protesters bring firearms to town hall meetings

[Mr.S.Marbo]

I don\'t know perhaps it\'s my simple mind but I can\'t see a valid reason for taking a gun to a town hall meeting apart from to intimidate and show force. I can\'t see any other reason, but perhaps someone could explain. Sure there is a right to bear arms, but why would you bring them to a debate and discussion about healthcare which has nothing to do with guns at all?

Guns are designed to kill and if you are walking around with one in a place that is safe you are sending out the message that you might be prepared to kill, you might use this to force people to do as you want. You might not be prepared to do any of these things but people can\'t tell what you are thinking. I don\'t know about you but I\'d be thinking why are there a group of people here putting their views across in a safe environment, while wearing guns? Why do they feel the need to have a lethal weapon with them during a civilised discussion?

Also this idea that the population needs guns in case they need to potentially overthrow a government that goes out of control is just crazy. It was probably a possibility when the Declaration of Independence was made, but is no longer realistic. The US government is spending around $1 trillion annually on defence (in 2005 it spent more on defence than the rest of the world did) and therefore it\'s silly to think that a group of civilians with small arms could make any sort of stand against that military might. To me it\'s the equivalent of wearing a safety hard hat and thinking that is going to protect you if a 20 story skyscraper was to fall on you from a great height.

I am also not sure what it is about trying to improve medical care for the poorest of the population that scares so many people. The Declaration of Independence says:

\"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.\"

It\'s fantastic I think that so much substance can be summed up in not that many words. I would say healthcare available to all was essential in ensuring that all citizens are equal, and have a right to life and happiness.

The reforms are not promising a massive state system like the NHS in the UK so why are people saying it is going to end up just like the NHS? I don\'t get it. The NHS is not perfect, but it is based on such a truly magnificent idea that no politicians here would dare propose to dismantle it, it\'s too popular. I say it needs a lot of work, but it has a lot too offer. Just as the UK could learn a lot from the US healthcare system so too I am sure the US could learn from the UK.

 

[skeeve]

Originally posted by airhead

Originally posted by Ritual

The government should work for you. Not the other way around.

[/soapbox]

I am sorry Airhead, but this is meaningless slogan subject to interpretation.

I for example, believe that the government that ignores profiteering by by either health insurance corporation or trial lawyers clearly does not work for me.

I am sure that if government decides to regulate health insurance industry the way I believe they should, CEOs of said corporations start screaming that the government doesn\'t work FOR THEM. Unfortunately, having much more means they can scream much louder creating this impression of enormous popular support.

 

[Minicreatures]

Originally posted by Mr.S.Marbo
I don\'t know perhaps it\'s my simple mind but I can\'t see a valid reason for taking a gun to a town hall meeting apart from to intimidate and show force. I can\'t see any other reason, but perhaps someone could explain. Sure there is a right to bear arms, but why would you bring them to a debate and discussion about healthcare which has nothing to do with guns at all?

Guns are designed to kill and if you are walking around with one in a place that is safe you are sending out the message that you might be prepared to kill, you might use this to force people to do as you want. You might not be prepared to do any of these things but people can\'t tell what you are thinking. I don\'t know about you but I\'d be thinking why are there a group of people here putting their views across in a safe environment, while wearing guns? Why do they feel the need to have a lethal weapon with them during a civilised discussion?

Also this idea that the population needs guns in case they need to potentially overthrow a government that goes out of control is just crazy. It was probably a possibility when the Declaration of Independence was made, but is no longer realistic. The US government is spending around $1 trillion annually on defence (in 2005 it spent more on defence than the rest of the world did) and therefore it\'s silly to think that a group of civilians with small arms could make any sort of stand against that military might. To me it\'s the equivalent of wearing a safety hard hat and thinking that is going to protect you if a 20 story skyscraper was to fall on you from a great height.

I am also not sure what it is about trying to improve medical care for the poorest of the population that scares so many people.

The people at the meeting weren\'t waving their guns around like maniacs. Or shooting off rounds in the parking lot for giggles, so I don\'t see how this would come off as a show of force, rather than just a reminder that people have individual rights that are important to them. I would be way more worried about the ones who show up with concealed firearms. Is it so hard to imagine that a sane rational person who happens to be carrying a gun legally could also go to a town hall meeting?

Really if you put your imagination to it anything could be designed to kill, (FORK OF DOOM!!!) there\'s nothing to fear except fear itself. And also maybe hyper paranoia...

I think the right to bear arms is certainly just as valid in this day and age as when it was first written. To not think so is to bury one\'s head in the sand and rely on hope and other people\'s goodwill or good intentions that everything is going to be fine and turn out the very best for everyone. That is just not the case. For every good intentioned person out there, there are just as many bad ones. Sorry to be mean but that view seems a bit innocent. I don\'t care if the gesture is a single drop against a storm. It\'s still something I as an individual can control.

Also the reason the US spends so much in defense comparatively to \"the world\" (which apparently we aren\'t deemed to be a part of) is because its defending (and fighting yes) so many international battles as well as national defenses at home. It\'s all well and good to point this out as imperialistic etc etc, however I always notice that when there\'s a crisis that needs cleaning up or some vigilante crazy pants is threatening the peaceful people of wherever, the US is looked to to step in and do something. Sometimes I think we spend more for defending abroad than we do at home depending on the crisis, natural disaster, war, implosion, flood, disease, hunger, etc. That costs alot of money which in turn comes from taxpayers like me.

So yes. I want my gun. And yes I\'ll bring it to my town hall meeting if I feel like it.

Also I\'d like to point out that I\'m curious how all these new projects are going to be funded, now and down the road. Our children and subsequent future generations are going to be paying for a long time just for the economic bailout alone (which US taxpayer money also went to to help international companies as well!!! Like we\'ll see benefit from that!). There\'s a lot of plot holes and requests for cash is all I\'m saying. That tends to make people think they\'re being played which no one likes.

Ending rant... for now... I need a drink.

 

[Farin]

@superVike

yes i know, i was simply refering to the fact that during recent weeks , these topics have become one big messy subject - a can of rocket worms if you like.

personally I say about gun laws that your that 2. amendment is clear on the subject, and i´m not going to argue, since this topic can´t be engaged rational: It has as mentioned by many Cmoners cultural, emonitional and historial aspects. I´m european and for people from our side of the pond, Guns have a different symbolic meaning: We don´t see the tools that let us fight opression that Airhead and many other american citizen see - we just see something that was used in two world wars and many wars before these to harm and kill innocent people

And Airhead i DO understand your point - still i believe in restricting gun ownership. Of cause , If someone has the necessary licence / permit and therefor proven that he is a resaponsible citizen AND has a reason for owning firearms other than some strange conspiracy theory, like say hunting , than he has any right to have one - i just don´t think it should be possibly to have such an easy access to automatic fire arms and assault weapons as in some States of the US.

And when i see a bunch of guys with intimidating weapons in front of a townhall where they political opponents just happen to be , and they tell everyone \"They just using a constitutional right\", then i can´t help but feel that they try to abuse that right to intimdate people

@Skeeve:

Yep, goverment for the people, unfortunately \"people\" seems to only rule in those who can afford regular donations to a party

 

[Minicreatures]

I like how apparently because it\'s a different opinion being argued, it can\'t be discussed or seen as rational. Hello brick wall...

Out of curiosity, If I showed up at a random Euro town hall meeting wishing to join in to discuss their proposed healthcare reforms, carrying a loaded gun in plain sight, and not displaying any erratic behavior at all, what would happen to me? Would I be arrested as a terrorist? Hahaha! I\'m totally picturing panic at Nabisco! Everyone would be like \"omgwtfbbq quick put her down! But we can\'t put her down! OHNOES!!! \"

I think the concept of treating each other as free and equal adults and not small children that need to be led by the hand is sadly fading from humanity\'s collective memory.

America was also involved in the world wars. Have we not seen what happens when citizens can\'t defend themselves and are at the mercy of whatever crazy pants is in power?

Ok ok getting a drink now :beer:

 

[Niall]

Originally posted by Minicreatures
Out of curiosity, If I showed up at a random Euro town hall meeting wishing to join in to discuss their proposed healthcare reforms, carrying a loaded gun in plain sight, and not displaying any erratic behavior at all, what would happen to me? Would I be arrested as a terrorist?

You would soon be meeting a bunch of MP5 wielding policemen!
Switzerland is the only European country to have people carrying assault rifles around with them, but they are militiamen of the Swiss army so have an excuse to use them. They still have to be in a case though.

I am sure that I heard that \'right to bear arms\' was only created when the American settlers wanted to create their own nation, so they needed a fast militia to hold off the British troops. It was never intended to last forever

 

[Minicreatures]

[/quote]
You would soon be meeting a bunch of MP5 wielding policemen! [/quote]

I\'ll show them some rationality!!! AHAHAHAHA! But maybe I just wanted to talk? And make friends? And this is how I meet them. At town hall meetings. In Europe. Er Switzerland. In Europe. :beer:

The right to bear arms is in the Bill of Rights which was meant to be a permanent fixture to protect the people against future crazy pants, or as permanent as can be considering the country still exists.

As a side note I find it immensely amusing that the bulk of my posts here at CMON are in a thread about guns... I\'m sorry, I\'m really not crazy... I\'ll try and branch out more.

 

[slah]

Originally posted by Minicreatures

Out of curiosity, If I showed up at a random Euro town hall meeting wishing to join in to discuss their proposed healthcare reforms, carrying a loaded gun in plain sight, and not displaying any erratic behavior at all, what would happen to me? Would I be arrested as a terrorist? Hahaha! I\'m totally picturing panic at Nabisco! Everyone would be like \"omgwtfbbq quick put her down! But we can\'t put her down! OHNOES!!! \"

I can´t speak with 100% certainty as to what you would be charged with, but I´m fairly sure that in every single european country you would be taken down fast and hard

I think the concept of treating each other as free and equal adults and not small children that need to be led by the hand is sadly fading from humanity\'s collective memory.

How come having access to guns is a means to freedom and equality? They are potentially highly dangerous pieces of equipment which I feel should be heavily restricted for no other reason that there is no obvious reason for people to have them. Why would you NEED to have a gun and bring it to the town hall meeting?

In that sense I don´t see any problems with \"robbing\" people of the perceived freedom of having a gun when weighed against the general populaces safety from knowing that various loons, nutjobs and psycopaths can´t get a gun and walk around with it loaded without anyone asking questions.


America was also involved in the world wars. Have we not seen what happens when citizens can\'t defend themselves and are at the mercy of whatever crazy pants is in power?

I have no answer here. Maybe it´s because all the wars and conflicts you have been in have been abroad. Only your soldiers have seen the horrors of war firsthand where as a lot of our parents and grandparents have seen their houses bombed to hell around them, and a lot of people know stories of friends and families who have perished.

... I don´t know?


Ok ok getting a drink now :beer:

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by darthfoley
I agree with the protestors\' stance, but not necessarily with the way they\'ve chosen to promote it.

However, with the fact that citizens have been shouted down and called \'un-American\' and \'Nazis\' by the current leadership, I\'m not a bit surprised that some of the angrier elements are beginning to growl more and more loudly.

As for global warming...yes, let\'s open that can of worms once more. Let\'s see how many scientists we can get right here on CMON to argue both sides of that coin again. lol

You are shitting me? The leadership is calling people un-american and Nazis?

With the Birthers and Glenn Beck/fox news on the side of the status quo that is just bollocks.

 

[mattsterbenz]

I would like to raise a toast to Airhead, Shawn, and Kathrynloch. Gun ownership is a right and a duty. These protesters are not at fault at all.


Ironic how issues involving right wing groups like these protesters gets insane media coverage, but something like this doesn\'t http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4MTQVMatW0&feature=related

That video shows members of the racist and violent Black Panther party armed with nightsticks and intimidating voters during the 2008 presidential election... That\'s wrong.


As to Uber\'s first post, I agree that politics should not be allowed in school. Period. But this is something that, in my opinion, doesn\'t tend to swing both ways. I\'m more of a third party voter (sort of like a more Conservative Libertarian) but I think it\'s funny that the Christian Right tend to get the most grief
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=8348665

I had an economics teacher in high school who absolutely hated President Bush and used every spare moment he had to insult him. I\'m not a big fan of Bush\'s policies myself, for the record. This teacher even had a running count of Iraq war deaths on the wall, a lifesize cardboard cutout of the President in the room, which he would speak to and insult DURING CLASS. The ironic thing is he never got in trouble, yet several other teachers who would speak about Conservative issues would get \"silenced\" by administration.

That could very well be just a local issue, but in my opinion it seems to be widespread.

That\'s it for politics from me

-Matt

 

[Minicreatures]

Originally posted by slah

Originally posted by Minicreatures

Out of curiosity, If I showed up at a random Euro town hall meeting wishing to join in to discuss their proposed healthcare reforms, carrying a loaded gun in plain sight, and not displaying any erratic behavior at all, what would happen to me? Would I be arrested as a terrorist? Hahaha! I\'m totally picturing panic at Nabisco! Everyone would be like \"omgwtfbbq quick put her down! But we can\'t put her down! OHNOES!!! \"

I can´t speak with 100% certainty as to what you would be charged with, but I´m fairly sure that in every single european country you would be taken down fast and hard

I think the concept of treating each other as free and equal adults and not small children that need to be led by the hand is sadly fading from humanity\'s collective memory.

How come having access to guns is a means to freedom and equality? They are potentially highly dangerous pieces of equipment which I feel should be heavily restricted for no other reason that there is no obvious reason for people to have them. Why would you NEED to have a gun and bring it to the town hall meeting?

In that sense I don´t see any problems with \"robbing\" people of the perceived freedom of having a gun when weighed against the general populaces safety from knowing that various loons, nutjobs and psycopaths can´t get a gun and walk around with it loaded without anyone asking questions.


America was also involved in the world wars. Have we not seen what happens when citizens can\'t defend themselves and are at the mercy of whatever crazy pants is in power?

I have no answer here. Maybe it´s because all the wars and conflicts you have been in have been abroad. Only your soldiers have seen the horrors of war firsthand where as a lot of our parents and grandparents have seen their houses bombed to hell around them, and a lot of people know stories of friends and families who have perished.

... I don´t know?


Ok ok getting a drink now :beer:

Yeah but the point I was making was that if I showed up at a Euro townhall meeting and I wasn\'t doing anything and happened to be wearing a firearm, I would be arrested. And whomever was at the assembly would be reliant on the MPs to show up to protect them in the unlikely event of me going berserk or whatever. That is living in fear to me.

Which ties into behaving like an adult, behaving responsibly with the weapon and handling it with care. The reaction of the imagined MPs would be based on the assumption that I would be planning on acting in a crazy way, and not allowing me to be innocent until guilty. If I meet some random person on the street, within reason I give them a benefit of the doubt that they aren\'t going to all of a sudden reach over to strangle me. By the same logic why would I all of a sudden go nuts and shoot someone without thinking about any of the consequences to them or myself?


(quoting you again from above)
\"Only your soldiers have seen the horrors of war firsthand where as a lot of our parents and grandparents have seen their houses bombed to hell around them, and a lot of people know stories of friends and families who have perished.\"

Our soldiers are family and friends also, and many have perished that were close to us. Both of my grandparents on both sides were involved as nurses and servicemen. I agree we have not had an on the soil battle destruction of property, but we were certainly not left unaffected.

 

[Niall]

Originally posted by Minicreatures
Yeah but the point I was making was that if I showed up at a Euro townhall meeting and I wasn\'t doing anything and happened to be wearing a firearm, I would be arrested. And whomever was at the assembly would be reliant on the MPs to show up to protect them in the unlikely event of me going berserk or whatever. That is living in fear to me.

It isn\'t living in fear, I don\'t go out my house worrying about some nut job carrying a gun. I don\'t need to have defensive measures to go about my daily life. In the UK the police force wear stab proof vests not flak jackets because the fear of firearms just isn\'t there. If there is a situation where guns are involved - London im looking at you! - then the armed response police will jump in. We don\'t need a vigilante service to do the police role.

You see in my country if a guy walks out his house with a knife or gun then we know he is looking for trouble because there is no logical reason for a deadly weapon to be carried in public

 

[Farin]

@Minicreatures:

As for Germany: You would cause a mass panic , since most people would think of you as a homicidal maniac, many would be scarred to death and you would be charged, depending on what weapon we are talking about not only with wearing a weapon in public ( which by itself is a major crime ) but maybe even for violation of the law against ownership of heavy weapons ( which means assault weapons , grenades, weapons clearly designed for armed forces ), so in the end we´re looking at several years in a german prison.

And trust me this has nothing to do with some kind of mental brickwall from my side - if i were even more open minded, my brain would fall out of my headlol - most people from germany would at this point , just for actually considering this, call you an incurable gunnut who should stay on his side of the pond.

Also it is not living in fear - Again this has to do with culture and history on both sides of the atlantic - you see weapons as tools and think people using a weapon are responsible adults with the skills and moral values only to use them as a mean of selfdefense and a kind of \"anti - tyrany insurance \".

In germany when i see someone who is not a police officer , soldier, ect. with a gun i have ,from the sum of my experience, to assume that he/she is either

- a criminal
- some Maniac on a killing spree
- a Nazi looking for somone not white or facist to harm or kill. If you think that wil never happen -a girl from my school class once faced a loaded gun from a Nazi.

We simply don´t have a second amendment ( or a similar right ) and therefore don´t see arms as an expresion of personal freedom - that´s really it

America was also involved in the world wars. Have we not seen what happens when citizens can\'t defend themselves and are at the mercy of whatever crazy pants is in power?

Who said they couldn´t defend themselve ? Let´s take Germany as an example:

Why do you think Germany in teh 1930 aqnd early 30´s was called \"Weimar Republic\" ? Because Berlin , even so it was the capital, was too dangerous for the goverment, so they were in Weimar. In Berlin Democrats, Communists and Fasicts where figthing each other, Gunfights , barricades, ambushes , the whole nine yards - Germany at this point was very close to civil war. And Hilter wasn´t given the power, nor could he simply waltz in and take it - he took it by force. At no point of the whole nightmare where Hilter and the other Nazis unopposed . They were fought on and off the streets by parts of the population - still the outcome was the same , because the pievotal factor was not the number of firearms

Or take Spain, the civil war against Franco - the republicans fought long and hard against the fascists , and with the support of a majority of the people AND international volunteers from all over the globe, still they lost, because of other factors (the support for franco through the Nazis, the internal struggles between the republican leaders....)

Sorry but you americans were the only ones who could win their freedom and independence by force - and that colors your view on the topic even today - I don´t mean that as an offense, it´s just something unique about you i accept

 

[skeeve]

I am sorry but equating caring a gun with \"adult responsible behavior\" is, in my book, the best illustration of American infantilism. You know... two five year old playing sand... -My father will kick your father ass... -NO, MY father will kick you father ass... and so on.

If you want to carry a gun go ahead, please do. You could be even arrogant enough to think that this act makes you anything but just a person with a gun.

An adult (as opposed to a teenager) usually had some idea what is appropriate in a specific context and what is not and also can predict potential consequences. Bringing gun into a politically charged meeting is simply irresponsible, demonstrates lack of judgment and has no other goal but to attract attention. All are very typical traits of an angry teenager.

 

[Minicreatures]

Originally posted by skeeve
I am sorry but equating caring a gun with \"adult responsible behavior\" is, in my book, the best illustration of American infantilism. You know... two five year old playing sand... -My father will kick your father ass... -NO, MY father will kick you father ass... and so on.

If you want to carry a gun go ahead, please do. You could be even arrogant enough to think that this act makes you anything but just a person with a gun.

An adult (as opposed to a teenager) usually had some idea what is appropriate in a specific context and what is not and also can predict potential consequences. Bringing gun into a politically charged meeting is simply irresponsible, demonstrates lack of judgment and has no other goal but to attract attention. All are very typical traits of an angry teenager.

Somehow I don\'t think the people at the townhall meeting were discussing their respective fathers\' rears... unless it was in medical terms.

Bringing a gun (legally) in a state that allows it as the norm to a political debate, does attract attention I suppose and it could be viewed as an attention ploy. It could be making a subtle statement sure. It could serve as a reminder of individual rights even. Something that would tie into the health care reform issue and how it\'s structured. However I don\'t see at all how it is irresponsible, or the acts of angry teenagers.

I think it\'s more disturbing (as I said earlier) that the President was admonishing the people for something that is already covered under law, and was not up for debate at the meeting.

 

[Shawn R. L.]

Originally posted by evil tendencies
If some people in government are nervous about legal, restrained and polite gun owners openly practicing their rights, I have to ask why. To the best of my knowledge, these aren\'t extreme right Aryans or anything similar - these are common people who just want their voice to be heard. The only intimidation they offer is the same admonishment that our Declaration of Independence makes to all of our leaders: respect the people or else.

If this administration is scared of people\'s reaction to policy changes, then these gun owners should be thanked for keeping the spirit of our independence alive.

:beer:

 

[airhead]

Originally posted by Niall
...I am sure that I heard that \'right to bear arms\' was only created when the American settlers wanted to create their own nation, so they needed a fast militia to hold off the British troops. It was never intended to last forever

Then you heard wrong.

That amendment was #2, only behind #1 Freedom of Speech. It was placed there for a reason; so that the government knew it\'s place.

****

Originally posted by Farin
...still i believe in restricting gun ownership. Of cause , If someone has the necessary licence / permit and therefor proven that he is a responsible citizen AND has a reason for owning firearms other than some strange conspiracy theory, like say hunting , than he has any right to have one - i just don´t think it should be possibly to have such an easy access to automatic fire arms and assault weapons as in some States of the US.

We don\'t have to have a reason to own guns. Hunting is not mentioned in the second amendment.

As to automatic weapons (an assault weapon is full auto by definition, contrary to what the press and Brady crowd would have you believe), they are not easy to come by, you have to go through a very thorough screening by the BATFE and pay a hefty premium (yearly) to own one.

****

The funniest part of this whole thread is the number of people from other countries that feel the need to tell citizens of the U.S. how our health care should be formed and how our gun laws ought to be changed. Don\'t get me wrong, I don\'t mind looking at alternatives, but our system has worked for 100 years and all of a sudden this power monger says we have to change it \"right now\" or it will fall apart. Hell, it took him 6 months to pick a \"first dog.\" Shouldn\'t we take more than 2 weeks to look over a massive society changing bill before we vote on it?

***

 

[BPI]

Greetings all, I\'ve found this thread really interesting & it\'s great that it hasn\'t descended into name calling. Many interesting points but the biggy for me is the reminder to try & view things from a local context. To my UK eye, wearing a handgun strapped to your thigh at any time in public is a provocative action (illegal here) but of course completely different in a country/state where such things are the norm. I particularly like the reminder that if it was concealed he\'d be breaking the law (need a special permit), so wearing it in a highly visible position isn\'t being provocative, it\'s being a responsible law-abiding citizen. I\'ve just not lived in a country where the person in front of me in the supermarket checkout has a gun on their belt but it hasn\'t taken long for me to get used to people walking down the street talking to themselves (hands-free phone) when only a few years ago I\'d have wondered if they were out on day release lol I wonder how long I\'d have to live there before I stopped noticing? (6-8 weeks to form new habitual behaviour so probably a similar thing).

Thanks all for the food for thought, always good to have my lazy default view spoon fed by the media challenged. B.

 

[slah]

Originally posted by airhead

Originally posted by Niall
...I am sure that I heard that \'right to bear arms\' was only created when the American settlers wanted to create their own nation, so they needed a fast militia to hold off the British troops. It was never intended to last forever

Then you heard wrong.

That amendment was #2, only behind #1 Freedom of Speech. It was placed there for a reason; so that the government knew it\'s place.

the reason it placed in the constitution all those years ago is for all intents and purposes completely irrelevant. Every law should be viewed on it´s merits based on the society as it is right now. No people could have predicted todays society back when the constitution was written, so reasons stated at that time are void and without meaning (at least in my opinion). Following this, and the fact that armed uprising against the state is not a realistic option in todays America (again - in my opinion) there really is no valid reason for such easy access to guns.

****

Originally posted by Farin
...still i believe in restricting gun ownership. Of cause , If someone has the necessary licence / permit and therefor proven that he is a responsible citizen AND has a reason for owning firearms other than some strange conspiracy theory, like say hunting , than he has any right to have one - i just don´t think it should be possibly to have such an easy access to automatic fire arms and assault weapons as in some States of the US.

We don\'t have to have a reason to own guns. Hunting is not mentioned in the second amendment.

As to automatic weapons (an assault weapon is full auto by definition, contrary to what the press and Brady crowd would have you believe), they are not easy to come by, you have to go through a very thorough screening by the BATFE and pay a hefty premium (yearly) to own one.

****

The funniest part of this whole thread is the number of people from other countries that feel the need to tell citizens of the U.S. how our health care should be formed and how our gun laws ought to be changed. Don\'t get me wrong, I don\'t mind looking at alternatives, but our system has worked for 100 years and all of a sudden this power monger says we have to change it \"right now\" or it will fall apart. Hell, it took him 6 months to pick a \"first dog.\" Shouldn\'t we take more than 2 weeks to look over a massive society changing bill before we vote on it?


I´ll admit that I have no idea of the inner workings of proposed health care changes in America, and as such have no idea whether or not it is a good idea.I do agree with you that if it really is a MASSIVE reconfiguring of the current system there should be time to look it over closely before voting on it.

However just because I´m a foreigner I do have an opinion on whether or not people owning guns are a good idea or not.
***

That´s too easy. Put strung out crackhead armed with a loaded handgun instead of rapist and a sign that says \"how do you like our gun-control laws\", and check how people respond instead

 

[Amazon warrior]

Originally posted by airhead
...our system has worked for 100 years...

100 years!!?!! Gosh-golly-gee-wow! Oh, wait....