Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:


I'll be honest. I can't understand the rest of what you typed. Your accent is coming through.

Thats why you are in the colonies....

 djones520 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

Thats because you're not doing it right.

I'll be honest. I can't understand the rest of what you typed. Your accent is coming through.

Agreed. Spent several hours on Sunday firing an AR-10, 12g Shotgun, and a .40 Smith and Wesson.

It was all for fun.

Lucky!

I spent several hours working on ARs last night . Hoping to hit the outdoor range as soon as the snow melts down far enough to staple targets to the mat. Right now building and reloading.

 Alexzandvar wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
Perhaps may I suggest that the point I was trying to make was not that "War widows deserve no sympathy" but that it is wrong and immoral to use someones death regardless of how close they were to you to purse a political agenda or to cause more anger and distress. That In seeing the people who lost their husband to the tragedy that was Bengazhi push the idea that because their husband's died the fact that I, by playing Video games was destroying this Country was not only offensive to me because she was insulting me but because she was using the death of an Ambassador Stevens, the two Navy seals, and Sean Smith as a platform from which to insult others.

I know its odd to say, but perhaps the fact that I was offended that she would turn peoples deaths into political talking points proves that I regard military sacrifice with respect rather than what you suggest that I "Don't give a gak about soldiers"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you got pissed at a woman who just lost her husband in a horrific way because someone's wife got offended at the fact you were talking about a video game you were playing at his memorial? It seems to me there is far more to the story than is being told here, and I wish I had the chance to hear what her side of the incident was.

I said that, on the other side of the room, after the memorial while everyone was eating and speaking I quietly mentioned to my father what I would do when I get come. I wasn't loudly announcing my intentions I wasn't attempting to inform anyone other than the person standing right next to me of what I was going to do when I got home.

During the actual memorial outside I was standing silently about 20 feet away from the seating, and would have been incapable of discussing anything with anyone as I was standing by myself with my trumpet.

She also stood up and made her announcement about her dislike of video games and how she hated facebook, and other things ect. The point of all my original posts you seemed to have missed was that I don't think it is right to use soldiers death for political gain regardless of political allegiance.

How did she then hear you, if you were talking quietly on the other side of the room?

I never said she heard me, although I do not discount that did because sometimes I talk louder than I think I do and the room wasn't all that big, but that she went on I tirade about video games and social media in general.

I probably took what she was saying to everyone more personally then I should have, but her way of using her dead husband as a political platform still upset me.

I recommend a trip over over to the Something Awful forums, Sean Smith was an avid poster over there and the way his death has been twisted makes them very upset about it.

You say that she pointed you out right after you talked about it, so I assumed you meant she heard you. To tell the truth, I think her husband being killed upset her quite a bit more than you did. But I think we are taking this too far off topic, so I bow out of this thread.

Knockagh wrote:


American people were tried and convicted of aiding Irish terrorists many times and of the specific crimes of arms smuggling, but many terrorist shipments got through the graveyards of my country are testament to it.

I shoot myself I have a 12 gauge shotgun I need on the farm and an .22 air rifle I use for target shooting. All ammunition I must purchase and be recorded on my licence. My guns are inspected regularly in my home by police officers as are all licensed gun holders weapons. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

The United States Constitution guarantees me the right to bear arms (2nd Amendment), and protection against unreasonable search and seizure (4th Amendment).

I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.


ETA in regards to the other posters:

Honestly, I don't even enjoy shooting anymore. I did when I was younger, but after you do it "at work" involuntarily, it loses a lot of its appeal. That said, everyone does it for their own reasons. Either way, if you enjoy shooting or not, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that the purpose of gun ownership is not related to target shooting or hunting in any way, shape, or form. It's about defense, plain and simple.

 CptJake wrote:

Knockagh wrote:

I shoot myself I have a 12 gauge shotgun I need on the farm and an .22 air rifle I use for target shooting. All ammunition I must purchase and be recorded on my licence. My guns are inspected regularly in my home by police officers as are all licensed gun holders weapons. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

So, your job is to End Life. I guess it is good work if you can get it.


I'm amazed that a life taker such as yourself is happy with police regularly coming into your home to inspect your private property. Really is a difference in cultures.

Now in the off chance your job is not to actually End Life, and instead it is to protect property/livestock, then your tool allows you to do so. So now we are looking at the tool as a means to protect life and property, which is the way many of us view the tool. The action of taking a life in the accomplishment of that protection really does not take away the fact that the goal is indeed protection.

There is a maturity about the ownership of firearms in the US that regrettably some other countries lack.

 Seaward wrote:

Relapse wrote:


I think my confusion with your thought process is understandable.

Well, give it time. If he actually makes it through BOLC B (or, heaven help us, to the fleet, if he's NROTC), his politics will have done a 180.

Unless he becomes one of those weird intel guys, I guess.

Hey now ... I was one of those 'weird intel guys' ... and I have to say, I am a little bit offen .... .... .... nah, we are a weird lot. Apt description really. One thing about it is simply this: Restrictive gun laws only make it harder for a law abiding citizen to legally obtain a gun. I am not opposed to waiting 7 days to get a gun ... I am good with that, I can see the positive to that.

The real question people need to ask is this: Who do YOU think you are to tell people what they can or can not do? Are you GOD? Are you Jesus in the flesh? Am I harming you in any way by purchasing this gun? You see the potential for me to go on a murder spree with it?

Great, then ban all modes of transportation as they kill more people than guns. Put giant corporations on trial as they kill people too. Hollywood? Burn it to the ground as they make violent movies that little Timmy wants to emulate, and it is full of hippies anyways.

These are all kneejerk reactions that are wrong. The thing to remember is this: Guns do not kill people, husbands that come home early kill people.

I am registered as a Democrat but I do not agree with every view that they have. I agree with some of the things that the Republicans say too. I trust NONE of them though.

rant over

 Alexzandvar wrote:
Yes I have contracted, 4 year ROTC scholarship

Ha. Sucker.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Knockagh wrote:


American people were tried and convicted of aiding Irish terrorists many times and of the specific crimes of arms smuggling, but many terrorist shipments got through the graveyards of my country are testament to it.

I shoot myself I have a 12 gauge shotgun I need on the farm and an .22 air rifle I use for target shooting. All ammunition I must purchase and be recorded on my licence. My guns are inspected regularly in my home by police officers as are all licensed gun holders weapons. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

The United States Constitution guarantees me the right to bear arms (2nd Amendment), and protection against unreasonable search and seizure (4th Amendment).

I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.

Ha ha brilliant. I love it when a yank gets all 'up in arms' about their constitution. It just a document folks not Holy Scripture. All documents change with the times, that's what history is all about.

I don't live in England. I live in different part of the United Kingdom. I will leave you to work it out. Enjoy your chewing tobacco.

It's much more then a document Knockagh. It's a system of belief that I've spent 12 years of my life defending, and have sworn to give my life to, if ever necessary.

It's another one of those culture things. So far, all you've managed to do is insult our culture again and again in this thread. I'm personally getting tired of it.

Knockagh wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Knockagh wrote:


American people were tried and convicted of aiding Irish terrorists many times and of the specific crimes of arms smuggling, but many terrorist shipments got through the graveyards of my country are testament to it.

I shoot myself I have a 12 gauge shotgun I need on the farm and an .22 air rifle I use for target shooting. All ammunition I must purchase and be recorded on my licence. My guns are inspected regularly in my home by police officers as are all licensed gun holders weapons. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

The United States Constitution guarantees me the right to bear arms (2nd Amendment), and protection against unreasonable search and seizure (4th Amendment).

I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.

Ha ha brilliant. I love it when a yank gets all 'up in arms' about their constitution. It just a document folks not Holy Scripture. All documents change with the times, that's what history is all about.

I don't live in England. I live in different part of the United Kingdom. I will leave you to work it out. Enjoy your chewing tobacco.

The document has changed in time. It guarantees us certain protections. That's why it was AMENDED.

It's fairly common practice to assume that all Americans are tobacco chewing fast food eating fat asses, but I am not one of them, and that sort of attitude is childish, ignorant, and obnoxious.

Knockagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:


I'll be honest. I can't understand the rest of what you typed. Your accent is coming through.

Thats why you are in the colonies....

Wrong. I am in Texas.

Knockagh wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Knockagh wrote:


American people were tried and convicted of aiding Irish terrorists many times and of the specific crimes of arms smuggling, but many terrorist shipments got through the graveyards of my country are testament to it.

I shoot myself I have a 12 gauge shotgun I need on the farm and an .22 air rifle I use for target shooting. All ammunition I must purchase and be recorded on my licence. My guns are inspected regularly in my home by police officers as are all licensed gun holders weapons. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

The United States Constitution guarantees me the right to bear arms (2nd Amendment), and protection against unreasonable search and seizure (4th Amendment).

I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.

Ha ha brilliant. I love it when a yank gets all 'up in arms' about their constitution. It just a document folks not Holy Scripture. All documents change with the times, that's what history is all about.

I don't live in England. I live in different part of the United Kingdom. I will leave you to work it out. Enjoy your chewing tobacco.

Pardon me, but aren't there clauses in the Magna Carta still in effect? What would happen over there if those clauses were revoked? BTW, I'm no Skoal brother, never used the stuff.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.

The PATRIOT Act, gun laws that ban guns based on how they look, and if I may be so bold, expecting a personal armory of firearms to protect you from everything is no less a foolish assumption that expecting the government to protect you everything.

Relapse wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
Perhaps may I suggest that the point I was trying to make was not that "War widows deserve no sympathy" but that it is wrong and immoral to use someones death regardless of how close they were to you to purse a political agenda or to cause more anger and distress. That In seeing the people who lost their husband to the tragedy that was Bengazhi push the idea that because their husband's died the fact that I, by playing Video games was destroying this Country was not only offensive to me because she was insulting me but because she was using the death of an Ambassador Stevens, the two Navy seals, and Sean Smith as a platform from which to insult others.

I know its odd to say, but perhaps the fact that I was offended that she would turn peoples deaths into political talking points proves that I regard military sacrifice with respect rather than what you suggest that I "Don't give a gak about soldiers"

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you got pissed at a woman who just lost her husband in a horrific way because someone's wife got offended at the fact you were talking about a video game you were playing at his memorial? It seems to me there is far more to the story than is being told here, and I wish I had the chance to hear what her side of the incident was.

I said that, on the other side of the room, after the memorial while everyone was eating and speaking I quietly mentioned to my father what I would do when I get come. I wasn't loudly announcing my intentions I wasn't attempting to inform anyone other than the person standing right next to me of what I was going to do when I got home.

During the actual memorial outside I was standing silently about 20 feet away from the seating, and would have been incapable of discussing anything with anyone as I was standing by myself with my trumpet.

She also stood up and made her announcement about her dislike of video games and how she hated facebook, and other things ect. The point of all my original posts you seemed to have missed was that I don't think it is right to use soldiers death for political gain regardless of political allegiance.

How did she then hear you, if you were talking quietly on the other side of the room?

I never said she heard me, although I do not discount that did because sometimes I talk louder than I think I do and the room wasn't all that big, but that she went on I tirade about video games and social media in general.

I probably took what she was saying to everyone more personally then I should have, but her way of using her dead husband as a political platform still upset me.

I recommend a trip over over to the Something Awful forums, Sean Smith was an avid poster over there and the way his death has been twisted makes them very upset about it.

You say that she pointed you out right after you talked about it, so I assumed you meant she heard you. To tell the truth, I think her husband being killed upset her quite a bit more than you did. But I think we are taking this too far off topic, so I bow out of this thread.

This was in 2013 not in 2012 so it wasn't RIGHT after it happened. I do get your point about her being upset (because at a memorial people get upset) but it still does not excuse the general use of a persons death as a platform from which to cast hate and bile at other people (Not me in particular).

But at this point the discussion of what happened at that memorial service (or rather what happened at the reception after) has gone the route of me just posting the same thing over and over explaining that the point wasn't she was mad at me, was that she was using a brave mans death to tell everyone what they should hate.

The constitution contains provisions for changing it, and has been amended many times.

Surely you do not disbelieve that?

 djones520 wrote:
It's much more then a document Knockagh. It's a system of belief that I've spent 12 years of my life defending, and have sworn to give my life to, if ever necessary.

It's another one of those culture things. So far, all you've managed to do is insult our culture again and again in this thread. I'm personally getting tired of it.

Its ok. Southern Comfort, Jack Daniels, and dark rum beats Irish whiskey and Irish stew like a redheaded...oh never mind.

 LordofHats wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.

The PATRIOT Act, gun laws that ban guns based on how they look, and if I may be so bold, expecting a personal armory of firearms to protect you from everything is no less a foolish assumption that expecting the government to protect you everything.

Like the L.A. Riots, where the gun owners were the only ones able to defend their property since the cops there told everyone they were on their own.

 CptJake wrote:

Knockagh wrote:

I shoot myself I have a 12 gauge shotgun I need on the farm and an .22 air rifle I use for target shooting. All ammunition I must purchase and be recorded on my licence. My guns are inspected regularly in my home by police officers as are all licensed gun holders weapons. My shotgun is a tool I need to do my job it's not a toy or a source of amusement, it is what it is a weapon designed to end life.

So, your job is to End Life. I guess it is good work if you can get it.


I'm amazed that a life taker such as yourself is happy with police regularly coming into your home to inspect your private property. Really is a difference in cultures.

Now in the off chance your job is not to actually End Life, and instead it is to protect property/livestock, then your tool allows you to do so. So now we are looking at the tool as a means to protect life and property, which is the way many of us view the tool. The action of taking a life in the accomplishment of that protection really does not take away the fact that the goal is indeed protection.

Last year in order to protect the life of my livestock I have shot five fox and a stray dog......

Why would anyone have an issue with the police coming into their house?

 LordofHats wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


I don't speak for all Americans, but I have no interest whatsoever in living as you do in England, and thankfully an ocean separates me from the willful embrace of tyranny, the knee-jerk emotional approaches to lawmaking, and people who assume that the government can protect them from everything.

The PATRIOT Act, gun laws that ban guns based on how they look, and if I may be so bold, expecting a personal armory of firearms to protect you from everything is no less a foolish assumption that expecting the government to protect you everything.

Everything? No. But if a bunch of thugs kick down my door at 4 in the morning, I'd rather have an AR15 than a telephone with the President of the United States, Delta Force, Seal Team 6, and Chuck Norris on the other end of the line.

A bomb could be dropped on your house tomorrow. Gun ain't gonna stop it.

An assumption is an assumption. You can either put your father in guns, or government, or pony magic, or all of the above. At the end of the day, it's still an assumption that gets blown out of the water by outliers so my advice is not to live in a fantasy land where you have any more control than most other people.

But if a bunch of thugs kick down my door at 4 in the morning, I'd rather have an AR15 than a telephone with the President of the United States, Delta Force, Seal Team 6, and Chuck Norris on the other end of the line.

And when they gun you down and rob you anyway, which is always a possibility, maybe you'd still be alive if you just let them come and go. Or maybe not.

Why would anyone have an issue with the police coming into their house?

And that there is a difference between cultures wider then oceans.
Police coming in without invite are what we call a dictatorship.

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:

 Spacemanvic wrote:

 Alexzandvar wrote:
That point of what I was saying was that I the reason I am not all upset and up in arms about the former SEAL's death is because within my family the sacrifice of death in battle is something that is regarded with respect but is not something to be ultra angry or ultra sad over. It is depressing sure, but if we let everything depressing or angering in our lives get to us we would be naught but emotional wrecks all the time.

Call it grim if you want, I call it recognition that my ancestors died for something worth fighting for and that by debasing ourselves and causing more hatred and anger and death over theirs serves not their memory but to poison it and corrupt it.

And Martian man, if you honestly think me talking about how I respect and honor my ancestors and their sacrifice is "hanging myself with my own words" then let me hang. I don't really mind all your scorn, but don't talk as If I do not regard what my family has sacrificed for this country with pride.

Hey Allie:

Not all of us have forgotten our oaths.

Wish you understood yours (or not yet maybe, have you contracted yet ? God I hope not).

Yes I have contracted, 4 year ROTC scholarship .

And what oaths do you speak of? I'm interested to know how in discussing the restriction/allowance of fire arms I am breaking an oath.

To be fair I don't really think the best way to get your point across is insults and implications I am unfit for military service, one of the big reason the Republican Party is losing ground is that insults and bad implications are not a good way to sell a point/political platform/idea

Said the kettle. Time to do a gut check Allie.

I would like you to answer my original question: What oaths am I breaking here?

Your also suggesting that my appeal that others should not let there passion about their right own and use a firearm blind them in the same way people let their political platform blind them

You also don't need to call me Allie, I would like to think we can speak kindly here.

 LordofHats wrote:
A bomb could be dropped on your house tomorrow. Gun ain't gonna stop it.

An assumption is an assumption. You can either put your father in guns, or government, or pony magic, or all of the above. At the end of the day, it's still an assumption that gets blown out of the water by outliers.

I've never had a bomb dropped on my house. In fact, none of my neighbors have experienced that either. But I have used a lawfully-carried handgun for self defense, and I know several other people who have done the same.

 LordofHats wrote:
A bomb could be dropped on your house tomorrow. Gun ain't gonna stop it.

An assumption is an assumption. You can either put your father in guns, or government, or pony magic, or all of the above. At the end of the day, it's still an assumption that gets blown out of the water by outliers.

You're going to put your father in guns? Finally someone else who is living the dream I want to live when I die - to be cremated and formed into bullets, to be shot at a list included in the will

Wife: "Stand here"
X: "What are you doing?"
Wife: "Its in the will. Don't move!"
Blam!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I've never had a bomb dropped on my house.

TBone the Magnificent can drop a bomb that will clear a room in seconds.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


I've never had a bomb dropped on my house. In fact, none of my neighbors have experienced that either. But I have used a lawfully-carried handgun for self defense, and I know several other people who have done the same.

But if a bunch of thugs kick down my door at 4 in the morning, I'd rather have an AR15 than a telephone with the President of the United States, Delta Force, Seal Team 6, and Chuck Norris on the other end of the line.

And when they gun you down and rob you anyway, which is always a possibility, maybe you'd still be alive if you just let them come and go. Or maybe not. You simply assume that because you have a gun you are safe, which is bull. It makes you feel safer. If you really want to guarantee your safety, you're better off jumping out the back door and running away.

Its better to have a gun and not need it, and need it, but not have it.

you're better off jumping out the back door and running away.

Says someone with knees that let them do more than walk, and not protecting children in the house.

Gotta admit I would trade my principles for a bolt pistol!!

 LordofHats wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:


I've never had a bomb dropped on my house. In fact, none of my neighbors have experienced that either. But I have used a lawfully-carried handgun for self defense, and I know several other people who have done the same.

But if a bunch of thugs kick down my door at 4 in the morning, I'd rather have an AR15 than a telephone with the President of the United States, Delta Force, Seal Team 6, and Chuck Norris on the other end of the line.

And when they gun you down and rob you anyway, which is always a possibility, maybe you'd still be alive if you just let them come and go. Or maybe not. You simply assume that because you have a gun you are safe, which is bull. It makes you feel safer. If you really want to guarantee your safety, you're better off jumping out the back door and running away.

In all fairness, if a bunch of thugs break down the front door, I wouldn't run away even if I could because chances are better than good my wife or kids would be trapped in the house with them. I would just as well not prefer to leave my family in the hands of thugs, who are not known for being men of good will.

 Frazzled wrote:

Why would anyone have an issue with the police coming into their house?

And that there is a difference between cultures wider then oceans.
Police coming in without invite are what we call a dictatorship.

There was a shooting in Alexandria the other day right across from my parents house, I was home at the time and I did not fear the officer who knocked on our door and informed us that the shooting had happened and asked for any information we could provide on the suspect.

He wasn't invited, but I was glad the Alexandria Police Department is willing to go door to door asking if people are okay, and offering to search peoples houses for the suspect if there scared.

I don't understand being afraid of cops, but then again, I live in an area with a well functioning police department and I dislike how police often profile people in places like New York.

 Frazzled wrote:
Its better to have a gun and not need it, and need it, but not have it.

I'm not arguing against guns per se, but rather that belief the government will protect you is somehow a worse option. Both involve faith (or fathers apparently ), and acting like its a one or nothing deal, or that either is any less an assumption is delusional.

Says someone with knees that let them do more than walk, and not protecting children in the house.

And guns often get used in hypothetical 'what if my house is robbed' scenarios not as a means of protecting the family but as a means of affirming one's own pride (and that's not an insult, it's just a fact). If you want to protect your family, risking a gun fight in your house has some downsides. GTFO or "take what you want" probably have similar chances of success depending*.

*GTFO probably won't work if you're in an apartment