
JMHO.
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
It's the way the media is protraying it as "shoot first, ask questions later."fadlan12 wrote:I have co-workers that ridicule the castle doctrine.
I know and have known people who served in the military, including in combat, and are opposed to civilian firearms ownership.fadlan12 wrote:I think that this country should force milltary service like Switzerland or Isreal where everyone has to serve for a time when they are 18.... More importantly everyone would have to shoot a gun and make their own mind up.
You are right...In the thread last week when all of this went down...The anchorperson on Houstons' CBS morning news crew said the same thing in the "copy" she read...seamusTX wrote:It's the way the media is protraying it as "shoot first, ask questions later."
When the media owns the story they can twist it how ever they want.seamusTX wrote:It's the way the media is protraying it as "shoot first, ask questions later."fadlan12 wrote:I have co-workers that ridicule the castle doctrine.
- Jim
Believe me, I understand your sentiment on the issue, but how would forcing a people to serve allow them to "make their own mind up"?fadlan12 wrote:I can't believe how polarizing the gun issue is to the general population. I have co-workers that ridicule the castle doctrine. They can't see why you should be able to defend yourself (they are Cali. transplants). I don't make it public knowledge about my guns because of fear of theft but also the stigma of guns due to the media. I think that this country should force milltary service like Switzerland or Isreal where everyone has to serve for a time when they are 18. We would have less obesity and spend less on related health care. More importantly everyone would have to shoot a gun and make their own mind up.
JMHO.
They actually would willingly submit to someone who intended to kill them? Wow! We are slowly being outnumbered by the sheeple. This kind of attitude has the potential to cost us our country. One day in the future, some half baked middle eastern country will attack us and our nation will not have the guts to fight back - the sheeple will rather surrender than fight.fadlan12 wrote:I have co-workers that...... can't see why you should be able to defend yourself (they are Cali. transplants![]()
Personally I doubt that would happen anytime soon. The same basic sentiments were being tabled in the 30’s in regards to Germany, Japan, and Russia. Isolationism held sway in most of the free world…anyone remember Neville Chamberlain 1938 (“Peace for our time�)? We know how that turned out…S&W6946 wrote: One day in the future, some half baked middle eastern country will attack us and our nation will not have the guts to fight back - the sheeple will rather surrender than fight.
Believe me, I understand your sentiment on the issue, but how would forcing a people to serve allow them to "make their own mind up"?
The beauty of this country is in the freedoms that we enjoy. You are free to enjoy guns, or you are free to hate them. But most importantly, you are free to decide whether you will put your life on the line to defend such freedoms.
I think kauboy was pointing out the irony of your statement. Forced service is incompatible with freedom, and isn't freedom what the right to keep and bear arms really all about?fadlan12 wrote:
Believe me, I understand your sentiment on the issue, but how would forcing a people to serve allow them to "make their own mind up"?
The beauty of this country is in the freedoms that we enjoy. You are free to enjoy guns, or you are free to hate them. But most importantly, you are free to decide whether you will put your life on the line to defend such freedoms.
What I mean is force people to serve and then let them make up their own minds about guns after they are completed with service.
I do ask them about self defense and they try to talk about odds. Its humorous how a conservative and a liberal cooperate to be anti.