protesters bring firearms to town hall meetings

[Wendy]

Originally posted by DrEvilmonki
nobs = bollocks (must be localised slang)

Also why are we debating if government can run healthcare better - the health care reform is talking about a public INSURANCE option. The government will not be running the healthcare system, they are not taking away peoples private insurance.

I would have at least some respect for those expressing their so called democratic right if they weren\'t blatantly lying about what was being proposed.

If there is a gov\'t option and a private option, the gov\'t will out compete the private option because of (apparently) limitless public money available. Private industry cannot compete against gov\'t because the gov\'t makes the rules. The current system is already rife with gov\'t enforced regulations and restrictions as it is. Private insurance will be run out of business.

The entity paying the bills is the one that runs healthcare.

 

[the Infadel]

do you guys realize that this was a staged event?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/18/right-wing-radio-host-sta_n_262559.html

 

[Wendy]

With regards to gun ownership, first, 99.9999% are very responsible people fully aware of the consequences for pulling the trigger. They take gun safety classes. They take responsibility for the safety of themselves and their family. As someone posted earlier, there are many instances where the police will arrive too late to make a difference. Not only that, courts have determined that the police are not responsible to protect anyone. Their role is to clean up the mess and attempt to prosecute criminals. In addition, remember that crimes prevented by guns don\'t make the news.

States with conceal carry permits have lower violent crime rates than states that do not allow carrying because criminals risk that their potential victim will be able to protect themselves. Besides, is it realistic to think that a criminal cares at all about gun laws? That they are perfectly willing to break other laws but not gun laws?

It\'s not like some spaghetti western with shootouts everywhere...

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by Wendy

Originally posted by DrEvilmonki
nobs = bollocks (must be localised slang)

Also why are we debating if government can run healthcare better - the health care reform is talking about a public INSURANCE option. The government will not be running the healthcare system, they are not taking away peoples private insurance.

I would have at least some respect for those expressing their so called democratic right if they weren\'t blatantly lying about what was being proposed.

If there is a gov\'t option and a private option, the gov\'t will out compete the private option because of (apparently) limitless public money available. Private industry cannot compete against gov\'t because the gov\'t makes the rules. The current system is already rife with gov\'t enforced regulations and restrictions as it is. Private insurance will be run out of business.

The entity paying the bills is the one that runs healthcare.

That just isn\'t backed up by reality. There are plenty of situations where both government and private industries compete in the same field. Education for example.

Even in countries with fully nationalized health services there are private insurance companies and private hospitals.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Originally posted by Wendy
With regards to gun ownership, first, 99.9999% are very responsible people fully aware of the consequences for pulling the trigger.

That may be true (personally I doubt that the number is that high - but I would give you 80-90%) BUT I don\'t think someone turning up to a rally about health care with an undoubted view to be provocative falls into the catergory of a responsible gun owner.

Remember this is a guy who was standing in a crowd with signs not only calling for the death of Obama but for Michelle and \"his two dumb daughters\"

 

[skeeve]

THe fact that you have rights to do do something doesn\'t mean that this right has to be exercised at all circumstances.

You have a right to wear a swim suite. Will you , say, discharge you jury duty while wearing one? Unlikely, simply because you waste substantial portion of you time discussing why you wear swim suite in a court room and depending on a judge you might even find yourself in contempt.

There is such thing as common sense. People who decide to bring an assault weapon at any event, let alone an even with a head of state (any head of state) in attendance display complete lack of it.

Btw, in case you don\'t know any venue protected by the secret service attains federal status for the time of protected period. Since open carry will not be allowed at the federal territory these people will not be allowed inside the town hall. So, whether this whole thing was staged or not it is very obvious that these people did not come there to discuss health care but rather to attract attention to themselves. IN that they certainly succeeded

As for gun control and gun-related violence. there is very little correaltion between mere number of guns in population and gun-related violence. Demography, economy and culture plays much more prominent role. Blind comparision is almost always misleading in not pointless.

 

[hestan101]

i personnaly agree whole heartedly with the statement \"people shouldnt be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people\", however, i dont mean that in the sense of physical intimidation, but i suppose in a society where the right to bear of arms was one of the founding corner stones, some ones going to try it. im not saying its right, but give a whole country of people guns, and you\'re going to have a few incidents. if an argument of a father and son deciding how to cook a chicken can develope into a fight with 9mml hand guns, some one\'s going to get hurt. i am NOT saying that you cant walk down a street in America without dving for cover from a 50 cal. shell, and as has been said, 80-90% of people are responsible. That said theres going to be one fool who isnt, and when he does use that right for uses other than it was intended for, at a public event, chances are a person\'s going to die. almost certainly him, but theres a tiny chance it might not be, and then, because of one idiot a whole society is judged as unstable guntoting maniacs.

 

[airhead]

Of licenced concealed carry weapon permit holders, only 0.02% ever lose their licence due to felony convictions.

That sounds to me like there is a pretty good correlation between legal concealed carry people and law abiding citizens.

****

Special interest groups (we\'ve got them out our ears...)
One of the prominent gun ones is OpenCarry. Their premise is that due to the second amendment we should all be allowed to open carry a sidearm (as is legal in a very few states). They remind me of the Libertarians, they have the right idea, but they seem to lack in the how to publicize it properly department. Anyone want to be that the guy at the AZ meeting was a member of OpenCarry?

****

Anyone notice that MSM News has completely covered up the fact that the guy is black? (Not that it matters to me one way or the other.) They have only shown him from the waste down and have referred to him as a white male in the article.

 

[o johnny boy]

Just wishing to toss in my two cents on a pleasantly intelligent debate (mind you, its 3:36 am at the time of this posting).

The way I view the constitution (in particular the bill of rights) is as a contract between the ruling body and its people; the people are guaranteed a set of rights, services, and protections in return for their tax dollars. From this perspective the second amendment can be viewed as an enforcement clause. With this in mind, any attempts to deprive the people of this right, or any other right guaranteed in the constitution as breech of contract.

And on a side note, has it occurred to anyone that this event was almost too good to be true for the democratic party? That this guy did everything short of scream \"I\'m a plant! Look at me!\" It would not be the first time this president has tried throwing up a smokescreen to bye himself time.

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Sure and 9/11 was all bush/cheney flying the planes by remote.

 

[philologus]

How I love CMON. A never-ending stream of Europeans explaining how much better the US could run and how much more sophisticated they are. I don\'t get on here and cry about matters in any one else\'s country. I work for one of the world\'s largest pharmaceutical companies. If the US goes with the current proposed House plan then Canada, the UK, France et al. will be in deep shit. US citizens with private insurance are subsidizing the low-cost drugs/medical appliances that socialized systems enjoy. Without profit margins there is no R&D. When we get \"free\" healthcare in the US who\'s gonna subsidize the cost for the world?

How do I know my govt. will F*&^-UP healthcare?
1. All our politicians are lawyers, the very profession that has screwed it up to begin with.
2. I am a military veteran, as is every male in my family going back 100 years. None of us will use our \"free\" VA benefits, because those hospitals are frightening.
3. Govt. has failed to run anything well. Witness our flawless switch to digital television, Medicare, Cash for Clunkers, regulating gas prices in the 70\'s. etc....

 

[DrEvilmonki]

Wow most ignorent post to date. How about the endless stream of Americans telling everyone how the sun shines out your heavily armed arses.

This is a public forum and if I am not very much mistaken the member who started this conversation was an American.

Of course it isn\'t to surprising you don\'t comment about other countries politics, the US is the only country that matters, right?

And of course the pharma companies don\'t make ANY profit outside US borders, get real.

 

[Evil Dave]

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Health care, insurance, and bailouts, for that matter, are not listed as Federal powers, therefore, must fall to the states or to the people.
If the people want health care, then by all means, amend the constitution so that it is a federal power.

Do I believe health care needs reform? Yep.
Do I believe this congress, or either party is competent enough to carry it out properly? Nope.

Most times doing something merely because \"something must be done\" has far worse consequences than waiting for the right way to do it, and doing it well.

Amend the constitution and you have to bring in state legislatures slowing down the process and making doubly sure that this is what the people want.

I predict that there is no way in hell this will happen.

Bringing guns to a rally? Who\'s intimidated by a rifle strapped to a man\'s back?

 

[Evil Dave]

Originally posted by o johnny boy
Just wishing to toss in my two cents on a pleasantly intelligent debate (mind you, its 3:36 am at the time of this posting).

The way I view the constitution (in particular the bill of rights) is as a contract between the ruling body and its people; the people are guaranteed a set of rights, services, and protections in return for their tax dollars. From this perspective the second amendment can be viewed as an enforcement clause. With this in mind, any attempts to deprive the people of this right, or any other right guaranteed in the constitution as breech of contract.

Close, but no.
The Constitution actually gives you no rights whatsoever, it does, however, say that these rights are \"God given\" (however you want to interpret that). The government does not give them to you and the government has no right/authority to take them away.

The Constitution is merely the government\'s rules and a clear definition of the federal government\'s scope of power/responsibility.
All other powers/rights/responsibilities that come into being after the Constitution was written automatically fall to the people or the states via amendments 9 and 10.

The only way for the federal government to legally gain new powers/rights/responsibilities is to amend the constitution, which in turn, must be supported by 75% of the states.

Of course, neither party has been following the rules since FDR. ( or perhaps even the US Civil War.)

 

[slah]

Originally posted by philologus
How I love CMON. A never-ending stream of Europeans explaining how much better the US could run and how much more sophisticated they are. I don\'t get on here and cry about matters in any one else\'s country. I work for one of the world\'s largest pharmaceutical companies. If the US goes with the current proposed House plan then Canada, the UK, France et al. will be in deep shit. US citizens with private insurance are subsidizing the low-cost drugs/medical appliances that socialized systems enjoy. Without profit margins there is no R&D. When we get \"free\" healthcare in the US who\'s gonna subsidize the cost for the world?

How do I know my govt. will F*&^-UP healthcare?
1. All our politicians are lawyers, the very profession that has screwed it up to begin with.
2. I am a military veteran, as is every male in my family going back 100 years. None of us will use our \"free\" VA benefits, because those hospitals are frightening.
3. Govt. has failed to run anything well. Witness our flawless switch to digital television, Medicare, Cash for Clunkers, regulating gas prices in the 70\'s. etc....

I might not agree with Airhead, Evil Dave and the other trigger happy americans (joking joking!) on many issues, but at least I respect their opinions because they back up what they say with cogent arguments and keep a civil tone.....

 

[airhead]

Originally posted by slah
I might not agree with Airhead, Evil Dave and the other trigger happy americans (joking joking!) on many issues, but at least I respect their opinions because they back up what they say with cogent arguments and keep a civil tone.....

Thank you, that is the nicest thing anyone has said to me all week.

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by DrEvilmonki
Wow most ignorent post to date.

Not likely. There\'s some real good ones on this board.

How about the endless stream of Americans telling everyone how the sun shines out your heavily armed arses.

This is a public forum and if I am not very much mistaken the member who started this conversation was an American.

I\'m well aware of that, but you\'ve been on here long enough to have seen all the same hundreds of threads on gun control on this site, and the non-americans are always quick to pipe up with their opinions. The conversation always steers toward how barbaric we are for actually owning firearms. It gets more than a bit old.

Of course it isn\'t to surprising you don\'t comment about other countries politics, the US is the only country that matters, right?

Apparently, as the non-yanks never get tired of chiming in and castigating us.


And of course the pharma companies don\'t make ANY profit outside US borders, get real.
They make very little profit, when govt.\'s with socilaized systems set price points very low, we aren\'t going to turn down any business. The point was, the difference is offset by the much higher prices set on the same products in the US.

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by cole-slah

My feelings got hurt....

Look snowflake, the only ire I had in that post was for my own dumbass govt. I didn\'t say anything negatiove about non-Americans, only that I was tired of the same rhetoric after 200 gun control threads.

 

[alextheartist]

Originally posted by philologus

Originally posted by cole-slah

My feelings got hurt....

Look snowflake, the only ire I had in that post was for my own dumbass govt. I didn\'t say anything negatiove about non-Americans, only that I was tired of the same rhetoric after 200 gun control threads.

Just beacuse you have seen 200 posts about the same thing doesnt mean that everyone else is.. Ive been on cmon a year (edit: two years.. time goes quick) and there have been possibly two threads in that time...

Anyway, everythread is differnent. This particular one is about bringing guns to a council meeting. And discussing that..


And not bashing non americans.. doesnt look like that to me...

And calling someone \"snowflake\", now if that isnt patronising I don\'t know what is...

 

[philologus]

Originally posted by alextheartist


And calling someone \"snowflake\", now if that isnt patronising I don\'t know what is...

It was intended this time. Cole-Slah nipped at my ankles the last time I posted here.