Shooting in Connecticut

Status
Not open for further replies.
Doesn't take much to blindside a guy who makes such profoundly stupid statements as 'facts mean nothing'

Keep on being edgy, cool guy

It's profoundly stupid to you because it's counter intuitive and edgy.

I would explain the roll of "facts" to any arguement and their lack of persuasiveness but you're not ready for that yet. Stay in your comfort zone and continue to hurl insults.
 
Don't let the facts keep you up at night, son.

"I'd argue with you for real but I don't feel like it right now!!!" stay classy BRO



PS. I think you meant "role", edgy guy
 
Society taking care of their own. Don't see a problem there.:p But seriously, society is so intertwined now that whatever you do could and often does affect others negatively. That can't be ignored. But it will always be ignored by those driving a personal agenda. Why so selfish?
I'll be the first to admit that the pendulum usually swings farther to the other side than need be but thats the price of doing business. Stay vigilant, protect what's right. Like the 650HP Viper. Sure the gubment and insurance industry tried to rid the mean streets of muscle cars circa early 70s but cars are now faster than ever. That's good, right?


I might be having a comprehension problem today, but you seem to be contradicting yourself. How is banning Halloween costumes taking care of their own? And if you don't see a problem with that, then way would you imply the 650Hp Viper is a good thing? Which it is BTW.

If you have your manhood tied to gun ownership, I can appreciate the problem. If not, this comment doesn't apply to you.

Seriously? Not the gun ownership compensating for some other short coming argument:lmao:
 
Hmm...so the long standing ethnic tensions that contributed to the war in Yugoslavia are where in this country? Who is invading us? Can you see the Russians from your house too? When the battalions of trained soldiers arrive how long are you planning on keeping the tanks at bay with your glock?

It would be highly unlikely Canada would be invaded by tanks. The continuing riots in France are a more likely scenario.

http://ww.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nce-Cars-buildings-wrecked-orgy-violence.html
 
Where are you getting this stuff from? Did someone mention an invasion or something? What other conclusion can I draw about you being in fear when you can't provide a coherent, mature argument to your stance on the subject.

Oh sorry, I thought you mentioned wanting to be armed to protect yourself from tyrannical regimes. I could go and get your quote if you like? I'm just supposing that a tyrannical regime would use things like helicopters, tanks and trained soldiers to effect their despotical takeover of democracy and descent into dictatorship. All Im asking therefore is what you suggest I use to protect myself against this eventuality assuming that it is indeed probable rather than simply possible? You see, I wasn't at all afraid of things like this happening before but you've convinced me that I now need to be armed so I can keep a troop of soldiers off my lawn and I won't even go into what tank tracks would do to my flowerbeds.
 
Oh sorry, I thought you mentioned wanting to be armed to protect yourself from tyrannical regimes. I could go and get your quote if you like? I'm just supposing that a tyrannical regime would use things like helicopters, tanks and trained soldiers to effect their despotical takeover of democracy and descent into dictatorship. All Im asking therefore is what you suggest I use to protect myself against this eventuality assuming that it is indeed probable rather than simply possible? You see, I wasn't at all afraid of things like this happening before but you've convinced me that I now need to be armed so I can keep a troop of soldiers off my lawn and I won't even go into what tank tracks would do to my flowerbeds.

You just watched red dawn didn't you? :)
 
Oh sorry, I thought you mentioned wanting to be armed to protect yourself from tyrannical regimes. I could go and get your quote if you like? I'm just supposing that a tyrannical regime would use things like helicopters, tanks and trained soldiers to effect their despotical takeover of democracy and descent into dictatorship. All Im asking therefore is what you suggest I use to protect myself against this eventuality assuming that it is indeed probable rather than simply possible? You see, I wasn't at all afraid of things like this happening before but you've convinced me that I now need to be armed so I can keep a troop of soldiers off my lawn and I won't even go into what tank tracks would do to my flowerbeds.

I'm talking about protection from your fellow citizens in a state of heavy civil unrest, which could be brought on by a 'tyrannical regime' or any number of social and economic factors. I'm not talking about Rambo taking on a MiG fighter jet with an AR15. Be sensible, and don't pretend it doesn't happen in the world.
 
I'm talking about protection from your fellow citizens in a state of heavy civil unrest, which could be brought on by a 'tyrannical regime' or any number of social and economic factors. I'm not talking about Rambo taking on a MiG fighter jet with an AR15. Be sensible, and don't pretend it doesn't happen in the world.

I don't much like my neighbour, his air conditioner is very noisy....can I shoot him? If it helps he has a deep tan in the summer and could be mistaken for the Taliban?
 
I'm talking about protection from your fellow citizens in a state of heavy civil unrest, which could be brought on by a 'tyrannical regime' or any number of social and economic factors. I'm not talking about Rambo taking on a MiG fighter jet with an AR15. Be sensible, and don't pretend it doesn't happen in the world.

Oh wait I gotcha now...you mean hockey riots right? OK perfect, I agree, nothing better than taking potshots at Habs fans and doing the whole bilingual disagreement thing some justice eh? What do you suggest...beretta or hunting rifle with scope?
 
I'm talking about protection from your fellow citizens in a state of heavy civil unrest, which could be brought on by a 'tyrannical regime' or any number of social and economic factors. I'm not talking about Rambo taking on a MiG fighter jet with an AR15. Be sensible, and don't pretend it doesn't happen in the world.


Imagine the Vancouver riot...... and everyone had guns. Not the best combination.
 
Response to Icbones:


I didn't parse the long list of banned practices. Halloween costumes I haven't thought about, probably won't in the forseeable future. You can call it banning, social engineering, adjustments, tweaking to suit tenor of times, whatever.....I don't need to agree or disagree with everything. It's not left or right.

Fact is (loves me facts) every society is fluid. Changes are inevitable. Not everbody's going to be happy. Some won't even notice. Guns were barely on my radar (thank you Canada) until I stumbled across inane defense of hand guns and high cap assault rifles. I like shooting fish in a barrel as much as the next guy.



Seriously? Not the gun ownership compensating for some other short coming argument:lmao:[/QUOTE]

I don't follow.
 
Last edited:
Guy #3, the one who wants to take away others' freedom to defend themselves because of an irrational fear of inanimate objects.

Unless of course you consider someone who keeps an extinguisher in the house to be in constant fear of fire.... then I suppose we're all afraid.

Ignoring that you avoided the question by inventing a third option, you also invented an argument for gun control; self-defense. Nobody is thinking of themselves when arguing for stricter gun laws, the argument is for a safer society.

I don't think you are capabale of understanding this, which is probably why you also ignored my previous question about whether "minding our own business" also meant we should have no empathy for others? You are the ultimate 'man as an island' (that's not a compliment BTW).
 

Saw the website, awesome. But IMHO I have a better chance of winning the lottery 3 times in a row than Canada being invaded by tanks.:eek: But if your plans to annex Alberta materialize, let me know in advance so I can pack up and move west before the tanks start rolling. You know I'm worried about my flower beds being destroyed.
 
Guy #3, the one who wants to take away others' freedom to defend themselves because of an irrational fear of inanimate objects.

Unless of course you consider someone who keeps an extinguisher in the house to be in constant fear of fire.... then I suppose we're all afraid.

This makes no sense.1
1. Nobody is calling for the removal of all guns. This means you can still defend yourself. If you really feel the need to own more than two guns in your home then perhaps you are living in the wrong country. If you are a gun collector that is different.

2. Fire extinguishers serve a common good. It keeps the fire from spreading to other homes and burning down a block or city.

3. Did you stop to think that if these "criminals" that everyone refers to has having all of the guns want to harm you they will just ambush.
They can set your house on fire and just shoot you as you run out. They can toss in a pipe bomb to kill you. They can just shoot you with a pee shooter when you are stopped at a red light. I presume you ride a motorcycle. They can just run you off the road with their car or tie a line across your street and wait for you.

You are so worried about dieing that you are forgetting how to live and time is passing you by.


You are clearly a person that lives in fear. It appears evident that something has occurred in your past or perhaps the environment you are in has shaped your views. When seat belts were made mandatory some people hated the idea because they might get trapped and drowned should they be involved in a car accident. Some of these people did not live by water. I wonder what the argument was against having windshield made from tempered glass.
 
Saw the website, awesome. But IMHO I have a better chance of winning the lottery 3 times in a row than Canada being invaded by tanks.:eek: But if your plans to annex Alberta materialize, let me know in advance so I can pack up and move west before the tanks start rolling. You know I'm worried about my flower beds being destroyed.

There's actually a huge flaw in my plan which is that to annex a province I have to be connected to it strictly speaking....and I have absolutely zero interest in Saskatchewan. I'll have to go east and annex Quebec and take control of global maple syrup supplies....unless I get beaten back by blokes in lumberjack attire called Guytan wielding hunting rifles of course....I don't want to get my tanks scratched as that **** takes forever to buff out.
 
Last edited:
This makes no sense.1
1. Nobody is calling for the removal of all guns. This means you can still defend yourself. If you really feel the need to own more than two guns in your home then perhaps you are living in the wrong country. If you are a gun collector that is different.

2. Fire extinguishers serve a common good. It keeps the fire from spreading to other homes and burning down a block or city.

3. Did you stop to think that if these "criminals" that everyone refers to has having all of the guns want to harm you they will just ambush.
They can set your house on fire and just shoot you as you run out. They can toss in a pipe bomb to kill you. They can just shoot you with a pee shooter when you are stopped at a red light. I presume you ride a motorcycle. They can just run you off the road with their car or tie a line across your street and wait for you.

You are so worried about dieing that you are forgetting how to live and time is passing you by.


You are clearly a person that lives in fear. It appears evident that something has occurred in your past or perhaps the environment you are in has shaped your views. When seat belts were made mandatory some people hated the idea because they might get trapped and drowned should they be involved in a car accident. Some of these people did not live by water. I wonder what the argument was against having windshield made from tempered glass.

Thanks Freud, I actually live a very easy going and care free life.

Guns are just one of my hobbies, like cars bikes and boats... And thankfully your opinion on the subject is completely insignificant ;)
 
Ignoring that you avoided the question by inventing a third option, you also invented an argument for gun control; self-defense. Nobody is thinking of themselves when arguing for stricter gun laws, the argument is for a safer society.

I don't think you are capabale of understanding this, which is probably why you also ignored my previous question about whether "minding our own business" also meant we should have no empathy for others? You are the ultimate 'man as an island' (that's not a compliment BTW).

You're arguing for general security at the expense of some personal freedom. I'm arguing for everyone being responsible for themselves. Buy a gun if you want one, buy a dog and an alarm system if you're scared of guns.. or don't buy anything because our society is plenty safe as it is. You're an adult you can make your own decision and extend me the same courtesy. What's wrong with that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom