Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 71

Thread: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

  1. #31
    Curmudgeon


    LowDown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Houston
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,572
    Blog Entries
    11

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    notquiteright: I know alot of cops who have had idiots/drunks/druggies/domestics go south even though the Officer was in uniform, sidearm fully in view. They have never had to shoot the bad guy. There is an escalation of force, it isn't ignore to brandish...
    True enough, police have to have the skills to get a good outcome, but the authority projected by the uniform and the armament goes a long way toward convincing people. In my opinion, many of the techniques that the police use would simply not work in a confrontation between unarmed civilians.

    If your ideology spurs you to enter dangerous confrontations without all the protection you might need but could have then I'd say that your ideology is in need of perspective.

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --HL Mencken

  2. #32
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,881
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Do you pull a gun out every time you get nervous? It's not like his suspicions were justified and the two guys beat the crap out of him. Nothing happened! I'd be a lot more concerned about the wellbeing of those two guys if he had had a gun, than I am about this guy being nervous for ten seconds.

    This guy is a dumbass and deserves all the ridicule he's now getting.
    No where does it say or even suggest that he would have pulled his gun out for simply being nervous. He would have just liked to have had the gun if there had been a need for it. And I don't blame him one bit. Anyone with half a brain would be nervous in his place also, thats just human nature. Whether they would admit it or not. And wishing you had a gun in case things went south is not idiotic. I'm quite sure that millions of unarmed people over the years had wished that they had had a gun when they were attacked.

    It is better to have and not need than it is to need and not have.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  3. #33
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie Orwontee View Post
    Regardless of "where" this occurred (even in Calgary) I don't see the question, "Have you been to the stampede?" as innocuous.

    If two aggressive punks asked me the question my suspicions to what their response would be to my answer would be to tell me my ticket was on the bottom of their boot as they kicked me in the head . . . Punks (at least the one's here in Philly) love using a play on words as the "icebreaker" before they proceed with the beatdown.

    "Stampede" is especially appropriate given the typical violent 'footwork" of current youthful strongarm robbers.
    Sounds like the skinheads in San Jose.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  4. #34
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Being asked a question about being to the stampede in a nature park, causes someone to wish that he was armed?
    I have no issue with guns, and may carry one myself one day, and this dude's wish for a gun -- hell, his entire reaction to the guys who approached him -- bewilder me as much as it bewildered them.

    Oh no, two strangers asked you a question without your permission?! Quick, find a burka for your wife and an AK for yourself!
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  5. #35
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    I have to agree with the officer. It doesn't matter if it's in the middle of a crowded street in broad daylight, I do not care to be disturbed from going about my activities by anyone. I don't talk to strangers. I don't even recognize the existance of panhandlers and their ilk. I go out of my way to be armed and ready as much of the time as humanly possible. It's just like I was taught many years ago.... "BE PREPARED".
    You're comfortable shooting through unarmed non-combatants to get to an armed prep. I care about as much about your opinion on self-defense as I do on women's rights.
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  6. #36
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    No where does it say or even suggest that he would have pulled his gun out for simply being nervous.
    The fact that he went to all the trouble to write a letter to the Calgary Herald arguing that he needed a gun, because two guys were supposedly rude to him, does not exactly make it sound as though he would have been a model of self-restraint if he had his gun with him. He sounds like a paranoid nut. In his letter, he even says that after he made his rude comment and walked away, that the two guys looked bewildered. This makes me suspect that they weren't even doing anything they thought could be construed as rude or threatening, let alone ACTUALLY threatening him.

    He would have just liked to have had the gun if there had been a need for it.
    And I'm sure the two ticket guys would have liked him to NOT have it. Fortunately he didn't or someone could have gotten hurt.

    And I don't blame him one bit. Anyone with half a brain would be nervous in his place also, thats just human nature. Whether they would admit it or not. And wishing you had a gun in case things went south is not idiotic. I'm quite sure that millions of unarmed people over the years had wished that they had had a gun when they were attacked.
    Yeah, but here's the thing: He wasn't attacked. If he had his gun and any confrontation had gone down, it would have been because HE was the aggressor.

    It is better to have and not need than it is to need and not have.
    Not for the people who end up getting shot because of paranoid loose cannons like this guy.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 08-11-12 at 03:30 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #37
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,881
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    The fact that he went to all the trouble to write a letter to the Calgary Herald arguing that he needed a gun, because two guys were supposedly rude to him, does not exactly make it sound as though he would have been a model of self-restraint if he had his gun with him. He sounds like a paranoid nut. In his letter, he even says that after he made his rude comment and walked away, that the two guys looked bewildered. This makes me suspect that they weren't even doing anything they thought could be construed as rude or threatening, let alone ACTUALLY threatening him.
    Oh please. Thats just reading far too much into something. The guy has a problem with Canada's gun laws and that makes him suspicious of possibly shooting someone just because he gets nervous? With this kind of thinking then anyone with a gun is guilty of such absurdity that you espouse here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    And I'm sure the two ticket guys would have liked him to NOT have it.
    Doesn't matter if they would have liked him to be armed or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Fortunately he didn't or someone could have gotten hurt.
    You have no valid grounds to base this assumption on. Just outta curiosity...do you know what happens when you "assume" something?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Yeah, but here's the thing: He wasn't attacked. If he had his gun and any confrontation had gone down, it would have been because HE was the aggressor.
    So everyone that owns a gun is the aggressor no matter the circumstances. What kind of troll logic is that? And don't try to say that "you didn't say that" because that is exactly where your "logic" leads to, and i'm sure you know that. Simply having a gun does not make ANYONE the aggressor. No wonder we have such idiotic laws in this country. We've got people with this kind of attitude living here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Not for the people who end up getting shot because of paranoid loose cannons like this guy.
    Last edited by Kal'Stang; 08-11-12 at 10:15 PM.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #38
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Oh please. Thats just reading far too much into something. The guy has a problem with Canada's gun laws and that makes him suspicious of possibly shooting someone just because he gets nervous? With this kind of thinking then anyone with a gun is guilty of such absurdity that you espouse here.
    I doubt that the guys were even TRYING to be rude to him since they were "bewildered" by his rude response, according to his own account. So if a guy has an unpleasant encounter with another person and his reaction is to get butthurt that he didn't have a gun with him (to the extent that he went to the trouble to write a newspaper letter about it), then yes, I'd be concerned about him possibly shooting someone.

    Doesn't matter if they would have liked him to be armed or not.
    Well actually it kinda does, since THEIR safety would be a factor too.

    So everyone that owns a gun is the aggressor no matter the circumstances. What kind of troll logic is that? And don't try to say that "you didn't say that" because that is exactly where your "logic" leads to, and i'm sure you know that. Simply having a gun does not make ANYONE the aggressor.
    Let me explain the logic to you as simply as I can:
    - He didn't have his gun.
    - Nothing bad happened.
    - Therefore, if he *had* had his gun and something bad had happened, then it would have been because he started some ****. Unless you think that a couple random people handing out rodeo tickets would be more likely to jump him if they saw he had a gun.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 08-11-12 at 10:34 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  9. #39
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,881
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I doubt that the guys were even TRYING to be rude to him since they were "bewildered" by his rude response, according to his own account. So if a guy has an unpleasant encounter with another person and his reaction is to get butthurt that he didn't have a gun with him (to the extent that he went to the trouble to write a newspaper letter about it), then yes, I'd be concerned about him possibly shooting someone.
    It doesn't matter if they were trying to be rude. He felt threatened and was afraid for his wife's safety. But feeling threatened does not mean that he would have automatically pulled out his gun or even showed it like you are implying that he would do. You have no evidence that he would have other than your own biased thought patterns.

    And people complain about gun laws all the time. Both in Canada and in the US. Yet you don't see them automatically pulling out guns the moment they feel threatened do you? Hell, we complain about gun laws lots here at DP for one example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Well actually it kinda does, since THEIR safety would be a factor too.
    It would have mattered had they been in any danger. And there is no evidence that they would have been had the guy had his gun with him. Again....all that he said is that he would have felt safer with it. Feeling safer =/= will cause trouble or shoot someone with gun if they have it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Let me explain the logic to you as simply as I can:
    - He didn't have his gun.
    - Nothing bad happened.
    - Therefore, if he *had* had his gun and something bad had happened, then it would have been because he started some ****. Unless you think that a couple random people handing out rodeo tickets would be more likely to jump him if they saw he had a gun.
    Idiocy. Just because someone has a gun does not mean that they are the ones to always start ****. That is why your "logic" fails. Another reason is that you have no idea if the guy would have carried concealed or open. Remember the question that I asked you about the word "assume"?
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #40
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: 'Nose Hill Gentlemen' pro-gun letter sparks Twitter frenzy

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post

    Let me explain the logic to you as simply as I can:
    - He didn't have his gun.
    - Nothing bad happened.
    - Therefore, if he *had* had his gun and something bad had happened, then it would have been because he started some ****. Unless you think that a couple random people handing out rodeo tickets would be more likely to jump him if they saw he had a gun.
    There is no reason whatsoever to assume that. Law-abiding citizens, and I'm pretty certain that he was law-abiding, due to his law enforcement background, carry for defense, not offense.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •