Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Great-great-grandparents had rights. Do we?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Oleg Volk, Sep 16, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Oleg Volk

    Oleg Volk Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    9,155
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
  2. Nolo

    Nolo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    Galveston, TX
    Gremlin!
    Nice Webley/Enfield.
    I want one.
     
  3. scrat

    scrat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    6,882
    Location:
    Monrovia, CA
    Thats a good poster. Nice job Oleg
     
  4. Just Jim

    Just Jim Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,099
    Problem is today we have bigger government that supresses our rights. It comes with too much civilization, the price you pay.

    jj
     
  5. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    Good job on the black and white motif on the left.
    Should the modern woman have a gun in her hand in some symbolic pose?
     
  6. yenchisks

    yenchisks member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    290
    No she should have a cellphone,calling 911, the operator will say, the police will be with you shortly 5-10min,try to scach your attacter so we can get dna,we will do all we can to find your murderer.
     
  7. Treo

    Treo member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    3,110
    Location:
    Co. Springs
    That is a good poster
     
  8. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    You are a clever devil.:evil:
     
  9. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    oh you mean like being able to eat anywhere we want?

    I hate to say it, but over all we have more rights now then we did back then.
     
  10. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    Who are we,TAB?
     
  11. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    poeple in the US...

    If you don't think we have more rights now then we did 100 years ago... you are very much mistaken.
     
  12. VPLthrneck

    VPLthrneck Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    212
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    Great poster. I like the contrast of B&W/Color, it seems to add to the message.

    Would have been neat to see the cat in both pics, IMHO.
     
  13. Oleg Volk

    Oleg Volk Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    9,155
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    TAB,

    I agree with you overall. We never had a utopia. However, the mix of recognized rights we have now is different from what we had in the past. The right to bear arms in IL and WI has been lost. Other rights have been gained. I argue that we shouldn't give up recognized rights in exchange but rather add recognition for other rights.
     
  14. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    You are evading the question,TAB.I did not give an opinion, so whatever you saying in the above quoted message, you are not quoting me.
    Again I simply ask, who are "we",TAB?What people?
     
  15. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    I gave you my reply... you just missed it... or you just read what was quoted by another poster.
     
  16. bogie

    bogie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,569
    Location:
    St. Louis, in the Don't Show Me state
    I would change "legally carry" to "legally protect herself" - gunnies understand "carry," but ordinary folks will be more comfy with "protect."
     
  17. Zoogster

    Zoogster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,091
    I think the message is just fine. Open and concealed carry was the right of most Americans for hundreds of years.

    Later on concealed was made out to be dishonest, the type of thing done by assassins. So open carry continued to be legal in the majority of the US with far fewer restrictions than even legal concealed carry has today, but concealed was frowned upon or restricted in some.
    Over time even open was slowly restricted in some places, off limits in saloons (bars/restaurants that served alcohol, sound familiar?) and similar places. Where it was off limits spread to more and more 'reasonable' locations in many states, and some places even tried to restrict where guns could be carried in town leading to some historical moments like the famous OK corral. Eventualy the right and practice of carry in public became foriegn in some states and regions.

    Suddenly not that many years ago some had the nifty idea to extend the privelidge (no longer the right) to purchase a license with qualifications and a tax (the fee) that almost gave as much freedom to carry concealed as everyone had enjoyed for most of American history just by being a citizen. It spread through a number of states and now we have all the right to carry states. That caught on and was the 'pro gun' success it is viewed as today.
    Now we see new places added progressively to even where that purchased privelidge is no longer valid (though sometimes those places are removed in pro gun victories.)

    Rights turned into gradualy restricted rights, that then become purchaseable state allowed privelidges. Now where that privlidge is valid is being increasingly regulated.

    The message is good, a woman once could carry anywhere in America, and the government could not infringe on that. Now she cannot, and in those places she can it is a purchaseable privelidge not a right.
     
  18. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    I didn't miss anything.Just go back over the dialogue.
    I'm just trying to get a straight answer from you.
    I'll be explicit.Are you talking about women,blacks,homosexuals,immigrants,abortion,segregation,gun rights,etc.?

    As Oleg Volk pointed out there has been a definite trade off.
    Are we ahead or behind 1908?
    It depends very much on a personal perspective.We can talk all night about those perspectives of blacks,whites,women,etc.
    I was just trying to get some insight into your idea of rights 2008 vs 1908.
    That's all TAB.
    Peace,Duke.:)
     
  19. TAB

    TAB Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,475
    Every one in the US has more rights now then they did 100 years ago. That better?
     
  20. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    Every one?Who are they?These everyone.Just curious.And what are those extra rights?
     
  21. Nolo

    Nolo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    Galveston, TX
    I believe "everyone" he is referring to would be all 300+ million residents and citizens of the United States of America.
    Which I agree with, to a scientifically acceptable margin.
    Of course, people are more liable to notice rights they don't have, than ones they enjoy...
     
  22. Duke Junior

    Duke Junior member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2008
    Messages:
    685
    Location:
    Cherokee County,North Carolina
    Fascinating!Explain scientifically acceptable margin.I love this New Age Jargon.Hey,that rhymes.
     
  23. Nolo

    Nolo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    Galveston, TX
    Basically, I mean that any who actually do have less rights (probably South Carolinians with aristocratic heritage, most likely, though there is some argument to be made for those of Middle Eastern descent) are of such a small percent (less than one, possibly less than 1/10th of one percent) as to be negligible in the big scheme of things.
    60 years ago, white men didn't even have the right to representation.
    Oh, and don't get smart. It doesn't make you look like a good person.
     
  24. JesseL

    JesseL Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,492
    Location:
    Prescott, AZ
    I don't think that there are many (any?) rights that I have today that I wouldn't have had 100 years ago.

    It's wonderful that now everybody has the same rights, regardless of sex, race, etc. But we have also definitely lost a few rights that should never have been touched.

    Rights aren't a zero sum game.
     
  25. Nolo

    Nolo Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,624
    Location:
    Galveston, TX
    Good post, JesseL.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page