HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Jan 30, 2013, 06:06 PM
Libertas in Infinitum
logan5's Avatar
Houston Ellington, Texas, United States
Joined Feb 2001
312 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by micro_builder View Post
His reasoning seems to be the same as a person buying a fire extinguisher because they realize there is some chance that a fire could happen. Better safe than sorry is not the same as living in fear. IMO.
Apparently wearing a seatbelt is also living in fear .... Or wearing a helmet for that matter. Heck if risk mitigation is living in fear .... Then why are all the progressives so hellbent for getting free condoms and birth control pills? YOLO!
logan5 is offline Find More Posts by logan5
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 06:16 PM
Dave?
RCWorks's Avatar
Joined Aug 2003
1,626 Posts
The ammusment parks are full of people living in fear, you never seen so many safety devices and speed limits.
RCWorks is offline Find More Posts by RCWorks
RCG Plus Member
Latest blog entry: HobbyCNC ProBoard...
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 06:58 PM
Trons and Fumes
wrightme's Avatar
Fallon, NV
Joined Mar 2007
5,033 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norman Adlam View Post
No offence taken - although I don't know why you seem to have problems with people being sympathetic.

Your words seem to say to different things ("I'm not afraid" and "I wish to be armed in case very bad things happen") which leaves one confused.

(It's rather like saying that you are "in fear" might lose your man card, or summat.. )

I suspect you'll just say that it's being 'prepared' - which also doesn't make sense. No-one prepares in such a way unless one is fearful of something bad happening.

Look, it's your life etc - I was just asking questions to try to figure out how it hangs together. I'm just interested / nosy.
The parts in bold should not 'leave one confused.' A person does not need to experience 'fear' to desire to prepare for possibilities.
wrightme is offline Find More Posts by wrightme
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:02 PM
Unrepentant Paragon addict
LVsoaring's Avatar
United States, OK, Moore
Joined Jan 2006
2,567 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b-E View Post
The laws are fine, enforcement is a joke.
How unsanitary! You took the words right out of my mouth!


Typical liberal logic is on display here.... the laws we have are not properly enforced, so let's pass some more laws that will do nothing to solve the problem, and will only place more burden on the law-abiding citizen.
LVsoaring is offline Find More Posts by LVsoaring
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:05 PM
Unrepentant Paragon addict
LVsoaring's Avatar
United States, OK, Moore
Joined Jan 2006
2,567 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Harris View Post
Maybe the problem is a patchwork of local and state laws. Perhaps the solution would be a single set of unified national firearms laws. Heaven forbid, but that is a direction it's headed.

--Bill

I rarely agree with you Bill, but your comment, IMHO, actually has some merit. The patchwork of laws you mention seemed to work pretty well 40, 50, 60 plus years ago. But nowadays our society is so mobile that uniform laws (and uniform enforcement) seems kinda reasonable, or at least worth discussing.
LVsoaring is offline Find More Posts by LVsoaring
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:09 PM
Restful User
Jacques Flambeau's Avatar
Backwoods Alabama
Joined May 2000
3,861 Posts
Quote:
We already have a single set of unified firearms laws... it says that a citizens right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Constitutional amendments are not laws.
Jacques Flambeau is offline Find More Posts by Jacques Flambeau
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:13 PM
Unrepentant Paragon addict
LVsoaring's Avatar
United States, OK, Moore
Joined Jan 2006
2,567 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Harris View Post
Constitutional amendments are not laws.
Back to disagreeing. But in this case it's not a disagreement. You are simply wrong. To wit:

Article. VI.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
LVsoaring is offline Find More Posts by LVsoaring
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:18 PM
Restful User
Jacques Flambeau's Avatar
Backwoods Alabama
Joined May 2000
3,861 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LVsoaring View Post
I rarely agree with you Bill, but your comment, IMHO, actually has some merit. The patchwork of laws you mention seemed to work pretty well 40, 50, 60 plus years ago. But nowadays our society is so mobile that uniform laws (and uniform enforcement) seems kinda reasonable, or at least worth discussing.
Yes, I think this is why so much is unenforcable-- there is such a Gordian knot of loopholes that even the most agressive, law-an-order magistrate or District Attorney has to tread lightly (or not really stomp). Not good for morale when a miscreant walks on a technicality.

--Bill
Jacques Flambeau is offline Find More Posts by Jacques Flambeau
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:20 PM
Unrepentant Paragon addict
LVsoaring's Avatar
United States, OK, Moore
Joined Jan 2006
2,567 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Harris View Post
Yes, I think this is why so much is unenforcable-- there is such a Gordian knot of loopholes that even the most agressive, law-an-order magistrate or District Attorney has to tread lightly (or not really stomp). Not good for morale when a miscreant walks on a technicality.

--Bill
Gordian knot..... had to look that up. Yes, we're back to agreeing. Good post.
LVsoaring is offline Find More Posts by LVsoaring
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:21 PM
Restful User
Jacques Flambeau's Avatar
Backwoods Alabama
Joined May 2000
3,861 Posts
Quote:
Back to disagreeing. But in this case it's not a disagreement. You are simply wrong. To wit:
Well-- semantics. The Constitution is the Law of the Land, but not laws or regulations. It is the basis for all law, but not a law.

I agree with you, but tend to be picky on details.

--Bill
Jacques Flambeau is offline Find More Posts by Jacques Flambeau
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 07:23 PM
Unrepentant Paragon addict
LVsoaring's Avatar
United States, OK, Moore
Joined Jan 2006
2,567 Posts
call it semantics if you wish.... when it says "shall be the supreme law of the land", it doesn't seem to have much wiggle room for loose interpretation.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. Looking forward to more comments tomorrow.
LVsoaring is offline Find More Posts by LVsoaring
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 08:37 PM
Libertas in Infinitum
logan5's Avatar
Houston Ellington, Texas, United States
Joined Feb 2001
312 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LVsoaring View Post
call it semantics if you wish.... when it says "shall be the supreme law of the land", it doesn't seem to have much wiggle room for loose interpretation.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. Looking forward to more comments tomorrow.
He's a progressive .... Everything in his opinion is open to lose interpretation.
logan5 is offline Find More Posts by logan5
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 09:15 PM
Borders, language & culture
AintQytRite's Avatar
United States, TN, Maryville
Joined Jun 2001
213 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by n00b-E View Post
The laws are fine, enforcement is a joke.
This.
AintQytRite is offline Find More Posts by AintQytRite
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30, 2013, 10:26 PM
Restful User
Jacques Flambeau's Avatar
Backwoods Alabama
Joined May 2000
3,861 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LVsoaring View Post
call it semantics if you wish.... when it says "shall be the supreme law of the land", it doesn't seem to have much wiggle room for loose interpretation.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. Looking forward to more comments tomorrow.
Well, yes. We could go back and forth all day, but in the end, it works and work long after we're gone...

Jacques Flambeau is offline Find More Posts by Jacques Flambeau
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31, 2013, 04:07 AM
Official Old Git!
Hampshire, UK
Joined Sep 2000
1,390 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by logan5 View Post
You might want to consider your wife's safety as well .... The UK has a higher rate of rape per 100000 than here in the US .... At least here we can chose to do something about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics
Well, it hasn't happened - or come anywhere near the vaguest possibility from what I know - in 63 years logan5!

How much 'preparation' do you think I might need to take?
Norman Adlam is offline Find More Posts by Norman Adlam
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help! GoPro Hero 2 Live Video Out Examples... RxFPV FPV Talk 28 Jan 03, 2013 08:45 PM
Discussion Just another example of Government and Corporations working hand in hand ... logan5 Life, The Universe, and Politics 1 Nov 17, 2011 11:51 AM
Discussion Watch the other hand... Obama and new gun laws rcjetpilot Life, The Universe, and Politics 179 Mar 30, 2011 07:54 PM
Discussion Swiss voters throw out gun law reform aerogel Life, The Universe, and Politics 21 Feb 16, 2011 07:15 PM
Discussion Yet another example of how the militarization of our Police has failed... FrogChief Life, The Universe, and Politics 63 May 21, 2010 07:48 AM