very irritating discussion

By his logic the 1A shouldnt apply to TVs, phones and internet because our founders couldnt predict satellites. Only old Gutenberg style presses.

And I dont base my toy purchases on need. If I want it I buy it, simple as.

My thoughts fireman to fireman?

We're all brothers, and just like real family, sometimes you just wanna sock 'em when they start to get on your nerves.
24 hours locked in a small building with a bunch of guys with strong personalities and opinions will cause a pissing match eventually.

Politics, firearms, promotion tests,and pay are the biggest arguement starters at the station supper table. Of course, I dont have to tell you that.
You did the best thing, walk away. I start clearing up the dishes which is an excuse for me to leave the table everytime something controversial comes up and I really dont want to hear it.
I got my opinions too, and if theyre in the right, I'll make it known how I feel, but I aint about to argue with some knothead who wont listen to reason, brother firefighter or no.

Be strong brother, be strong.

And go ahead and buy yourself an M-4 with the M-203 launcher and tell everyone your taking a Tactical Medic course.

Works for me. ^_^

My thoughts?
Usually those that state that the Founding Fathers only would approve of muskets and rifles being legal haven't put much thought into the topic.
IF you can get them to keep silent long enough to make your point then you can basically destroy their argument and make them look foolish and uninformed. I realize that this is The HighRoad but when someone is advocating taking away your rights I believe that it's important to make them look as stupid as possible.
You aren't trying to change their minds. You are however trying to sway the undecided person in the group. Perhaps it's someone there that really isn't into guns but they have a mild interest in the topic. The only thing that they may know is what they have heard from the media and around the water cooler. Your argument may plant a seed that eventually takes root in a new gun owner.
I remember reading an NRA magazine years ago when I was in the service. I had always heard that many Dems want to ban guns but had never heard anything on the news (before the interweb). After reading a few NRA magazines a friend loaned me I was pi$$ed off and this started me on the road to following politics and keeping up with legislation.
Worry about swaying the views of the undecided people in a group. Don't worry about the views of the anti gunners. If they aren't someone that you want to try to take shooting then make them look foolish, shortsighted and uninformed.
I've heard the argument that most of us are law abiding citizens and behave responsibly with our guns but all we have to do is cross the line and we can become criminals at a moments notice. I generally ask those making this statement if they have a computer. I then tell them that they are currently able to behave themselves but they are only a few keystrokes from becoming an internet predator and perhaps they should give up their internet "For the children."
Most anti gun arguments can be easily countered as they are rooted in feelings instead of logic. I don't walk away from any of these arguments.

I think that 1) if the Authors didn't want us to discuss it they would have been more specific, and 2) you missed an opportunity to influence someone.

I actually might need some convincing myself... what DO you think the rules should be regarding full-auto weapons?

FiremanJim said:

Politics, firearms, promotion tests,and pay are the biggest arguement starters at the station supper table. Of course, I dont have to tell you that.

Click to expand...

I wonder if those discussions ever entail the ills of affirmative action? If so I'd pat the guy on the back who was willing to speak out against the un-Constitutional discrimination of that program. Unfortunately too many people fear not being politically correct and they shy away from such discussions. When groups are discriminated against they speak up and eventually the squeaky wheel gets the grease if it is a deserving cause. Discrimination against whites and/or males should be no different!

Trying to argue with an idiot is a waste of your time because they wear you down and beat you with experience (of their being ignorant).

Folks who are completely devoid of logic can not be convinced of anything because they do not understand logic, do not even recognize logic and have very thick, dense and hard craniums.

Don't EVEN waste good air on them.

In the firehouse, what goes on at the supper table, stays at the supper table.
We dont always agree about certain things, but we're civil about it.


And if we really need to blow off steam, well, thats why firemen have become legendary for practical jokes.

I'm latino, and the rest of my engine squad are mixed.
Race aint a problem amongst us.
Each one of us became a fireman by our own blood, sweat, and tears.
NOBODY gave us ANYTHING.
We live together, work together, play together, and suffer together.

Thats why we're BROTHERS.

And thats why racism and such silliness has no place in the firehouse.


Anyhoo, as long as the bullets aint flying my way, I dont care at all if your weapon is full auto. Most of the P.D. guys here own Class 3 guns and if it werent so expensive, most of us would too. Long as it aint for criminal purposes and shooting up the place, auto weapons would be nice to own.

Shoot, I'd like to own an M-2 if I could.
Better yet a mini gun would be really cool.


Now, if ya'll would excuse me, it's time to do the dishes.

And go ahead and buy yourself an M-4 with the M-203 launcher and tell everyone your taking a Tactical Medic course.

Click to expand...

Excuse me, I've been through the tactical medical course, and really, it's more about using your head (and keeping it attached) than big gun, after all that's what they pay other people to carry, you got your bag.

That said, I won't tell if you won't...
FA is FUN (and Very expensive)

Ignorance is no excuse for stupidity. Forget it and walk away or don't say anything. Reasoning went out the door with some people. Recognize it and forget it.

Forgive me for intruding gentlemen. I'm not a fireman, nor do I own an automatic (though not for lack of wanting!), but I do have a couple thoughts on the topic.

First, to get it out of the way, I did an article last summer about the history of a local community here. It was one of the few in which blacks and whites lived near each other peacefully back in the 50/60s. I asked an old shrimper about that, a white man. He snorted, shook his head, and said, "When you're out there, you're a shrimper. The water don't know color." I'd venture to guess that fire doesn't know color either.

Second, you did the right thing walking away Stricklan. There are some people you just can't reason with, no matter how logical, rational, or morally right your arguement is. As several have said, waste of breath, waste of time. In these instances, there's little hope of educating and converting an anti. With people like that, nothing short of a dramatic event is going to change their way of thinking and it isn't to us to bring that event on. In that instance, you make a mental note that this person won't be standing beside you if things go wrong and leave it at that.
But this does emphasize the importance of influencing/educating others about 2A - by others I mean those who don't fall into the "can't be rational" category. There are plenty of people out there who are either ambivalent, unaware of what gun control really means, just uninformed at all, have never had experience with guns and just don't know how to get involved, or have never had an instance arise when they had to think about it. If you can enlighten five of them, that trumps the one who can't see reason.

I got together with the girls last week. It was the first time since my divorce and return to active shooting that I'd seen many of them. I was hesitant to bring up the subject - this isn't exactly a girly hobby - but I also think its important to discuss. One of the women is an avid hunter (she got the deer in the family last year, not her husband!) and I started off mentioning to her, across the table, that I'd bought a pistol and was shooting regularly. Dead silence. But after about 20 minutes of answering questions calmly and matter-of-factly, only one woman at the table was opposed to the idea. And she wasn't opposed to 2A, but guns scared her and she was adamant that we'd never get her to the range. We'll work on that! But the point is, in less than an hour, there are five women who will likely pick up guns and learn to use them for SD and/or as a hobby. Five women who, prior to that, had never considered the idea. Five women who have a little better understanding of what 2A is all about and will go on to educate themselves further. That, to me, is a lot better use of my time and energy than the person who argues for the sake of arguement and doesn't possess the ability to think locially or rationally.

Incidentally, the strongest "selling point" if you will, was when I answered the question, "Why?" with regard to why do I shoot, carry, etc. My answer was, "Look around. Do you see a cop? Is your husband here? What if that guy over there pulled out a gun and started shooting? Who in this room do you want to rely on to protect you?"
Two of them are going with me to ladies night at the range this Thursday.

Have not rulings by the Supreme Court established that the laws regulating full auto firearms are constitutional, and that the 2A is not without limitations?

Regards,
Jerry

Don't forget that the Battle of Lexington and Concord was fought because the colonists were hoarding the highest tech weapons at the time, cannons and rifles. The common musket was like the AR-15 of the time period. It was military issue, and was considered the paramount point of military technology. The Founding Fathers used the latest and highest technology weapons available to them to defeat the British Army, and to say anything else is revisionist history. I guarantee you, if Thomas Jefferson was alive today, he'd have an AR. That's my two cents, anyway.

By his logic the 1A shouldnt apply to TVs, phones and internet because our founders couldnt predict satellites. Only old Gutenberg style presses.

Click to expand...

Thats actually a pretty good argument. Kudos to you.

Don't forget that the Battle of Lexington and Concord was fought because the colonists were hoarding the highest tech weapons at the time, cannons and rifles. The common musket was like the AR-15 of the time period. It was military issue, and was considered the paramount point of military technology. The Founding Fathers used the latest and highest technology weapons available to them to defeat the British Army, and to say anything else is revisionist history. I guarantee you, if Thomas Jefferson was alive today, he'd have an AR. That's my two cents, anyway.

Click to expand...

I have to agree.

The 2nd Amendment was about the people having the weapons to defend against a tyrannical government taking over... including our own. It would be significantly more difficult if we had to fight a modern army with muskets.

SpentCasing said:

By his logic the 1A shouldnt apply to TVs, phones and internet because our founders couldnt predict satellites. Only old Gutenberg style presses.

Click to expand...

I have stored this little gem in my memory.

When people don't want to listen, you are just wasting your time. You end up getting aggravated and he walks away, He accomplised what he set out to do.

I would have invited him to come to the range with me the next time I went. Now, I might get some flak for this but I think that the average citizen should be able to obtain any weapon that they so choose and be able to use said weapon, for recreation, hunting, sporting purposes, and self-defense, including nuclear devices. Simply put, if you have under your command the resources necessary to either construct and operate a nuclear ballistic missile submarine, or to purchase one outright, you are already beyond the purview of governments and are yourself a sovereign power, therefore possessed of the right to defend yourself with it regardless.

Thanks to all you firemen and policemen for your dedication to our safety. I have two nephews in Omaha, one is a cop, the other is a dragonslayer. Proud of those boys.

Ignorance of liberty and the second amendment crosses all cultural and vocational lines. Even Mr. Zumbo, the TV hunting personality, revealed some ingnorance and bias on the issue a few years back. Send a donation to the NRA every time someone makes you mad in a discussion like this. $5 every now and then adds up, and helps keep the dummies from winning.

It is difficult to change someone's mind on the 2A issue. It takes knowledge and patience. I doubt he considers himself "ignorant" if you used that word in your "argument". Nothing wrong with a good discussion on 2A. Often there is no winner. There are pro's and con's to the argument for and against 2A rights relative to present day firearms and society. Just look at the Supreme Court decision on the DC case and you will see it was a split decision.

No reason in the world for machine guns to proliferate.

If you want one bad enough, save up and buy one, just like any other toy.