After Years of Republican Neglect

[BT]

Where's the fun in that?

BSB

If you don't take yourself seriously, why should we?

[BSB]

"why should we?"

We[sic] huh. Monolithic are you?



BSB

[BT]

No.

But the question(s) still remain.

[sirs]

At one time he could be taken seriously, by all sides of the ideological spetrum.  Now that this forum is nothing more than a zen buddha rant ring, I can see why its more fun being intellectually lazy vs dealing/discussing/defending serious issues with facts.

[BSB]

Aristotle:

"Law should govern"

 "It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens: upon the same principle, if it is advantageous to place the supreme power in some particular persons, they should be appointed to be only guardians, and the servants of the laws."

[sirs]

You mean like the Constitution?  You should check that out sometime for some good legal reading.  But until that time, hope the zen practice is working out for yas

[Plane]

I don't know how dumbass ratwing jesusfreak rednecks run their states.

BSB


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

I would say this is an assertion of real fact.

[Xavier_Onassis]

sirs' state is run by Democrats, ably governed by Jerry Brown. I doubt if sirs approves. He would prefer a governator or somesuch creature.

The military is wise to prevent soldiers, sailors and Marines to be universally armed on duty. While perhaps 99.9% of them would never fire a weapon, there is always the possibility that one unhinged member of that remaining .01% might do so. If no one is armed, there is a 100% chance that this will not happen, provided all follow the regulations, of course.

It would be a bad idea for every employee of the Pentagon to be packing heat, in my opinion.

[sirs]

And sirs state is bleeding to death, ala Greece, by the union beholden Brown, as businesses leave by the boatload, leaving less and less of 'the rich" to pay for everyone else.  I do appreciate Xo helping to bring to light what can happen to a state completely controlled by hard core liberal Democrats, thank you very much.

[BSB]

"The military is wise to prevent soldiers, sailors and Marines to be universally armed on duty."

Wise is an understatement. The idea is laughable in it's absurdity.


BSB

[BT]

"The military is wise to prevent soldiers, sailors and Marines to be universally armed on duty."

Wise is an understatement. The idea is laughable in it's absurdity.


BSB

Yeah it about as absurd as requiring cops to carry arms. on duty or off.

[BSB]

"Yeah it about as absurd as requiring cops to carry arms. on duty or off."

The comparison of an E4 cook at say, Ft Dix NJ, to say, a Boston Police officer, in terms of carrying a loaded weapon around is so absurd it boggles the mind.


BSB

[sirs]

Why?  Explain please why the cook shouldn't have a similar access?  Has he not been trained to use one.....by the military of all folks?

[BSB]

Why on earth would want every soldier at Ft Dix to be walking around with a loaded weapon? They didn't even allow that on the major bases in Vietnam, and for good reason. Do you know how dangerous is it is to have every Tom, Dick, and Jane, packing? Do you know how many accidents occur even in a combat infantry unit? Just off the top of my head I can think of two wounded and one killed via firearms accidents in the units I was in. And that only scratches the surface or reasons not to allow it.

The military doesn't allow it because they know better. Don't believe me? Go ask someone in todays military, they'll tell you.

This is really an asinine topic folks.


BSB

[sirs]

Why on earth would want every soldier at Ft Dix to be walking around with a loaded weapon?

Why not??

They didn't even allow that on the major bases in Vietnam, and for good reason. Do you know how dangerous is it is to have every Tom, Dick, and Jane, packing? Do you know how many accidents occur even in a combat infantry unit? Just off the top of my head I can think of two wounded and one killed via firearms accidents in the units I was in. And that only scratches the surface or reasons not to allow it.

Ahh, I appreciate you using some facts and experience, vs just trying to convey how superior in knowledge you appear to think yourself to be.  So, the biggest reason appears to be some "accident".  I suppose from a mathematical standpoint, that makes some sense.  Less packing, less accidents. 

I can post the same level of facts and experience that produce #'s, in this country such as.....the greatest # of gun crimes occur in areas with the strictest gun laws/restrictions.....with the connected level of decreased gun crime, in areas with more permissive gun laws......that the predominant form of gun used in murders are handguns, not Bushmasters,....and that wonderful recent revelation, that despite the increase in the #'s firearms owned, and more people exercising their right to own a firearm, that we've actually had a DECREASE in violent crime, over that same time. 

Outside of Zimmerman, who was the last person with a CCW that "went off" on some mass murder spree??

Glad we had this conversation