I am very disappointed...

[dieselram94]

GIB: What does that say about those of us that live in Florida? Especially, those of us who live in Florida who are not elderly...we must be completely nutso to participate.

Crispin, if I had my way I would be in Florida like you and wondering why anyone would be in the frozen lands like I am. I think I will start calling Maine, "Desperation Flats" as I am desperate for summer!

 

[dieselram94]

diesel,

Pretty good choice....heck there's still a chance for you yet.....I'll turn you into a crazy Canuck yet......lol.

Regards + HH

Bill

Can I be an absent crazy Canuck? The cold is killing me! My fingers are still numb from helping to put away the snow balls!

 

[Rebel - KGC]

The everything else section keeps all the elderly blue headed yankees busy till the snow melts, the ground thaws and they can go out detecting again.

LOL!

 

[hvacker]

Are you someone who believes in wealth transfer or what?

I'd guess most all of us believe in wealth transfer or redistribution of wealth. It's called taxes. Also a lot of government jobs are effective conduits for redistribution.

 

[dieselram94]

I agree taxes are redistribution. The wealthy pay the most and the poor pay little to nothing, but receive the most from the govt. Socialism......

 

[Crispin]

I'd guess most all of us believe in wealth transfer or redistribution of wealth. It's called taxes. Also a lot of government jobs are effective conduits for redistribution.

I'm changing sides again, I'm now anti-gun.

Stratification of wealth is an absolute for any functioning society. Socialism, is self-destructive, and will collapse upon itself. People who buy into socialism will be mowed down by the greedy and the selfish who seek to profit by the abuse of others. In stratifying wealth, classes are formed. For simplicity's sake, we can narrow our current capitalistic society down to lower, middle, and upper class. Upper class has no need to redistribute wealth and will lobby against it. They have no need to own guns because they will pay others to fight their wars, fill their coiffeurs, increase their stock dividends, and protect their loved ones. Why should they take a bullet when they can pay somebody else to do it for them?

Middle class has no need of guns. To survive in a capitalistic society as middle class necessitates hard work, ethics, and morality. All three of these things are hindrances to becoming upper class. Thus, hard working, honest people will have little need to defend themselves. They are held in check by the 1 percent who owns the government, they will not attack others due to their morality, and they have little that the lower class would want to take.

Lower class has no need of guns. Truly, the majority of murders and violence in guns occurs from this class doing crimes against each other. In the rare circumstances when it crosses over into middle and upper class the response and retaliation is swift. Guns serve nothing but to accelerate the deaths of other lower class compatriots. The very existence of the upper and middle class depend on a lower class. Deaths by murder work against that purpose.

In conclusion, elimination of guns in society will protect hard working people with ethics and morals. The lower class will find other ways to do destruction on each other and the upper class was never in danger.

The second amendment does little but to give a false sense of security. The constitution was drafted by upper class men in order to keep other races and women subservient to them. Joe Farmer and John Mason had no say in the ratification. This false sense of security is used to manipulate the honest and good people in this world. Guns kill people.


Prove me wrong Dieselram!

Crispin

 

[worldtalker]

I agree taxes are redistribution. The wealthy pay the most and the poor pay little to nothing, but receive the most from the govt. Socialism......

I don't recon many folks realize that.

 

[bill from lachine]

Crispin,

Dude....you've outdone yourself this time.....you're at least at check if not checkmate....let's see what well thought out rebuttals follow.....lol.

As a matter of fact.....I was one of those unwashed middle class types.....35 years of busting my buns earning my keep and feeding the system...never owned a gun or felt the need for one.....I don't want to take them away from anyone either....

Time for the next contestant to enter the lion's den.

Regards + HH

Bill

 

[G.I.B.]

.we must be completely nutso to participate.

...uhhhh Post#1 Crispy... you started this~

 

[dieselram94]

I'm changing sides again, I'm now anti-gun.

Stratification of wealth is an absolute for any functioning society. Socialism, is self-destructive, and will collapse upon itself. People who buy into socialism will be mowed down by the greedy and the selfish who seek to profit by the abuse of others. In stratifying wealth, classes are formed. For simplicity's sake, we can narrow our current capitalistic society down to lower, middle, and upper class. Upper class has no need to redistribute wealth and will lobby against it. They have no need to own guns because they will pay others to fight their wars, fill their coiffeurs, increase their stock dividends, and protect their loved ones. Why should they take a bullet when they can pay somebody else to do it for them?

Middle class has no need of guns. To survive in a capitalistic society as middle class necessitates hard work, ethics, and morality. All three of these things are hindrances to becoming upper class. Thus, hard working, honest people will have little need to defend themselves. They are held in check by the 1 percent who owns the government, they will not attack others due to their morality, and they have little that the lower class would want to take.

Lower class has no need of guns. Truly, the majority of murders and violence in guns occurs from this class doing crimes against each other. In the rare circumstances when it crosses over into middle and upper class the response and retaliation is swift. Guns serve nothing but to accelerate the deaths of other lower class compatriots. The very existence of the upper and middle class depend on a lower class. Deaths by murder work against that purpose.

In conclusion, elimination of guns in society will protect hard working people with ethics and morals. The lower class will find other ways to do destruction on each other and the upper class was never in danger.

The second amendment does little but to give a false sense of security. The constitution was drafted by upper class men in order to keep other races and women subservient to them. Joe Farmer and John Mason had no say in the ratification. This false sense of security is used to manipulate the honest and good people in this world. Guns kill people.


Prove me wrong Dieselram!

Crispin

Crispin, here we go! Lets first start with upper class. Most of them have their money through hard work (Bill Gates for example). They have a lot of money but this is a double edged sword. It allows those to pay and have security of which many choose to not do. In our current political situation, the politics of envy are running high. Those who are a have not want to punish those that have as a general rule (look at last presidential election for proof). This by it's very nature necessitates protection, the kind only a gun can provide.
Middle class: the middle class is a target for the lower class (again politics of envy). Often the middle class lives near or inter mixed with the lower class. This just invites confrontation.
Lower class: Up until now in my post I have depicted them as all bad. This is not necessarily the case, again the good mixed with the bad. Confrontations are inevitable again a gun is the only protection from becoming a victim.
In all cases the chance a would be victim could be carrying is often all the deterrent a criminal needs to not commit a crime. If guns are outlawed of course only the criminals will have guns, and we all know what this will lead to.

 

[dieselram94]

I would also add that comments from Obama like " the police acted stupidly " just serve to rile people up. He was supposed to be the great uniting new president but this country is going through a very intense class war. How has that been good for the safety of everyone?

 

[0121stockpicker]

You can not prove a negative. As the person proposing a positive statement, you have to prove it is correct.

Come on man you just ruined all the fun. Yes I do know that it was my dry Yankee wit in action.

 

[0121stockpicker]

"Life Liberty and Happiness" is Thomas Jefferson's propagandized version of "Life, Liberty, and Property" Written by John Loche. Jefferson was working with/for the rich in order for them to protect themselves from taxes that hit THEM rather than taxes that taxed the poor. Who used paper, which was taxed by the stamp tax? The rich read newspapers and books. The Rich signed contracts, and land agreements. The Tea Tax? The rich drank tea, the poor were forced to drink ale, beer, or heaven forbid... WATER (gross). The Tax revolt that was the American Revolution was a process of the rich duping the poor into fighting their war for them. The poor would have been better off with the British taxes on Luxury, rather than the Tariffs the US survived on, which taxed the Products the poor used in order to protect the Rich's industry.

And as you know all those great liberties were not granted to the slaves that Jefferson owned. And the vote was restricted to landowning white males.

 

[0121stockpicker]

I agree taxes are redistribution. The wealthy pay the most and the poor pay little to nothing, but receive the most from the govt. Socialism......

And the old receive social security and Medicare which are the largest socialist programs in the world and bankrupting this country.

 

[G.I.B.]

If you double tap correctly this would not be an issue to start with. But lets say it's the below situation...

So you come home and some guy is raping your wife. You shoot him once. He's bleeding badly.

Your wife is quivering in the corner in a fetal position crying. You see signs of physical abuse.

Do you:

A: Comfort your wife, treat her non-life threatening wounds and hold her?
-or-
B. Ignore your wife and hold direct pressure on the bleeder?

So crispin,

Which do you choose? (if you're presently on the anti gun side, replace it with a baseball bat, knife, screwdriver and so on, same intense trauma)

 

[Frankn]

I'm changing sides again, I'm now anti-gun.

Stratification of wealth is an absolute for any functioning society. Socialism, is self-destructive, and will collapse upon itself. People who buy into socialism will be mowed down by the greedy and the selfish who seek to profit by the abuse of others. In stratifying wealth, classes are formed. For simplicity's sake, we can narrow our current capitalistic society down to lower, middle, and upper class. Upper class has no need to redistribute wealth and will lobby against it. They have no need to own guns because they will pay others to fight their wars, fill their coiffeurs, increase their stock dividends, and protect their loved ones. Why should they take a bullet when they can pay somebody else to do it for them?

Middle class has no need of guns. To survive in a capitalistic society as middle class necessitates hard work, ethics, and morality. All three of these things are hindrances to becoming upper class. Thus, hard working, honest people will have little need to defend themselves. They are held in check by the 1 percent who owns the government, they will not attack others due to their morality, and they have little that the lower class would want to take.

Lower class has no need of guns. Truly, the majority of murders and violence in guns occurs from this class doing crimes against each other. In the rare circumstances when it crosses over into middle and upper class the response and retaliation is swift. Guns serve nothing but to accelerate the deaths of other lower class compatriots. The very existence of the upper and middle class depend on a lower class. Deaths by murder work against that purpose.

In conclusion, elimination of guns in society will protect hard working people with ethics and morals. The lower class will find other ways to do destruction on each other and the upper class was never in danger.

The second amendment does little but to give a false sense of security. The constitution was drafted by upper class men in order to keep other races and women subservient to them. Joe Farmer and John Mason had no say in the ratification. This false sense of security is used to manipulate the honest and good people in this world. Guns kill people.


Prove me wrong Dieselram!

Crispin

You say, the elimination of guns in our society would protect hard working people!! How can this be? You would be taking away there defense. THE RISE OF THE BLADES!!!! Frank

 

[Crispin]

So crispin,

Which do you choose? (if you're presently on the anti gun side, replace it with a baseball bat, knife, screwdriver and so on, same intense trauma)

GIB: Given my current profession, I can tell you that it is impossible to take a glance at somebody and tell if they have life threatening or non-life threatening wounds. We were taught to triage in times of mass crisis. In this case there are two patients and only one physician. The first thing I would do is call 911 for an ambulance. Then, as the life of my wife is valued infinitely more then the other I would attend to her first. I would have to do an extremely thorough exam to make sure she did not have life threatening injuries. Let us not forget that the mind is extremely vulnerable in the first moments of a trauma. Once I secured her physical safety I would have to do a thorough psychiatric exam to check the fragile state of her mind. There is no way I could do both of these exams properly in less than an hour. Surely, by that time, the ambulance would be there.

When there is more then one person injured, it may not be possible to save both. We are taught to stick with the first patient until we are absolutely sure of their safety. Just doing my job...just doing my job. We can't save everybody.

Crispin,

Ps. If it was in my house, I would have a samurai sword. Decapitation has a tendency to be difficult to survive.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

And the old receive social security and Medicare which are the largest socialist programs in the world and bankrupting this country.

I get SSDI; I DO NOT regret it, b/c I paid MY taxes, when gainfully employed; BOTH Public AND Private Sectors. SOCIALIST Program...? After the DEPRESSION, MAYBE it WAS... So frigging WHAT! Only a FEW had $$$$$$$$$$ in my parents' generation; it was WORSE, in the 30's and NEEDED!

 

[0121stockpicker]

I get SSDI; I DO NOT regret it, b/c I paid MY taxes, when gainfully employed; BOTH Public AND Private Sectors. SOCIALIST Program...? After the DEPRESSION, MAYBE it WAS... So frigging WHAT! Only a FEW had $$$$$$$$$$ in my parents' generation; it was WORSE, in the 30's and NEEDED!

Only point is that let's not throw stones at "socialism" and "social programs" when EVERYONE is part of the biggest socialist program. It is NOT just welfare freeloaders - everyone is benefiting. And everyone is benefitting far more than what they put in - no matter what you chipped in for ss and mc. That's why our country is broke broke broke. Paying out way more than it took in - period. And if your using your bush given subsidized prescription drug card you never have paid one red cent for that bene and its no diff than getting a welfare check. It was republican middle class welfare to grab the aarp vote pure and simple. Frankly I have no problem with social safety nets for the less fortunate. I made a fortune at a very young age in this great country and I am more than happy to help out those less fortunate. And beyond paying a massive amount in taxes every year I more than tithe every year also. If I had my way communities, families, churches and charities would be providing that safety net for the vast majority but people are too damn selfish for that to work anymore.

Sorry to have insulted all you pinnacles free market capitalists but your part of a massive wealth redristibuting socialist society. I dont like it anymore than anyone else but at least im willing to call the spade the spade and not be a hypocrite. Best

 

[dieselram94]

Only point is that let's not throw stones at "socialism" and "social programs" when EVERYONE is part of the biggest socialist program. It is NOT just welfare freeloaders - everyone is benefiting. And everyone is benefitting far more than what they put in - no matter what you chipped in for ss and mc. That's why our country is broke broke broke. Paying out way more than it took in - period. And if your using your bush given subsidized prescription drug card you never have paid one red cent for that bene and its no diff than getting a welfare check. It was republican middle class welfare to grab the aarp vote pure and simple. Frankly I have no problem with social safety nets for the less fortunate. I made a fortune at a very young age in this great country and I am more than happy to help out those less fortunate. And beyond paying a massive amount in taxes every year I more than tithe every year also. If I had my way communities, families, churches and charities would be providing that safety net for the vast majority but people are too damn selfish for that to work anymore.

Sorry to have insulted all you pinnacles free market capitalists but your part of a massive wealth redristibuting socialist society. I dont like it anymore than anyone else but at least im willing to call the spade the spade and not be a hypocrite. Best

Wow! Stockpicker are you wrong....I don't receive ANY benifits, even though I pay taxes and I am not likely to ever receive. The idea that Americans are selfish is a major insult! We give more than any other nation and that is a FACT! HOW DARE YOU SAY DIFFERENT! I grew up very poor and know what that's like so don't you dare say I don't! The govt should not be in the wealth redistribution buisness.....YOU ARE SO OUT OF LINE!!!!!!