|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/03/2015 04:44:07 PM · #126 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by jagar:
We could have a challenge called "The Hug" special rule: one person involved in the hug must be wearing a gun. |
Originally posted by Cory:
Hug this. ;-)
 |
No hugs needed here.......we'll take you from across the way!
 |
Where the hell is the like button? ;-) |
|
|
|
09/04/2015 08:05:30 AM · #127 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Cory:
Not even a chance of me supporting any of this. |
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Why? Any of what....? A grass roots effort to enact some meaningful gun control? Please explain as SPECIFICALLY as you can so there are no questions as to where you stand....? (not trying to start a fight....I promise!) |
Cory, why would you blanket reject this idea before it's even started? Are you seriously telling me you think unqualified and/or mentally unstable people should be able to purchase firearms? They can now, but you think that's a good idea? Wouldn't you feel better knowing that in order for someone to buy a handgun that there was some form of vetting process?
You really feel that there should be no sensible, reasonable qualifiers to gun ownership, expecially for the guns that are more dangerous than a bolt action rifle, i.e., semi-automatic rifles & pistols?
Have you no interest at all in doing anything that might make a change for the better? |
You've got it quite wrong. I do not believe this will ever be done correctly. Hell, most of the common sense restrictions people mention are already law, mentally unstable people are, in fact, not allowed to buy guns, but that's only if they're honest when filling out the forms. In reality, they just fill out the form with lies and walk away with a gun. you'd do better to figure out how to enforce the laws we already have.
Remember that you live in a world where agendas and dirty tricks are the accepted norm. Expecting this to not be corrupted is foolish.
In the end, I do not support the loss of any freedom, can't say I ever will.
Message edited by author 2015-09-04 08:10:03. |
|
|
|
09/04/2015 09:09:35 PM · #128 |
In the end, I do not support the loss of any freedom, can't say I ever will.
If you have no loss of freedoms, then my freedoms are in jeopardy. Should you get to drive drunk? Poison my water supply? Sell me contaminated meat? Hang my cat from a lightpost because it pooped in your flowers? Fall on your gun in Walmart and kill my kid when it goes off accidently? Where do YOUR freedoms end and mine begin?
Here's a quote that kinda says it all for gun control advocates and I'd like your reaction:
"In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over." ~ Dan Hodges, Telegraph
It seems your right (and anyone's...literally anyone's 'cause, y'know...LIBERTY), in your mind, supercedes the right of anyone else to go about their daily business and not be murdered by a "responsible gun owner". Why does YOUR right override MINE? And, WHY wasn't Sandy Hook bad enough for changes to occur? What WILL be bad enough for you to give up a few liberties for the sake of your neighbors and loved ones?
|
|
|
|
09/05/2015 06:24:37 AM · #129 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Not even a chance of me supporting any of this. |
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Why? Any of what....? A grass roots effort to enact some meaningful gun control? Please explain as SPECIFICALLY as you can so there are no questions as to where you stand....? (not trying to start a fight....I promise!) |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Cory, why would you blanket reject this idea before it's even started? Are you seriously telling me you think unqualified and/or mentally unstable people should be able to purchase firearms? They can now, but you think that's a good idea? Wouldn't you feel better knowing that in order for someone to buy a handgun that there was some form of vetting process?
You really feel that there should be no sensible, reasonable qualifiers to gun ownership, expecially for the guns that are more dangerous than a bolt action rifle, i.e., semi-automatic rifles & pistols?
Have you no interest at all in doing anything that might make a change for the better? |
Originally posted by Cory:
You've got it quite wrong. I do not believe this will ever be done correctly. Hell, most of the common sense restrictions people mention are already law, mentally unstable people are, in fact, not allowed to buy guns, but that's only if they're honest when filling out the forms. In reality, they just fill out the form with lies and walk away with a gun. you'd do better to figure out how to enforce the laws we already have.
Remember that you live in a world where agendas and dirty tricks are the accepted norm. Expecting this to not be corrupted is foolish.
In the end, I do not support the loss of any freedom, can't say I ever will. |
Okay....then you do blanket reject any attempts to try to work towards doing anything because you've decided that since it's already so screwed up that it can't be fixed.
Got it.
And you know with complete certainty that the efforts will be corrupted, so why bother.
Got it.
So you'll just pass off the same "Loss of freedom" bullshit and go back under your rock.
Got it.
What kind of world would we live in if everyone took your stance? Nothing would ever get done, nobody who needed help would be, and people just plain couldn't live together at all because God help us.........you've got your right to live your f*cked up life and would rather tough it out and hope it never happens to you than care.
Message edited by author 2015-09-05 06:47:52.
|
|
|
|
09/05/2015 06:28:27 AM · #130 |
Originally posted by Cory:
In the end, I do not support the loss of any freedom, can't say I ever will. |
Originally posted by Luciemac:
If you have no loss of freedoms, then my freedoms are in jeopardy. Should you get to drive drunk? Poison my water supply? Sell me contaminated meat? Hang my cat from a lightpost because it pooped in your flowers? Fall on your gun in Walmart and kill my kid when it goes off accidently? Where do YOUR freedoms end and mine begin?
Here's a quote that kinda says it all for gun control advocates and I'd like your reaction:
"In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over." ~ Dan Hodges, Telegraph
It seems your right (and anyone's...literally anyone's 'cause, y'know...LIBERTY), in your mind, supercedes the right of anyone else to go about their daily business and not be murdered by a "responsible gun owner". Why does YOUR right override MINE? And, WHY wasn't Sandy Hook bad enough for changes to occur? What WILL be bad enough for you to give up a few liberties for the sake of your neighbors and loved ones? |
I'm gonna say it out loud simply because at this point I'm pissed off and normally no one would say it.
It seems to me, Cory, until someone YOU love gets shot in a senseless situation, you'll never be willing to address the problem.
Or is that okay with you? Ya know.......shit happens?
|
|
|
|
09/05/2015 08:43:31 AM · #131 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Cory:
In the end, I do not support the loss of any freedom, can't say I ever will. |
Originally posted by Luciemac:
If you have no loss of freedoms, then my freedoms are in jeopardy. Should you get to drive drunk? Poison my water supply? Sell me contaminated meat? Hang my cat from a lightpost because it pooped in your flowers? Fall on your gun in Walmart and kill my kid when it goes off accidently? Where do YOUR freedoms end and mine begin?
Here's a quote that kinda says it all for gun control advocates and I'd like your reaction:
"In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over." ~ Dan Hodges, Telegraph
It seems your right (and anyone's...literally anyone's 'cause, y'know...LIBERTY), in your mind, supercedes the right of anyone else to go about their daily business and not be murdered by a "responsible gun owner". Why does YOUR right override MINE? And, WHY wasn't Sandy Hook bad enough for changes to occur? What WILL be bad enough for you to give up a few liberties for the sake of your neighbors and loved ones? |
I'm gonna say it out loud simply because at this point I'm pissed off and normally no one would say it.
It seems to me, Cory, until someone YOU love gets shot in a senseless situation, you'll never be willing to address the problem.
Or is that okay with you? Ya know.......shit happens? |
You keep believing that action=desired effect.
As long as we're talking about fantasy, I'd like to date a supermodel and ride a unicorn to work, and live in a perfect world without gun violence, or any violence. Yeah, that would be awesome. |
|
|
|
09/05/2015 02:30:04 PM · #132 |
"You keep believing that action=desired effect."
Nooooo....that's not how it works. Taking action means doing something, rather than making excuses about why nothing can be done...as you're doing now.
Your America...the one you wave the flag and your guns around, is the one Hodges was talking about when he said "In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over."
You've decided killing kids is not only "bearable", but okey dokey. Even desirable if it means you can keep your gun. Otherwise, you'd care enough to at least discuss measures that would lessen the chance of Sandy Hook ever, EVER, happening again. Yet, you keep whining about your "liberties" and pretend that Obama is out to grab your security blanket. When it's your kid, your mom, or your sister....I wonder if you'll feel the same.
Just ewwwwwwww.
|
|
|
|
09/06/2015 09:05:41 AM · #133 |
Originally posted by Cory:
You keep believing that action=desired effect. |
No Cory, that is a blatantly erroneous statement. It shows that you're not paying attention at all.
Action=effect. I'm talking about making the effort/action, trying to make a difference.
No action=NO effect.
Sitting back and saying that nothing will work to justify doing nothing is pretty typical of a lazy stance that supports accepting an unacceptable state of affairs.
Like what you seem to be falling back on now.
Originally posted by Cory:
As long as we're talking about fantasy, I'd like to date a supermodel and ride a unicorn to work, and live in a perfect world without gun violence, or any violence. Yeah, that would be awesome. |
Well, nobody except you right now was talking fantasy. Of course the unicorn thing is ridiculous.......I've seen you using that as your fallback spiel to try defray intelligent discourse before.
Maybe you could date a supermodel. But it will never happen if you decide it never will and don't even try.
I don't expect fantastic things to happen in my life, but if you're out there in life they do. I watched Paul Newman in his first sports car national chamionship, and was there to hear him interviewed in the pits at the end of the race for one of the finest examples of human decency and humility I've ever heard.
Mia Hamm visited my daughter in the hospital when she was sick.......Mia was being a goodwill ambassador for the kids in the children's ward.
I met and talked with Stevie Ray Vaughn for a while after a concert.
I've been to Honduras on a mission trip.
I've photographed Christmas portraits for a poor community at a church.
All fantastic memories for me, and simply because I was there.
Life happens when you show up and try.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 07/20/2025 02:57:34 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/20/2025 02:57:34 PM EDT.
|
