September 29, 2012

"One Bullet - One Ballgame"

Is an old school slogan for military firearms instructors. If is absolutely accurate that the individual who is capable firing one well placed round at a time in the heat of battle has the best possible chance to survive the encounter.

Differing dramatically from mounted machine guns, "Assault Weapons" are designed to be man carried, automatic, high volume, high ammunition consumption firearm that can rarely sustain continuous operation for as much as one minute due to overheating, jamming, and the shear weight and volume of bullets required. They have virtually no point accuracy and are designed to strike fear in and suppress accurate return fire from an opponent in a defensive position by an attacker attempting to seize / over run that defensive position.

No matter what it looks like, that is the very definition of an Assault Weapon.

With very rare exception, Assault Weapons have been illegal in the USA since long before I was born.

Semi-automatic firearms allow for very accurate, well aimed first round and rapid following, well aimed rounds.

A man carried, automatic assault firearm is designed as an Offensive, Fire Suppression Weapon.

A man carried, semi-automatic is a "One Bullet - One Ballgame" weapon allowing an individual to engage one or more individual targets very accurately and rapidly at extended range.

No matter what it looks like, that is the very definition of a Defensive Weapon and a very capable hunting arm as well.

Semper Fi,

September 25, 2012

NO!!! None At All.

If a citizen who is authorized by State law to carry a defensive weapon wants to patronize a non-governmental facility and that facility does not allow firearms on it's premises, then the individual must either:

1. Patronize the facility at his/her own risk without a defensive firearm, or
2. Not patronize the facility until and unless it's "No Guns" policy changes

It is the individual's right and free choice to carry a defensive firearm

It is a business owner's right and free choice to establish the terms and conditions under which he/she will do business

Both are individual rights, not to be infringed. Neither bares any responsibility to the other.

the Free Market, NOT more regulation will sort it out.

Semper Fi,

September 20, 2012

So do you think someone who is HIV Positive

Should either:
1. Never "bring a loaded weapon (themselves) within range of others, or
2. Wear a sign board that says "I'M HIV POSITIVE" when in public?

Semper Fi

September 19, 2012

Shepards, not wolves, lead sheep to the slaughter

As confirmed by the 2nd amendment, Peace Through Strength applies to individuals just as it applies to our Nation.

I learned those facts long before serving in the Unites State Marine Corps and, as a Marine, standing as one of America's "open carry" weapons.

I do not deride those who choose not to carry or even own firearms. At the same time, I will actively oppose those who would restrict my freedom of armed defense.

Semper Fi,

September 17, 2012

Which "herd" thinks that way you ask.

IMO, the "herd" you apparently belong to thinks that way.

Simple example. You wrote:
"...if such danger presents itself, then I would definitely consider carrying and I wouldn't be hiding it either"

The fact is, if such danger presents itself, it will be too late for you to consider anything but trying to survive the attack by whatever means possible - just like sheep do when wolves attack.

I know that a group of sheep is called a "flock" rather than a "herd" but I am confident you get my drift.

Semper Fi,

September 17, 2012

IMO This song defines our debate

&feature=player_embedded

I have saved the lyrics which is a well considered, lengthy, and accurate list of potential causes for violent, anti-social behavior.

No inanimate tool of any type that can be used to enhance violent, anti-social behavior is on that list. A list of those types of tools could be at least as long as the list in the lyrics.

Yet the conclusion is to remove access to one (1) type of tool; not correct the anti-social behavior which is the basis of all such violence.

Antis blame the tool. Pros blame the anti-social behavior.

I felt this song deserved a thread of its own.

===================================

• If It Were Up to Me• Words and Lyrics by:
• Cheryl Wheeler
•
• Maybe it's the movies, maybe it's the books
• Maybe it's the bullets, maybe it's the real crooks
• Maybe it's the drugs, maybe it's the parents
• Maybe it's the colors everybody's wearin
• Maybe it's the President, maybe it's the last one
• Maybe it's the one before that, what he done
• Maybe it's the high schools, maybe it's the teachers
• Maybe it's the tattooed children in the bleachers
• Maybe it's the Bible, maybe it's the lack
• Maybe it's the music, maybe it's the crack
• Maybe it's the hairdos, maybe it's the TV
• Maybe it's the cigarettes, maybe it's the family
• Maybe it's the fast food, maybe it's the news
• Maybe it's divorce, maybe it's abuse
• Maybe it's the lawyers, maybe it's the prisons
• Maybe it's the Senators, maybe it's the system
• Maybe it's the fathers, maybe it's the sons
• Maybe it's the sisters, maybe it's the moms
• Maybe it's the radio, maybe it's road rage
• Maybe El Nino, or UV rays
• Maybe it's the army, maybe it's the liquor
• Maybe it's the papers, maybe the militia
• Maybe it's the athletes, maybe it's the ads
• Maybe it's the sports fans, maybe it's a fad
• Maybe it's the magazines, maybe it's the internet
• Maybe it's the lottery, maybe it's the immigrants
• Maybe it's taxes, big business
• Maybe it's the KKK and the skinheads
• Maybe it's the communists, maybe it's the Catholics
• Maybe it's the hippies, maybe it's the addicts
• Maybe it's the art, maybe it's the sex
• Maybe it's the homeless, maybe it's the banks
• Maybe it's the clearcut, maybe it's the ozone
• Maybe it's the chemicals, maybe it's the car phones
• Maybe it's the fertilizer, maybe it's the nose rings
• Maybe it's the end, but I know one thing.
• If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns.

==========================

Semper Fi,

September 9, 2012

+1 and I would add

Have your photo ID in your raised hand to give to the responding LEO(s) so that you do not have to reach in your pocket for anything when they arrive.

Semper Fi,

September 8, 2012

I am unclear on who you are talking about

You wrote:…
“You have every right to your opinion and every right to get involve in our legislative process!

If you feel strongly about your opinion fight for it!”

Excellent statement. I support it 100%.

Then you wrote:…
“I'm sure you notice by now that the only thing they can say to you is to insult you. So what? Screw them and their insults. Sticks and stones and all that.”

Followed by:
“Gunners are not some patriot group fighting for Constitutional rights! They are a bunch of people with a fetish prostituting the Constitution for their own selfish interest.”

And in your next post:…
“Fuck gunner statistics! It is a useless game the play.”

After reading your comments above, I am really unclear on exactly who you were talking about when you wrote:

“I'm sure you notice by now that the only thing they can say to you is to insult you”

but the answer is Yes, I have noticed and so have the vast majority of Americans.

Semper Fi,

P.S. "Profanity is the last refuge of the ignorant, the insensitive and the illiterate"
-- anon --

September 6, 2012

Let's Ban Murder and Violent Attacks However Committed.

Leave the firearms and air guns; knives and other sharp objects; bats, clubs, and other blunt objects; vehicles; cords and ropes; etc., etc., etc.

It does not matter to a victim if they are murdered with a gun or a rock. Either way they are just as dead. It is not the fault of the gun or the fault of the rock. It is the fault of the individual who determined to, without just cause, exert violence on another

I doubt I will ever support more gun control laws and infringement of my 2A rights but I will get in lock step with heavy handed laws in support of Violence Control.


Semper Fi,

September 3, 2012

Why are there virtually NO examples

of civilians legally defending themselves with firearms and accidentally shooting innocent bystanders in the process?

Countless times antis have stressed that armed civilians will go "cowboy" crazy and shoot hoards of innocent bystanders while trying to defend themselves with a firearm. I have searched for examples of such occurrences. I even posted two (2) threads

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117266664#post5

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117267298

asking for examples.

All efforts have generated one (1) example of one (1) innocent bystander accidentally being shot by one (1) individual legally defending himself from two (2) armed robbers.

Sounds to me like it is way past time to put that straw man to bed.

Semper Fi,