Do you trust your neighbor to own a sword?

[Old Bookaroo]

Tahts-a-dats-ago:

Not off topic - just examples of how the Constitution has changed. I am fully aware of the amendment process - that's why I provided examples. I did not state the Constitution restricted birthright citizenship to whites only. That was a matter of legislation and case law. Surely you are aware of the Chinese Exclusion Act, and other laws that limited or prohibited citizenship for non-whites. Have you read the Wong Kim Ark (1898) decision? The dissent? The 14th Amendment?

No slights are intended. I have not distorted the Constitution - that's a distraction not backed up by anything I've posted. I haven't forgotten anything. You repeat yourself with no examples. Several of my claims are false? Such as?

Here are the simple facts:

America has approximately 4% of the world's population

America has almost 50% of the world's privately-held firearms

America has a high murder rate - compared to similar countries, a very high rate

America has a very high incarceration rate - we peaked at over 7 per 100,000 citizens and we're back down to a little over 4 per 100,000 (almost 1% of our adult population) - the data varies depending on the definition of incarceration. Particularly at the state level, the trend is increasing dramatically. At a tremendous cost of money and to society. We have approximately 20% of the world's prisoners. Yet there are those who contend we don't have enough. California built over a dozen prisons before it built one new state college or university.

Are we the safest nation on earth?

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Duckshot]

My yes, compared to similar countries we have a high murder rate.

Which countries would those be exactly?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Don't want to be incarcerated, don't break the law, don't want to be shot while resisting arrest, don't resist arrest.

The fact the US has 50% of the worlds firearms, you want to fix it, fix it with out infringing on my rights, we have a right that is also guaranteed by our Constitution to be armed, no where in our Constitution does it say we are limited to how many fire arms we can own or how much ammo we can own, how ever it does say what right the government has to restrict our ownership, it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. " If the amount of firearms own by Americans bothers anyone living here they are free to move to a country where firearms are restricted, outlawed, or has far less firearms.

Here is a list they can move to..

• China - Restricted
• Eritrea – Banned
• India – Restricted
• Indonesia – Restricted
• Iran – Restricted
• Japan – Restricted
• Lebanon – Restricted
• Malaysia – Restricted
• North Korea – Banned
• Singapore – Restricted
• Taiwan – Restricted
• Venezuela – Restricted
• Vietnam – Restricted

 

[Tesorodeoro]

My yes, compared to similar countries we have a high murder rate.

Which countries would those be exactly?

I second this question. Which country in this entire world is similar to the USA?!!

That’s right...none! We would be better off acknowledging that fact and appreciating what got us to that status instead of brow beating and holding good people responsible for others actions and what people did in a different time. European countries are NOTHING LIKE THE USA whatsoever.

 

[Garscale]

You know why Japan did not invade? Private gun ownership.

 

[FreeBirdTim]

don't want to be shot while resisting arrest, don't resist arrest.

I think the problem is that people think they won't get shot by the police if they're unarmed, regardless of what they do. Wrong! They can and will shoot an unarmed person. Keep your hands where they can see them at all times if you're stopped. Too many cops are shot to death by people who suddenly whip out a gun. That's why they are so touchy when they order you to "show me your hands!" Bottom line, common sense goes a long way in this world.

Here's a video that will show you how little time cops have to react. Seemed like a simple domestic squabble, but it ended up with the cop being shot to death. The cop messed up because he didn't immediately order the guy to show his hands. That mistake cost him his life...

 

[Tahts-a-dats-ago]

Tahts-a-dats-ago:

Not off topic - just examples of how the Constitution has changed. I am fully aware of the amendment process - that's why I provided examples. I did not state the Constitution restricted birthright citizenship to whites only. That was a matter of legislation and case law. Surely you are aware of the Chinese Exclusion Act, and other laws that limited or prohibited citizenship for non-whites. Have you read the Wong Kim Ark (1898) decision? The dissent? The 14th Amendment?

At a minimum, two board mods have cautioned the thread participants to remain on-topic (the topic being - loosely explained - acceptance of a fellow citizen partaking in their right to keep and bear arms).

The mods have a tough enough job without people intentionally ignoring their directives. This is not my house, nor is it your house. We are guests here.

We now fully recognized birthright citizenship for everyone - not just white folks.

That one statement is false, and your pathetic attempt to deny you made it is likewise false.

I have read the documents mentioned.

They do not apply to the thread's topic.

In an effort to comply with the board moderator's reminders, I am not going to discuss your mischaracterization of those documents.

No slights are intended. I have not distorted the Constitution - that's a distraction not backed up by anything I've posted. I haven't forgotten anything. You repeat yourself with no examples. Several of my claims are false? Such as?

Are you now pretending that you aren't responsible for the words you wrote?

Someone wrote your posts. That someone chose to use the words used.

I've addressed some of your attempts to distort in prior posts, and again in this post.

It isn't a question of whether you made the attempt - your words are here for all to read.

I've likewise addressed some of your falsehoods in prior posts, and again in this post. Examples were cited, but I can understand why you're so eager to pretend otherwise.

Here are the simple facts:

America has approximately 4% of the world's population

America has almost 50% of the world's privately-held firearms

America has a high murder rate - compared to similar countries, a very high rate

America has a very high incarceration rate - we peaked at over 7 per 100,000 citizens and we're back down to a little over 4 per 100,000 (almost 1% of our adult population) - the data varies depending on the definition of incarceration. Particularly at the state level, the trend is increasing dramatically. At a tremendous cost of money and to society. We have approximately 20% of the world's prisoners. Yet there are those who contend we don't have enough. California built over a dozen prisons before it built one new state college or university.

Are we the safest nation on earth?

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

Those "facts" are not so much simple as they are simple-minded excuses used by those who wish to infringe upon the rights of others.

The very figures that you assign a negative connotation to (percent of guns privately owned) are more aptly described as proof of freedom in action.

If those numbers truly represent the negative you falsely portray, the US should have almost 50% of the world's "gun crimes" too. We don't. It isn't remotely close.

The vast bulk of those incarcerated (in the US) are not incarcerated for a conviction involving the illegal use of a gun. Tossing overall incarceration figures in with a push to infringe upon the rights of law-abiding citizens is as dishonest as it gets.

California isn't a logical example of good governance; though it may well have a far greater need for the means of dealing with the many problems created by government, than it does with any pretense of a supposed educational system that all-too-frequently does little more than accelerate the problems.

How many of your rights are you willing to trade for the status of being the safest nation?

How many of your rights do you think you'd retain in a nation that had the power to to crush individual freedoms as it deemed necessary?

 

[releventchair]

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

And it was not a Michigan thing.
Though in Mi. I was raised similerly.

Point being then as now , you do NOT point a gun at someone unless your life is being threatened in a real manner.
Guns were /are not to settle slights ,insults ,feelings , disagreements ect.
Guns are not to gain notoriety by shooting someone (note street creds as example.)

Deadly force is an insult to the innocent. We knew ,as we know now , no one at home was going to defend us if we abused others at gunpoint. Period.

Something change since we were young?
I won't pretend to speak for you , but no kid of mine abuses others with guns. It's unacceptable , cheap , and would void our shooting together again , obviously.

A relative once asked (during an "assault rifle" discussion a couple years ago) , What if (my kids name) got into one of your your gun safes and got ahold of one?
My answer was ( my kids name) has a key to one of them. But has no need to as ( the kid) has guns , nearer than mine.
Yet raised to respect human and animal life safely when wielding deadly force (obviously not too warm/fuzzy type respect in our hunting , but if we consider clean kills as a goal , it relates) and not use a gun to resolve perceived insults. Self defense understood and aside , we simply don't use guns to insult innocents.
Many shoots among many other shooters. Safely. Purposely.

 

[Duckshot]

Well Old Bookaroo, since you ain't offering any suggestions, I'll offer one of mine. The control freaks are always saying we need more education. How about firearms saftey classes taught in highschool?

You can make the saftey classes mandatory if your wants demand it...

You are not anti-education, are you?

 

[stoneshirt]

More than willing to listen to someone on gun control as long as their solutions do not violate my rights.

A zillion different kinds of Guns out there and your FEARFUL "They" are going to take away your favorite One.

 

[stoneshirt]

Well Old Bookaroo, since you ain't offering any suggestions, I'll offer one of mine. The control freaks are always saying we need more education. How about firearms saftey classes taught in highschool?

You can make the saftey classes mandatory if your wants demand it...


You are not anti-education, are you?

HOW ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT DON"T WANT A GUN SOCIETY?..Having a Gun does not put you in control of any situation!

 

[wainzoid]

I know there is people willing to die fighting to keep their guns. Are there people willing to die fighting to take those guns?

 

[Duckshot]

HOW ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT DON"T WANT A GUN SOCIETY?..Having a Gun does not put you in control of any situation!

Well you already got not only a "gun society", but a world controlled by people with guns who call themselves governments. It ain't about the guns. You will never be rid of them. It's about who is holding the gun and whom that gun is pointed at. and in fact the largest demographic of gun owners is governments and not citizens.

People that don't want a gun don't have to buy one. It's a free country. But, everyone should be educated on safe use of firearms. You are not against people being better educated, are you?

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Duckshot:

Assuming your suggestion is serious, what is taught in public high schools is under the purview of local boards, operating under state regulations and guidelines. It wasn't all that long ago the Federal government tried to institution a national set of standards - and the regressives immediately got their collective panties in a bunch.

However, your idea reverts to the laws of the late 18th Century. Before you know it, we might have a well-regulated militia.

I would favor a national program of compulsory public service when every citizen turns twenty-one. Two years. Enlisting in the military would be an obvious option. There would be many others. Students could get a deferment - not an exemption - until they have completed their education. Depending on their major and where they are willing to live, they could get some actual loan relief - not a fake program impossible to qualify for. Those with debilitating medical conditions such as bone spurs or anal cysts could still find useful public service.

Citizens who haven't graduated from high school, or taken college courses, could have an education option as part of the program if they elected to take it. Similar to labor union apprenticeships - a combination of work and study. There could even be a job training component, providing potential entry to fields with openings for qualified workers.

The primary emphasis would be on national public service. Such a program could unite people, help get young people to understand what our nation is all about, and how democracy is a participation sport.

We have areas with no clean water. We have citizens living in the South under Third World conditions because they don't have access to municipal sewage systems. We have First Nation people living in terrible conditions. Opioid addiction remains a very serious problem in many places. I remember being told that one was easy to solve - yet nothing much has been done.

Our country has many serious problems. Let's get started on resolving them.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[Duckshot]

Regressives.

Do you mean to tell me that idea of publicly funded mandatory educattion is a progressive idea?


If it's progress you desire maybe you should read our DOI. It's like president Coolidge said in his July 5 1926 speech. If all men are created equal with equal rights then how you going to progress beyond that? Any other system is not progress but a return to ancient systems of governance.

But, I was only half serious about mandatory classes paid for by people who don't want or don't need them. I ain't a proponent of mandatory state taxes for mandatory state education the content of which is determined by unelected, appointed officials. It is parents that should be responsible for their own children's education.

With that in mind, the DOI says nothing about a right to procreation. No such right exists, ad no right can be had at someone else's expense. So, if we must have legislation I suggest licsensing and registration of parents, single mothers, and daddies on the lam.

Seriously. Not a perfect solution but then again perfect solutions really only exist in mathematics anyways. It's something to consider anyways. But, no doubt here that politicians will find a way to screw it up. They most always do.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

A zillion different kinds of Guns out there and your FEARFUL "They" are going to take away your favorite One.

Our Constitution does not say that our 2nd amendment right is limited to only certain firearms or limited to how many we can own, it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". Does freedom of the press only apply to certain formats, does freedom of religion only apply to certain religions?

Please remember this is not the politics forum, keep the replies generic as far as the politics go.

 

[Old Bookaroo]

Duckshot:

Regressives - the opposite of Progressives.

The Declaration of Independence is a premise and a promise. It didn't create a reality when it was drawn up (Americans owned slaves, women couldn't vote - many couldn't own property or have an equal opportunity for an education, when General Washington was elected President about 10% of the adult population could vote, child labor was common, etc.) and. sadly, it isn't a reality today.

Progressives brought us things like the Pure Food and Drug Act. People no longer give their babies opium soaked in alcohol.

We're doing better of course, but we're hardly there yet. "To form a more perfect union..." that's the goal.

As for a right to procreation (or amateur) - that's part of the pursuit of happiness.

Here we elect members of the school board. Apparently that is not the case where you live.

Good luck to all,

The Old Bookaroo

 

[davest]

in actuality, I own 579 fishing rods, well over 3869 lures, 7 boxes of assorted hooks, 2 1/2 tons of sinkers. My wife tells me I'm a hoarder, I tell her I don't want to be standing around when the government comes to take em.

two questions:

Should I tell my neighbors

and


Should I buy more or do you think I have enough

 

[releventchair]

A zillion different kinds of Guns out there and your FEARFUL "They" are going to take away your favorite One.

Favorite?
Hope I don't have to choose a favorite....

Do you own tools? And call one your favorite?

I own a variety from .22's to .62 caliber.
There may be one better designed than another for a specific. Varity makes for better use.
Just as having different hammers , including weights for a variety of tasks.
A two pound hammer was the right one yesterday with a malleable piece being struck between it and the stainless flange that needed straightening.
But that's based on my familiarity and experience with hammers.
I'll keep a variety , for variety of use and application.
Can one gun cover the use of all?
Like hammers , only having one limits covering more than one specific best use.
And what happens when you're using an adjustable wrench for a hammer? (Hint , the wrench don't care. But , what are you using the wrong tool for?)

 

[davest]

ok, I just have a slight addiction to fishing rods but I've been a pondering about what the founding fathers meant by a "Well regulated militia" when they wrote that 2nd amendment.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, ........"

It should rank right up there with the rest of it, don't ya think? Do you surmise they meant the National Guard? The Civil Air Patrol?, The National Park Service?

Who was that "WELL REGULATED MILITIA" supposed to be "well regulated" by?