How many times have you ever needed a gun to defend yourself?

What jobs (besides police officer) do you need a gun to protect yourself?

And where do you get these numbers?

------------------
"[Smith] ran on an agenda that was revolutionary for his time -- a 45 cent minimum wage, limiting the workweek to six days, building a bridge to the 1930's -- and I want to say it's quite a tribute to Al Smith that Governor Bush has adopted the same agenda." - Al Gore

And again, I say just as I thought. Omega, me dear, did you actually read the articles? Cause your quote:

quote:

---

I say again: WHAT EFFING DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE if he can't do public speaking well?

---

certainly tells me that you didn't. The articles are about so much more.

Here, I'll help you with some of the things you missed while patting yourself on the back for being the smartest person you know.

quote:

---

In 1956, upon being told that he had all the "thinking people" on his side, Democratic presidential candidate Adlai Stevenson replied, "That's wonderful. But I need a majority." Bush's handlers are gambling that the majority will turn its back on the smart kid in favor of the frat party glad-hander....No presidential candidate ever went broke betting on the anti-intellectualism of the American people.

---

quote:

---

There's a slapdash disorder to many of his infelicities -- they are piles of disconnected words, a sequence of flash cards. Each stands for a slogan that stands for an impulse. He knows he is to repeat them, but he is not clear on what relation they have to each other.

---

quote:

---

He dashes around pressing rhetorical buttons: the "costs money" button, the "options" button, the "trust" button, the "strong" button, the school button, the hard work button. He cannot give cogent reasons for what he sys. He does not think he has to. In fact, throughout his career, he has not had to give reasons. He is entitled. He need not stoop to reason. This is not exactly stupidity, in the sense of native incapacity -- it may be that, but he has not been tested. What it is is slovenliness of a mind-boggling order. He may or may not be dyslexic, but who cares, since he has never had to read much, write much or reason much to get where he's gotten.

---

quote:

---

But what does he mean when he says that "insurance" is "a Washington term"?

---

quote:

---

When he says that local control of schools is vital, criticizes his opponent for wanting to "federalize" education, promises as president to impose various requirements on schools, complains that federal money comes with too many "strings," calls for after-school funds to be used for "character education," endorses a federal law forbidding state lawsuits against teachers, and so on, does he have a path through this maze of contradictions? When he promises a federal school voucher program and then deflects criticism by saying "vouchers are up to states," is he being dense or diabolically clever?

---

Bear in mind my political junkie friends that this is intended to be about Bush and his policies as he speaks them from his ever so nimble minds. This isn't necessarily anti-Gore, which is a fine tactic my conservative pals have tried to use in some of the above posts to divert attention from Bush.

So, if you want to argue for Bush go ahead, stay on topic if you can. I'll be waiting for someone to actually give substance to Bush's thought patterns.

------------------
Get going! And answer those phones, install the computer system, and rotate my office so the window faces the hills.
~C. Montgomery Burns

Does anyone know how old Omega is? I'm thinking he's a 12-year old kid.

Guess what, Omega: there was an armed COP at Columbine, and he didn't even HIT the two kids who did that awful deed. That's right: he had a gun, he didn't have a trigger lock, and FAT LOT OF GOOD HE DID.

I suppose you'd've liked it if every kid at Columbine had been armed. I can see the hallways now, with kids shooting each other trying to hit the two badguys. Sheeeesh.

I know! Maybe the teachers should have guns too! You know what, maybe we should arm all house pets too, would you like that?

Omega, hundreds of children are killed every year because of handguns. It's sad. It's also sad you think that the death of a child is a worthy sacrifice for people to carry a killing machine with them.

One day, you'll realize this for yourself. I used to think everyone should be allowed to carry a gun, too.

You wanna know what happened? I grew up. Hey, maybe its just that I'm blessed to live in an area where I'm not in danger. Keep in mind: I live in Towson, MD, just north of BALTIMORE, and near Washington, DC. Keep in mind, D.C. used to be known as the murder capital of the world, and Baltimore has the 3rd highest murder rate in the U.S.!

So what does that mean? I'm probably in more danger than you are, living where I am, but I don't feel the need to carry a gun. Why is that, I wonder? I don't have a death wish. Maybe it just means that carrying a gun isn't an answer.

If you depend on a gun to "protect" yourself, how can you have a life? Do you look over your shoulder every five minutes expecting to see someone with an AK-47 aiming it at you? Oh, I know, Little Jimmy wants to pick your pocket. Go on, shoot him.

Hypothetical situation, Omega:

You're licensed to carry a gun, and you're coming out of a supermarket. You walk to your car, and someone surprised you, aiming a gun at you. "GIVE ME YOUR MONEY!" he demands.

WHAT DO YOU DO?

------------------
"[Smith] ran on an agenda that was revolutionary for his time -- a 45 cent minimum wage, limiting the workweek to six days, building a bridge to the 1930's -- and I want to say it's quite a tribute to Al Smith that Governor Bush has adopted the same agenda." - Al Gore

*whistles*
Can we get an objective article in here?

------------------
Intelligence, Integrity, Responsibility.
Vote Bush/Cheney 2000

But I agree with the gist of this thread. Rabbit-humping shouldn't be allowed without a five day "cooling off" period. You'll go to hell if you hump a rabbit you don't love, after all.

So, like Omega says, prove the articles wrong. Show me in concrete ways that Bush isn't as painted in the articles.

"How many times have you ever needed a gun to defend yourself?"

What do I have to do with it? Irrelevant.

"What jobs (besides police officer) do you need a gun to protect yourself?"

Who said anything about jobs? You need a gun to protect yourself in the event someone breaks in to your house, for the first thing. THEN we can talk about jobs, which include doing pretty well anything at night.

"And where do you get these numbers?"

I get them by staying informed. Unlike certain other people I could name.

Jay:

The quote that starts "In 1956" is all conjecture, and bad conjecture at that. Baseless crap.

The quote that begins "He dashes around" is rather trite. It accuses BUSH of not explaining what he's talking about? What the heck does "the "strong" button" refer to? As for not giving "cogent reasons for what he sys [sic]," I'd like to see an example of what they're talking about, please. I prefer not to waste my time shooting down vagueries.

The "When he says" quote is written by a heavily biased person. Whomever it is is taking that quote from Bush out of context, and it's the only contradictory thing there.

But you're right. The articles aren't saying that Bush shouldn't be president because he can't speak in public. They say he's dumb because he can't speak in public. BIG difference.

"I'll be waiting for someone to actually give substance to Bush's thought patterns."

And we'll be waiting for you to show us a valid attack to defend him against.

JK's second post:

"Does anyone know how old Omega is?"

This matters how? May age is irrelevant. I'm obviously better informed than you are, and have better training in logic and debate tactics, as you demonstrate by engaging in another ad hominem. You're digging a grave for your own credibility, here.

The rest is complete drivel. Not that that wasn't. Ignored.

------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"

Do you know what self-defense is?

If someone breaks into your home, why don't you have an alarm system?

Why don't you call your police?

If all else fails, why don't you get the hell out of your home until the police arrive?

And why didn't you answer the hypothetical question?

------------------
"[Smith] ran on an agenda that was revolutionary for his time -- a 45 cent minimum wage, limiting the workweek to six days, building a bridge to the 1930's -- and I want to say it's quite a tribute to Al Smith that Governor Bush has adopted the same agenda." - Al Gore

What does having Al Gore and George Bush as the two main candidates running for the office of President of the United States have to say about the "anti-intellectualism of the American people"

How can it be irrelevent if you're defending it? HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU (OR ANYONE YOU KNOW PERSONALLY) EVER USED A GUN TO DEFEND THEMSELVES?

Of course you get your numbers by staying informed. Too bad you never present any webpages that could possibly verify these numbers.

Now see, I want to know your age simply out of curiousity. It's not an attack. I'm not saying, "look at Omega, he wet his diapers." I want to know if you're a high school student, a college student, etcetra. I just want to know where in your life you are, thats all. I'm offended that you take it as an attack, but you do seem a bit paranoid (that's an observation, not an attack).

Dimwit (okay, THAT'S an attack, call out the militia, I've called Omega a dimwit! I'm such a ad-homenienium!)

No, seriously, dude. If you want to present numbers, I want you to back them up.

The question is: why do law abiding citizens need guns?

------------------
"[Smith] ran on an agenda that was revolutionary for his time -- a 45 cent minimum wage, limiting the workweek to six days, building a bridge to the 1930's -- and I want to say it's quite a tribute to Al Smith that Governor Bush has adopted the same agenda." - Al Gore

JK1:

"Do you know what self-defense is?"

Yes. It's pointing a gun at someone from across the room so they can't kill you with the crowbar, for one example.

"If someone breaks into your home, why don't you have an alarm system?"

What makes you think that they can't circumvent the thing? Or that the police will get there in time? Let's see. Time it takes police to get to your house: five minutes, give or take. Time it takes a burgaler to get INTO your house and harm someone: about thirty seconds. Real tough call.

And that's assuming the competance of the alarm company. We once got three calls in the middle of the night from ADT wanting to confirm that our alarm had gone off. Our alarm's been unplugged for four years. In the meantime, someone wasn't getting police protection.

"Why don't you call your police?"

Who says we don't? But the above objections still hold.

"If all else fails, why don't you get the hell out of your home until the police arrive?"

That's 'bout the stupidest thing you've said yet, JK. Because it's MY HOUSE. The intruder has no right to be there, and he's not about to drive me and my family out. Even if you ignore that, ask yourself: burgaler, prowling about in the dark, exact wherabouts unknown, armament unknown. Do you really want to be moving your children about the house?

Jay:

Bush is vague? BUSH is vague? He's the one who gives specifics! "Oh, we're going to shore up medicare, and get 100,000 new teachers," says Gore. Oh, please, tell us how you plan to conjure up 100,000 new teachers. Go compare www.georgewbush.com and www.algore.com. See who has more details.

JK2:

"How can it be irrelevent if you're defending it?"

You really need to learn to make a coherant argument. I say that how many times I've needed to use a gun is irrelevant, and you say I'm defending... what?

"HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU (OR ANYONE YOU KNOW PERSONALLY) EVER USED A GUN TO DEFEND THEMSELVES?"

I can immediately think of one instance. And that's just the one that happened to come up because he was driving the vehicle we were in past the locale of the incident. You want statistics? An FBI study found that guns in the hands of private citizens prevent one to two MILLION crimes a year. Even you won't argue that that is outweighed by the number of deaths involving guns. Your credibility won't stand it, and you know it.

"Of course you get your numbers by staying informed. Too bad you never present any webpages that could possibly verify these numbers."

Because I don't feel like wasting my time aleviating your self-inflicted ignorance. Why don't you go do some research for yourself, eh? I'll even give you a good start.
http://ciir2.cs.umass.edu/Govbot/ http://www.firstgov.gov

And it's not an attack to say someone seems like they're twelve? How would you feel if I said you were acting like you were eight?

"If you want to present numbers, I want you to back them up."

Again, why don't you go do your own research? You have nothing to combat me with, except your own beliefs based in ignorance. Find the truth for yourself. It'll mean more that way.

"hundreds of children are killed every year because of handguns"

And your source would be...?

But just to make athe point, no one is killed BECAUSE OF HANDGUNS. They are killed WITH handguns. The original statement supports the view of many liberals: that normal, sane people can suddenly become homicidal maniacs when you put a gun in their hands, then revert when you take it away. It don't work that way. That's like saying people are killed because of the violence on TV. They're killed because of the hatred of the people holding guns, nothing else.

"why do law abiding citizens need guns?"

This is the stupidest question in the history of mankind. Sorry, but it is. No comment on your intelligence personally, just the question.

*ahem*

Let's work through this logically. A gun is a weapon. Weapons are for harming people (or other things, but we'll stick with people for now). Thus the question becomes: Why would a law-abiding citizen harm someone? This begs the question: How can one remian law-abiding and still harm someone? The obvious answer is if they are about to infringe on one's rights, or the rights of others. Thus guns, being a method of defence, can and should be used by law-abiding citizens to defend their rights, or the rights of others.

These rights include their lives, their property, and their freedom. Thus anyone who would violate one's rights is a valid target for a law-abiding citizen with a gun, be they criminals, errant government officials, or invading armies (or other possibilities that don't make themselves immediately obvious).

Good enough?

Self-defense? You mean, like, carrying a gun?

"If someone breaks into your home, why don't you have an alarm system?"

Unless it's the kind of alarm system that clubs intruders with a mallet, it won't always be especially effective.

"Why don't you call your police?"

Calling the police and waiting for them to arrive takes time.

"If all else fails, why don't you get the hell out of your home until the police arrive?"

Because it's silly to assume people should unconditionally surrender their houses to criminals?

"What does having Al Gore and George Bush as the two main candidates running for the office of President of the United States have to say about the 'anti-intellectualism of the American people'?"

I think both will probably be ineffective presidents. We should all vote for Harry Browne...being ineffective is his campaign promise!

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"Gardening for Dummies is too intense." - Rick