How I damaged gun rights today

[cce1302]

Why is that a problem?

Because he doesn't give a crap what we think of him...but wants us to give a crap what he thinks of us...

 

[ViperJock]

And such compelling counterpoints, too: "that's your opinion."

LMFAO. Do you even read your own BS? You don't have any more proof or evidence than the other side. You and ATM and the others basically just shout down and ridicule anyone who disagrees with you.

You haven't provided a shred of evidence that your position is correct.

You have the moral high ground in the right to carry. But that's not the issue here. The issue is, "how will OC an AR into public places (with an antagonistic attitude) affect policy both in the private sector and legislation."

Both sides have historical examples of success and failure but only with regard to topics other than OC of ARs in public. Yet, here you are acting like you have the grace of God himself plastered all over your shallow hypocritical posts. You think you are right? Let's see evidence. I believe I asked you for some in a different thread--it never showed up there either.

my predictions to your responses: telling me I don't get it. Maybe throw in a few personal insults. Make some claims about how I'm not "really" a 2A supporter. BUT no proof of anything. Add some snarky comments from your buddies. Fill another 10pages patting each other on the back for "supporting freedom." BUT still no proof of any of it.

OCT is well intentioned. Hell, they may even prove victorious. But to sit here and belittle people who have reservations about their methods without any proof of success of your own is arrogant, ignorant, and hypocritical.

 

[cce1302]

My position is liberty, that's all.

It's not defending whatever actions you claim I should be defending or proving whatever it is you think I should be proving about liberty.

Liberty is enough.

 

[ViperJock]

My position is liberty, that's all.

It's not defending whatever actions you claim I should be defending or proving whatever it is you think I should be proving about liberty.

Liberty is enough.

very good political answer. You hit the buzzwords and said nothing. And you are FOS. You have repeatedly made the argument that OCT is doing a good thing and making a positive difference without any proof thereof. Not only that but you go so far as. To ridicule anyone else's viewpoint even though you have no substantial basis for your own argument.

NOONE (on INGO) has argued that these guys don't have a right to do it. NOONE has said so much as they think measures should be taken to prevent them from doing it. How then is Liberty being challenged? The argument being presented is rather one that challenges the benefit (to the 2A) of the actions taken vs the possible detriment in terms of political fallout. Ever heard of the law of unintended consequences? Some of us think it's stupid. Just like riding a motorcycle without a helmet, smoking tobacco, and voting for democrats. Is it legal? Yep. Do I try to make it illegal? Nope. But I think it's stupid and dangerous and detrimental. And I wish people wouldn't do it.

Your entire argument is fluid and the only thing you have proved is that whatever someone else says you can manipulate the language enough to continue with your theme of "you are always right and know everything and anyone who disagrees with you is not only wrong but needs to be made fun of for how wrong they are."

I just got tired of the BS you are hurling at a few of the guys and had to call you on it. /rant over.
Good day sir.
Viper out. (Yes, Rhino, I stole your line.)

 

[88GT]

very good political answer. You hit the buzzwords and said nothing. And you are FOS. You have repeatedly made the argument that OCT is doing a good thing and making a positive difference without any proof thereof. Not only that but you go so far as. To ridicule anyone else's viewpoint even though you have no substantial basis for your own argument.

NOONE (on INGO) has argued that these guys don't have a right to do it. NOONE has said so much as they think measures should be taken to prevent them from doing it. How then is Liberty being challenged? The argument being presented is rather one that challenges the benefit (to the 2A) of the actions taken vs the possible detriment in terms of political fallout. Ever heard of the law of unintended consequences? Some of us think it's stupid. Just like riding a motorcycle without a helmet, smoking tobacco, and voting for democrats. Is it legal? Yep. Do I try to make it illegal? Nope. But I think it's stupid and dangerous and detrimental. And I wish people wouldn't do it.

Your entire argument is fluid and the only thing you have proved is that whatever someone else says you can manipulate the language enough to continue with your theme of "you are always right and know everything and anyone who disagrees with you is not only wrong but needs to be made fun of for how wrong they are."

I just got tired of the BS you are hurling at a few of the guys and had to call you on it. /rant over.
Good day sir.
Viper out. (Yes, Rhino, I stole your line.)

 

[ATM]

...You and ATM and the others basically just shout down and ridicule anyone who disagrees with you...

Well, disagreeing with me is ridiculous, but shouting?

I don't recall shouting.

I support carry. I don't wait to see if it produces some benefit, a popular outcome or speculate the possible "political fallout" before declaring that support.

If I based my support on those other outcomes, it wouldn't really be support, would it?

 

[Rey B]

We are the Borg.
Resistance is futile.

Resistance is not futile! It is voltage divide by current!

 

[ViperJock]

Well, disagreeing with me is ridiculous, but shouting?

I don't recall shouting.

I support carry. I don't wait to see if it produces some benefit, a popular outcome or speculate the possible "political fallout" before declaring that support.

If I based my support on those other outcomes, it wouldn't really be support, would it?

shouting can be a tone of voice or an overwhelming mass of voice as well as a volume. Saying you support them is fine. I don't, but that's your right. I OC maybe 50% of the time I carry. But I don't think its a good idea to bring a rifle into a crowded restaurant in "slung ready" and try to antagonize/start a dialogue with people there who just want to eat in peace/do their job. If you really feel like you need a rifle in Target to feel safe then fine. But attention whores (of any kind) rarely do their cause any good and need a new way to improve their self esteem. If you feel like you need a rifle in Chilis to be safe then fine. But don't act like you are "helping the cause" because you probably aren't.

What irritates me is the attitude (especially by cce) that anyone who disagrees with OCT type tactics is ignorant and somehow anti-gun. And I got really tired of his attitude toward some of the other posters. Based on the misbegotten idea that he had "facts" and "truth" but really --he only has opinion like the rest of us.

PS. Im sorry I made you cry 88. You know I think you are high caliber.

 

[jcwit]

Ya, I'm anti gun, that's why I'm a range officer at the Regional Bullseye Matches this weekend. That's one of the matches where the best of the best shooters in this region compete.

Really I just don't like making a fool of myself, but then if others do that is their option.

 

[jcwit]

This too is simple: I don't care how my life makes a stranger feel. I don't care about their opinion, and rarely do I ask for the approval of anyone.

Do you apply this same logic/attitude when going for a job interview?

 

[actaeon277]

Do you apply this same logic/attitude when going for a job interview?

yes.
and it got me hired.

 

[jcwit]

yes.
and it got me hired.

Amazing! What type of job & position?

 

[actaeon277]

Amazing! What type of job & position?

Systems Repairman
Instrumentation & Electronics.

Since they (mill) loses hundreds of thousands at the drop of a hat, they seemed to care more about my ability.

 

[88GT]

Ya, I'm anti gun, that's why I'm a range officer at the Regional Bullseye Matches this weekend. That's one of the matches where the best of the best shooters in this region compete.

Really I just don't like making a fool of myself, but then if others do that is their option.

If it matters so little to you, why are you so indignant about the way other people behave?

Do you apply this same logic/attitude when going for a job interview?

I make my decisions based on what I consider my best interest. In my daily life, that generally means not concerning myself if the woman behind me in the grocery line or the fellow at the table next to me at McDonald's have a problem with my choices. In a job interview, my best interest means not giving any reason for the person on the other side of the desk to find a reason to disqualify me. My choices in both are pre-determined by my best interests. Your mistake is assuming that my best interest is singular and unchanging.

 

[Redhorse]

Ya, I'm anti gun, that's why I'm a range officer at the Regional Bullseye Matches this weekend. That's one of the matches where the best of the best shooters in this region compete.

Really I just don't like making a fool of myself, but then if others do that is their option.

I think that that fact that you're in the NRA pretty much clarifies you aren't anti-gun. Saying as much is absurd considering they're the single most powerful lobby group in America and they lobby for...guns.

 

[jcwit]

Systems Repairman
Instrumentation & Electronics.

Since they (mill) loses hundreds of thousands at the drop of a hat, they seemed to care more about my ability.

Oh, OK. Most of my working life was in management, wearing a suit & tie, dress codes were and are important IMO, I was one of those that hired & fired at times, and what I thought of someone was important.

Ever notice the old pictures from back in the 20's & 30's and take note as to how even the poorest dressed then? People going to church today do not even dress for the occasion. We have turned into a sloppy country.

 

[Redhorse]

Well, disagreeing with me is ridiculous, but shouting?

I don't recall shouting.

I support carry. I don't wait to see if it produces some benefit, a popular outcome or speculate the possible "political fallout" before declaring that support.

If I based my support on those other outcomes, it wouldn't really be support, would it?

Disagreeing with you is simply having a different opinion, something that we have a right to guaranteed in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States.

 

[Redhorse]

LMFAO. Do you even read your own BS? You don't have any more proof or evidence than the other side. You and ATM and the others basically just shout down and ridicule anyone who disagrees with you.

You haven't provided a shred of evidence that your position is correct.

You have the moral high ground in the right to carry. But that's not the issue here. The issue is, "how will OC an AR into public places (with an antagonistic attitude) affect policy both in the private sector and legislation."

Both sides have historical examples of success and failure but only with regard to topics other than OC of ARs in public. Yet, here you are acting like you have the grace of God himself plastered all over your shallow hypocritical posts. You think you are right? Let's see evidence. I believe I asked you for some in a different thread--it never showed up there either.

my predictions to your responses: telling me I don't get it. Maybe throw in a few personal insults. Make some claims about how I'm not "really" a 2A supporter. BUT no proof of anything. Add some snarky comments from your buddies. Fill another 10pages patting each other on the back for "supporting freedom." BUT still no proof of any of it.

OCT is well intentioned. Hell, they may even prove victorious. But to sit here and belittle people who have reservations about their methods without any proof of success of your own is arrogant, ignorant, and hypocritical.

Please read the articles, and some my posts, to see some of the evidence I have provided as to why I think the controversial OCT protest will have negative consequences to the 2A. I have provided evidence sir.

 

[ATM]

Disagreeing with you is simply having a different opinion, something that we have a right to guaranteed in the Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States.

Semantics.

Having a different opinion than mine is also ridiculous.

 

[Redhorse]

Semantics.

Having a different opinion than mine is also ridiculous.

Lol, it's too bad I'm too young to drink or I'd say lets all go get a beer