Wal-Mart to stop selling assault rifles!

rt3 said:
some folks here don't believe an armed society is an polite society.
Click to expand...

Polite is, as polite does. There are societies armed with other than firearms, and they may be no less polite; that I cannot say for certain. imp
 

Shalimar said:
IMO, Imp, we shall have to politely disagree. I come from a different culture where gun ownership is not considered a constitutional right. Most Canadians are not armed, and prefer it that way. We are not an armed society, but everyone knows Canadians are polite! Lol.
Click to expand...

Many of us here in this country don't believe gun ownership to be a constitutional right either... unless of course you are a member of a well regulated militia.. SO.. I will politely disagree also..
 
Shalimar said:
IMO, Imp, we shall have to politely disagree. I come from a different culture where gun ownership is not considered a constitutional right. Most Canadians are not armed, and prefer it that way. We are not an armed society, but everyone knows Canadians are polite! Lol.
Click to expand...

Yes, indeed! My own belief has always been, and still is, that there will NEVER be a society devoid of all firearms; it just cannot happen. Just as with any other "banned" item, there will always be certain numbers of clandestinely possessed firearms. As Hitler's troops went door-to-door confiscating arms, surely many remained in hiding places, intentionally. Then, the Fuehrer declared that for the first time in written history, a nation could live in safety! Thence, the War commenced.

And, law enforcement as well as military forces, will always possess firearms. And, every so often, an individual so trustingly allowed exception, will invoke havoc, using Agency-issued "firepower", just as every so often, does an armed citizen so turn criminal. imp
 

QuickSilver said:
Many of us here in this country don't believe gun ownership to be a constitutional right either... unless of course you are a member of a well regulated militia.. SO.. I will politely disagree also..
Click to expand...

Please be aware, I really do try to "feel" the feeling of others opposed to private firearms ownership. I can see that such feeling must be due to fear, if not entirely, then at least in part. What I cannot see, is exactly why there is no fear of the presence of any number of other potentially lethal tools. I have wondered about this for a lifetime. imp
 
imp said:
As Hitler's troops went door-to-door confiscating arms, surely many remained in hiding places, intentionally. Then, the Fuehrer declared that for the first time in written history, a nation could live in safety! Thence, the War commenced.
Click to expand...

Really? I never heard of this before. Can you cite an actual historian on this point or did you read it in an NRA publication?
 
Dame Warrigal said:
Really? I never heard of this before. Can you cite an actual historian on this point or did you read it in an NRA publication?
Click to expand...

Really a bad thing to do by using NRA in a spite note. NRA is not a hateful group at all. Just trying to defend the laws and lifestyles that have been around for hundreds of years. The Germans did a lot of stuff that ignored personal privacy. Would not be surprised if it is actually true.

Do you also hate the Swiss for their open gun ownership rules and lifestyles?
 
BobF said:
Really a bad thing to do by using NRA in a spite note. NRA is not a hateful group at all. Just trying to defend the laws and lifestyles that have been around for hundreds of years. The Germans did a lot of stuff that ignored personal privacy. Would not be surprised if it is actually true.

Do you also hate the Swiss for their open gun ownership rules and lifestyles?
Click to expand...

Spite note? Hateful group? I've been verballed.
My point is that they are not exactly objective in their publications.
Real historians are more likely to give a balanced account.
 
Shalimar said:
Disagreement is not the same as hatred, nor is it spiteful. It is part of discourse. If we all continuously preached to the choir, conversation would die of boredom. Lol.
Click to expand...

You haven't gotten the memo... A certain group can disagree and state their viewpoints and it's "debate" and "conversation"... while another group, doing the very same this is being hateful, and foolish as well as guilty of personal attacks.. It's just the way it goes...
 
QS, if that is indeed the case and some of us are relegated to "voices crying out in the wilderness," we shall need to make ourselves heard, politely and persistently, of course. Isn't that what free speech truly stands for in a "free society?"
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top