🚀 go-pugleaf

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C564E8.6A788240
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


  "Whizbang" <whizbang@correctopinions.com> wrote in message =
news:429A9AEE.9F6CCB1B@correctopinions.com...
  Fine, back to my original argument, since nobody seems to be able to =
follow a thread .......=20
  1) a gun that's advertised by its manufacturer as being able to shoot =
down an aircraft should NOT be classified as having a sporting purpose, =
as the NRA is trying to do in the state of Illinois, for example.=20



  Please cite an advertisement by a manufacturer that their gun can =
shoot down an aircraft.=20

  Second please explain how an advertisement by the manufacturer in any =
manner controls how the gun is used for sporting purposes. I mean we see =
car ads where the person is driving at reckless speed through mountain =
roads, but that doesn't govern how the car is normally used.





  2) there's no reason you can't defend yourself with a shotgun or a =
hunting rifle or a handgun ..... you don't need a gun with a giant clip; =
if you do, then you're too stupid to own a gun in the first place=20



  Sure, I can defend myself with those, or what I chose to. You, =
however, have no business telling me what I can and can not defend =
myself with. Further please explain this "giant clip" of yours. Mine is =
no larger than those used by the police and if it's good enough for =
them, then it should be good enough for me.



  3) there is NO record of police or any other authorities using gun =
purchase records to harass honest citizens,

  Then you better go back and do some research. California did EXACTLY =
that. Also you might want to research the program "Forward Trace" for =
another example.



   only to track down those who buy huge amounts of guns to resell to =
criminals, therefore there's no reason we can't keep gun purchase / =
background check records around for more than 24 hours=20

  Except your primus above is flawed, and as such there is every reason =
not to retain these records.=20



  As far as you missing something, YEAH ...... assault style weapons are =
highly favored by gangs ...... they're not designed for sport, only for =
killing humans, therefore they don't belong in civilian hands.=20



  Except that even the government admits that "assault style weapons" =
are rarely used by gangs and are under representated in crime satistics. =
For something you claim aren't used for sporting, they are used largely =
for exactly that purpose. Your problem is you think you know a lot, you =
have a lot of emotion but your arguements are hardly informed, educated, =
thought out, or objective. You don't like certain guns and that's that.=20



  Further I note your inability to address the issues I raised and =
instead diverted the discussion by stating another list of your =
objections. Tell me what you consider "reasonable limits". Explain to me =
why we should prohibit "military style" arms, particularly given their =
common and regular useage as sporting arms.=20

  http://www.correctopinions.com=20
   =20

  Scout wrote:=20

      "Whizbang" <whizbang@correctopinions.com> wrote in message =
news:429944C8.F32955FF@correctopinions.com...Amateur Cichlids wrote:=20
          "Whizbang" <whizbang@correctopinions.com> wrote in message =
news:429529F0.53B16823@correctopinions.com...Gun grabbers? C'mon.=20
          Gun nuts all want all types of guns available all the time, =
with any kind of ammo, even when it's of a brand that should rightfully =
(as even Bush admitted before his balls shrivelled on him) be available =
to the military only.

        The term gun nuts already sets up a bias that really taints your =
entire argument. From where I sit, it seems you are saying anyone that =
would own a gun is a nut. Those like Michael Moore who speak against =
owning guns but make sure their bodyguards have them, where do they =
fall?
      No, I don't believe that all guns have to disappear. When I say =
gun nuts, I mean those who favor no reasonable limits whatsoever. =
Military style weapons have no place in civilian life, no self-defense =
purposes, and no sporting purpose.

      Please define what YOU consider reasonable limits.

      And what exactly do YOU mean by military style weapons? Most guns =
are either used by one military or another, were used by one military or =
another, or derived from guns used by one military or another. So what =
do you consider to be military style weapons, and explain to me why they =
have no purpose in civilian life. You claim they have no self defense =
purpose, but it seems to me a military style weapon will defend =
someone's life just as well if not better than any other sort of weapon. =
You claim they have no sporting purpose as if military style weapons =
aren't just as effective at target practice, varmint hunting, hunting, =
plinking, and other sporting purposes as other guns. Sorry, but I must =
be one of your gun nuts, because I just can't seem to see how what the =
military does with it has any bearing on whether it has a place in =
civilian life, particularly when it can and does fulfill functions which =
are entirely suitable for civilian life. So explain it to me, maybe I'm =
missing something.=20
       
------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C564E8.6A788240
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2627" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>"Whizbang" &lt;<A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:whizbang@correctopinions.com">whizbang@correctopinions.com=
</A>&gt;=20
  wrote in message <A=20
  =
href=3D"news:429A9AEE.9F6CCB1B@correctopinions.com">news:429A9AEE.9F6CCB1=
B@correctopinions.com</A>...</DIV>Fine,=20
  back to my original argument, since nobody seems to be able to follow =
a thread=20
  .......=20
  <P>1) a gun that's advertised by its manufacturer as being able to =
shoot down=20
  an aircraft should NOT be classified as having a sporting purpose, as =
the NRA=20
  is trying to do in the state of Illinois, for example.=20
  <P>&nbsp;
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Please cite an advertisement by a =
manufacturer=20
  that their gun can shoot down an aircraft. </FONT>
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Second please explain how an =
advertisement by=20
  the manufacturer in any manner controls how the gun is used for =
sporting=20
  purposes. I mean we see car ads where the person is driving at =
reckless speed=20
  through mountain roads, but that doesn't govern how the car is =
normally=20
  used.</FONT>
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;
  <P><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;
  <P>2) there's no reason you can't defend yourself with a shotgun or a =
hunting=20
  rifle or a handgun ..... you don't need a gun with a giant clip; if =
you do,=20
  then you're too stupid to own a gun in the first place=20
  <P>&nbsp;
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Sure, I can defend myself with =
those, or what I=20
  chose to. You, however, have no business telling me what I can and can =
not=20
  defend myself with. Further please explain this "giant clip" of yours. =
Mine is=20
  no larger than those used by the police and if it's good enough for =
them, then=20
  it should be good enough for me.</FONT>
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;
  <P>3) there is NO record of police or any other authorities using gun =
purchase=20
  records to harass honest citizens,
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Then you better go back and do some =
research.=20
  California did EXACTLY that. Also you might want to research the =
program=20
  "Forward Trace" for another example.</FONT>
  <P><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;
  <P>&nbsp;only to track down those who buy huge amounts of guns to =
resell to=20
  criminals, therefore there's no reason we can't keep gun purchase / =
background=20
  check records around for more than 24 hours=20
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Except your primus above is flawed, =
and as such=20
  there is every reason not to retain these records. </FONT>
  <P><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;
  <P>As far as you missing something, YEAH ...... assault style weapons =
are=20
  highly favored by gangs ...... they're not designed for sport, only =
for=20
  killing humans, therefore they don't belong in civilian hands.=20
  <P>&nbsp;
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Except that even the government =
admits that=20
  "assault style weapons" are rarely used by gangs and are under =
representated=20
  in crime satistics. For something you claim aren't used for sporting, =
they are=20
  used largely for exactly that purpose. Your problem is you think you =
know a=20
  lot, you have a lot of emotion but your arguements are hardly =
informed,=20
  educated, thought out, or objective. You don't like certain guns and =
that's=20
  that. </FONT>
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;
  <P><FONT color=3D#ff0000 size=3D2>Further I note your inability to =
address the=20
  issues I raised and instead diverted the discussion by stating another =
list of=20
  your objections. Tell me what you consider "reasonable limits". =
Explain to me=20
  why we should prohibit "military style" arms, particularly given their =
common=20
  and regular useage as sporting arms. </FONT>
  <P><A =
href=3D"http://www.correctopinions.com">http://www.correctopinions.com</A=
>=20
  <BR>&nbsp;=20
  <P>Scout wrote:=20
  <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3D"CITE">
    <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
    style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">"Whizbang"=20
      &lt;<A=20
      =
href=3D"mailto:whizbang@correctopinions.com">whizbang@correctopinions.com=
</A>&gt;=20
      wrote in message <A=20
      =
href=3D"news:429944C8.F32955FF@correctopinions.com">news:429944C8.F32955F=
F@correctopinions.com</A>...Amateur=20
      Cichlids wrote:=20
      <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3D"CITE">
        <STYLE></STYLE>

        <BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
        style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">"Whizbang"=20
          &lt;<A=20
          =
href=3D"mailto:whizbang@correctopinions.com">whizbang@correctopinions.com=
</A>&gt;=20
          wrote in message <A=20
          =
href=3D"news:429529F0.53B16823@correctopinions.com">news:429529F0.53B1682=
3@correctopinions.com</A>...Gun=20
          grabbers? C'mon.=20
          <P>Gun nuts all want all types of guns available all the time, =
with=20
          any kind of ammo, even when it's of a brand that should =
rightfully (as=20
          even Bush admitted before his balls shrivelled on him) be =
available to=20
          the military only.</P></BLOCKQUOTE>
        <DIV dir=3Dltr>The term gun nuts already sets up a bias that =
really taints=20
        your entire argument. From where I sit, it seems you are saying =
anyone=20
        that would own a gun is a nut. Those like Michael Moore who =
speak=20
        against owning guns but make sure their bodyguards have them, =
where do=20
        they fall?</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
      <DIV dir=3Dltr>No, I don't believe that all guns have to =
disappear. When I=20
      say gun nuts, I mean those who favor no reasonable limits =
whatsoever.=20
      Military style weapons have no place in civilian life, no =
self-defense=20
      purposes, and no sporting purpose.</DIV>
      <DIV dir=3Dltr>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV dir=3Dltr><FONT color=3D#ff0000><FONT size=3D-1>Please define =
what YOU=20
      consider reasonable limits.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
      <DIV dir=3Dltr>&nbsp;</DIV>
      <DIV dir=3Dltr><FONT color=3D#ff0000><FONT size=3D-1>And what =
exactly do YOU=20
      mean by military style weapons? Most guns are either used by one =
military=20
      or another, were used by one military or another, or derived from =
guns=20
      used by one military or another. So what do you consider to be =
military=20
      style weapons, and explain to me why they have no purpose in =
civilian=20
      life. You claim they have no self defense purpose, but it seems to =
me a=20
      military style weapon will defend someone's life just as well if =
not=20
      better than any other sort of weapon. You claim they have no =
sporting=20
      purpose as if military style weapons aren't just as effective at =
target=20
      practice, varmint hunting, hunting, plinking, and other sporting =
purposes=20
      as other guns. Sorry, but I must be one of your gun nuts, because =
I just=20
      can't seem to see how what the military does with it has any =
bearing on=20
      whether it has a place in civilian life, particularly when it can =
and does=20
      fulfill functions which are entirely suitable for civilian life. =
So=20
      explain it to me, maybe I'm missing something.</FONT></FONT> =
<BR><FONT=20
      color=3D#ff0000><FONT=20
  =
size=3D-1></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOT=
E></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C564E8.6A788240--