Guns

[havok579257]

You're cute when you get all worked up.

 

 

I agree I am cute.  Although how you got that I was worked up from that baffles me.  Its that reading thing again isn't it?

[PhuturePriest]

I agree I am cute.  Although how you got that I was worked up from that baffles me.  Its that reading thing again isn't it?

 

My sincerest of apologies, sir. If I have misunderstood your emotions, perhaps it is because of the frightening lack of punctuation and proper English skills in your posts.

[havok579257]

I'll tell whoever the heck I want, dang it, 'cause I have opinions and a computer, and certainly even people that agree with me want to hear me speak, because I'm me and amesome like that.

 

 

The key difference: You committed yourself to the debate. I never let on or said that I was in any way getting involved in the discussion other than for the occasional witty comment.

 

 

You know, just because your buddies on here over use sacrasm does not mean you have to follow them to a T. 

[PhuturePriest]

You know, just because your buddies on here over use sacrasm does not mean you have to follow them to a T. 

 

Oh, please. Giving them credit for my natural sarcasm is like giving the paint job all the credit for the beauty of a car. I had a natural sarcasm all along. They simply honed it into its current glorious state.

[Winchester]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik

 

I find that charming. I think your advocacy of evil is made with the best of intentions. I think that means a lot. I'm comforted by the thought that many, if not most, DEA agents believe that when they are committing assault, battery, kidnapping, and murder, really think they're doing the work of good. I'm positive God will take that into account. That's an example. I think FDR thought he was being a good guy when he threw Japanes people into concentration camps, and incinerated Hiroshima and Nagasaki. When the FBI sniper executed a woman holding a baby, I'm sure he thought this execution was for the good of society. When Federal troops mowed down unarmed indians at Wounded Knee, I'm certain they thought they were doing God's work. When troops murdered students at Kent State, when our government starved Iraqi women and children, when they bombed innocents in Afghanistan...well, I think I've made my point. You're worried about a few morons doing stupid stuff. So you're going to put psychotics in control.

 

Gee. What could possibly go wrong?

 

I follow the non-aggression principle. You don't appear to grasp that. I'm certain you'll find something negative to read on it, and let it form your opinion. Like I said, your side won. Your side includes Obama, Bush, Pelosi, McCain, Reid, Santorum, Gingrich, Cheney, and a host of other murderous bastards. Nice company you keep.

[havok579257]

My sincerest of apologies, sir. If I have misunderstood your emotions, perhaps it is because of the frightening lack of punctuation and proper English skills in your posts.

 

 

Yeah because being able to tell if something is in caps or not is very hard right?  LOL, wanting proper english on an internet forum.  Where have I seen that before... oh wait, in this thread.  Come up with something original next time please.

[havok579257]

Oh, please. Giving them credit for my natural sarcasm is like giving the paint job all the credit for the beauty of a car. I had a natural sarcasm all along. They simply honed it into its current glorious state.

 

 

Be an original, not a copy.

[havok579257]

I find that charming. I think your advocacy of evil is made with the best of intentions. I think that means a lot. I'm comforted by the thought that many, if not most, DEA agents believe that when they are committing assault, battery, kidnapping, and murder, really think they're doing the work of good. I'm positive God will take that into account. That's an example. I think FDR thought he was being a good guy when he threw Japanes people into concentration camps, and incinerated Hiroshima and Nagasaki. When the FBI sniper executed a woman holding a baby, I'm sure he thought this execution was for the good of society. When Federal troops mowed down unarmed indians at Wounded Knee, I'm certain they thought they were doing God's work. When troops murdered students at Kent State, when our government starved Iraqi women and children, when they bombed innocents in Afghanistan...well, I think I've made my point. You're worried about a few morons doing stupid stuff. So you're going to put psychotics in control.

 

Gee. What could possibly go wrong?

 

I follow the non-aggression principle. You don't appear to grasp that. I'm certain you'll find something negative to read on it, and let it form your opinion. Like I said, your side won. Your side includes Obama, Bush, Pelosi, McCain, Reid, Santorum, Gingrich, Cheney, and a host of other murderous bastards. Nice company you keep.

 

 

Your side is not much better than his side.  You've got the crazy nutjob conspiricy theroists extreme right wingers,  Once again a man who is convinced only he is right, everyone who opposes him is wrong and their is no postives to the other sides arguement.

[PhuturePriest]

I find that charming. I think your advocacy of evil is made with the best of intentions. I think that means a lot. I'm comforted by the thought that many, if not most, DEA agents believe that when they are committing assault, battery, kidnapping, and murder, really think they're doing the work of good. I'm positive God will take that into account. That's an example. I think FDR thought he was being a good guy when he threw Japanes people into concentration camps, and incinerated Hiroshima and Nagasaki. When the FBI sniper executed a woman holding a baby, I'm sure he thought this execution was for the good of society. When Federal troops mowed down unarmed indians at Wounded Knee, I'm certain they thought they were doing God's work. When troops murdered students at Kent State, when our government starved Iraqi women and children, when they bombed innocents in Afghanistan...well, I think I've made my point. You're worried about a few morons doing stupid stuff. So you're going to put psychotics in control.

 

Gee. What could possibly go wrong?

 

I follow the non-aggression principle. You don't appear to grasp that. I'm certain you'll find something negative to read on it, and let it form your opinion. Like I said, your side won. Your side includes Obama, Bush, Pelosi, McCain, Reid, Santorum, Gingrich, Cheney, and a host of other murderous bastards. Nice company you keep.

 

Say what you will, but having all of those people in the same room together would bring about some really funny contradictory arguments.

 

Be an original, not a copy.

 

Sense. Get some.

 

Yeah because being able to tell if something is in caps or not is very hard right?  LOL, wanting proper english on an internet forum.  Where have I seen that before... oh wait, in this thread.  Come up with something original next time please.

 

Expecting proper English out of adults is something I hold to, yes. Unless, of course, that's not what the intent of this post was. It was kind of hard to understand the meaning behind all of the improper punctuation.

Edited April 18, 2013 by FuturePriest387

[PhuturePriest]

Your side is not much better than his side.  You've got the crazy nutjob conspiricy theroists extreme right wingers,  Once again a man who is convinced only he is right, everyone who opposes him is wrong and their is no postives to the other sides arguement.

 

Why must his side be full of right-wing nut job conspiracy theorists? It seems as if you are judging an entire political philosophy by a few conspiracy theorists. I've never seen Winchester say a conspiracy theory, except in the case of when he sometimes makes fun of them.

Edited April 18, 2013 by FuturePriest387

[havok579257]

Say what you will, but having all of those people in the same room together would bring about some really funny contradictory arguments.

 

 

Sense. Get some.

 

 

Expecting proper English out of adults is something I hold to, yes. Unless, of course, that's not what the intent of this post was. It was kind of hard to understand the meaning behind all of the improper punctuation.

 

 

Although expecting an adult to act mature is not somethingyo expect obviously?  Unless your honestly going to tell me you had no clue what I said.  Although if so then the question begs why even respond?  See I get winchester.  He's a sacrastic poster here but at least he's an original.  Although in your case all your doing is trying to follow in his and other foot steps to come off as cool.  Just be an original man and stop trying to be just like someone else.

[Winchester]

Your side is not much better than his side.  You've got the crazy nutjob conspiricy theroists extreme right wingers,  Once again a man who is convinced only he is right, everyone who opposes him is wrong and their is no postives to the other sides arguement.

 

If a conspiracy theorist believes in the NAP, then I agree with him on that point. I'm not real fussy about liking crazy people.

 

There are positives to your argument. I pointed them out. Your intent is positive, your means are evil. If I believed I were right, I would be prescribing positive action. I'm not. I'm saying leave people alone until they actually do something wrong. You're advocating preemptive strikes. It's precisely my lack of knowledge that leads me to advocate not ruling over others. You're the one advocating programs. It's you claiming to have solutions. It's you claiming to know what's best. I'm saying quit sticking guns in peoples' ribs.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Winchester

[havok579257]

Why must his side be full of right-wing nut job conspiracy theorists? It seems as if you are judging an entire political philosophy by a few conspiracy theorists. I've never seen Winchester say a conspiracy theory, except in the case of when he sometimes makes fun of them.

 

 

There is that reading thing again.  I never said his side was full of them.  I said his side has them in it.  Big difference there.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

Nvm... i guess i misread. 

 

Edited April 18, 2013 by CatholicsAreKewl

[Winchester]

Wait, was that directed towards me? Because I don't really disagree with any of this...

 

No. My response to you was well before. I pointed out I am an expert, but only on my motivation behind my beliefs.

[CatholicsAreKewl]

No. My response to you was well before. I pointed out I am an expert, but only on my motivation behind my beliefs.

I know, my video was in your response. That's why I was confused. I'll just sit back down and finish my popcorn.

[havok579257]

If a conspiracy theorist believes in the NAP, then I agree with him on that point. I'm not real fussy about liking crazy people.

 

There are positives to your argument. I pointed them out. Your intent is positive, your means are evil. If I believed I were right, I would be prescribing positive action. I'm not. I'm saying leave people alone until they actually do something wrong. You're advocating preemptive strikes. It's precisely my lack of knowledge that leads me to advocate not ruling over others. You're the one advocating programs. It's you claiming to have solutions. It's you claiming to know what's best. I'm saying quit sticking guns in peoples' ribs.

 

 

So just so I understand, are you ok with guns to released murders?  What about people in know terrorists groups?  What about nuclear weapons to countries such as North Korea?  Do you advocate letting people and or countries have nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction until they attack us?  Would that be part of the non aggression philosophy?  Even though we know or can nearly be certain what they will do with these weapons once they get their hands on them.

[havok579257]

If a conspiracy theorist believes in the NAP, then I agree with him on that point. I'm not real fussy about liking crazy people.

 

There are positives to your argument. I pointed them out. Your intent is positive, your means are evil. If I believed I were right, I would be prescribing positive action. I'm not. I'm saying leave people alone until they actually do something wrong. You're advocating preemptive strikes. It's precisely my lack of knowledge that leads me to advocate not ruling over others. You're the one advocating programs. It's you claiming to have solutions. It's you claiming to know what's best. I'm saying quit sticking guns in peoples' ribs.

 

You did not point out positives you were just condisending(sp?) by saying I see why you think your evil ideas are right.  That is not at all looking at the other sides point of view.  That's further digging in your heels on your point of view.  Honestly, if you can see no positives to the other side of an argument then your saying I am unwilling to comprimise, I am unwilling to even consider the other point of view and my being wrong, I am right, nah nah nah. 

[Winchester]

I know, my video was in your response. That's why I was confused. I'll just sit back down and finish my popcorn.

 

I didn't notice it was you. I'm sorry.

[Winchester]

So just so I understand, are you ok with guns to released murders?  What about people in know terrorists groups?  What about nuclear weapons to countries such as North Korea?  Do you advocate letting people and or countries have nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction until they attack us?  Would that be part of the non aggression philosophy?  Even though we know or can nearly be certain what they will do with these weapons once they get their hands on them.

 

If a man is safe enough to be let out of prison, then why should he not have a means of defending himself.

 

Yes, I advocate non-interventionism. I know of one country that has used atomic weapons. Twice.

 

You can look up NAP. There's always a gray area in what is considered a credible threat. Gerard Casey, a Catholic libertarian anarchist, probably has some articles out there. There's also Stephan Kinsella, but he's not a Catholic.

 

We've already committed acts of war against North Korea. Economic sanctions are acts of war. Maybe we should start by ending that crap. I don't believe in American exceptionalism.

 

"Can nearly be certain". Well, if that isn't enough to harm innocents, I don't know what is. Sucks being a good guy, sometimes.