Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
TradEddie
Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2013 - 07:50pm PT
|
As I stated earlier, if there is no crime, then nobody is "disenfranchised" by the law. This is the point you seem unable to "get." It might, by your lights, be a USELESS law. But if NOBODY is adversely affected by it, then you have nothing to carp about.
Everybody else gets it. Nobody is being disenfranchised at present (the PA law has been stayed by the courts) because in-person voter fraud essentially does not exist, if you disagree, please provide any evidence to the contrary, take whatever sample size you want.
The PA Voter ID law was passed to prevent a non-existent crime, but the law if implemented will prevent legitimate voters from voting, even if its only the few hundred who forget their ID. Disenfranchised is a strong word, but the end result is the same. These laws are intended to reduce voter turnout in urban areas, by young people, or people too poor to own a car or spend the money needed to get Voter ID.
These laws have been crafted because tiny changes in election results in swing states like PA matter a lot. 20 electoral college votes up for grabs is well worth corrupting democracy for.
Back to your inalienable rights, I acknowledge the theoretical difference between voting and the concept of an inalienable right (I don't actually acknowledge the existence of inalienable right except in theory, a theory I do like), but while self-defense is in inalienable right, purchasing a firearm for that purpose cannot be an inalienable right because it is dependent on another person.
Off climbing for a week, enjoy.
TE
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2013 - 04:51am PT
|
dingus wrote:
I don't have a fear of guns but I am sexually and emotionally retarded.
At least you're not an anti-dentite.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2013 - 05:00am PT
|
madbolter1,
All that writing about the sanctity of the second amendment and never a peep from you regarding the Patriot Act. Why is that?
In your verbose posts I have yet to read a clear explanation as to why background checks are unconstitutional and why holding a gun owner responsible for what happens with their gun(s) would also be unconstitutional.
We have lots of laws and regulations providing a framework for rights laid out in the Constitution. Why should the 2nd amendment be any different?
A recent study of crime stats revealed that the large majority of guns used in murders (and the recent high-profile massacres) were purchased less than 3 years prior to the crime. So the argument that "there are lots of guns already out there" does not hold water to the reality of the murders being committed.
Also, the NRA represents a small sliver of the US population, and primarily lobbies - contrary to popular belief - for gun manufacturer interests. The situation is the way it is today because gun manufacturers want it that way in order to continue to make money (through the legal or illegal sale of guns, they don't care) hand over fist.
Anyway, here's what a I wrote in another thread almost exactly a year ago and it still applies:
First, there will always be deviants and criminals, but that does not mean that one should not have laws. But indeed, there needs to an effort that goes beyond simply banning weapons in order to address the violent crime in the United States. How about universal healthcare? Better schools? The village raising the child so to speak.
Second, this issue is similar to immigration or healthcare: the system is not changing because those who are making a huge amount of money off it don’t want it to change. For immigration, crack down on the employers and you will see much less illegal immigration; in healthcare the pharma companies and the big corporate providers are okay with bilking the American public as long as no one lifts a finger; and with guns, the gun/bullet manufacturers are all too happy to make money off the current system (legal or illegal sales, their bottom lines don’t care), crack down on them and things will change.
Third and lastly, I always find it ironic that those in favor of such repressive legislation as the Patriot Act, or trashing every other portion of the Constitution, evoke the second amendment as if they even care about the Constitution. Why not just be honest with yourselves, you like guns, like the easy access to guns in the US and are hiding behind the second amendment? Jody, et al, you know who you are, since when have you cared about liberty?
I'll add, madbolter1, when have you ever cared about liberty?
|
|
Brandon-
climber
The Granite State.
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2013 - 01:15pm PT
|
Yikes!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2013 - 09:15pm PT
|
...never a peep from you regarding the Patriot Act. Why is that?
Degaine, congrats... that might well be the most disconnected post on this whole thread. I mean, you obviously disagree with what you THINK I'm saying or stand for, but you rail on me (clearly) without having actually READ what I've written. "Never a peep?"
First, this thread is not ABOUT the Patriot Act. A thread on that topic would garner more discussion from me about it. But even in this thread, here's the "never a peep" show from me....
Aug. 4: "You want slippery slope? Just look at how the Patriot Act has become continual NSA violation of the Fourth Amendment, with very, very little outrage on the part of the people that all should know better!"
Aug. 15: "The 'Patriot Act?' Classic 1984 Doublespeak."
To which HighTraverse posted a lengthy expose' on the Patriot Act, stating that both parties had blood on their hands for passing it. And that same day I responded to HighTraverse saying: "We are certainly on the same page about this. Neither party had a principled leg to stand on here. Yet, it's the gift that keeps on giving, and neither party seems willing/able to unring that bell, despite the many abuses that have emerged from it, just as I (and it sounds like you) predicted when Bush was falling all over himself to get it passed."
So, either you're a flagrant troll, or you literally don't have a clue what principles I believe in or stand for (which would indicate intentional ignorance, given all I've written on this thread).
And, on the topic of the Patriot Act, we now find that the DEA has for years been supplied data from the NSA (supposedly all "meta," if you'll all remember) to support the DEA's (utterly failed) "war on drugs;" and the DEA then repeatedly and regularly manufactured evidentiary trails and lied to courts in order to cover up the fact that the "evidence" they had in many drug cases was illegally obtained. This process was used so often that DEA agents were explicitly trained in how to manufacture evidence in order to obscure the source of the original evidence that was obtained solely from the NSA's secret spying program, thus making it appear to normal courts that the DEA's evidentiary trail was "normal," legal, and intact.
Now caught on this, the response is that the Patriot Act both justified and legalized this behavior. HOW the DEA can try to float that normal drug enforcement investigations qualify as a matter of national security or relate in any way to the war on terror will be the subject of a lot of discussion going forward!
So, Patriot Act, and next thing you know, the whole rule of law is right out the window, and we live in a Police State.
(Is that enough for you in THIS thread on how I feel about the Patriot Act?)
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2013 - 10:42pm PT
|
A far right wing Christian....
LOL, and I mean ROFL! You are so clueless about what I believe.
Abortion? Should be legal!
Gay marriage? Should be legal!
Drugs? Should be legal (and taxed)!
Need I go on?
I'm about as far from a "right wing" Christian as it's possible to be. You don't recognize basic philosophical distinctions: Libertarian != Right Wing.
So, your attempt to sum me up? Fail!
ROFL
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2013 - 11:44pm PT
|
We don't give sh!t how they do it in the UK.
This is America.
In America we slaughter everything sight and all over the world too.
Wake up Hedge.
Your vacation will be in the UK.
You'll be safe there. (rolls eyes)
Here in the slaughterhouse of America this how it's done.
Stop slaughtering everything first and then your gun control will naturally take effect.
You have to stop violence first.
America is the most violent country. Guns got nothing to do with it.
Get your ticket to the UK.
They're pretty violent too there ......
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2013 - 01:19am PT
|
At the 2010 British Press Awards The Telegraph was named the "National Newspaper of the Year" for its coverage of the MPs expenses scandal (named "Scoop of the Year"), with William Lewis winning "Journalist of the Year".
The Telegraph won "Team of the Year" in 2004 for its coverage of the Iraq War. The paper also won "Columnist of the Year" three years' running from 2002 to 2004: Zoë Heller (2002), Robert Harris (2003) and Boris Johnson (2004.
|
|
Sredni Vashtar
Social climber
The coastal redwoods
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2013 - 01:19am PT
|
As her Britannic majesty's envoy to Supertopia I can comment on all things from the sceptred isle.
Yes, we are a rowdy bunch who like to mix it up after a night drinking wife beater at Wetherspoons but thankfully we don't shoot each other all that often. The poll on the Handgun ban was conducted by the Telegraph newspaper (I think) and its read by a conservative bunch, like fox hunting, a lot of people feel that laws were passed in a reactionary knee jerk manner in response to (in the case of the handgun blanket ban) a horrific crime. Overnight law abiding handgun owners became potential criminals if they retained possession of their firearms. Its not so much people want open carry on the streets of Tunbridge Wells its just the way it came about. Unfortunately for you guys, there are far too many firearms doing the rounds and no real records of who has them.
On a side note, I read on some other web forums about how some people will only venture into the backcountry armed, what is everyone so afraid of they treat camping like combat? is it 'squatches? pot growers? two legged coyotes? In other countries there doesn't seem to be this fear and I am curious as to why its so prevalent here.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2013 - 01:25am PT
|
On a side note, I read on some other web forums about how some people will only venture into the backcountry armed, what is everyone so afraid of they treat camping like combat?
Aside from Grizzly Bear habitat very few people here feel the need to be armed in the back country. Even in Grizzly terrain there are many who travel safely without a gun. In the areas I go in wilderness I would never carry a gun.
Some of the places I car camp are another story.
|
|
Delhi Dog
climber
Good Question...
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2013 - 01:25am PT
|
^^It's the big bad wolf they're afraid of.
|
|
Sredni Vashtar
Social climber
The coastal redwoods
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2013 - 01:39am PT
|
To clarify, I live here in the US now and I know for a fact some people take handguns into the backcountry and certainly not in grizzly country.
r.e gun owners still being alive, criminals can still source guns for crimes, the knee jerk gun ban just criminalized those people that legally held guns and trust me, you have to jump through hoops to own guns in the UK. we still have shotguns and rifles there but the licensing is a strict vetting process and a criminal record might well prevent you from holding an FAC (firearms certificate).
Anyway I don't need a gun, I got a Donk
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Aug 18, 2013 - 01:48am PT
|
and I know for a fact some people take handguns into the backcountry
Hardly a good idea if you care how much weight you are carrying.
By "donk," if you are referring to a shortened baseball bat with a strap through the handle, possession is a felony in California.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2013 - 01:16pm PT
|
Borrowed shotgun blasts and stops terrorist.
A drug crazed half naked boat hijacker who stole a yacht near Seattle WA and was ramming moored vessels damaging them severely was stopped when
a military veteran who served briefly in Vietnam, said he borrowed the shotgun from the owner of an adjacent boat to end the 11pm rampage.
He decided to fire, he said, because the stolen boat appeared headed to ram a boat that he knows someone is living in.
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2021838559_marinashootingxml.html
|
|
Pate
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 10, 2013 - 12:38am PT
|
533- sick troll. DMT is smarter than all of you combined.
|
|
manemachen
Sport climber
Pinedale, Wyoming
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2013 - 02:04am PT
|
My husband is a "dyed in the wool" fisherman, not a hunter. We have been in Wyoming 20 years. about 10 years ago he started fishing at the Fire Hole in Yellowstone and in Pilgrim Creek, which opens at 10AM and closes at 5pm due to Grizzly activity. In the county we live in now, there are 1,000 lakes- but he HAS TO fish Yellowstone. Sheez
One time at the Fire Hole he heard a big crack in the willows. He started to look around and HOLY SH#T!! a bunch of cars had stopped on the road on the other side of the Fire Hole, obviously wildlife watchers- He fled.
You can hardly have a day in Yellowstone anymore without some observation of grizzly activity. The wolves have had a very successful 10 years (+) as well. Wolf packs have split and split again. Finally they have issued wolf tags to hunters.
If you wonder what initiated these introductions, it was the Elk. The Elk refuge in Jackson Hole was feeding 20K elk in the winter. The Refuge managers and the feds wanted the #'s down. This was getting expensive and over populated. Elk and Buffalo transfer brucellosis to cattle- a big issue in Wyoming. Brucellosis makes cows abort. Also, in the 30's, Wyoming had to shut down her borders due to scabies- which came from elk and were transferred to all pasture stock. Over population is a problem. Hunting tags were issued left and right and deprivation hunts were also given to hunters when elk caused a financial burden on a rancher by eating his hay intended for cattle. Now the number of elk on the refuge is closer to 12,000.
Since we arrived 20 years ago, it has been said that a rifle report is a dinner bell in Grand Teton- especially around 2 Ocean Pass. A lot of hunters have had the experience of not being able to recover their elk. Mostly it is grizzlies, but wolves have had their turn as well. Mostly, though, wolves are blamed for taking down fawns and elk calves.
I bought my husband a .480 Ruger- which fired smoother than the Freedom Arms Casual (I think that is how you spell it-It is supposed to be the biggest hand gun you can buy.) A grizzly attack changes your life. Your body becomes a liability, not the asset it was. At that time you couldn't bring a handgun into a National Park- You have all heard SSS- shoot, shovel and shut-up. He was gonna carry that pistol if you'd have asked ME.
There is no waiting period here in WYOMING, at least there wasn't for me. I had to fill out a questionnaire * that was ridiculous*.
Have I broken out of jail or prison?
Have I escaped from a mental hospital? That caliber (pun) of questions
It was a joke- and there lies the problem. Extrapolate that....
In Germany you can own guns but you have to belong to a gun club, and you don't keep them at home. You check them out, use them and bring them back to the club when you are done. Now, there is an idea to con-volute and improve on..
I have heard the same arguments as you have. WTF! Do you need automatic weapons for robbing a 7-11? or are you expecting Ruby Ridge?
Me, I carry a .357 when I travel with my horses. I have seen two terrible rear end accidents involving horses and horse trailers and I won't wait for someone to show up (Officer Joe Blow- thanks- he's never shot a horse in his life- horses have a lot of adrenalin it is hard enough to shoot them once). . Please don't take my gun away. I need it here in Wyoming- I have never thought of having one before I moved here. Most situations can be cured with a $60 can of bear spray- especially during divorces. The jury is still out on a griz encounter vs bear spray.
Anyone going unarmed going into remote back country in the Rockies should be fully aware what the consequences could be. It is coming- the wolves and Griz populations have swelled to dangerous. Someone is going to be headlines soon. Don't let it be you. Believe the close call stories that you have heard.
|
|
xtrmecat
Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
|
|
|
Nov 10, 2013 - 08:29am PT
|
Bruce Kay wrote,
To clarify.... A hand gun - even a 44 - is no sure bet with a grizzly and in any event, bear spray is statistically proven better than any fire arm in preventing damage from bear attack.
Which begs the question - why bother with a gun when bear spray ( mace ) is a superior deterrant without the risk of fatal injury?
Answer: Killing tastes better
Bruce, I will take your question on. I can tell the poster just below yours is obviously not qualified, or very honest either.
There are several different kinds of encounters. Accidental encounters with a griz are not the most dangerous, because the bear may run back away from you and assess the situation. Bear spray would be the perfect tool for an encounter of this sort.
Another type of encounter would be a chance sighting, with some ground between you and the big old bruin. This is another great time to have a fresh can of spray, in case the bruiser decides you warrant a closer inspection as a potential food source.
The worst case of meeting a griz is a predatory encounter. I will give you a likely and probable scenario. I have personally had the example occur to my wife and I more than once. Any encounter at night should be considered predatory as the bear is not traveling through, just curious about you or your camp. He is there to gleen your camp and you for any food possible. His behavior is predictable and dangerous. You cannot spray him through a tent, even the netting should you have your fly off renders the spray useless. This is one time it is truly you or him and lethal force is your best tool.
I can think of several other experiences I have personally had that the revolver I carried was the best tool for the incident. I luckily have never had to dispatch one of these spectacular beasts, and as much time as I am out there, have had many close encounters.
Scenarios while hunting can require a deadly force use as well. I can think of many more but haven't the time to write all morning. I am heading out to be among the critters, predators and all.
I carry both spray and a large ultralight handgun. Two of the tools needed here to prevent becoming a statistic.
Don't think you have an understanding because you have read and heard of many things from many sources. You may be wrong. It doesn't taste better. Just what you must do. Experience is the only way to know for sure.
To the poster right below from Wyo. .
The question you say you answered were a joke when purchasing your gun, were part of a federal form we all fill out and has only had slight changes to it in many years. Your description of it is so less than real, I beg you to shut up. It makes your argument useless when you do this, and you may be causing damage to other enthusiasts who can be honest and have a real need also.
Burly Bob
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!