much space to say absolutely nothing.I,ve about come to the conclusion that he,s only trying to antagonize and rile up gun rights advocates for his own amusement.I still say he,s a very smart guy,but I don,t know what he,s trying to accomplish here,it,s sure not about discussing concrete solutions to a problem since he absolutely refuses to give any of his own thoughts other than a nebulous expert study.I think I,ll bow on out and go over to the todays finds and see what got found today.I remain a staunch advocate of the second amendment and until somebody figures out what to do about these predators who roam the streets I,ll just keep on carrying on,if you get my drift there.Thanks to all who made intelligent arguments.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Topic is not Oak Island.

 

[Duckshot]

I give up!Without meaning it as an insult, trying to get anything concrete out of bookaroo is like trying to nail jello to a wall.This guy is as slick as a greased pig at a county fair!It,s truly admirable how he manages to use up so much space to say absolutely nothing.I,ve about come to the conclusion that he,s only trying to antagonize and rile up gun rights advocates for his own amusement.I still say he,s a very smart guy,but I don,t know what he,s trying to accomplish here,it,s sure not about discussing concrete solutions to a problem since he absolutely refuses to give any of his own thoughts other than a nebulous expert study.I think I,ll bow on out and go over to the todays finds and see what got found today.I remain a staunch advocate of the second amendment and until somebody figures out what to do about these predators who roam the streets I,ll just keep on carrying on,if you get my drift there.Thanks to all who made intelligent arguments.

That's not entirely accurate. Old Bookaroo has suggested making the stupid simple firearm safer like we did with complex mechanical devices like automobiles. I'm really not sure what he means though. Let's us see what we did with cars-

1. Government mandated Horns.

2. Government mandated Tail lights

3.functional brakes

4. State registration and licsensing.....

5. Government mandated airbags

Bookaroo insists that we don't need more laws. But we really don't know what he means by that because the example he cites seems to support more laws.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

crashbandicoot:

"Antagonize?" By offering inconvenient facts? By not joining the groupthink? I haven't insulted anyone. I haven't made silly generalizations about people who don't agree with me.

You've asked no body else to offer solutions. You haven't even agreed there's a problem.

I've never pretended to have all the answers. I do know the first step in finding the solution to any serious issue is to admit something must be done. And, as my Dad used to say, if you don't question your assumptions you probably won't reach a different conclusion.

I could propose any number of potential things that might be done. But to what purpose? Most of the posters here made up their adamantine minds long ago.

There was a time in America when owning other human beings was a "right." It was supposed to be the natural order of things. Heck, it was even benevolent to Christianize the heathen. The Constitution of the United States of America condoned the slave trade, while stating that slaves were three-fifths of a free person when it came time to count heads.

Eventually, enough people saw the horror and things changed for the better.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Duckshot]

There was a time in America when owning other human beings was a "right." It was supposed to be the natural order of things. Heck, it was even benevolent to Christianize the heathen. The Constitution of the United States of America condoned the slave trade, while stating that slaves were three-fifths of a free person when it came time to count heads.

Revisionist history. You make it sound as if all Americans condoned slavery while ignoring abolishonist efforts. It was with great reservation that some of the founders signed our Declaration of Independence. The statement that the USA is inherently racist is a bald-faced lie. Slavery was tolerated, but not condoned by the constitution and certainly not condoned but actively opposed by the Declaration of Independence.

Have you read the D.O.I.? Point out the slavery supporting parts for us, please.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

Well now buckeroo, let’s not characterize people in that light.
I see what your doing there. You have done well in maintaining civility whilst being in the minority of opinions.

I’d say your mind is as made up as anyone else’s.

History will be the real judge.

 

[Duckshot]

I've never pretended to have all the answers. I do know the first step in finding the solution to any serious issue is to admit something must be done. And, as my Dad used to say, if you don't question your assumptions you probably won't reach a different conclusion.

This paragraph is antethetical to the next paragraph.

I could propose any number of potential things that might be done. But to what purpose? Most of the posters here made up their adamantine minds long ago.

You could?

I don't think you will which is even worse than if you couldn't. From this side of the screen it looks like you are avoiding discussion of your ideas out of fear of scrutiny. You WON'T allow your assumptions to be questioned. Obviously a defensive measure on your part.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Tesorodeoro:

Thank you. I don't think I'm characterizing any people in any light. If that is how you took it, then I probably didn't word my comment very well.

My mind is firmly made up that we need to do better. My mind is very open regarding how we do that.

Just for the record here - I grew up with guns, shooting at an early age. My Dad took me and my brother plinking on a Lake Michigan beach many times. I was 7 or 8 in summer camp, frustrated that I couldn't do better at the rifle range with a .22. Turned out I just needed glasses. Got my Boy Scout marksmanship merit badge. Participated in a National Guard civilian marksmanship training program while in high school, shooting at their indoor range. And, yes, I became a very good shot. Shot clay pigeons with a very good friend and he remarked that I obviously knew what I was doing with a shotgun. The emphasis throughout was always safety and respect for a weapon. I'm not bragging - just showing that when it comes to guns I have considerable personal experience. I'm sure many people here have more - no argument there.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Garscale]

crashbandicoot:

"Antagonize?" By offering inconvenient facts? By not joining the groupthink? I haven't insulted anyone. I haven't made silly generalizations about people who don't agree with me.

You've asked no body else to offer solutions. You haven't even agreed there's a problem.

I've never pretended to have all the answers. I do know the first step in finding the solution to any serious issue is to admit something must be done. And, as my Dad used to say, if you don't question your assumptions you probably won't reach a different conclusion.

I could propose any number of potential things that might be done. But to what purpose? Most of the posters here made up their adamantine minds long ago.

There was a time in America when owning other human beings was a "right." It was supposed to be the natural order of things. Heck, it was even benevolent to Christianize the heathen. The Constitution of the United States of America condoned the slave trade, while stating that slaves were three-fifths of a free person when it came time to count heads.

Eventually, enough people saw the horror and things changed for the better.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

Well this is just classic. If you cant defend your position (what ever that might be), just say the opposition is racist. I have tried dialogue with you but instead I get "assignments" to research or read some report.

I generally say what I mean and mean what I say . You just ramble around insinuating we are just too closed minded to help solve this problem yet have not said what you believe the problem is. Please say what you actually think.

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

crashbandicoot:

"Antagonize?" By offering inconvenient facts? By not joining the groupthink? I haven't insulted anyone. I haven't made silly generalizations about people who don't agree with me.

You've asked no body else to offer solutions. You haven't even agreed there's a problem.

I've never pretended to have all the answers. I do know the first step in finding the solution to any serious issue is to admit something must be done. And, as my Dad used to say, if you don't question your assumptions you probably won't reach a different conclusion.

I could propose any number of potential things that might be done. But to what purpose? Most of the posters here made up their adamantine minds long ago.

There was a time in America when owning other human beings was a "right." It was supposed to be the natural order of things. Heck, it was even benevolent to Christianize the heathen. The Constitution of the United States of America condoned the slave trade, while stating that slaves were three-fifths of a free person when it came time to count heads.

Eventually, enough people saw the horror and things changed for the better.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

I suppose the term "groupthink" is one of endearment?

You likely missed it, but many of those responding in this thread were pointing out the fact that the "groupthink" you so abhor is actually this nation's supreme law.

Not that anyone is keeping track, but several of your "inconvenient facts" were actually convenient untruths.

I've seen no evidence suggesting a single respondent (in this thread) doesn't see a problem with the wrongful violent actions [of a very small percentage of the population]. Not championing further infringements (on individual rights) isn't a case of seeing no problem - it's a case of pointing out the fact that violating the Constitution isn't legal, nor is it a workable solution.

The mods have been very lenient with this thread. Out of respect for the moderators I am not going to address the misconceptions broached in the latter part of your comment. [thread topic is not slavery]

 

[crashbandicoot]

See what I mean Tats?Slick,insults you while saying he never insults anyone,accuses you of not offering any solutions when you have offered some,they just don,t fit his beliefs whatever they may be.Really slick,refined too,and smart.Back over to today,s finds.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Tahts-a-dats-ago:

You missed my point. I'm fully aware of the tread topic. Our nation's "supreme law" has been changed in the past, and it will be changed again, although the pace of change has slowed considerably over the years. We now fully recognize birthright citizenship for everyone - not just white folks. And we no longer have slavery. The franchise isn't limited to property-owning white men. We have direct election of senators. And it's clear that if the President can no longer serve, the Vice President takes that office.

If you found "groupthink" offensive (intended to be a statement, not an insult) how about "consensus?"

As for the facts you think are incorrect, you're welcome to point them out. I did post a mistake, acknowledged it was wrong, and thanked those who corrected it. I have yet to read anyone else here doing the same.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Duckshot]

And we no longer have slavery. (snippet]

Of course we still have slavery. You would have to be hiding under a rock to think otherwise or maybe complicit.

Or, what do you suppose the Mexican drug gangs are doing tossing kids over the fence?

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

Tahts-a-dats-ago:

You missed my point. I'm fully aware of the tread topic. Our nation's "supreme law" has been changed in the past, and it will be changed again, although the pace of change has slowed considerably over the years. We now fully recognized birthright citizenship for everyone - not just white folks. And we no longer have slavery. The franchise isn't limited to property-owning white men. We have direct election of senators. And it's clear that if the President can no longer serve, the Vice President takes that office.

If you found "groupthink" offensive (intended to be a statement, not an insult) how about "consensus?"

As for the facts you think are incorrect, you're welcome to point them out. I did post a mistake, acknowledged it was wrong, and thanked those who corrected it. I have yet to read anyone else here doing the same.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

Yet you conveniently stray off topic whenever you feel it helps you in some odd manner?

The Amendment process is the sole legal means of changing our Constitution.

The Constitution addresses "birthrights" and never restricted citizenship to whites only.


I'm not offended by your slights - I am merely pointing out the fact that you frequently engage them.

The Constitution isn't a matter of a "consensus" - it is legal fact. Your efforts to distort do not go unnoticed.

Several times your convenient untruths have been specifically pointed out. Have you forgotten already?

It's not that 'I think your "facts" are wrong' - it's that I know several of your claims are false.

There is a difference.

 

[crashbandicoot]

Yet you conveniently stray off topic whenever you feel it helps you in some odd manner?

The Amendment process is the sole legal means of changing our Constitution.

The Constitution addresses "birthrights" and never restricted citizenship to whites only.


I'm not offended by your slights - I am merely pointing out the fact that you frequently engage them.

The Constitution isn't a matter of a "consensus" - it is legal fact. Your efforts to distort do not go unnoticed.

Several times your convenient untruths have been specifically pointed out. Have you forgotten already?

It's not that 'I think your "facts" are wrong' - it's that I know several of your claims are false.

There is a difference.

Best summation of this guy I,ve seen yet.You nailed it tahts!Way to go.

 

[bc5391]

Such a long thread to only have just started .
Fact if every citizen was armed there would be less gun violence.
If you want to stop all the Riots put the instigator in Jail (George Soros)
Suicides will happen regardless, (mental illness) my first wife overdosed with pills (long after we divorced) there is no way to predict who will be next . I have lost 2 people to sucide
Lost track of how may friends died in combat, auto accidents.

I carry and will not let anyone take them away

 

[newnan man]

Sadly there has been the recent Fed Ex shooting we all are aware of. This will get all the tiresome windbags again calling for gun control reform or the like. All of these politicians clamoring for action are themselves protected 24/7 by guns. No one can get close to them in a harmful manner. Still their contention is that my right to own firearms is somehow involved with a mental/evil person committing a crime. Very little if anything is mentioned about our lenient justice system (at this very moment prosecuting police for attempting to subdue known criminals). Nothing is being done about the escalating mental issues causing most of these people to act out. The FBI has dropped the ball on two recent terror related shootings and in the case of the South Florida teen as already noted, people had reported on his erratic violent behavior for months. So much for " see something say something". Everyone was too worried about his " feelings" to mount an investigation. The coward school policeman did nothing to help either. I'm tired of bearing the onus for societies nut cases by having my ability to protect my loved ones threatened. I and I dare say millions like me will choose to ignore any law that would violate my 2nd amendment rights. The 2nd amendment is clear and "shall not be infringed" doesn't mean a bunch of politicians can make laws to nullify it. They took an oath to uphold the constitution, anything else is criminal.