Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 223

Thread: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

  1. #171
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    I agree... not nearly enough would stay.
    the "war" would be over the minute it starts.
    There would not be a war, I don't believe there are enough gun owners that would be willing to wage war against the government in order to keep their guns to begin with. Most people are fairly rational and I would think, believe that living is much more important than owning a gun.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

  2. #172
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    This is just asinine. How would they cross the entire atlantic or pacific oceans without us noticing with a force large enough to take out a state? The only treat would be an invasion thru Canada, or thru Mexico from South America. Again, we would quickly identify such a force massing long before they could attack. The only way this could possibly occur would be if a country on our continent decided to invade and we would still detect any mass of military force before it could invade.

    Not to mention, civilians don't have the training or the weaponry to fight such a war to begin with. We would have to rely on our military to defend us either way.
    good lord dude.... do you understand that the civilian population has in it's midst millions of veterans.. millions more of combat veterans... and 280 million guns?

    put your thinking cap on man...

  3. #173
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    good lord dude.... do you understand that the civilian population has in it's midst millions of veterans.. millions more of combat veterans... and 280 million guns?

    put your thinking cap on man...
    How many veterans would it take to shoot down an aircraft flying MAC 2 with a rifle? How many veterans would it take to take out a heavily armed tank? How many veterans are even fit enough for the task to begin with? Those who are, would be recalled into the military ranks anyway to fight any battle against an invading force.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

  4. #174
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,025

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    This is just asinine. How would they cross the entire atlantic or pacific oceans without us noticing with a force large enough to take out a state? The only treat would be an invasion thru Canada, or thru Mexico from South America. Again, we would quickly identify such a force massing long before they could attack. The only way this could possibly occur would be if a country on our continent decided to invade and we would still detect any mass of military force before it could invade.

    Not to mention, civilians don't have the training or the weaponry to fight such a war to begin with. We would have to rely on our military to defend us either way.
    See... All you do is deflect and you give no concessions what so ever, at all. You rather shoot down the little things to avoid the big things. You are okay with civs being fish in a barrel. Most of us arent. Good thing majority rules. No matter how you hash it an invading force on a town would be met more resistance with armed civs than defenseless civs. The point isnt how. The point is IF. Just because you think America is invincible from attack doesnt make it so.

    Our troops are bogged down across the world. And you want to declaw the average populace??? THIS truly sounds crazy and asinine.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

  5. #175
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    There would not be a war, I don't believe there are enough gun owners that would be willing to wage war against the government in order to keep their guns to begin with. Most people are fairly rational and I would think, believe that living is much more important than owning a gun.
    47% of Americans profess to owning a gun... many have guns, but won't admit it.


    ...and you think that "not enough" would willing to fight for their rights against an oppressive tyrannical government.


    not sure why you constantly underestimate our civilian population... but it's unwise

  6. #176
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris View Post
    See... All you do is deflect and you give no concessions what so ever, at all. You rather shoot down the little things to avoid the big things. You are okay with civs being fish in a barrel. Most of us arent. Good thing majority rules. No matter how you hash it an invading force on a town would be met more resistance with armed civs than defenseless civs. The point isnt how. The point is IF. Just because you think America is invincible from attack doesnt make it so.

    Our troops are bogged down across the world. And you want to declaw the average populace??? THIS truly sounds crazy and asinine.
    No, the point is, the situation you have created is one that would never occur. With current day technology, it is virtually impossible a large scale attack could sneak up on us from a rouge country. Now... If you had argued that maybe a small specialized group of insurgents could possibly make it thru our porous boarder and attack a town and temporarily terrorize it undetected, I could see that happening. However, that is again, would be temporary as our military or local police forces would easily take out a small terrorist faction. And more than likely, if our government was not able to see it coming, the town attacked would not be prepared for it either.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

  7. #177
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    47% of Americans profess to owning a gun... many have guns, but won't admit it.


    ...and you think that "not enough" would willing to fight for their rights against an oppressive tyrannical government.


    not sure why you constantly underestimate our civilian population... but it's unwise
    You believe that a ban on guns would be the definition of a oppressive tyrannical government? Might want to get that schizophrenia diagnosed and get some meds stat.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

  8. #178
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,025

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    No, the point is, the situation you have created is one that would never occur. With current day technology, it is virtually impossible a large scale attack could sneak up on us from a rouge country. Now... If you had argued that maybe a small specialized group of insurgents could possibly make it thru our porous boarder and attack a town and temporarily terrorize it undetected, I could see that happening. However, that is again, would be temporary as our military or local police forces would easily take out a small terrorist faction. And more than likely, if our government was not able to see it coming, the town attacked would not be prepared for it either.
    Well hey! At least that is some sort of concession. Almost.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

  9. #179
    Professor
    Capster78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    08-24-15 @ 02:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtpoorchris View Post
    Well hey! At least that is some sort of concession. Almost.
    That is probably the most realistic threat, but not one I believe legitimizes the private ownership of guns. If we are living in that kind of fear on a daily basis, then we should be at war with someone and not sitting around in our houses waiting to be attacked.
    - There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
    - Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
    - Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.

  10. #180
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,908

    Re: Clackamas man, armed, confronts mall shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I don't concede we're safer either way. Both sides try to use one hit instances to make a false point. Both sides use fallacious arguments and questionable statistics. Perhaps absolute safety isn't possible and in free society, we have to live with that.
    I like this... it's very true.

Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •