TriniTuner.com  |  Latest Event:  

Forums

Right to bear arms

this is how we do it.......

Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods

User avatar
src1983
18 pounds of Boost
Posts: 2402
Joined: February 17th, 2009, 11:09 am
Location: Somewhere

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby src1983 » March 10th, 2015, 9:44 pm

desifemlove wrote:lolol......any more regulations added in any state area has to account for the culture we does have. and a gun is a weapon designed to kill. corruption in house allocation may not be good, but nobody eh use no house or flat to kill.


But according to your statements, because of "trini mentality" we not capable of knives, rolling pins, vehicles etc.

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 15th, 2015, 3:53 pm

I see Mr Ramadar has taken a position in the middle of nothing.

Smh

desifemlove
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6964
Joined: October 19th, 2013, 12:35 am

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby desifemlove » March 15th, 2015, 6:39 pm

src1983 wrote:
desifemlove wrote:lolol......any more regulations added in any state area has to account for the culture we does have. and a gun is a weapon designed to kill. corruption in house allocation may not be good, but nobody eh use no house or flat to kill.


But according to your statements, because of "trini mentality" we not capable of knives, rolling pins, vehicles etc.


i'm sorry? dunno what rolling pins you does use, but cooking utensils aren't used nor designed to kill and maim.

User avatar
src1983
18 pounds of Boost
Posts: 2402
Joined: February 17th, 2009, 11:09 am
Location: Somewhere

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby src1983 » March 15th, 2015, 8:42 pm

desifemlove wrote:
src1983 wrote:
desifemlove wrote:lolol......any more regulations added in any state area has to account for the culture we does have. and a gun is a weapon designed to kill. corruption in house allocation may not be good, but nobody eh use no house or flat to kill.


But according to your statements, because of "trini mentality" we not capable of knives, rolling pins, vehicles etc.


i'm sorry? dunno what rolling pins you does use, but cooking utensils aren't used nor designed to kill and maim.


They aren't but the mentality of the people you described will use it for that.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10073
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby 88sins » March 15th, 2015, 9:10 pm

desifemlove wrote:i'm sorry? dunno what rolling pins you does use, but cooking utensils aren't used nor designed to kill and maim.


So what's your take on the cutlass? They were designed for that exact purpose, & they proliferate this country today. I am pretty sure over 80% of homes in T&T have at least 1 cutlass.

Using your logic, it seems odd that every Trini isn't dead or at least scarred from chop wounds :roll:
Last edited by 88sins on March 16th, 2015, 10:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 9:35 am

88 sins, if you can't see the potential attacking difference between a melee weapon and a gun then chances are you are a pretty crappy shooter and should be kept far away from guns to make sure you don't hit someone with a stray bullet while trying to hit your attacker.

So if guns and cutlasses are the same, why do yo want the right to bear arms? Bear cutlasses instead.

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 10:40 am

I think 88 point is that if we were to regulate guns on the basis of what we believe to be peoples MISUSE of the weapon then the same logic could be applied to cutlasses etc....

I understand his point.....and agree....IF the basis of the argument is the BELIEF that TnT people will abuse it then the logic holds true for many other day to day instruments.

Its a misguided basis to establish a POV. Yet it seems to make sense to many folk..

We are plagued with a system that
1) was established decades ago...and not updated
2) is not supported by decisive and consistent enforcement

Collectively we end up with what we have today...beyond the issue of Firearms ...a plethora of problems that seem insurmountable.
And systems that dont work...because they have not been enforced.

We have rules/law that govern most of what ails us as a country.
We just have not enforced many of them...or selectively enforce some.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10073
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby 88sins » March 16th, 2015, 11:00 am

Ok Smartifartblast.

Since you seem determined to speak on matters of which you have very limited experience or knowlwedge about, I have a proposal for you. If you accept & follow through with it, you might learn something.

If in your opinion trini's are allowed to legally keep melee weapons, I want you to prove your theory by attempting to conceal an unsheathed cutlass or large knife in the waist of your pants & under a t-shirt, then walk into a police station & start speaking loudly. When you do this, if you are arrested, inform the police that there is no permit needed to carry a concealed cutlass & you are well within your rights to do so. Hear what they tell you, then report back here with your findings on their interpretation of the Offensive Weapons Act after your rectum has been thoroughly wrangled during your stay at the Frederic Street Yellow wall hotel.

But before you accept or decline my request that you stand behind your idiotic utterances by actions, a little light reading material for you.

http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/laws2/al ... /11.09.pdf
http://rgd.legalaffairs.gov.tt/Laws2/Al ... /11.10.pdf


Now, go read, & don't come back until you've developed something that resembles at the very least rudimentary intelligence.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 11:04 am

That's why people aren't restricted from cutlasses... because it actually has a use. Also, he must know that comparing the misuse of a cutlass and the use of a firearm (i.e. saying they are similar) is moronic while still trying justify his want for a right to bear arms (i.e. saying that they are dissimilar). See the cognitive dissonance?

I'm all for proper regulations and a full overhaul of the current system which I fully agree is a load of bollocks that does way more harm than good. But from the second you have any sort of qualification process to attain legal firearms it becomes regulated and by definition is not a "right to bear arms"

A right to bear arms means that anyone over 18 years old with a valid form of ID can walk into gun store and walk out with a gun without and approval process. Is this what you guys are advocating?

Also, judging by the way that we treat our rules and regulations concerning rolling boxes of metal that can completely destroy multiple human beings on impact, what makes you think that we (meaning general populace, not just 88sins and frens) would treat something that is able to take one life with any more caution?

Also, what are you thoughts on the fact that increased number of households with guns is likely to lead to the increased likelihood of guns falling into the wrong hands (i.e. somebody takes their daddy's gun to school to deal with another child that stepped on his $1200 clarks)? Let's not forget how many irresponsible parents we have out here. Children can't sneak cutlasses to school and knives are melee weapons (i.e. a lot easier to outrun and fight back against, so they cannot be compared. Ever wonder why you never hear of mass school stabbings?)

All I am hearing is "criminals have guns so I want guns to".

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 11:12 am


All I am hearing is "criminals have guns so I want guns to".


Re read the thread....if thats 'ALL' you hearing then you not listening to what is being said....repeatedly.

The misuse of a cutlass is the same PRINCIPLE as the misuse of a gun.

Its the MISUSE that is the basis.Not the weapon.

If misuse is the basis of law then the logic holds true for ANY misuse.

How many instances have you heard of LEGAL guns being misused?
What were the injuries caused?

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 11:16 am

Also, what are you thoughts on the fact that increased number of households with guns is likely to lead to the increased likelihood of guns falling into the wrong hands


I feel that I should not be restricted on the basis that some one else is deficient.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 11:21 am

Slartibartfast wrote:I'm all for proper regulations and a full overhaul of the current system which I fully agree is a load of bollocks that does way more harm than good. But from the second you have any sort of qualification process to attain legal firearms it becomes regulated and by definition is not a "right to bear arms"
I am yet to see a good argument for this. You guys are talking about regulating it, which I am in full agreement with. And for 88sins "legal exercise" it might surprise you to know that not everyone (myself included) in as into being anally raped as you are. But feel free to cut through the crap (no pun intended) and state your point.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 11:24 am

Redman wrote:
Also, what are you thoughts on the fact that increased number of households with guns is likely to lead to the increased likelihood of guns falling into the wrong hands


I feel that I should not be restricted on the basis that some one else is deficient.
I fully agree with you. But how will they know who is deficient and who is not? By regulating it and have proper qualification/training. Which means it no longer becomes a "right" to bear arms as you have to fulfill certain criteria before you are allowed to do so.

Image

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 11:34 am

Slartibartfast wrote:
Redman wrote:
Also, what are you thoughts on the fact that increased number of households with guns is likely to lead to the increased likelihood of guns falling into the wrong hands


I feel that I should not be restricted on the basis that some one else is deficient.
I fully agree with you. But how will they know who is deficient and who is not? By regulating it and have proper qualification/training. Which means it no longer becomes a "right" to bear arms as you have to fulfill certain criteria before you are allowed to do so.

Image


No one has said mass ownership...and WE have advocated exactly the opposite...freedom WITH the responsibility to deserve the privilege.


The bold part would be a pg 17 post...which you agreed with.

So evidently I speak English....the challenge seems to be you reading it.

desifemlove
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6964
Joined: October 19th, 2013, 12:35 am

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby desifemlove » March 16th, 2015, 11:38 am

88sins wrote:
desifemlove wrote:i'm sorry? dunno what rolling pins you does use, but cooking utensils aren't used nor designed to kill and maim.


So what's your take on the cutlass? They were designed for that exact purpose, & they proliferate this country today. I am pretty sure over 80% of homes in T&T have at least 1 cutlass.

Using your logic, it seems odd that every Trini isn't dead or at least scarred from chop wounds :roll:


iz plants people too? i does mine to cut down branches, if you use it to kill people...well i ent telling de police yuh secret safe wit me....

desifemlove
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6964
Joined: October 19th, 2013, 12:35 am

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby desifemlove » March 16th, 2015, 11:41 am

src1983 wrote:
desifemlove wrote:
src1983 wrote:
desifemlove wrote:lolol......any more regulations added in any state area has to account for the culture we does have. and a gun is a weapon designed to kill. corruption in house allocation may not be good, but nobody eh use no house or flat to kill.


But according to your statements, because of "trini mentality" we not capable of knives, rolling pins, vehicles etc.


i'm sorry? dunno what rolling pins you does use, but cooking utensils aren't used nor designed to kill and maim.


They aren't but the mentality of the people you described will use it for that.


cos if our civil service and ting corrupt, then how would a licensing system escape that? people will pass ting under table for gun, with no background check, or give gun wit no licence to dey son, daughter, lil nephew.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 11:52 am

Redman wrote:No one has said mass ownership...and WE have advocated exactly the opposite...freedom WITH the responsibility to deserve the privilege.


The bold part would be a pg 17 post...which you agreed with.

So evidently I speak English....the challenge seems to be you reading it.[/quote]
Cool so we all agree against a right to own firearms. I have no problem with letting people own a firearm after proper qualification, screening and training (i.e. it being selective). I also agree that the current "system" we have is just a farce and serves almost no purpose.

Just to be clear. I think we on the same page and we agreeing with each other. What do you think?

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 12:16 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:
Redman wrote:No one has said mass ownership...and WE have advocated exactly the opposite...freedom WITH the responsibility to deserve the privilege.


The bold part would be a pg 17 post...which you agreed with.

So evidently I speak English....the challenge seems to be you reading it.

Cool so we all agree against a right to own firearms. I have no problem with letting people own a firearm after proper qualification, screening and training (i.e. it being selective). I also agree that the current "system" we have is just a farce and serves almost no purpose.

Just to be clear. I think we on the same page and we agreeing with each other. What do you think?[/quote]


I think it is semantic whether its a right or not.

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 12:21 pm

Frankly I think it is my right to be able to own a fire arm to defend myself.... if there isnt anything disqualifying me from doing so.

User avatar
Baldhead
Street 2NR
Posts: 87
Joined: February 19th, 2009, 2:51 pm
Location: Claxton Bay

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Baldhead » March 16th, 2015, 12:25 pm

Prakash..COP Leader say they should look into firearm permits and the way they are issued, in today papers...another non-election ploy...hmmm...

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 1:17 pm

Lol... aite Redman. I feel our argument really just come down to semantics now cuz it look like we agreeing.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10073
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby 88sins » March 16th, 2015, 1:32 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:A right to bear arms means that anyone over 18 years old with a valid form of ID can walk into gun store and walk out with a gun without and approval process. Is this what you guys are advocating?

I never made such a statement. You need to read the thread from the beginning again.

Slartibartfast wrote:Also, judging by the way that we treat our rules and regulations concerning rolling boxes of metal that can completely destroy multiple human beings on impact, what makes you think that we (meaning general populace, not just 88sins and frens) would treat something that is able to take one life with any more caution?

Because killing someone with a vehicle may be construed as a accident, but intentionally aiming at or in the direction of someone & then shooting someone is murder unless it can be proven that it was either self defense or accidental, either of the three earning the shooter either a brief, long or terminal prison sentence if they're dumb enough to do such.


Slartibartfast wrote:Also, what are you thoughts on the fact that increased number of households with guns is likely to lead to the increased likelihood of guns falling into the wrong hands (i.e. somebody takes their daddy's gun to school to deal with another child that stepped on his $1200 clarks)?

I ain't in the mood to type this again, so look it, do what yuh want with it
88sins wrote:I believe that a concealed carry provision related to sidearms would lead to problems very quickly, potentially that criminals would be able to access pistols a little more freely w/o a license(just steal a pistol, or buy one from some shady character willing to sell it to them). Or some unstable hothead fool that believes he's superman because he has a concealed weapon on him might be all too happy to shoot someone w/o proper cause. Or a child could hide a pistol in his bag & take it to school in a rage or to show off & we all know the possible scenarios of that. That's why I personally wouldn't recommend starting with allowing pistols or cc from the beginning. Most rifles are not as easy to hide as a pistol, unless trini's plan to start wearing trench coats & dashiki's on a regular basis in the kinda heat we get here. Too easy to hide=too easy to be misused & abused. Businessmen with a desire to protect their stores can keep a weapon concealed behind the register, or have concealed armed security if need be.

Try to figure out if that makes sense you can.

Slartibartfast wrote:Let's not forget how many irresponsible parents we have out here.

Parents can be held accountable for their child's actions if their negligence assisted/enabled said actions. Thus motivating parents to be more responsible, both for their offspring, & their firearm.

Slartibartfast wrote:Children can't sneak cutlasses to school
they can't sneak a full length .410 shot gun into school either, thus your point is moot

Slartibartfast wrote:and knives are melee weapons (i.e. a lot easier to outrun and fight back against, so they cannot be compared.

If you think so, I won't debate that with you. But keep these tidbits the back of your mind.
The most dangerous weapon against an individual is the one they cannot see coming.
A knife with a 2" blade will kill a man just as dead as a cutlass with a 20" blade, particularly if the wielder knows how & where to use it.

Slartibartfast wrote:Ever wonder why you never hear of mass school stabbings?)

Had a rash of them a while ago, seems to have died down thank God. I neither know or care where you were when they were occurring.



Slartibartfast wrote:All I am hearing is "criminals have guns so I want guns to".


Best I could tell you is yuh should buy Q-tips & ear drops wholesale. Your hearing seems defective.

Redman
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10430
Joined: August 19th, 2004, 2:48 pm

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Redman » March 16th, 2015, 1:46 pm

Well now that we know where we agree....here is where we might differ.

The assessment of the maturity of the population is made in a environment that lacks regulatory enforcement.

Yet we have the ability to conform to regulation when it is enforced.
Eg when in in the US..

And many of us self regulate...do you consider yourself to be too immature to own a fire arm??

Our 'maturity' is conveniently judged against those societies where there is a culture of enforcement....without the opportunity to adapt...we are penalized for something we have no control over.

So I disagree with the acceptance of our lack of maturity as a reason NOT to do anything.

All humans will do as much as they get away with.

User avatar
src1983
18 pounds of Boost
Posts: 2402
Joined: February 17th, 2009, 11:09 am
Location: Somewhere

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby src1983 » March 16th, 2015, 2:25 pm

desifemlove wrote:
src1983 wrote:
desifemlove wrote:
src1983 wrote:
desifemlove wrote:lolol......any more regulations added in any state area has to account for the culture we does have. and a gun is a weapon designed to kill. corruption in house allocation may not be good, but nobody eh use no house or flat to kill.


But according to your statements, because of "trini mentality" we not capable of knives, rolling pins, vehicles etc.


i'm sorry? dunno what rolling pins you does use, but cooking utensils aren't used nor designed to kill and maim.


They aren't but the mentality of the people you described will use it for that.


cos if our civil service and ting corrupt, then how would a licensing system escape that? people will pass ting under table for gun, with no background check, or give gun wit no licence to dey son, daughter, lil nephew.


This does not prove that people are incapable of having weapons, but proves that some in society are corrupt.

Because some people are corrupt, doesn't mean people don't need guns. What should be done is like I mentioned before, a fool proof system be implemented which is simple to do.

People should not be oppressed just because of corruption.

Using your logic because LO is corrupt, we should stop issuing licenses because of road deaths.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 2:46 pm

I'll meet you halfway on that one redman. But I'll stick to my original point that just giving everyone a right to own arms with the way things are doesn't make sense. If you want proper qualification, screening, training and enforcement before someone is allowed to own firearm then I'm all for that.

88sins wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:A right to bear arms means that anyone over 18 years old with a valid form of ID can walk into gun store and walk out with a gun without and approval process. Is this what you guys are advocating?

I never made such a statement. You need to read the thread from the beginning again.
You are a special kind of stupid aren't you. Look again at the title of he thread. Now read up on how native english speakers use the work "right" in this context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights

Slartibartfast wrote:Also, judging by the way that we treat our rules and regulations concerning rolling boxes of metal that can completely destroy multiple human beings on impact, what makes you think that we (meaning general populace, not just 88sins and frens) would treat something that is able to take one life with any more caution?

Because killing someone with a vehicle may be construed as a accident, but intentionally aiming at or in the direction of someone & then shooting someone is murder unless it can be proven that it was either self defense or accidental, either of the three earning the shooter either a brief, long or terminal prison sentence if they're dumb enough to do such. At the end of the day, the punishing someone for an accidental killing does not bring the person back. I am more concerned about prevention and was highlighting the irresponsibility that is clearly already evident in out society.


Slartibartfast wrote:Also, what are you thoughts on the fact that increased number of households with guns is likely to lead to the increased likelihood of guns falling into the wrong hands (i.e. somebody takes their daddy's gun to school to deal with another child that stepped on his $1200 clarks)?

I ain't in the mood to type this again, so look it, do what yuh want with it
88sins wrote:I believe that a concealed carry provision related to sidearms would lead to problems very quickly, potentially that criminals would be able to access pistols a little more freely w/o a license(just steal a pistol, or buy one from some shady character willing to sell it to them). Or some unstable hothead fool that believes he's superman because he has a concealed weapon on him might be all too happy to shoot someone w/o proper cause. Or a child could hide a pistol in his bag & take it to school in a rage or to show off & we all know the possible scenarios of that. That's why I personally wouldn't recommend starting with allowing pistols or cc from the beginning. Most rifles are not as easy to hide as a pistol, unless trini's plan to start wearing trench coats & dashiki's on a regular basis in the kinda heat we get here. Too easy to hide=too easy to be misused & abused. Businessmen with a desire to protect their stores can keep a weapon concealed behind the register, or have concealed armed security if need be.

Try to figure out if that makes sense you can. Lol... I didn't say this

Slartibartfast wrote:Let's not forget how many irresponsible parents we have out here.

Parents can be held accountable for their child's actions if their negligence assisted/enabled said actions. Thus motivating parents to be more responsible, both for their offspring, & their firearm.Still.... a life lost is still a life lost. I am more concerned about prevention than the aftermath.

Slartibartfast wrote:Children can't sneak cutlasses to school
they can't sneak a full length .410 shot gun into school either, thus your point is moot You need to learn to argue better. They can sneak a 9mm pistol in their bookbag. Did you know a 9mm pistol can also be lethal?

Slartibartfast wrote:and knives are melee weapons (i.e. a lot easier to outrun and fight back against, so they cannot be compared.

If you think so, I won't debate that with you. But keep these tidbits the back of your mind.
The most dangerous weapon against an individual is the one they cannot see coming.
A knife with a 2" blade will kill a man just as dead as a cutlass with a 20" blade, particularly if the wielder knows how & where to use it. Actually I would argue that a knife is a lot more dangerous because it is easier to wield than a cutlass. The thing with a knife is that the attacker has to be close to the victim. So at least the victim has a chance to fight back. An assailant could point and shoot from 5 feet away and kill their target. Unless their target is Yao Ming then the assailant would be out of reach of the victim and the victim would therefore be defenseless.

Slartibartfast wrote:Ever wonder why you never hear of mass school stabbings?)

Had a rash of them a while ago, seems to have died down thank God. I neither know or care where you were when they were occurring. Link to articles please. It seems a lot easier to run from a guy with a knife than a guy spraying bullets.



Slartibartfast wrote:All I am hearing is "criminals have guns so I want guns to".


Best I could tell you is yuh should buy Q-tips & ear drops wholesale. Your hearing seems defective.... uh... ok...

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10073
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby 88sins » March 16th, 2015, 3:37 pm

After all that bs, you still have neither accepted nor declined my proposal that you prove your theory. You have however proven that you are as intelligent as a bucket of pig scat.

That being said, your opinions are rife with idiocy, & I personally have neither the time nor the desire to aid you in your efforts to display to the entire global population exactly how stupid you really are or would like to be.

User avatar
Slartibartfast
punchin NOS
Posts: 4646
Joined: May 15th, 2012, 4:24 pm
Location: Magrathea

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby Slartibartfast » March 16th, 2015, 4:13 pm

ok...

rspann
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 11167
Joined: June 25th, 2010, 10:23 pm
Location: Trinituner 24/7

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby rspann » March 16th, 2015, 6:29 pm

88, in the wtf thread,you said the woman would come up missing the same day if it was your yute. Do you think that is the right temperament for an applicant for a firearm license? Alot of people cannot control their temper and would use a firearm for the slightest reason, that is what makes it hard for the ones who really qualify. There are licenses given out still, so it's not like there is a ban or anything.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10073
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby 88sins » March 16th, 2015, 8:18 pm

rspann wrote:88, in the wtf thread,you said the woman would come up missing the same day if it was your yute. Do you think that is the right temperament for an applicant for a firearm license? Alot of people cannot control their temper and would use a firearm for the slightest reason, that is what makes it hard for the ones who really qualify. There are licenses given out still, so it's not like there is a ban or anything.


no need for a gun to make someone come up missin son.
all about waitin on timin & recognizin opportunities when they present themselves & being to act upn them prepared when they do

as to temper, I doh wast my time gettin vex pallie. gettin vex causes grey hair, wrinkles, elevated bp & heart rate, headaches & a myriad of other not so nice issues.
instead of gettin vex, i usually either get away from the annoyance, get justice, or get even.
who don't like it that's fine, yuh dont have to. but that is just d way it is, cuz daiz d way it is.


now allyuh doh get me wrong eh I do advocate for firearm ownership & responsibility. But I personally I have a fond preference for knives.

rspann
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 11167
Joined: June 25th, 2010, 10:23 pm
Location: Trinituner 24/7

Re: Right to bear arms

Postby rspann » March 16th, 2015, 8:46 pm

I hear you, but personally,I don't like knife and cutlass as a defence option,you have to go in too close and when is more than one, a sig p 226 does even the odds.

Advertisement

Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 115 guests