Ban all guns

Listen Up......Don't let folk like danielpalos get to you. They just enjoy giving fine people like yourself mind masterbations.

He claimes to be a Federalist.

They know nothing, and never will.
They are in denial, because their mind programmed by the Big Brother Socialistic liberal system.
They are living a life of equal shared misery.

 

Quit dodging now, friend. If you don't accept factual proof, then accept the burden of proof and show where and when this Japanese General supposedly said this quote. The Authority on this topic, Donald M. Goldstein, who has written a number of books on the pearl Harbor invasion has claimed that the quote is a fabrication. So, put your money where your mouth is and show me the proof of your claim that the quote is genuine.



PS,....... are you content with the current level of gun control, and is there ANY form of gun control you favor? No dodging now.

 

Whether or not you like me is irrelevant. I can live with your displeasure, but I am puzzled by your avoidance of addressing your cut and pasted passages that were NOT of your own writing. Where did you get them from?

Hopefully you DO wish to be honest and honorable here, no? Post your sources.

 

Really? You would really set the bar that low? Make up any quote you like, and as long it sounds OK, then all's good?

Most would agree to a little more integrity than that.

During Colonial times---Yes. Applying your statement to today could be a more difficult task. I would argue that the most important factor that keeps a nation free from invasion would be the military power of that particular nation. The percentage of civilian gun ownership would be far down on any list of deterrence.

Again, you've made a conclusion that is not supported by fact. Can you prove that gun ownership has "reduced crime"?

 

"Make up any quote you like, and as long it sounds OK, then all's good?"

That's correct. Content always trumps form (1st year college sociology/philosophy). Strange you didn't know that. And what does it have to do with "integrity" ? Nothing.

Of course the military is the most important factor, but a nation being fully armed vs. disarmed is important too. HIGH on the list of deterrence. This conclusion not only is supported by fact but it has been for over 15 years now. Old story.

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/postsbyday/RTCResearch.html

http://hematite.com/dragon/usatodayccw.html

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

There's the formal fact. Here's the informal. If you suspect that I have my .380 semiautomatic in my pocket (loaded with hollowpoint bullets that explode inside of you, turning your insides into hamburger), and my concealed weapons permit to back it up, do you think you'd want to mess with me ? There's the best "proof" you can get.

 

It’s argument not ‘agument’. The problem is that our laws say abort in is not murder. They are wrong, I say by natural law abortion IS murder. You subscribe to positive law/rights which is to say that our rights are derived from the state etc. That is the way the Nazis were able to murder the Jewish people, they made it legal because the state could do just that! Still natural law and history said it was MURDER. This is off topic so if you want to start a new thread I would be happy to spank you like a new baby (pun intended) in exchange for those murdered.

RevA

 

He can add Mr Danct to Mr Danielpalos to that mix.

Hi Danct happy to see you again! (we have a history)...

RevA

 

After a lot of soul searching I aplogized to Danct for for my insults etc. I think Danct those that have similar though processes have a good heart. I believe that they really believe the statistics they read and think that more gun control would be good for the population at large. The reason the Dancts and the RevAs irritate each other is our value systems. I can’t speak for Danct but his ideas and even personality is irritating to me, even though I have nothing personal against him.

How so? Here is my beliefs and what I think Dancts of the worlds are as well that cause the irritations.

1. I believe my constitutional rights are more important than nearly anything else including the inherent safety of gun ownership.

2. I may be wrong but I feel as if many gun control advocates and their cousin’s those that believe all guns should be banned view gun proponents as ignorant low income uneducated Neanderthals.

3. Most extreme gun control propones are politically different therefore their way of viewing the world is different. The difference is much like religious folks vs. atheists.

So with all due respect the lack of respect is to be expected.

RevA

 

I subscribe to the law of common sense. Forget about the Nazi rhetoric, Ive heard it all before. Now show me those stats which support the statement that .3 million babies are "vacuum torn to death" as you fanatics put it.

 

the KKK and Hitler would agree with you



this Liberal Atheist Democrat Leader agrees gun control works

 

Donald M. Goldstein = Liberal Democrat who backs gun control
your not my friend you are my enemy and the enemy to America/Israel and Western Civilization

 

so what the sources were under the quotes i cant help you do not know how to use the net.

this man a liberal atheist progressive democrat agrees that gun control works


More gun control proponents

 

Attributing a made-up quote to somebody IS by definition a deceptive act. Therefor it has EVERYTHING to do with "integrity". Strange that you would not realize that.

Well, you're right about it being an "old story". Unfortunately for you, this "old story" has been widely discredited. All three of your sources refer to the same study done by Lott (your listing of three sources tends to give the false impression that you offered three separate sources which you did not). I can easily refer you to two separate reviews that find glaring flaws in his work.

One here.
&
One here.

You'll have to do better than that, friend. You have referred to a flawed study that does NOT an any fashion support your claim that private gun ownership deters modern day national invasions. That flawed study refers to domestic and civilian deterrence. Two different topics that you're attempting to lump together.

I have no need for an "informal" hypothetical when I know of "formal" evidence that disputes your false perceptions.

 

I could give you the world wide stats on abortions, however they are not at all accurate. Many more abortions are commited than admitted. Not everyone wants the world to know about their crime. BTW if a late term unborn is vacuum torn, that is one murder too many. One. Zero late term abortions would be my goal. I place abortion supporters etc on a sliding scale category. One is the pro death supporter that doesn’t care at all about the unborn late term etc. Those ’people’ are beyond criminal. Then there are the naïve ignorant types that are so ignorant they know no better. In most cases they use denial and other mechanisms to protect their conscious. Around number three are the abortions for convenience, just a form of birth control, that too is sickening and murder IMO. The death of the mother is possible probable is around an eight. The number eights are people who’s souls are salvageable, still human and I can understand their thought processes. The pro death types are a zero on a scale of one to ten and of course the naïve are a ten. Everyone else is somewhere in-between. One is equal to a cold blooded murderer that premeditates the crime. By crime I am speaking of violations of natural law.

RevA

 

Maybe they will wise up one day, I still love my Australian friends tho' its the goverment I despise...ha ha but all goverments are evil by degrees and default.

RevA

 

The important thing to remember when speaking of abortion statistics is that dilation and curretage procedures performed routinely after miscarriage are also included in abortion statistics. I dont know how it works in the US but I suspect the number of women using abortion as a method of birth control is extremely low. I agree with your view on long term abortions but Im pro choice not pro death. You dont do your case any good by labelling people as such.

 

The exact same can be said about those who oppose abortion and that, it would seem on the surface, amounts to little more than opposing views. However once the basis for those views are examined, it becomes quite clear that one is founded on ignorance, and generally being uninformed or religious dogma which has no place in public policy, the other in liberty, societal norms, legal precedent and thinking that is rational not emotional knee jerk reaction.

 

Ha........ No, I'm going to say that Jews and the Jewish faith have nothing to do with my post that you responded to.

I see that you are still struggling with being relevant. It comes easy to most of us, but occasionally some people such as yourself seem not to be able to latch onto this simple concept.

Now then, do you wish to actually respond to my post, or do you wish to troll with irrelevant inanities? Your choice, friend. I've given you many chances already.

 

You might be surprised to realize that we both partially agree here. I believe that adherence to our Constitution very important and vital. That no particular right is more important than any other, and that the Founding Fathers intent should be paramount in any interpretation of this document. That being said, there are certainly different interpretations to be made from this document, hence the tenuous job of our SCOTUS.

Remember that the beginning of our Constitution reads:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."​

It would seem that from time to time you lose sight of this.

Why now, are you referring to a small minority of Americans? I thought you were going to tell us why you despise me, remember? I have never advocated banning guns, so your attempt to argue against the extremes, frankly comes across as somewhat shrill and hollow.

Any "extremist" could be said to have a dearth of respect from others, but I have already shown you quite clearly how MY views on guns is very mainstream. Certainly not close to your "extreme" characterization, so it IS puzzling why you would formulate such an extreme view based on a false perception. We have previously talked about this and I have linked you to my personal views, so you really have no excuse for this error.

I can only assume that you prefer to wallow in the most cynical and extreme views of the world, while ignoring realities that have been provided you. I find this a pity, really.

 

Well, this IS disappointing, friend. I asked you to not dodge the question and this is precisely what you ended up doing. Have some pride now and address your use of a bogus quote in a previous post. You have been exposed in using a false quote AND in using other people's words as your own. Your ONLY defense to this has been talking about "Jews" and "Liberals" as if they had ANYTHING to do with this. Of course we all know they do not and that you are attempting to use bluster and false accusations to mask your errors. A fairly transparent and obvious tactic and yet you persist with it. I'm still hoping you will learn from this and decide to become relevant. What say you?

 

Yes, we already went over this, friend. Try to keep up. You're looking foolish now. I showed you the quote in question and you still have not posted your source for it.

Once again, the passage under your false Yamamoto quote that said:

"Advising Japan's military leaders of the futility of an invasion of the mainland United States because of the widespread availability of guns. It has been theorized that this was a major contributing factor in Japan's decision not to land on North America early in the war when they had vastly superior military strength. This delay gave our industrial infrastructure time to gear up for the conflict and was decisive in our later victory. "​

Are those YOUR words? Huh? Oddly missing the usual "LIBERAL" smears and baseless references to "Nazis" and "Socialists"?

Be honest now. Show us all how you're capable of participating here honorably and fairly. Time to turn a new leaf, friend. Admit that you cut and pasted those quotes AND the accompanying passage that I showed you AND tell us where they came from.

 

Quit trolling.

If you have something relevant and anything substantial to offer us then,..... try it.

 

Time to close the thread. Start another if you want to continue the debate.