hornadylnl
Shooter
- Nov 19, 2008
- 21,505
- 63
INGOers love their public ranges.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
"Feeding the children during the shutdown"
- Thread starter traderdan
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
INGOers love their public ranges.
steveh_131
Grandmaster
You won't bother, because you've already lost this debate. It really wasn't even fair.
Bogan...really? You have consumed far too much of that flavor of kool aid. We don't
like that flavor here. There are few here that would not help someone TRUELY in need. When we are forced to support the lazy....then we get torqued.
like that flavor here. There are few here that would not help someone TRUELY in need. When we are forced to support the lazy....then we get torqued.
The problem never was with helping the needy.
The problem is that if it is done privately or at the local level, the people giving the aid know the recipients. They know who is truly needy and who is "working the system." In that situation, they can and do refuse help to those who could take care of themselves and don't.
This is unpopular because, to buy votes with aid, you have to give it to those who want it rather than those who need it. You can't buy votes with a system based on need because you deny money to some who think they deserve it.
When taxes were reasonable, more people helped each other. The government took over that function so they could buy votes with tax dollars.
"When you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, you can count on Paul's support."
As more people "drop out" of the overt economy and go to barter or unreported cash-only transactions, the vote buying system will collapse under its own weight.
The problem is that if it is done privately or at the local level, the people giving the aid know the recipients. They know who is truly needy and who is "working the system." In that situation, they can and do refuse help to those who could take care of themselves and don't.
This is unpopular because, to buy votes with aid, you have to give it to those who want it rather than those who need it. You can't buy votes with a system based on need because you deny money to some who think they deserve it.
When taxes were reasonable, more people helped each other. The government took over that function so they could buy votes with tax dollars.
"When you're robbing Peter to pay Paul, you can count on Paul's support."
As more people "drop out" of the overt economy and go to barter or unreported cash-only transactions, the vote buying system will collapse under its own weight.
Sorry Bogan, it is wealth redistribution. It's taking from someone who has EARNED and giving to someone who hasn't. It has nothing to do with 'Getting Rich' off welfare. If this lady needs help, there are a great many places that can and will assist. None of which rely on funding from the Federal Givernment. Point is, she's got to put down the cheeto's and look for it, not wait for it to magically appear. Welfare was never intended to be a career choice. Attitudes like the one you seem to be displaying are the basis for what has gone so wrong with this Nation. Being all too willing to hand over the responsibility of caring for your fellow man to a faceless bureaucracy and then patting yourself on the back because you did your 'fair share'.
Go down to Henryville or Joplin and ask the residents where the most help came from when their SHTF. I guarantee you, the answer will be from their neighbors and others from outside the community who put boots to mud and rubber to road, not the all mighty Government.
Go down to Henryville or Joplin and ask the residents where the most help came from when their SHTF. I guarantee you, the answer will be from their neighbors and others from outside the community who put boots to mud and rubber to road, not the all mighty Government.
I am not opposed to a government program that feeds the poor...Rice beans,green vegetables and some type of meat. We need to gut the welfare system until it only does what it should..sustains life! I do get tired of seeing people talking on their I phones,buying junk food with their blue card...Beer and cigarettes (and Lotto) with their cash.
hornadylnl
Shooter
- Nov 19, 2008
- 21,505
- 63
What exactly constitutes welfare? Is it only food stamp cards and cash payments? What about HUD housing? Do we level the same vitriol against INGOers who live in HUD as we do those with food stamp cards?
Are public parks and hunting lands welfare? Are the Indianapolis Colts welfare? They are taking money from the unwilling by force of the gun yet they don't receive the same vitriol as the proverbial "Shaniquah" we so often read about here.
How can one justify in their mind that providing food for someone through government is such an evil thing while thinking that a public shooting range is a good thing?
Are public parks and hunting lands welfare? Are the Indianapolis Colts welfare? They are taking money from the unwilling by force of the gun yet they don't receive the same vitriol as the proverbial "Shaniquah" we so often read about here.
How can one justify in their mind that providing food for someone through government is such an evil thing while thinking that a public shooting range is a good thing?
Long ago, when "welfare" was about helping people instead of buying votes, the government used to buy food to support the farmers and give it to the needy. The problem was that the needy didn't want the food, they wanted the money. So, many of them sold the food to working people.
When stockpiling and giving away food became cumbersome, the government went to food stamps that could be traded for food. Again, many were sold, at reduced rates, to get the money.
Now, they've just gone to the EBT card because "no one should feel bad about being on government assistance. Its your right." The "poor" can buy what they want with EBT or sell it to someone else at a reduced rate and get their food at the many food pantries set up to help the poor.
When stockpiling and giving away food became cumbersome, the government went to food stamps that could be traded for food. Again, many were sold, at reduced rates, to get the money.
Now, they've just gone to the EBT card because "no one should feel bad about being on government assistance. Its your right." The "poor" can buy what they want with EBT or sell it to someone else at a reduced rate and get their food at the many food pantries set up to help the poor.
I guess I have not been paying enough attention because I don't understand the gripe about shooting ranges...I am really not a fan of any housing programs,ect. We do not need to spend money on many,many things such as public parks,pools....As for the Endofnoplace Colts?? Surely public funds are not available to them!?
hornadylnl
Shooter
- Nov 19, 2008
- 21,505
- 63
The city of indianapolis paid well over half a billion dollars for the colts stadium by force of the gun on its residents. I've seen all manner of justification on INGO on how it was the right thing to do.
I've read many here who believe that the taxpayers should fund public ranges. Some even went so far as to say public ranges are constitutional.
Both of the above are wealth redistribution but funny that they don't receive the same vitriol as Shaniquah.
HUD housing "usually" requires some type of financial participation on the part of the resident if they are capable. Not perfect, but more palatable than "free" for the lazy.
The tax for the colts is just plain unfair, the city and ring counties are frigging nuts for allowing the blackmail. But, they do provide entertainment so there is some, albeit maligned, return for it. I have shared "vitriol" as you put it, on this often.
Indiana state parks are a perfect model....pay for use. Doesn't mean there isn't abuse, but the model is better than freeloading entirely.
So to compare these with what I qualified earlier is not apples to apples.
The tax for the colts is just plain unfair, the city and ring counties are frigging nuts for allowing the blackmail. But, they do provide entertainment so there is some, albeit maligned, return for it. I have shared "vitriol" as you put it, on this often.
Indiana state parks are a perfect model....pay for use. Doesn't mean there isn't abuse, but the model is better than freeloading entirely.
So to compare these with what I qualified earlier is not apples to apples.
69 posts and only 3 or 4 are actually about shooting? Sure you're in the right place, maybe you would be more comfortable here:
Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post
Oh yeah..I remember the stadium fiasco now.I agree 100% with your take on that.I was working in Marion Co. back then.Still though,the free food of any type you wish program is a much greater problem.The government's hand in your pocket is getting ever closer to the things you REALLY treasure!
Sure gubment makes money from the colts, but the colts are a for profit organization, their profit should be used to pay for their equipment and pay for the place they play. Schools have to pay for their stadiums, why shouldn't the colts. If attendance will support a team and a huge stadium, then they will have the money to build it.
hammer24
Master
Bogan, after reading so many of your posts berating other members here for being ignorant (almost every other post of yours, seemingly) I was just beginning to truly believe that you were superior to everybody else in intelligence, knowledge, and understanding. I was beginning to think your understanding of the world and how it works was so vastly greater than many of our own that you were so far beyond us that we simply couldn't comprehend the greatness of your intellect.....until this little nugget.
It feels a little like this...
It feels a little like this...
How is it greedy, selfish and heartless for me to want to keep what I make and provide the best I can for *my* family, but it's NOT greedy to want to take some of what I make away from my family for yourself?
Who's really greedy and heartless here? Those who provide for their own, or those who take from others to provide for themselves?
Who's really greedy and heartless here? Those who provide for their own, or those who take from others to provide for themselves?
Yeah, he probably used to be anti but just bought a gun so he's pro gun but thinks "common sense" restrictions are a good thing and obama has the best intentions. Yawn.
