And now for something Completely different

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Saya

Again, bars yes or no? Or do self defense rights end when alcohol is involved? Should crazies get guns? Serial killers? People with a violent criminal history?

EDIT: Ah, so if bar owners don't want drunk people shooting up the place, they just have to let it happen? Violence and alcohol are linked, might as well make it easier for them to kill each other, right?

That's when the owner calls the authorities and has their asses thrown in jail,for their ACTIONS of shooting up the place.

[Saya]

Wait, I do recall when you were telling us gals how we should slash the fingers off of street harassers that you did say you shouldn't bring weapons to a bar. And now you're saying you're all for it? Why not just prevent the whole mess and save lives by saying "if you want to come in here you have to leave your guns behind"? Like at school and political rallies?

And you're voting for a guy who's anti-abortion no matter what and opposes gay marriage, holy shit.

[Solumina]

So Deadman out of curiosity are you okay with people drinking and driving and only getting into trouble if they actually hit someone/something? Cuz I'd say drunk driving is a hell of a lot safer than drunk gun handling and you seem to be okay with that as long as nobody ends up getting shot.

[Ben Lahnger]

On tonight's Rachel Maddow show, she found a letter to the editor that Dr. Rand Paul sent to his local paper in Bowling Green in 2002 to chastise the newspaper for endorsing the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits housing discrimination. Here's the quote from that letter that she highlighted on her show tonight:

"A free society will abide unofficial, private discrimination - even when that means allowing hate-filled groups to exclude people based on the color of their skin." - Rand Paul - (source: Washington Post, 5/20/02)

Meanwhile, in the aftermath of his implosion on her show last night, he has spent the day today walking back from the position he held last night.

First, he released a written statement that said, "I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964."

Finally, appearing on The Situation Room on CNN, Wolf Blitzer asked him if he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and he answered, "Yes, I would have voted yes. ... I think there was an over-riding problem in the south that was so big that it did require Federal intervention in the 1960's."

And that is a brand new position for Dr. Paul.

Wheeeeeeeeeee!!!!!

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Then answer my question.

Is it okay for someone to take away the rights of self defense or free speech because someone MIGHT do something harmful no matter skin color or gender?

Besides driving isn't a right it is a privilege.

[Saya]

Its not taking anyone's right to self defense. You can defend yourself in more than one way. In Canada we have the right to defend ourselves, we just don't use bullets. This is crazy, but sometimes all you need is your bare hands.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Besides driving isn't a right it is a privilege

So something idiotic that puts numerous innocent lives in jeopardy should be allowed because it involves your "right"?

Btw the right that you are talking about allows you to have a gun and know how to use it, it doesn't mean that it should be your fucking shadow and go with you everywhere.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Solumina

So something idiotic that puts numerous innocent lives in jeopardy should be allowed because it involves your "right"?

Btw the right that you are talking about allows you to have a gun and know how to use it, it doesn't mean that it should be your fucking shadow and go with you everywhere.

And now we get back to the real issue.

It isn't just my right but the right of every U.S. Citizen we are talking about here.

Are you also in favor of limiting free speech,because we can't have people running into a movie theater yelling fire can we?

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Are you also in favor of limiting free speech,because we can't have people running into a movie theater yelling fire can we?

Um...yeah I am. People shouldn't be able to cause a panic that could very well kill people just for shits and giggles.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Solumina

So something idiotic that puts numerous innocent lives in jeopardy should be allowed because it involves your "right"?

Btw the right that you are talking about allows you to have a gun and know how to use it, it doesn't mean that it should be your fucking shadow and go with you everywhere.

I could say the same thing about a drunk driver hitting a bus/truck/car load of kids,what happens more often these days?

Someone going into a bar open carrying and shooting the place up?

Or

A drunken moron getting behind the wheel and slamming into a bus/truck/car load of kids?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Solumina

Um...yeah I am. People shouldn't be able to cause a panic that could very well kill people just for shits and giggles.

So by extension you would limit the free speech of someone like M.L.K.Jr?

Because you know it could make some folks uncomfortable and just might cause a panic.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Someone going into a bar open carrying and shooting the place up?

Or

A drunken moron getting behind the wheel and slamming into a bus/truck/car load of kids?

Even most complete morons know better than to go near a gun when drunk also guns are currently not allowed to bring guns in most bars. You are completely ignoring the fact that we aren't talking about people wanting to go into a bar and shoot up the place, we are talking about people being allowed to get drunk while they already have a gun and then having a tragic accident. Now a much more interesting, and pertinent, question would be if someone already has a gun on them and they get drunk what percentage of them end up having an unfortunate accident.

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

So by extension you would limit the free speech of someone like M.L.K.Jr?

Because you know it could make some folks uncomfortable and just might cause a panic.

If M.L.K. Jr. knowingly said something that would incite panic and lead to the potential loss of innocent lives then no I don't think that should be protected, but that isn't what he did. Also I think you should really look into the word panic, it does not mean making folks uncomfortable, or even making folks scared.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Solumina

Even most complete morons know better than to go near a gun when drunk also guns are currently not allowed to bring guns in most bars. You are completely ignoring the fact that we aren't talking about people wanting to go into a bar and shoot up the place, we are talking about people being allowed to get drunk while they already have a gun and then having a tragic accident. Now a much more interesting, and pertinent, question would be if someone already has a gun on them and they get drunk what percentage of them end up having an unfortunate accident.
If M.L.K. Jr. knowingly said something that would incite panic and lead to the potential loss of innocent lives then no I don't think that should be protected, but that isn't what he did. Also I think you should really look into the word panic, it does not mean making folks uncomfortable, or even making folks scared.

Check out news reels from the million man march,it caused a lot of racist whites of the day to panic,and M.L.K.Jr's message was one of non-violence.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Saya

Wait, I do recall when you were telling us gals how we should slash the fingers off of street harassers that you did say you shouldn't bring weapons to a bar. And now you're saying you're all for it? Why not just prevent the whole mess and save lives by saying "if you want to come in here you have to leave your guns behind"? Like at school and political rallies?

And you're voting for a guy who's anti-abortion no matter what and opposes gay marriage, holy shit.

Does your country recognize your natural right of self defense with the best means available?

Or

Are you told that you don't need it because someone else might feel panicked or threatened?

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Check out news reels from the million man march,it caused a lot of racist whites of the day to panic,and M.L.K.Jr's message was one of non-violence.

Actually it allowed them to rationalize extremely violent and hateful acts, not panic, again I think you need to look up a psychological definition of panic (as that is the definition in mind when people are talking about putting a limit on free speech). I will also point out the reason why panic in a theater is generally used to demonstrate the point: panic in tight spaces generally lead to people getting trampled, therefor if you knowingly cause that situation to occur you know that people will most likely die. This is a hell of a lot different that scaring individual bigots (even if they are in groups it is still individualized fear not group fear, though in many cases group-think did arise after the fact).

[Ben Lahnger]

So, DEADMAN ...

how does it feel to be following a political candidate who stands by a deeply held conviction for years, but quickly reverses his position just because being under the hot spotlight of the press got to him a little.

Completely reversed his position?!?!? What the hell?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Solumina

Actually it allowed them to rationalize extremely violent and hateful acts, not panic, again I think you need to look up a psychological definition of panic (as that is the definition in mind when people are talking about putting a limit on free speech). I will also point out the reason why panic in a theater is generally used to demonstrate the point: panic in tight spaces generally lead to people getting trampled, therefor if you knowingly cause that situation to occur you know that people will most likely die. This is a hell of a lot different that scaring individual bigots (even if they are in groups it is still individualized fear not group fear, though in many cases group-think did arise after the fact).

What were those groups acting out of?

Fear,fear leads to panic,panic leads to a feeling of being threatened and as a result the folks in the majority sought to crush the minority.

It doesn't matter if that panic occurs in a large open area or a tightly packed movie house,the result is the same,loss of life and blood shed.

[Solumina]

Fear=/=panic, panic is different, you need to learn this concept, especially since it causes the logic for that last post to fall completely apart.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Solumina

Fear=/=panic, panic is different, you need to learn this concept, especially since it causes the logic for that last post to fall completely apart.

What?

Have you been smoking crack?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

It's clear there is a consorted effort on the part of more than a few members here.

So how long did it take you to get your heads together on this?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

So, DEADMAN ...

how does it feel to be following a political candidate who stands by a deeply held conviction for years, but quickly reverses his position just because being under the hot spotlight of the press got to him a little.

Completely reversed his position?!?!? What the hell?

Same question right back to you.

What about Obama,he said that we would be pulling troops out of Iraq,hasn't happened yet.

He told the people of this country that any topic they have questions about will be honestly discussed,the number one topic was Marijuana Legalization,and the establishment puppet laughed not just into the microphone but in face of the whole nation on a national TV broadcast when asked about it,he then openly dismissed any rational discussion,think of Patients that are in jail because the medicine they use is illegal at the federal level,laughing like the whole thing is a big joke.

and the bastard admitted he smoked up "I inhaled,frequently, that was the whole point".

Yet we still see more laws going after recreational pot smokers as well as medicinal marijuana users.

[JCC]

Deadmanwalking_05: where Martin Luther King's speeches were the same as walking into a movie theatre and shouting 'fire'.

[Underwater Ophelia]

Deadman, your right to defend yourself ends where my right to not get shot in a bar begins.

It has nothing to do with civil rights. Just like Solumina has been saying, in cases like these, you choose the lesser or two evils. For example. It's bad to not be free to have your gun. It's also bad to be shot. It's worse to be shot. Therefore, no guns in bars ESPECIALLY when we know that people are idiots and irresponsible.

I'm sure there are people who can handle having a gun in a bar, however, people who can't ruin it for them, and I'm sure the people who ARE responsible enough understand that they don't need to have a gun in a bar if it means someone might get shot.

[Ben Lahnger]

Dude, President Obama never reversed his position radically overnight on a deeply held conviction IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CAMPAIGN.

So you can't compare your candidate to President Obama. See, President Obama got elected ... thank heaven, oh happy day. God bless us all, everyone.

You can start comparing your guy to the President IF he gets elected ... which, based on the way he's flaking now, doesn't seem likely.

[Ben Lahnger]

Also, wtf are you doing coming out in defense of impaired drivers?