Post: #26

Sounds good to me. Let's all have guns...all the time.

I want an M-240 G Machine Gun mounted on the roof of my house.

Keys, wallet, phone, gun, supressor, sub-sonic rounds.

I think exploded-view weapons coloring books for children could be a billion-dollar industry.

I'd like the Honda CRV with the Ma Deuce package and leather seats for my wife, please.

I'm not kidding.
#worldpeace

At least that's my script when talking to anti gun folks.

I kind of doubt they'll allow guns in the rnc, i see this as a statement: people want their guns and they want the government to know they want them, and will group together to have them.

And that's not a bad thing for a government to be aware of.

Post: #27

h3ltrsk3ltr, it's good to see you back around

Post: #28

Thanks GM. Glad to see you're still here.

Post: #29

There's one question I have been asking for a long time: why is the life of a politician more valuable than anyone else's life? In fact, politicians are non-productive individuals. In many cases, they destroy the production of others. A farmer's life is certainly more valuable than a politician's life. I'll say the same for nurses, doctors, and people who manufacture clothing. Politicians produce absolutely nothing of value, and we certainly have plenty of them. If one candidate gets killed, another will take his place.

Politicians don't grow food. They don't build houses. They don't provide clean water. They don't make clothing. They don't provide health care. Their lives are totally dispensable.

Post: #30

"There's one question I have been asking for a long time: why is the life of a politician more valuable than anyone else's life? In fact, politicians are non-productive individuals. In many cases, they destroy the production of others. A farmer's life is certainly more valuable than a politician's life. I'll say the same for nurses, doctors, and people who manufacture clothing. Politicians produce absolutely nothing of value, and we certainly have plenty of them. If one candidate gets killed, another will take his place.

Politicians don't grow food. They don't build houses. They don't provide clean water. They don't make clothing. They don't provide health care. Their lives are totally dispensable."

Is this a serious question or a rhetorical one? Because I can answer it if it's a serious one, but I'm not going to waste my time if you're just trying to get in a dig at politicans, who are admittedly a pretty tempting target.

Post: #31

@puckerman

Facilitating the trading, storage and the peacefulness of the environment around your essential resources will eventually lead to the development a bureaucracy which will probably become bloated and corrupt.

If resources, society and stuff like that make up the body, I'd agree that politicians are the waste. However, I don't like to imagine a world in which i can't poop.

Maybe we just need to find a better way to flush our nation's toilet.

...so to speak.

Post: #32

(03-26-2016 07:26 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(03-26-2016 06:20 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

(03-26-2016 04:33 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Zero chances this can happen. If people carry guns into the Arena, someone will shoot at the candidates, especially at Trump.

People will have to leave their guns in the car.

I went to a bar in Jerusalem where 45 people were open carrying and a number more were concealing. They never had a problem.

That's just a BIT smaller in magnitude than the RNC, don't ya think?

There is no WAY they could vet everyone into that arena as peaceful people or not.

In Israel, licensed gun owners are allowed to carry their licensed weapons anywhere. They don't have a problem of Jew on Jew accidental fire fights. This includes large events such as concerts and sporting events.

They view "private armed citizens" as force multipliers and require health/medical checks along with firing tests to ensure effective performance. Israeli posters on this forum can highlight how it works more in detail.

This has made Israel the Wild West... with a lot of Jews.

Doing a quick search, they had the Rolling Stones appear in Tel Aviv back in 2014 to a crowd of almost 50,000 in an open air park. No shoot outs occurred.

What works for Israel will work for the US. Don't let the libtards tell you otherwise.

Post: #33

There are middlegrounds here that don't go the full retard in either direction.

For example, have a reserved area up front with no access for the armed that puts the candidates beyond easy assassination by pistol. The armed can still attend, just not have full access rights to the front rows that are locked down by the SS in any case.

Of course, you're always going to have to contend with this guy...

Post: #34

(03-27-2016 12:30 AM)weambulance Wrote:  Sure, my examples weren't entirely reasonable. That's because I was mocking your ridiculous notion that the crowd will be packed with crazy people who are willing to die to kill a candidate when, I reiterate, there hasn't been a serious attempt on a president or candidate on US soil since 1981. You just got through telling me how vulnerable Trump was in transit, and the same thing applies to all the other candidates and the president himself. So if the country is so full of these crazy-but-competent fucks, why haven't they taken their shots? Your logic is lacking.

Why do you want to get Trump killed?

You showed it in your bolded statement. Last presidental candidate to rock the boat close to Trump, was also the last to get shot.

You don't strike me as someone who would unwittingly jump on team Soros/Hillary.

Post: #35

(03-27-2016 08:32 AM)JacksonRev Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:30 AM)weambulance Wrote:  Sure, my examples weren't entirely reasonable. That's because I was mocking your ridiculous notion that the crowd will be packed with crazy people who are willing to die to kill a candidate when, I reiterate, there hasn't been a serious attempt on a president or candidate on US soil since 1981. You just got through telling me how vulnerable Trump was in transit, and the same thing applies to all the other candidates and the president himself. So if the country is so full of these crazy-but-competent fucks, why haven't they taken their shots? Your logic is lacking.

Why do you want to get Trump killed?

You showed it in your bolded statement. Last presidental candidate to rock the boat close to Trump, was also the last to get shot.

You don't strike me as someone who would unwittingly jump on team Soros/Hillary.

Why are you arguing like a dick? The point at hand is whether it would actually put Trump in more danger. You don't get to jump over that, just declare it would, and therefore your opponent is a Trump killer and Soros supporter. Stop hanging out too much with the SJWs, it's rubbing off.

Post: #36

John Hinckley Jr. shot Reagan in an attempt to impress Jodie Foster. He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was insane, and has been institutionalized since, though he has recently been granted furloughs.

We have to go back to RFK in 1968 for the last (probably) politically motivated presidential candidate assassination. And in all of US history we've never had a whole pack of independent crazies try to take out a presidential candidate at the same time.

Post: #37

(03-27-2016 08:41 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 08:32 AM)JacksonRev Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 12:30 AM)weambulance Wrote:  Sure, my examples weren't entirely reasonable. That's because I was mocking your ridiculous notion that the crowd will be packed with crazy people who are willing to die to kill a candidate when, I reiterate, there hasn't been a serious attempt on a president or candidate on US soil since 1981. You just got through telling me how vulnerable Trump was in transit, and the same thing applies to all the other candidates and the president himself. So if the country is so full of these crazy-but-competent fucks, why haven't they taken their shots? Your logic is lacking.

Why do you want to get Trump killed?

You showed it in your bolded statement. Last presidental candidate to rock the boat close to Trump, was also the last to get shot.

You don't strike me as someone who would unwittingly jump on team Soros/Hillary.

Why are you arguing like a dick? The point at hand is whether it would actually put Trump in more danger. You don't get to jump over that, just declare it would, and therefore your opponent is a Trump killer and Soros supporter. Stop hanging out too much with the SJWs, it's rubbing off.

Trump is the most important politician in thirty years, and you're concerned about hypothetical freedoms of an event you're not even going to. You have no long term strategy, and you're playing directly into the hands of the people that started this, who are also completely against the 2A except for this one event.

But....but....but....hypothetically, in Israel, and if nobody could shoot, then Trump is totally not at risk.

This is more important than you.

Post: #38

(03-27-2016 08:48 AM)weambulance Wrote:  

John Hinckley Jr. shot Reagan in an attempt to impress Jodie Foster. He was found not guilty on the grounds that he was insane, and has been institutionalized since, though he has recently been granted furloughs.

We have to go back to RFK in 1968 for the last (probably) politically motivated presidential candidate assassination. And in all of US history we've never had a whole pack of independent crazies try to take out a presidential candidate at the same time.

Have you been to a Trump rally? Have you seen who's there? Fuck, Afghanistan and Iraq both had less crazies.

Post: #39

(03-27-2016 08:48 AM)weambulance Wrote:  ... in all of US history we've never had a whole pack of independent crazies try to take out a presidential candidate at the same time.

In fairness, in all of US history the crazies have never been this numerous or crazy.

Post: #40

Oh, you were serious. Okay.

See, this is where the convoluted conspiracy theory thinking goes off the rails. If someone like Soros, with his $23,000,000,000 or whatever it is, wanted to simply kill Trump, why the hell would he do it this way? It's completely nutballs. It's unreliable as hell. He could pretty easily just find a couple psychopaths with sniper training who work for PMCs, promise them he'll pay for a nice lifestyle in a non-extradition country when the job is done, and sit back and wait. Shit, just import them from Africa maybe, Africa has loads of mercenaries.

Or, instead of shooting him at long range, use any of a hundred other ways to kill him that a well-funded person can afford. Buy a few modern Russian SAMs, stick a ship in international waters, and shoot down Trump Force One when he's flying over the mid-Atlantic. Even if the operation cost $100,000,000, that's not daunting to a guy like Soros.

What are the limits of this sort of thinking?

And again, you have not made any progress proving that allowing citizens to carry pistols at the RNC would endanger any of the candidates. You seem to think it's a given.

This is all a moot point anyway. I think there is a 0% chance of the RNC allowing any non-LEO/USSS people to carry guns.

Post: #41

Interviewer asks Trump about the petition ( 11:30 ), but Trump does not make a comment because he was otherwise unaware of it. We will see it brought up again I am sure.

(03-27-2016 08:57 AM)Tokyo Joe Wrote:  Gents: Trump has been rather quiet the past few days, but Sunday morning he had a call-in interview with ABC's This Week --

If Trump comes out in favor, so will Cruz. Kasisch has the power to make it happen. But the party will likely protest because they are cucks. End result: Trump comes out stronger.

Post: #42

(03-27-2016 08:52 AM)JacksonRev Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 08:41 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  Why are you arguing like a dick? The point at hand is whether it would actually put Trump in more danger. You don't get to jump over that, just declare it would, and therefore your opponent is a Trump killer and Soros supporter. Stop hanging out too much with the SJWs, it's rubbing off.

Trump is the most important politician in thirty years, and you're concerned about hypothetical freedoms of an event you're not even going to. You have no long term strategy, and you're playing directly into the hands of the people that started this, who are also completely against the 2A except for this one event.

But....but....but....hypothetically, in Israel, and if nobody could shoot, then Trump is totally not at risk.

This is more important than you.

You didn't answer the question, you just did more of it. Are you capable of having an intelligent rational discussion? I'll just repeat it until you answer or stop responding.

Why are you arguing like a dick? The point at hand is whether it would actually put Trump in more danger. You don't get to jump over that, just declare it would, and therefore your opponent is a Trump killer and Soros supporter.

Post: #43

(03-27-2016 09:06 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(03-27-2016 08:48 AM)weambulance Wrote:  ... in all of US history we've never had a whole pack of independent crazies try to take out a presidential candidate at the same time.

In fairness, in all of US history the crazies have never been this numerous or crazy.

Well that's not true. Things are at the highest pitch they've been in, oh, 50 years or so, but we've had plenty of worse times. Like the Civil War.

I find it amusing how so many pundits and news people are squawking about the race being so dirty. I guess they're simply unfamiliar with US political history. Mudslinging goes back to essentially the birth of the US. Regarding the presidential election of 1800:

Quote:Jefferson's camp accused President Adams of having a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."

In return, Adams' men called Vice President Jefferson "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father."

As the slurs piled on, Adams was labeled a fool, a hypocrite, a criminal, and a tyrant, while Jefferson was branded a weakling, an atheist, a libertine, and a coward.

Even Martha Washington succumbed to the propaganda, telling a clergyman that Jefferson was "one of the most detestable of mankind."

Kind of off topic. But this isn't new, and people outright hating candidates isn't new either.

Post: #44

(03-27-2016 09:32 AM)weambulance Wrote:  ...
Well that's not true. Things are at the highest pitch they've been in, oh, 50 years or so, but we've had plenty of worse times. Like the Civil War.
...

Seriously. I'm not out and out against your stance here but I'm pretty sure that there weren't 70 million Americans on mood altering drugs during the civil war.

Add the crack addicts and the undiagnosed crazies and the numbers are right up there, to make no mention of everyone doing a social sciences degree.

Post: #45

If that's how you define, "crazies", that's fine, though raw numbers don't matter, rates do. I guess I missed your point.

Either way, this is far from the most unstable time in the history of the country. The Civil War accounted for 49% of all American war deaths, and 2% of the nation's population died in it. In modern terms, that would be like ~6 million Americans killing each other over a matter of principle today. In this election, as far as I know we've seen like five fistfights at rallies, one moron who tried to rush Trump, and no deaths. I just think things are being blown way out of proportion.

Post: #46

It seems this petition is gaining some steam and was started by someone who appears to be using it to take Trump down a peg on his 2nd amendment stance.

There was an article by ThinkProgess: "Republicans want guns in schools but not their convention."

You could argue the RNC convention is not a gun-free zone. The people with guns will be the police and secret service.

Post: #47

(03-27-2016 08:35 PM)memcpy Wrote:  You could argue the RNC convention is not a gun-free zone. The people with guns will be the police and secret service.

The term "gun free zone" refers to exactly what you describe: an area where only The Right People (government agents) are allowed to carry weapons. And, incidentally, those Right People have no obligation to protect or aid individual citizens.

Post: #48

Just to be clear, this is not a breach of the second amendment.

If the venue owner and the event mangers say "no guns" then that's that, just the same as you can in your own house or business.

The moral argument is an entirely different matter.

edit: This is assuming the location of the event is privately owned.
edit2: Location: Quicken Loans Arena
Owner: Gateway Economic Development Corp.
Operator: CAVS/Quicken Loans Arena Company

Post: #49

(03-27-2016 01:51 AM)Swell Wrote:  

(03-26-2016 11:10 PM)ElConquistador Wrote:  

Quote:... My knowledge is based on sending thousands of rounds down range and having read these two books.


This goes over specific events that have happened in history and then planning and logistics behind them.


This has more of the technical side of long range marksmanship.

I want to read those books!

Well, that's a simple enough itch to scratch.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #50

Lots of good points here.

I agree with you weambulance. With the 3 scenarios you outlined however I'm going to play the devils advocate. How will the USSS agents properly identify the bad guys from the good guys? Assuming a shot is fired, people carrying are probably going to draw giving the agents a harder job.