McCain Plays Dirty By Choosing a Woman as His VP

See north the problem is you try too hard, the logic is much simpler than what you are trying to make it. The second amendment means a lot to me, i shoot regularly, my wife shoots regularly, (this is the selfish portion of my stance) We enjoy shooting, therefore, not only is does the second amendment protect my right to protect my family and home, in doing so it also allows me to continue my hobby. Adding even more importance on the table.

You may be a very intelligent man, but that is apparently your handicap in this situation, because you are trying way too hard.

 

There is still a significant difference. Americans in particular are some of the worlds most selfish people. I would be willing to bet that the vast majority of people who attend rally's, do fundraisers, and are in the NRA actually own guns. I'm even willing to admit that my interest is probably not close to simply's. I hunt occassionally, I own 3 guns, and I grew up in a household that had guns. But I don't go shooting very often at all, I rarely get them out of the safe, and I don't even have them in a location where they would be viable for self-protection if someone were breaking in. Someone who is around them more often, who gets more enjoyment out of them, and has an honest belief that they are needed for self-protection would certainly care more than myself.

Thats not to say that I don't care at all, I do. But I don't care enough to get involved too much. This means that non gun owners probably care even less than myself except for the amount of time they spend spewing their opinion here on the forums.

Just somethign else that came to mind. This whole topic reminds me of people who are career politicians and others who vote at every election versus those who just vote every 4 years or less. Its not saying that they don't care who gets elected, I'm sure they do. They just care less.

 

Simply, you certainly "tried hard" to argue that because you owned a gun, you were somehow more "pro-2nd Amendment" than Grim (or me, or anyone else who doesn't own a gun), simply because you own a gun. I have tried to help you see that this is an utterly illogical position to take, and I have tried to help by many different approaches, but you aren't seeing it.

I'm glad you enjoy shooting, as do I, but it's quite basic. How much you benefit personally from a given tenet of the constitution has nothing to do with whether you have more authority with respect to the merits of that tenet. I can't make it any simpler, and it really is, well, that simple, Simply.

 

But again, this completely misses the mark, PHP.

Could be, or could be wrong, depending on the non-gun owner. I can only say it so many different ways:

Or, in the alternative, I will ask you to please deal squarely with my Amendment V analogy, as this is directly comparable, but perhaps more easily seen.

 

This is totally true! If you get rid of guns you will see oppression when the first power crazed politician takes over. Freedoms will be taken away. It would be a very grim day for America.

If our government goes down the wrong path, it is up to the people to tear down that government, to tear down the evil. I am shocked it has not happened already. The only reason it has not happened, is because the Republican and Democratic parties, Both being outlets of a secret organization to put who they want in the white house.

They have people thinking that they have a choice, when this secret organization says pick from this one or this one (being the democratic & republican nominees). They still get their guy in the white house.

This organization is made of very rich bankers who own the federal reserve. The guys who our government borrows money from...collectively known as the deficit.

I listened to Palin's speech last night on a web cast. She was very impressive with her speech. She is comely in her appearance. I was blindly a Republican in the past, now I consider myself an Independent. A few things worried me about her speech...

I really do not want to see nuclear power in America as she proposes. They say the technology has improved, they are safer. But how safe would a nuclear facility be from a terrorist threat. I did not hear her mention one thing about the environment, or global warming (reducing green house gasses). Environmentalism is no longer a left wing thing. Its a main stream concern, which has failed to be addressed.

I far as Obama is concerned...this guy is a slippery snake. They should have hired Denzel Washington, he would have been a better actor.

I do like John McCain, and I don't think that he will let those special interests control him. He was a Prisoner of War, and as a former United States soldier who has been in similar situations I do know one thing. "That when your down, you learn to appreciate how little you have, and you never forget from these life struggles." I do believe that McCain has the countries best interests at heart.

I am against the war, but I am also against pulling out too soon and allowing civil wars to take over and end up with a worse leader than Saddam ever was. That country needs stability, which it has not seen in many hundreds of years. The people there are dirt poor. I liked it when the USA picked up Japan after WW2. We need to do the same for Iraq. We need to show the whole world we are the good guys.

On another note...heres what I would do if I were in the political position to do so... I would make a law, that in ten years all gasoline driven passenger vehicles would be outlawed for production, with exception to small recreational vehicles.

This would put a flame under the auto manufactures butts to start releasing hydrogen powered vehicles instead. This would lower our dependence on oil...big time. Which seems to be the main thing hurting our economy.

Right now my vote is up in the air, but I do know I will not be voting for Obama. He is simply the wrong guy for the job. Muslim one minute,,,Christian the next. I know we definately cannot afford to have a guy like him in office.

 

All else aside,

Sources?

 

I didn't get the opportunity to read that example. But even that really doesn't apply. A better analogy for this situation would be your money of $1,300,000 versus simply's $0.00. If he had no money to steal, how much would he care about the law against stealing money then? He probably wouldn't care as much as you would assuming he has never owned or earned a dime in his life.

I do have to make note that this is not a very good analogy either because everyone has earned money. Not to mention the vast majority of people have also had stuff stolen from them. This is putting them directly into the situation of caring, whereas the 2nd Amendment is something foreign to many Americans today.

 

Boy, you guys sure are wasting a lot of time argueing over who likes the second amendment the most.

Seems pretty silly to me.

Flame On!

 

Um, this has been all over the news...I don't have any actual reference, as I am not writing a essay.

 

Then allow me reprint it.

Really? How do you know, if you didn't read it?

OK, then Simply has no money in the bank, as opposed to "$3.12." Given:

Are you seriously trying to argue it necessarily follows he is somehow "less" in support of the law than someone who couldn't care less about the law, capital L, in principle, but who "likes" it because he has a lot of money in the bank?

Bottom line, as I have said many times, is it possible to believe in a principle of law, irrespective of whether one personally benefits? Perhaps believe "more" than many "liking" the law because it "does good things for them, 'selfishly?' "

A final time, man, since I've said it several times and you've missed it each time: we aren't talking about non owners who don't care, we are talking about "owners" and "non-owners" WHO DO CARE, but the argument is being made that the non-owners NECESSARILY CARE LESS BECAUSE they don't own a gun. Plainly, now: a sentiment with no basis in logic of any kind; baseless.

 

Obama being a Muslim has been all over the news? Yet you don't have any actual reference?

Is it possible "Obama being Muslim" has been all over the web, and the web is known to throw snow jobs around as a matter of sheer entertainment from time to time?

A general statement: One problem I have with the "rational actor" argument in terms of optimizing utility - it presumes perfect information. Somewhere, Earl, if you're reading, I think you rightfully brought this up as well.

 

They are really pulling out all the stops to try to beat Obama. Like caged, rabid dogs!

 

Thank you for bringing this up. I DO NOT NOR WILL I MORE THAN LIKELY EVER SUPPORT THE NRA.

Why might you ask if I claim to be so pro the 2nd amendment?

Simple really, I see them and their supporters as SELL OUTS to what the 2nd actually is for, what it stands for, part of the problem of watering it down.

Ahh but to me it's not so much as to 'who supports the 2nd more'

It is a determining factor as to who supports the CONSTITUTION, much more in depth and much more important than something as silly as who is more pro 2nd amendment, much, much, more..

I support everyones rights in the US, hell even child molesters of whom I think are the biggest scum out there, I however support their rights as much if not more so than many of them would, not because it effects me directly 'because I am not a child molester' but because anytime you take a right away from any citizen, any time you water down the constitution it hurts our great nation as a whole IMHO. It can also trickle down as it often does and inadvertently effect you or your loved ones years later.

 

The rights of the innocent are often protected by the guilty in court. It is never the person who was illegal searched and they cops found nothing who takes the issue to court. It is always pathetic when I hear someone speak about an illegal search and they say "If you don't have anything to hide, what does it matter?"

If we do not protect the constitutionally protected rights of the guilty we will all suffer.

 

Precisely my point. In order to protect all of our rights we must protect even those most vile creatures among us at the same time

Take them down within the confines of the law, within the constitution. If don't follow the constitution for all US citizens, what purpose does it serve? All men would obviously not be 'equal'

 

The NRA may be sell outs as a institution, but i wouldnt say that about the members. Im am actually not a member, but i know many that are members simply for the large stance they(NRA) make on the second amendment

 

I sometimes feel like shooting the television without due process, particularly last night. Am I bad?

 

The sound a TV makes as the bullet passes through the TV set is satisfying. You should try it as an alternative to your workout routine.

 

Won't that waste the TV and ruin the money used to buy it. Big price to pay for a little satisfaction.

 

Simple, he wants to Win. Why come this far to lose.