guns and religion

83 posts / 0 new

way back in 2008, i remember a presidential candidate saying that there are folks who "[cling] to guns or religion" and have distrust of federal government. that comment got said candidate lambasted in the "liberal" media. right-wingers said that that kind of rhetoric was racist. (or reverse-racist, or whatever.)

"But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

considering the rise of the "tea party," and the re-emergence of christian whack-jobs with guns advocating taking up arms agin' the fed'rals, i think the candidate's remarks were fairly prescient.

now, who was that candidate?

in any case, it seems to me that these "patriots" are criticizing democrats for something that hasn't been done to them: raising taxes. i'm going to go out on a limb and say that there are no tea partiers who reside in the the top 2% of wealth or income.

if debt and deficit are your complaint against the current administration, did you get outraged when congress raised the debt ceiling to $10 trillion at the urging of the previous administration where was the tea party then?

sleeper's picture
sleeper
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Comments

Quote sleeper:

if debt and deficit are your complaint against the current administration, did you get outraged when congress raised the debt ceiling to $10 trillion at the urging of the previous administration where was the tea party then?

Yes, I was outraged.

Bush's budget was bad enough, Obama raising the debt ceiling by 2 trillion dollars in one year is out of control.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

Costs more to fix something than to wreck it. Most people figure that out before reaching adulthood.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Somehow I missed the anti-war spending protests from the fiscally conservative Right. I have heard individuals say that they opposed these wars, but they did not organized any political protests or participate in them. There were anti-war vets in the Peace protests, but we caught rhetorical hell from the Proud Patriots waving their bloody flags. We were for the terrorists, etc.

Had any real Righties been there in the protest, I wish they had gone over to the flag-wavers and told them why they were there and to stop calling the true fiscal conservatives traitors. But they were not there.

And I wish our deficit hawks could appreciate what needs to be done to fix this economy. When capitalism goes into its spasms, you can choose to kill everything until the spasms stop, or you can try to cure the patient without killing him. That means pumping blood into the patient on the operating table until the operation is done and the recovery from the surgery is adequate.

Money is only the blood for this economy. Saving it in the blood bank does not make you wealthy or healthy. It just makes you dead with blood in the bank. Keeping people in homes and businesses from closing is what the government has to do because the privates cannot. The fact that it "cannot" is good reason to change the system as well, but right now there is no way to compel Wall St. to do what America needs.

The answer is to do it by government instead, and no, it is not about "spending" as opposed to investing. It is totally the latter. War is totally the former, and so is Wall St. speculation. We call it "investing," but speculation is really about playing with money, not about creating value. The stimulus spending is about creating value as well as keeping people and communities from going through much more serious trauma.

There is some tough guy talk about letting the economy do its thing and starting over, but the expense in the lives of real Americans is immense. Repairing the damage will be more costly than preventing or minimizing it. It is not that deficits never matter, it is just that right now keeping the economy alive requires Emergency Room economics.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote drew013:

Costs more to fix something than to wreck it. Most people figure that out before reaching adulthood.

How exactly is Obama fixing it?

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

On a basic level, I never understood the nexus of guns and religion.

In my most zealous gun ownership faze I shied away from the NRA and most of what they stood for.

In my most zealous religious faze, I had difficulty reconciling with my gun collection.

As a anti gun atheist, I still have difficulty wrapping my head around the need for one to justify the other.

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote DRC:

The answer is to do it by government instead, and no, it is not about "spending" as opposed to investing. It is totally the latter. War is totally the former, and so is Wall St. speculation. We call it "investing," but speculation is really about playing with money, not about creating value. The stimulus spending is about creating value as well as keeping people and communities from going through much more serious trauma.

So, Obama spends more money on the wars in the middle east and gives trillions to Wall Street and you call that "investing" ......after calling it spending. How is the stimulus money creating value?

There is some tough guy talk about letting the economy do its thing and starting over, but the expense in the lives of real Americans is immense. Repairing the damage will be more costly than preventing or minimizing it. It is not that deficits never matter, it is just that right now keeping the economy alive requires Emergency Room economics.

How is the repair being done? Quadrupling the spending that didn't work when Bush floated 350 billion to Wall Street in '08?

DRC, from your point of view, what is the damage done and how is Obama repairing anything. Please be specific.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote norske:

On a basic level, I never understood the nexus of guns and religion.

In my most zealous gun ownership faze I shied away from the NRA and most of what they stood for.

In my most zealous religious faze, I had difficulty reconciling with my gun collection.

As a anti gun atheist, I still have difficulty wrapping my head around the need for one to justify the other.

I don't get the correlation either. What does one have to do with the other?

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

"I don't get the correlation either. What does one have to do with the other?" slabmaster

You would think/hope none.

Friday, February 26, 2010Guns and Religion: a Scary MixA Baptist pastor/evangelist recently opened a gun store in Smithfield, N.C., along with lots of help from his wife and his son, who manages the store.

They were stuck on a name for the the store, which features handguns along with full line of rifles and shotguns, until his wife dreamed that God told her to name it after the Second Amendment, which speaks of a constitutional right for citizens to bear arms -- and that they should call it the "2nd Amen-ment Gun Shop."

When I read the article in the News and Observer, I wanted to throw up. Seriously.

The same day, I heard a radio clip of presidential wanna-be Sarah Palin stumping for Texas governor Rick Parry, a Republican who's running for reelection. To raucous cheers, Palin said "A lot of us in our states proudly cling to our guns and religion."

I almost had to pull over.

What is wrong with our country -- what is wrong with the American brand of Christianity -- that leaves it open to such perversion? What are we thinking? The twisted notion of combining guns and religion in any way -- much less citing them as top core values -- calls for the most vehement objection, and yet huge masses of people cheer! Jesus must stand on his head at the thought of his teaching -- which calls for humility and self-sacrifice -- being morphed into a gospel of macho bang-o cowboy conservatism -- yet millions of Americans have been led to believe that gun-slinging and Bible-toting are somehow akin.

That picture is so wrong that you could throw it in the dump and the garbage would throw it back.

It's not Denmark that has the problem. Something is rotten in the state of Texas, and Alaska, and North Carolina and . . .Posted by Tony W. Cartledge

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Just exactly how is stocking up on guns ...a merging of weapons and religion....compatible with this?

"They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore." - Isaiah 9:5

Retired Monk

"Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Pull off the blinders and look around. If you can't see what is starting to happen right in front of your face, it ain't my problem. Don't really have the time to explain it all appropriately. Sorry.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I buy guns regularly and I am a Christian.

Never really thought the two were something to worry about.

Some people gotta have a target to hate I suppose.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

" I buy guns regularly and I am a christian "

Is that the redneck eqivilent of a really rich dude buying loads of ferrari's? Why do you want so many weapons, how often is regularly, twice a week? I eat regularly, three times a day. I saw a bumber sticker which read, " Jesus please protect me from from your followers " That also just about sums it all up.

Christians with guns, almost as silly as Jews for Jesus.

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Bulawayo2:

" I buy guns regularly and I am a christian "

Is that the redneck eqivilent of a really rich dude buying loads of ferrari's? Why do you want so many weapons, how often is regularly, twice a week? I eat regularly, three times a day. I saw a bumber sticker which read, " Jesus please protect me from from your followers " That also just about sums it all up.

Christians with guns, almost as silly as Jews for Jesus.

I like weapons and shooting. I buy 3-4 guns per month usually. Sometimes more. I sell some that I don't like too. The great thing about this country is that I can still enjoy what I want and have freedoms to shoot and own guns. Can't imagine living in the shackles of others countries belligerent and domineering governments.

Speaking of Ferarri, I looked seriously at buying an F430 earlier this year but decided against it. Though Porsche's are very common around here, they're just a better regular driver and perform on par. I must be succumbing to responsible spending habits foisted on me by my wife the bean counter.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

For me it was just a personal observation within my own zeitgeist. Myself and other gun owners which I associated with back in the day did not have a 'siege' mentality and did not 'hoard' weapons. Carrying a weapon on our person never entered our minds.

The churches I associated with back then were predominantly progressive and focused on helping the hungry, homeless, and other disadvantaged sorts.

I look around today and see the morphing of guns and religion and I wonder how did it all go to hell in a hand basket.

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote norske:

For me it was just a personal observation within my own zeitgeist. Myself and other gun owners which I associated with back in the day did not have a 'siege' mentality and did not 'hoard' weapons. Carrying a weapon on our person never entered our minds.

The churches I associated with back then were predominantly progressive and focused on helping the hungry, homeless, and other disadvantaged sorts.

I look around today and see the morphing of guns and religion and I wonder how did it all go to hell in a hand basket.

I associate with a couple hundred gun owners regularly (weekly) and none have any seige mentality. None are really afraid of the government as alot of them work for the government. Most see the reality of zealot politicians that will enact laws and/or taxes to infringe on our rights. That is a reality. It comes to light every 4 years. Some people "hoarding" is anothers hobby. Some people I know have a thousand bottles of wine and it's a passion. Who am I to question it? It's their business.

The church I go to provides hundreds of thousands in charity to those hungry, homeless, and disadvataged. They have dozens of community services dedicated to it. It's the real focus. I wouldn't call them progressive. I'd call them Christian.

I don't see the morphing.

I see rehtorical hype.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

slabmaster wrote: "I like weapons and shooting. I buy 3-4 guns per month usually. Sometimes more. I sell some that I don't like too. The great thing about this country is that I can still enjoy what I want and have freedoms to shoot and own guns. Can't imagine living in the shackles of others countries belligerent and domineering governments."

Do you follow the Federal and your state's laws about selling guns? Or do you believe you're above the law and these people should have guns too:

The following groups of people are ineligible to own firearms under the Gun Control Act of 1968 .

  • Those convicted of felonies and certain misdemeanors
  • Fugitives from justice
  • Unlawful users of certain depressant, narcotic, or stimulant drugs
  • Those adjudicated as mental defectives or incompetents or those committed to any mental institution and currently containing a dangerous mental illness.
  • Illegal Aliens
  • Those who have renounced U.S. citizenship
  • Those persons dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces
  • Minors defined as under the age of eighteen for long guns and handguns
  • Persons subject to a restraining order
  • Persons convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (an addition)
  • Persons under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year are ineligible to receive, transport, or ship any firearm or ammunition.

In its flagship magazine, First Freedom, the NRA told its members that:

"Lethal Logic presents what will likely be the key talking points for gun control advocates and their media allies in the coming months and years."

Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths That Paralyze American Gun Policy by Dennis A Henigan

Product Description

“Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.”

“When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

“An armed society is a polite society.”

Who hasn’t heard these engaging assertions, time and time again? Burned into the national consciousness by years of targeted, disciplined messaging by the National Rifle Association and others, they are just a few of the bumper-sticker slogans that have defined the gun control debate in America. Long ridiculed by gun control advocates, they are the first words that come to mind for most Americans when the gun issue is discussed.

This is the first book both to acknowledge the profound and deadly impact of the gun lobby’s bumper-sticker logic on the gun control debate and to systematically expose the misguided thinking at the core of the pro-gun slogans. Indeed, the author contends that the gun lobby’s remarkable success in blocking passage of lifesaving gun laws is the result, in large part, of its relentless and effective use of these simple and resonant messages. Their persuasive power has been a largely ignored influence on the current politics of gun control, in which the gun lobby wields unprecedented power in the Republican Party, while many Democratic Party leaders see the policy benefits of stronger gun laws as not worth the political risk of standing up to the NRA. The book contends that the current political stalemate over guns will never be broken until the pro-gun slogans are exposed as the cleverly disguised fallacies that they are.About the Author Dennis A. Henigan is the Vice President for Law and Policy at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and Founder of its Legal Action Project. For twenty years, he has been a leading advocate for stronger gun laws, appearing dozens of times on national television shows, including 60 Minutes, The Today Show, Nightline, Larry King Live, and Dateline NBC. Henigan coauthored Guns and the Constitution: The Myth of Second Amendment Protection for Firearms in America (Aletheia Press, 1995).

rowdyliberal
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote rowdyliberal:

slabmaster wrote: "I like weapons and shooting. I buy 3-4 guns per month usually. Sometimes more. I sell some that I don't like too. The great thing about this country is that I can still enjoy what I want and have freedoms to shoot and own guns. Can't imagine living in the shackles of others countries belligerent and domineering governments."

Do you follow the Federal and your state's laws about selling guns? Or do you believe you're above the law and these people should have guns too:

I've been an FFL dealer for over 25 years.

Swing and a miss, RL....once again.

FYI, guns can be sold through the want ads in the paper by a private party to anyone by you, the average citizen. I get scrutinized far more as I have taken the step to make it a business. Never had an issue. In a town of over 2 million, we don't have a problem with gang warfare and shooting deaths are low. Strange huh? Compare it to similar size cities with strict gun ownership regulation and/or confiscation such as Wa.DC, Detroit, Chicago, L.A. Pittsburg, NYC, Boston,......

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

Like I said, my personal observations. I wouldn't exactly equate secreting guns about the house and speaking rapturously of their killing power with collecting bottles of wine, but hey, whatever gets you through the day.

Glib responses aside, the comingling of church and gun is a strange evolution to observe. At least where I am from.

norske's picture
norske
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Hey Slab, Your rhetoric is sounding dangerously close to Footprints. almost boasting how much you have etc.,

So you buy on average 40 guns a year, not sure what to say about that statistic, paranoia? probably. Me I'm searching for the place that gives one the freedom not to own a gun. Being a so called christian and armed with what must be hundreds of guns, I'm assuming you are over 21? Makes you the biggest looney on here, a christian gun nut, Jesus would have been proud of you. Or are you an old testament type of christian? either way it sounds like you might need some psychiatric treatment. What on earth do you want hundreds of guns for.

This is a windup isn't it?

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

The issue for me is less about the tool than the attitude of the one using it. If Slab likes to hunt or sport shoot and he has friends who share those interests, they use their guns to pursue those ends. No problem.

When a National Cult identifies part of the population as "real" and the other as not quite right with God, the meme of religious war has been planted and the tool acquires a more sinister meaning. I think the Right is crazy and dangerous, but I don't think they are inherently evil or cursed by Satan. I am not planning for an America where they are eliminated. They do have to learn to get along with the rest of us, but we are not saying that "they" have no place in "our" America.

Can we all just say the Pledge of Allegiance together? Use the original if the "under God" revision is a problem.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Bulawayo2:

Hey Slab, Your rhetoric is sounding dangerously close to Footprints. almost boasting how much you have etc.,

Slabmaster and Footprint are one and the same. Apparently, for some reason he was unable to use "Footprint" on this new board, so he now uses "Slabmaster", which I understand to have been his username on a previous version of this board.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Drew, I suspected that, the styles were too similar. Most of what he writes is to provoke, he wants a reaction to his ridiculous comments. By my reckoning he must have close to a thousand guns, please tell me this is a wind-up\piss take, can there really be folk like that wandering around in our society. I know one thing if god\Jesus had anything to do with it there wouldn't be!

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

There are. I've personally known a few. Kind of sad when you think about it. But as you know, there are many forms of deviant behavior.

drew013's picture
drew013
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Bulawayo2:

Hey Slab, Your rhetoric is sounding dangerously close to Footprints. almost boasting how much you have etc.,

You're quick. Let me slow this down for you. I had to adopt Footprint as the last board wouldn't accept Slabmaster. No one knew why (probably me as the operator) so George suggested starting over. It's not a conspiracy, unless you want it to be.

So you buy on average 40 guns a year, not sure what to say about that statistic, paranoia? probably. Me I'm searching for the place that gives one the freedom not to own a gun. Being a so called christian and armed with what must be hundreds of guns, I'm assuming you are over 21? Makes you the biggest looney on here, a christian gun nut, Jesus would have been proud of you. Or are you an old testament type of christian? either way it sounds like you might need some psychiatric treatment. What on earth do you want hundreds of guns for.

This is a windup isn't it?

Give or take. As I said earlier, I sell a few too. I'd have to look, but I think currently I have 70-80 total. Scaled back a couple years ago as there were some that I just never shot and didn't want to maintain. I keep a small collection of pre-1900 models as a hobby. Oldest is a 1803 Harpers Ferry model in original flintlock (not converted). 1817 frontier rifle, 1842 Harpers Ferry, several Civil War rifles 1861 and 1863 Springfields, several Winchesters and Marlin rifles 1873, 76, 81, 94, '95, '96 '97, '98. 1873 Trapdoor Spinfields, '96 and '98 Krags, a couple of 1890ish Euro muzzel loader shotguns, an 1874 Sharps, and then into more modern military versions such as 1903 Springfields, 1917 Enfield, M1 Garrands, M14 Springfields, a few AR15's, AR57, AK47, SKS,. Several custom tactical rifles, several shotguns for various endevous, several bolt action hunting rifles, ,22's, and a whole list of various handguns from antique and new revolvers to the latest semi autos. I've got a guy pestering me to sell him a bunch of them for his collection. I don't know though. their increased value makes it tempting and then I could start over. Some people collect stamps, I collect firearms. The historical part is what is most interesting.

I am over 21 and I've been called worse than a loony or a chritian gun nut. I consider the source when being called names. Don't see the need for a shrink. Shooting is a great relaxer.

What do people want hundreds of baseball cards for? Who knows? It's not my position to tell them what they can or cannot have.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote DRC:

The issue for me is less about the tool than the attitude of the one using it. If Slab likes to hunt or sport shoot and he has friends who share those interests, they use their guns to pursue those ends. No problem.

Geez....common sense at last. Thanks for not acting paranoid and spewing sensless rehtorec as some others do, drc.

When a National Cult identifies part of the population as "real" and the other as not quite right with God, the meme of religious war has been planted and the tool acquires a more sinister meaning. I think the Right is crazy and dangerous, but I don't think they are inherently evil or cursed by Satan. I am not planning for an America where they are eliminated. They do have to learn to get along with the rest of us, but we are not saying that "they" have no place in "our" America.

Can we all just say the Pledge of Allegiance together? Use the original if the "under God" revision is a problem.

I think some people on the left are using a very small fringe element to vilify Christians and guns. It's a silly agenda IMO. It just ramps up this "them vs us" BS.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote slabmaster:

I'd have to look, but I think currently I have 70-80 total. Scaled back a couple years ago as there were some that I just never shot and didn't want to maintain. . . .and then into more modern military versions such as 1903 Springfields, 1917 Enfield, M1 Garrands, M14 Springfields, a few AR15's, AR57, AK47, SKS,.

I'm pretty sure an AK47 is fully automatic which makes it illegal, is it not?

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Choco:
Quote slabmaster:

I'd have to look, but I think currently I have 70-80 total. Scaled back a couple years ago as there were some that I just never shot and didn't want to maintain. . . .and then into more modern military versions such as 1903 Springfields, 1917 Enfield, M1 Garrands, M14 Springfields, a few AR15's, AR57, AK47, SKS,.

I'm pretty sure an AK47 is fully automatic which makes it illegal, is it not?

Decent catch Choco.

The original Kalashnikov AK-47 was a select fire or full auto. The more recent semi auto versions and clones are also referred to as an AK47, though not a true representitive of the orignal. Laymans term for this type is often referred to as AK47, even though it may be a varient such as the common AK74 or AKM. Mine is a Yugoslov version. It's a spray and prey ammo burner. Not accurate by any means, but you could run it over with a truck and it would still operate.

Full auto weapons are not illegal if one has a Class 3 license. I've found that for every restrictive law banning weapons, there are two ways around it. Confiscation breeds avoidence of the law.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

Nothing in your response to change my mind, you're a bullshit artist. You collect guns, you go hunting christ knows how many times a year, you come to the Reno Safari Convention, you were going fishing for Marlin a few months ago. When Mel, stated you haven't travelled much, you said you were off to Mexico, no mention of all these trips hunting in Africa\Alaska or Canada\Nevada\Idaho etc.,

I saw you on here several hours ago when I posted my last posting, that last big posting, took you more than 15 minutes to type and put together, you spend an age on here, you hardly work, you might have some money, but somehow I think you live in a fantasy World. You have an AK, " Spray and pray " every sportsman should have something like that, it was made for close action combat, and if you really knew shit about weapons you would know it's the best at it's job. I've no idea why you weren't allowed on here, personally I don't care who you are, but I do know the truth and reality are a little confusing for you. You buy on average forty guns a year, you sell some and you now have 80 odd left, you go shooting several times a week.

Slab there really aren't enough hours in the day to carry out your lifestyle. My guess is you're probably retired and have nothing better to do than annoy people. Probably a person with a few head problems, but certainly a bullshit artist!!!

PS, When you are on here your name is shown, so claiming you spend 15 minutes a day on here is stretching it, are you on welfare by any chance, because really with the amount of time you spend here you are, or retired maybe. You just don't add up Slab\Footprint or whatever you want to call yourself.

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Bulawayo2:

Nothing in your response to change my mind, you're a bullshit artist. You collect guns, you go hunting christ knows how many times a year, you come to the Reno Safari Convention, you were going fishing for Marlin a few months ago. When Mel, stated you haven't travelled much, you said you were off to Mexico, no mention of all these trips hunting in Africa\Alaska or Canada\Nevada\Idaho etc.,

Was I supposed to go to those places again? I will, as time permits unless you had another plan. Early June is another Cabo Marlin trip. Mid week 3 day is a great deal.

I saw you on here several hours ago when I posted my last posting, that last big posting, took you more than 15 minutes to type and put together, you spend an age on here, you hardly work, you might have some money, but somehow I think you live in a fantasy World.
I'm a two finger typer and long posts come in between doing other stuff at work. Pesky people are always walking in my office when I'm trying to type, the phone rings, have to answer e-mails, paperwork, etc.... I wish sometimes I could focus on messageboard humor, but it's usually not the highest on the priority list.

You have an AK, " Spray and pray " every sportsman should have something like that, it was made for close action combat, and if you really knew shit about weapons you would know it's the best at it's job.
It's a novelty for me, same as the Uzi. In your opinion, it's the best. I'm OK with everyone having an opinion about what they like. Ford vs Chevy arguments mean nothing to me.

I've no idea why you weren't allowed on here, personally I don't care who you are, but I do know the truth and reality are a little confusing for you. You buy on average forty guns a year, you sell some and you now have 80 odd left, you go shooting several times a week.
Not quite sure what you are babbling about here.

Slab there really aren't enough hours in the day to carry out your lifestyle. My guess is you're probably retired and have nothing better to do than annoy people. Probably a person with a few head problems, but certainly a bullshit artist!!!
Well, I know there are 24 hours and I'm not retired. Probably never will as I like what I do. Get up at 5am and workout, get to work about 630 M-F and sometimes on Saturday for a few hours. Rarely miss a day. Take a few weeks of vacation each year to do and see different stuff. Yeah, I probably have head problems.

PS, When you are on here your name is shown, so claiming you spend 15 minutes a day on here is stretching it, are you on welfare by any chance, because really with the amount of time you spend here you are, or retired maybe. You just don't add up Slab\Footprint or whatever you want to call yourself.
It's a pretty fair avarage. This week, I probably have more time in as there is more drama to read. If I leave my browser open on this site, I appoligize. I know it's an obsession for you. Welfare isn't my thing. Don't quite know where I'd get it or why. You can call me whatever you like. It matters not.

Having you as a groupie makes me feel special.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

What I'm babbling about is there isn't enough time in the day to do all the crap you say you do.

Buying 40 guns a month and selling some takes time, doing it every month and only having 80 guns, doesn't add up!

You mentioned you go to Africa every three years? Lies? Let's just say its possible you went once, I doubt you could afford to go too often, especially with the prices of some of the game you mentioned you killed. What's an oryx cost not far short of $2000, I'll bet.

Rarely miss a day, can believe that, you rarely seem to do much work at all.

You obviously have never been in combat , I have and many of my friends also, trust me the AK47 would be the weapon of choice in a close combat situation, most contacts in the bush take place within 25 yards. My corporal carried an UZI also ok for close encounters.

No not obsessed with you, just amazed with the crap you come out with, I do like exposing a bullshitter, Dr Bobby for instance, and I'm still not sure that isn't your third persona?

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

I grew up in Pennsylvania where the first day of deer season is an excused absence from school. I'm a bleeding heart liberal and I hunted and I certainly don't have a problem with gun ownership for hunting, sport or self defense... I do think there should be at least as stringent a law for gun ownership as there is for a driver's license.

This past week Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman appeared together and Mrs. Palin opened up her speech with a nod to to the great patriots who like to hunt and fish.

Okay, I've hunted and I've fished but what the phuck does that have to do with politics. Republicans have made gun ownership a political issue, a god given right...What the hell does that mean? God given? What was God giving out that day.

Republicans believe in State's rights until a State decides to have stricter gun regulations.

I write music and I'm a boxer. Those are things I love to do. What does that have to do with politics or God?

Help me out.

danieladamsmith's picture
danieladamsmith
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote danieladamsmith:I write music and I'm a boxer. Those are things I love to do. What does that have to do with politics or God?

Help me out.

What if, hypothetically, some group of people were trying to control you, to take away your ability to write music? Would you object to this aggression against you and insist that you had a right to be left alone in peace to write your music. Would you say that your right to compose music was yours, not by any grant of government, but simply due to your existence as a human being? If you were religious, might you say that you were endowed by your Creator with certain rights?

It has to do with politics for the simple reason that there are those who are using politics to try to control the peaceful behavior of others. Once they take that step, they have politicized the issue. Then the targets of this aggression will be forced to use politics to defend their rights, which they feel are endowed by their Creator, which is to say God-given.

Attempts to control others always have unintended consequences, and statists always seem to be surprised by this.

rbs's picture
rbs
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Okay...so what does God have to do with guns or any weapon and show me where God has written that you are allowed to own a weapon?

Book, Number & Passage...please.

I believe that same creator (I'm guessing you are talking about the God of Abraham, correct?)

said it was okay to have more than one wife. That same God said that eating shellfish was an affront to God...As was lying, greed, sloth, etc.

Buffet Religion...all you can eat and take whatever you please..

danieladamsmith's picture
danieladamsmith
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote slabmaster:

I like weapons and shooting. I buy 3-4 guns per month usually. Sometimes more. I sell some that I don't like too. The great thing about this country is that I can still enjoy what I want and have freedoms to shoot and own guns. Can't imagine living in the shackles of others countries belligerent and domineering governments.

The issue to me is, at what point does the right to own guns begin to infringe on the rights of other folk not to be afraid or be shot. In the US, 25% of all commercial robberies are with guns and robberies with guns are three times more likely to end with fatalities than robberies with other weapons.

I do agree that people have a right to be left in peace by the government and the mere act of owning a gun isn't immoral. But you can't seriously argue than an unregulated gun market doesn't correlate to an increase in gun related injuries and deaths, whether criminal, self-inflicted, or accidental.

It is not the premeditated crimes I am so concerned about, however, as the crimes of the moment. The heat of the argument, the moment of rage, and the availability of a gun makes tragedy all the more likely.

On the other hand, I also think it has an awful lot to do with inequality and poverty. Norway has a high rate of gun ownership, but a low rate of gun crimes, and I would wager it's in large part because they live in a more socially just and economically equal society.

Quote rbs:Then the targets of this aggression will be forced to use politics to defend their rights, which they feel are endowed by their Creator, which is to say God-given.

Feeling something doesn't make it true. If rights are absolute and God-given, then they are independent of politics or countries. Then there is no justification to deny the right to bear arms to a felon or terrorist. It is precisely because rights are not absolute or God given, but experiential and mutable, that we can say, oh wait, history and reason show us that it is justifiable to deny gun ownership to some peoples.

The sticking point then becomes again, as I said above, where do we draw the line? There is no single answer to this and the line will continue to move, sometimes expanding, sometimes contracting. Neither gun control advocates nor gun rights advocates have an absolute claim to the correct solution. (There is no one correct solution.)

reed9's picture
reed9
Joined:
Apr. 8, 2010 10:26 am
Feeling something doesn't make it true. If rights are absolute and God-given, then they are independent of politics or countries. Then there is no justification to deny the right to bear arms to a felon or terrorist. It is precisely because rights are not absolute or God given, but experiential and mutable, that we can say, oh wait, history and reason show us that it is justifiable to deny gun ownership to some peoples.

Well this certainly provides clarity on where we disagree. I think that human rights are indeed independent of politics or countries. I think we all have the same rights, not due to the country in which we live, but by virtue of our very human-ness.

Of course, as you say, my belief doesn't make it true. But what's the alternative you propose? Denying rights to certain undesirables. By what authority? Divine right? Brute force? You believe you have the authority to deny others the right to be left alone. Just because you believe that, doesn't make it true either.

Naturally, I won't convince you, but I will point out that denying someone a right is an act of aggression and violence. You may not agree with me, but I find such actions morally wrong and therefore I can't support gun control.

rbs's picture
rbs
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote rbs:
Feeling something doesn't make it true. If rights are absolute and God-given, then they are independent of politics or countries. Then there is no justification to deny the right to bear arms to a felon or terrorist. It is precisely because rights are not absolute or God given, but experiential and mutable, that we can say, oh wait, history and reason show us that it is justifiable to deny gun ownership to some peoples.

Well this certainly provides clarity on where we disagree. I think that human rights are indeed independent of politics or countries. I think we all have the same rights, not due to the country in which we live, but by virtue of our very human-ness.

Of course, as you say, my belief doesn't make it true. But what's the alternative you propose? Denying rights to certain undesirables. By what authority? Divine right? Brute force? You believe you have the authority to deny others the right to be left alone. Just because you believe that, doesn't make it true either.

Naturally, I won't convince you, but I will point out that denying someone a right is an act of aggression and violence. You may not agree with me, but I find such actions morally wrong and therefore I can't support gun control.

I don't understand. You can't support gun control or you can't support the idea that people shouldn't own guns.

I'm not allowed to drive a drag racer or a tank or a construction utility vehicle on the highway but that doesn't mean I can't buy one.

I don't have a problem with people being able to own most types of guns. I certainly don't think some regulation or limitations infringes on any right, god given or otherwise.

I like swimming in the nude but I understand I'm not able to walk down the street nude and what is more "god-given" than my body.

danieladamsmith's picture
danieladamsmith
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

When gun ownership is defended on the basis of "human rights," or the "inalienable rights" inherent in our being, the argument is wrong. Gun "rights" in America are strictly about how we interpret the Constitution on its special language about guns v. any other personal possession or activity.

All of these private acts involve not doing damage to others or the community. We even restrict a number of private and personal acts such as enjoying a relaxing toke. Where the ontological freedom to not have a busybody parent messing with our personal stuff ends and we become part of a social covenant where rights are about equal access and opportunity shared with others is not fixed.

Because of the 2nd Amendment and what I believe to be over-reach about personal ownership v. militia context, the nature of the "rights" involved in gun ownership have been differentiated from the principle of the driver's license and the responsible use of a lethal weapon. Nothing Slab says about his own life with guns has anything to do with the metaphysics of human v. civil rights, and then where "rights" and "privileges" are distinguished. He is a responsible gun owner and recreational shooter/hunter and a Christian. I have known more than a few of these guys, and compared to the others, they are the one's I would go hunting with if I had any desire to.

Claiming the "God given" right to own guns just moves a civil right/privilege into an ontologically specific right akin to freedom of conscience. This is a dangerous baptism of guns as much more than a tool. It is now a holy weapon in religious war. The right to shoot at federal agents follows that radical declaration of the God given right to own a gun v. any satanic secular official who dares challenge, not just that "right," but even filling out a census form.

I wish the Supremes had not gone over the edge and had maintained the "militia" context for the argument at the level of civil rights. I would include hunting for food and livestock protection. The personal right to own and operate guns would not compromise the access to guns for those who have legitimate uses. Even if I and others would like to see fewer guns around, I think there is little point in punishing or demonizing those who are not a problem.

But those who are a problem need more than NRA propaganda and support from the radical Right. They need more criticism and correction from those who do it correctly so this conversation does not devolve into a good/bad hunter polemic. If guns were not being waved around symbolically in a troubling adolescent attitude-fest of the middle-aged, I don't think Liberals would be bothered about hunters. Somebody on the Right needs to tell them to stop acting like idiots playing with guns.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote "danialadamsmith":I don't understand. You can't support gun control or you can't support the idea that people shouldn't own guns.
Both. I can't morally support any violence against those who are acting consistent with ordered liberty. How is owning a gun inconsistent with ordered liberty?

Quote "danialadamsmith":I'm not allowed to drive a drag racer or a tank or a construction utility vehicle on the highway but that doesn't mean I can't buy one.
I agree. The mere possession of a tool like a gun or drag racer does not harm anyone. Using it in an unsafe manner might, which is why we don't allow drag racing or target practice on public roads.

Quote "danialadamsmith":I like swimming in the nude but I understand I'm not able to walk down the street nude and what is more "god-given" than my body.
Not going to touch that one.

Quote "danialadamsmith":I don't have a problem with people being able to own most types of guns. I certainly don't think some regulation or limitations infringes on any right, god given or otherwise.
Regulations and limitations are enforced through violence. You're aware of this right? So you are advocating the initiation of aggressive violence against someone who happens to own a gun whose barrel is 17 3/4 inches long rather than the allowed 18 inches? And you claim that this doesn't infringe on any right? Tell that to Vicki Weaver. Oops, you can't because she's dead. Exactly what crime was she guilty of? Whom did she harm or injure? Where is the victim of her misdeeds?

rbs's picture
rbs
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote "drc":When gun ownership is defended on the basis of "human rights," or the "inalienable rights" inherent in our being, the argument is wrong.
Again, a good clarification of our different positions. I think that the right to self-defense is a fundamental human right, independent of anything the constitution says. People in China have just as much a right to self-defense as people in the US.

I'd also point out that your position necessitates to the aggressive initiation of violence against people who have harmed no one. This may not be your motive, but it is the consequence of your position. Sadly, that's generally the consequences of statism in general.

rbs's picture
rbs
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote rbs:
Feeling something doesn't make it true. If rights are absolute and God-given, then they are independent of politics or countries. Then there is no justification to deny the right to bear arms to a felon or terrorist. It is precisely because rights are not absolute or God given, but experiential and mutable, that we can say, oh wait, history and reason show us that it is justifiable to deny gun ownership to some peoples.

Well this certainly provides clarity on where we disagree. I think that human rights are indeed independent of politics or countries. I think we all have the same rights, not due to the country in which we live, but by virtue of our very human-ness.

Of course, as you say, my belief doesn't make it true. But what's the alternative you propose? Denying rights to certain undesirables. By what authority? Divine right? Brute force? You believe you have the authority to deny others the right to be left alone. Just because you believe that, doesn't make it true either.

Naturally, I won't convince you, but I will point out that denying someone a right is an act of aggression and violence. You may not agree with me, but I find such actions morally wrong and therefore I can't support gun control.

The source of rights cannot be God given - there should be rights regardless of whether a deity exists and even within the same religious tradition there is vehement disagreement on just what God says.

Rights equally cannot be derived of the "Laws of Nature". Nature is morally neutral. I reject the idea that rights exist in some Platonic form out there waiting to be discovered.

Rights should, however, be something more than mere preferences. When the founder's wrote in the Declaration that rights come from "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God", it was because they had to find claim a source of rights outside of legal positivistic law - they were obviously taking extra-legal action. I don't disagree that there ought to be rights transcendent of law. That a extra-legal standard ought to exist by which we can evaluate the "rightness" of law. I just disagree that the source is absolute, and resides in God or Nature.

We cannot all agree on a Utopian ideal of what society ought to look like. But we can most agree on dystopian visions of society and perceived wrongs. We almost that the Inquisition was a tragedy and morally wrong. So we can experientially agree that freedom of and from religion is important in a just society, to help ensure such a tragedy doesn't happen again. But it is not absolute. An absolute right to religious freedom would mean we could not condemn the Islamic extremist from killing an infidel. Or if there is an absolute right to life, then we have two absolutes in conflict and how do we choose which is the more fundamental right? Or if there is an absolute right to life, we could not go to war.

Experience of wrongs shows us which rights should be entrenched in our society, but different societies at different times will have different experiences of wrongs, and may reach a different conclusion than us about which rights are paramount or how to balance competing rights. In the US, the right to free speech, even if the speech is abhorrent, is generally protected. But I cannot outright condemn Germany for making it illegal to teach Holocaust denial, based on their experience of injustice and wrongs.

In American history, we too have drawn the line between what is protected speech and what is not at different points in different times. There are legitimate questions on where to draw that line. If a radical Imam outright preaches murder, is that protected speech? If they couch it in metaphor, is that protected speech?

The problem I have with the pro-gun faction is that I rarely see any recognition that there is a cost to that freedom. Reasonable people can disagree where to balance the freedom to bear arms and the cost to society that entails. We all mostly agree on the extremes, if a fellow shoots someone in a robbery, we take away his right to own guns. But the middle is a grey area. My position is that the right to bear arms is of a far lesser order than the right to freedom of religion or speech. The costs to society of unregulated gun ownership is high and the "violence" done in restricting the right is low, therefore strong regulations are acceptable. We will continue to debate this and that's as it should be. Rights must constantly be fought for and protected.

reed9's picture
reed9
Joined:
Apr. 8, 2010 10:26 am

My opinion. Love of guns amost has to be in somebody's DNA. I don't feel like criticizing people who have this condition. I don't think they can help it.

I bought a small rifle once to try to take care of a problem with predators that were bothering our livestock. I did a little plinking, but got bored with that. When it came to actually shooting a coyote, I just didn't want to do it. I like to hear them singing in the hills around our place. I just wanted them to leave us alone. We found a much better way to deal with that problem. I haven't touched the rifle in years.

(Danialadamsmith, you say you like to write music. That's my hobby, too. Have you posted any MP3s on the web)?

Art's picture
Art
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote DRC:

When gun ownership is defended on the basis of "human rights," or the "inalienable rights" inherent in our being, the argument is wrong. Gun "rights" in America are strictly about how we interpret the Constitution on its special language about guns v. any other personal possession or activity.

This is basically my feeling as well except I do believe that it is my right to defend myself and my loved ones with whatever means needed.. "Inalianable" rights is language from the constritution. It describes strength, immovable, permenant, part of our basic rights as seen by our forfathers. Gun ownership is a society thing, not a religeous experience. I think we have to try to understand the meaning of what they were trying to convey and how it applies to us.

All of these private acts involve not doing damage to others or the community. We even restrict a number of private and personal acts such as enjoying a relaxing toke. Where the ontological freedom to not have a busybody parent messing with our personal stuff ends and we become part of a social covenant where rights are about equal access and opportunity shared with others is not fixed.
The tool isn't the problem, it's when man misuses the tool. Accountability for the use solves the misuse problem.

Because of the 2nd Amendment and what I believe to be over-reach about personal ownership v. militia context, the nature of the "rights" involved in gun ownership have been differentiated from the principle of the driver's license and the responsible use of a lethal weapon. Nothing Slab says about his own life with guns has anything to do with the metaphysics of human v. civil rights, and then where "rights" and "privileges" are distinguished. He is a responsible gun owner and recreational shooter/hunter and a Christian. I have known more than a few of these guys, and compared to the others, they are the one's I would go hunting with if I had any desire to.
Rights are different that licences or privilages imposed by the state. I want to keep them different. The small minority of militia wannabes that run around Michigan getting attention for acting out are the fringe of Americans that happen to own a few guns. Glorifying them for their antics or making them out to be something they aren't, is as silly as saying the rabble that shatters windows in a protest represents all liberals. Hunting is one of the great passions of my life. It is something I'll do 'till I drop. It's the commrodery, bonding, outdoor experience that makes it cool. Some of the best hunts I've been on were ones that we shot no animals. The animal is the goal, but the human experience with those you enjoy is the real gift.

Claiming the "God given" right to own guns just moves a civil right/privilege into an ontologically specific right akin to freedom of conscience. This is a dangerous baptism of guns as much more than a tool. It is now a holy weapon in religious war. The right to shoot at federal agents follows that radical declaration of the God given right to own a gun v. any satanic secular official who dares challenge, not just that "right," but even filling out a census form.
Its a real stretch to equate gun ownership with "God given". People that would justify murdering a cop using religion is as loony as the kooks of middle eastern dissent that declare Jihad on all non believers of Allah. There are nuts in every society.

I wish the Supremes had not gone over the edge and had maintained the "militia" context for the argument at the level of civil rights. I would include hunting for food and livestock protection. The personal right to own and operate guns would not compromise the access to guns for those who have legitimate uses. Even if I and others would like to see fewer guns around, I think there is little point in punishing or demonizing those who are not a problem.
that is exactly the danger of blanket firearms restriction and confiscation. The small few affect the vast majority. There are 100 million gun owners in the U.S.. A handful of weekend shooters that shop at the Army/Navy don't represent gun owners.

But those who are a problem need more than NRA propaganda and support from the radical Right. They need more criticism and correction from those who do it correctly so this conversation does not devolve into a good/bad hunter polemic. If guns were not being waved around symbolically in a troubling adolescent attitude-fest of the middle-aged, I don't think Liberals would be bothered about hunters. Somebody on the Right needs to tell them to stop acting like idiots playing with guns.
The very few seem to garner the most attention. A half a dozen sightings of people with a rifle by the news media inflames the rehtorec. The nutballs that plan to kill cops for no reason need to be prosecuted, as they are. Those on the right are for putting assholes in jail that abuse their rights. It's not OK with anyone that a small group of citizens is bent on creating anarchy. Same as the vandals that break windows and burn dumpsters hopefully don't represent you, the wannabe militia hobbiests that beak the law don't represent me or anyone I know. I've never seen militia types and I've been around the shooting world a few times. The closest was a half dozen kids in the Hayden lake Idaho area about 15+ years ago. They were stupid looking punks that posed no threat to anyone. Like alot of kids with a low self esteem, they dressed funny to get attention.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote Bulawayo2:

What I'm babbling about is there isn't enough time in the day to do all the crap you say you do.

Yet I seem to have a little time to spare. I could actually get more done if I didn't waste a certain amount here and elsewhere, but, I like it. As much as I have going on (which I like) there is always more to do.

Buying 40 guns a month and selling some takes time, doing it every month and only having 80 guns, doesn't add up!
Gunbroker.com It doesn't take all that much. Composing this post takes twice as long as buying a rifle.

You mentioned you go to Africa every three years? Lies? Let's just say its possible you went once, I doubt you could afford to go too often, especially with the prices of some of the game you mentioned you killed. What's an oryx cost not far short of $2000, I'll bet.
Why the hostility? Jesus man, if all you can blurt out is that I must be lying, why bother reading?

Twice in the last 6 years. The average cost is in the $18,000 range. Taxidermy is expensive. the trip is only about $10,000. It's the rest that gets ya. How in the hell would you know what I can afford anyway?

Rarely miss a day, can believe that, you rarely seem to do much work at all.
Well, today I'm not working as it's my 22nd anniversary and I told my wife I'd spend it with her. I did send a few emails this morning though and lined up a PM on a jobsite before she woke up though.

You obviously have never been in combat , I have and many of my friends also, trust me the AK47 would be the weapon of choice in a close combat situation, most contacts in the bush take place within 25 yards. My corporal carried an UZI also ok for close encounters.
Nope, never have claimed to either. If you think AK47's are the weapon of choice, more power to ya. I just have different opinions. Weaponry has come a long way.

No not obsessed with you, just amazed with the crap you come out with, I do like exposing a bullshitter, Dr Bobby for instance, and I'm still not sure that isn't your third persona?
You follow me around like a lost puppy. I think it's cute. I don't know who Dr Bobby is.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am
Quote danieladamsmith:

I write music and I'm a boxer. Those are things I love to do.

No shit? I boxed for 4 years at the Eagles club in Seattle. Did the ammeture prison and club curcuit. Lots a fun. Not too many rules when you enter the state penn and deal with the inmate boxing club. I remember my first fight at Walla Walla and after the first round complaining to the ref and my corner about the spitting, elbows, low blows, etc... I was enduring. My cornerman asked "do you know where the fuck you are son?" "You can get busy or I'll leave you here". Learned a lot about life during those years in the ring.

slabmaster
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 10:12 am

And Slab, what about those like you making more public statements about the misuse of the gun as symbol and in rhetoric because you have a lot more credibility with the wackos than anyone who is not a fan of guns can have. We need that voice in the mix now.

And for that, if no other reason, I wish to stipulate that I believe Slab is an honest poster and person. Have a great anniversary. You are obviously among the privileged "kept men club" to which I am proud to claim a lucky 44 years.

I will be glad to play the music others write and am about to get back into active playing as my dental work and other impacts of health and wear are being resolved. Jazz and blues flute baby. I am amazing myself with some of the playing I am doing now. It is a privilege to be able to do it. I cannot explain how it is done.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
You obviously have never been in combat , I have and many of my friends also, trust me the AK47 would be the weapon of choice in a close combat situation, most contacts in the bush take place within 25 yards. My corporal carried an UZI also ok for close encounters.
Nope, never have claimed to either. If you think AK47's are the weapon of choice, more power to ya. I just have different opinions. Weaponry has come a long way.

[/quote] I have never been in the military but I am certain that no American military personel have ever been issued an AK47 or UZI for use in combat or for any other purpose.

bufffalo1's picture
bufffalo1
Joined:
Apr. 1, 2010 6:49 am

OK Slab, A truce is in order, just try and be a little less crass about your accomplishments, you surely know that a lot of your statements are meant to get a reaction. The country is going to hell and you come over as rather boastful, a little more humility and less of " The Ugly American " You know full well that you are pushing buttons with the guns thing and some of your other statements. I don't think with a lot of folk hurting you should be talking about all your toys and trips, just a little humility.

Have a good anniversary, I've been married 37 years, my greatest accomplishment. I too used to box as an amateur, stopped when I got to the seniors, big boys hit harder and as you say they've learned all the nasty tricks by then.

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

AKs never issued to our guys either, picked up from dead terrorists.

Bulawayo2's picture
Bulawayo2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote slabmaster:
Quote danieladamsmith:

I write music and I'm a boxer. Those are things I love to do.

No shit? I boxed for 4 years at the Eagles club in Seattle. Did the ammeture prison and club curcuit. Lots a fun. Not too many rules when you enter the state penn and deal with the inmate boxing club. I remember my first fight at Walla Walla and after the first round complaining to the ref and my corner about the spitting, elbows, low blows, etc... I was enduring. My cornerman asked "do you know where the fuck you are son?" "You can get busy or I'll leave you here". Learned a lot about life during those years in the ring.

Yeah hey good on you.

It is the sweet science. I don't get concussions anymore but I still have a long way to go. I've only been doing it for the last 17 months. There's a lot to learn in the ring. A lot of friends don't understand it but I'll tell you what. I sleep like a baby. It's the hardest thing I've done physically in many, many,many years and the hardest thing I've done mentally EVER!!!

danieladamsmith's picture
danieladamsmith
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm
Quote Art:

My opinion. Love of guns amost has to be in somebody's DNA. I don't feel like criticizing people who have this condition. I don't think they can help it.

I bought a small rifle once to try to take care of a problem with predators that were bothering our livestock. I did a little plinking, but got bored with that. When it came to actually shooting a coyote, I just didn't want to do it. I like to hear them singing in the hills around our place. I just wanted them to leave us alone. We found a much better way to deal with that problem. I haven't touched the rifle in years.

(Danialadamsmith, you say you like to write music. That's my hobby, too. Have you posted any MP3s on the web)?

Art, I'm just going through the process of finishing the artwork for my new record and sending it off the the vinyl cutters to create an acetate. Once I get everything done along with the cds I'll give you a shout.

danieladamsmith's picture
danieladamsmith
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 3:01 pm

Currently Chatting

The world we're leaving for today's teens...

Without immediate global action on climate change, today's teenagers will be forced to live with the consequences of our inaction. The World Bank has issued their third report of climate change, and it says that global temperatures could rise by as much as 4 degrees Celsius by the time today's teens hit their 80th birthday.

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system