Charlton Heston has passed

[NaturalSoul]

How you can get into a hissy fit over nothing is truly amazing. If I "stand corrected" on anything, it is my belief (probably wrong) that the picture is doctored. So? How you can weave that into some kind of anti-right nonsense is beyond me, but this wouldn't be the first time you misinterpreted things. BTW, I never asked you to apologize for calling me all sorts of foul names when you were wrong about the WMDs, did I? Nor should I have--we all have differing opinions and there is nothing wrong with that, but don't start making stuff up just to stir up controversy. I think you need to cool off and re-read this thread, but try to do it with an open mind, and ask yourself why I would in such a devious manner express a disbelief in Heston's past moment of decency. I'm sure he did get involved in the Civil Rights movement--good for him--but that is not going to change the way I feel about his failure to see the need to ban assault weapons on Main Street. Anyone who so blindly supports the NRA lobby is a fool, IMHO, and you underestimate my forthrightness when you start reading hidden messages into my posts.

Keep this going, if it gets you off, but I've had enough of your twisted deductions.

Unbelievable that even now, you can only bring yourself to say that your belief that the picture is doctored is "probably wrong".

Let's run it down:

four out of six initial posts were negative.

Conrad posted an image of Heston at a Civil Rights rally to counteract the stated opinions that he was an evil warmonger.

You immediately declared the picture a poor photoshop job.

Immediately thereafter 7/4 established beyond any doubt that the picture was legitimate.

Now, if you knew that Heston was an early supporter of the civil rights movement, why was your immediate reaction to cast doubts on the validity of the photo? Why cast doubts on it at all? If you knew he was a civil rights supporter, you'd know that as one of the biggest movie stars of the age, there would be plenty of photographs of him at civil rights marches and events.

No, you chose to declare that the photo was fake.

And the problem that you can't get passed is that people like Mark, who are inclined to agree with you when it comes to whether most Republicans are evil, saw your post exactly the same way that I did.

But you are blameless Chris. Always blameless.

www.internetisseriousbusiness.com

[Chuck Nessa]

Really curious if all the members here are so confident in America that they want the government to control the weapons.

Serious question.

[Jazzmoose]

Moose understood it and agrees with me and Lord knows that doesn't happen very often.

Must be a full moon or something!

[Jazzmoose]

Really curious if all the members here are so confident in America that they want the government to control the weapons.

Serious question.

Certainly not me. I know this sounds like a joke, or an ignorant comment by many, but I seriously believe that our freedom to bear arms is a key part of our freedom in this country. There are too many people that are willing to hand over all of our freedoms in the name of safety, on both the Left and the Right. Plus, I fail to see why the solution to crime and criminals is to take away rights from law abiding citizens.

[AllenLowe]

I just look at every country that has strict controls - the populace is SAFER, less crime, less murder, more personal security virtually everywhere in Europe (England, France, Germany, Scandinavia) - that is the proof of the error of our ways, IMHO -

[Aggie87]

I just look at every country that has strict controls - the populace is SAFER, less crime, less murder, more personal security virtually everywhere in Europe (England, France, Germany, Scandinavia) - that is the proof of the error of our ways, IMHO -

The culture in those countries is completely different than ours to start with though. I think gun control there is just a symptom of a society that accept and obeys the rules it has in place, moreso than here in the U.S. Northern European countries are generally more homogeneous populations than in the U.S.

I think U.S. culture, individual means, lifestyles, and just society in general are much more diverse than in the places you're comparing the U.S. to. Not to mention those are generally socialist countries, comparatively. Not sure if that is part of the difference or just a coincidence.

Edited April 8, 2008 by Aggie87

[porcy62]

Really curious if all the members here are so confident in America that they want the government to control the weapons.

Serious question.

Maybe you missed the point: government already controls the real weapons, though it leaves the boys playing in the street or at school with small and deadly toys. Actually most of your taxes go into weapons (aka National Security aka Rand aka Pentagon), instead of NHS, social welfare, etc.. On the other hand nobody at Tombstone would ask the money back to the fastest gun in town, even if he has the biggest national debt on the earth (and I know what I am talking about, over here we have a serious national debt). So, history, strategical issues and Constitution a part, the federal government already got you, and left to you the right of carrying small toys and the illusion of freedom. Meanwhile NSA and the other Intelligence Agencies got your CC reports, read your email and build a big file with your name on it.

BTW if you really think that carrying firearms would prevent the government of doing BS, well, nobody shooted to GWB or Cheney or Rove, on the contrary JFK, Bob Kennedy, Malcom and M.L. King were the targets, so...

My modest and partisan view, obviously.

[Chuck Nessa]

Maybe you missed the point:

Never missed the point.

Should I give up because they have more?

[Chuck Nessa]

Want to say I had a shotgun as a teen for hunting. Don't own a gun now. Don't contemplate owning a gun in the future - BUT - I can imagine a scene where Dick Cheney has a gun and I don't.

My bad.

[connoisseur series500]

Really curious if all the members here are so confident in America that they want the government to control the weapons.

Serious question.

Never seriously considered it from this viewpoint. After thinking about it, I still don't like the idea of allowing people to own handguns.

[porcy62]

I just look at every country that has strict controls - the populace is SAFER, less crime, less murder, more personal security virtually everywhere in Europe (England, France, Germany, Scandinavia) - that is the proof of the error of our ways, IMHO -

The culture in those countries is completely different than ours to start with though. I think gun control there is just a symptom of a society that accept and obeys the rules it has in place, moreso than here in the U.S. Northern European countries are generally more homogeneous populations than in the U.S.

I think U.S. culture, individual means, lifestyles, and just society in general are much more diverse than in the places you're comparing the U.S. to. Not to mention those are generally socialist countries, comparatively. Not sure if that is part of the difference or just a coincidence.

Correct. I was talking with my wife about the differences of Constitutions, law systems, etc.

I would say that U.S. were born as the most democratic country in world at times, compared to european kingdoms. In Europe democracy was a long and hard fighting against old heritage, so we are meticolously ruled by democratic governments, we accept this as our natural and historic development and progress in order to be safe from dictatorships and old flawness. In U.S. you probably have the opposite problem: even the smallest law is saw as a menace of your personal freedom. I think that things changed in Europe since King George and Napoleon, and things changed in U.S. since Thomas Jefferson. The greatness of a country relies on his ability to evolve. I don't see any valid arguments against a strict gun control, if guns are a serious social problem. You preserves natural parks or animals as public good, you banned smoking in public places because of public health, why don't preserve teenagerhood with a strict gun control?

I always found odd that taking drugs is forbidden, and it's a personal choice that, theorically, harms only the one who take the choice, and buying assalt weapons is legal.

[porcy62]

Want to say I had a shotgun as a teen for hunting. Don't own a gun now. Don't contemplate owning a gun in the future - BUT - I can imagine a scene where Dick Cheney has a gun and I don't.

My bad.

Dick Cheney isn't that good with gun, I wouldn't worry about that, unless you're a Cheney's friend.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney_hunting_incident

[papsrus]

That Second Amendment is a tricky one. But the government already has some degree of control over the sale of firearms, doesn't it?

The five-day waiting period (under the Brady Law) for handgun purchases expired on November 30, 1998 and was replaced by a computerized criminal background check prior to any firearm purchase from a dealer holding a Federal Firearms License (FFL). All dealers, manufacturers and importers must verify the identity of a non-FFL customer and receive authorization from the National Instant Check System (NICS) which often takes only minutes instead of the several-day waiting period.

I don't think it's unreasonable to require criminal background checks for the purchase of firearms. The government does bear some responsibility for the general safety, after all. At the same time, law-abiding citizens should have the right to own firearms (as long as they agree to participate in a well-regulated militia).

[Chuck Nessa]

I AM well regulated.

[Chalupa]

I AM well regulated.

[Chuck Nessa]

Exactly!

[user0815]

are our "babies" safe ?

[AllenLowe]

simple formula - less guns=less murder and less accidental death; the whole self-defense thing is b.s - and has was recently pointed out, TRAINED personnell (as in cops) only hit their targets 20 percent of the time - you do the math -

[Jazzmoose]

That may be true. All I know is that when I lived in Louisiana, where a HUGE porportion of the population is armed, the crime of "home invasion" was unkown. Yes, accidents are a problem, and frankly, I think people who are so careless with their guns as to allow untrained kids access should be punished accordingly. But crime? I hate trotting out the old cliches, but criminals aren't actually going to say "darn, we have to turn in our guns now" if they are outlawed, are they?

(For honesty's sake, I should point out that, while in past discussions on this board about gun control I made note of the fact that I didn't own a gun; that is no longer the case as I own a 9mm handgun. Only take it out to go to the pistol range. I can't say it would do me any good for self defense since, if anyone broke in, I'd have to find the key to the safe, figure out the combination, load the damn thing and THEN tell the robber "okay; I'm ready now" before it would help. Just have it because I tried target shooting and liked it. Oh, and to shoot gun control advocates, of course...)

[user0815]

"i’ve got a shotgun; do you want me to stop them?"

Shootings Test Limits of New Self-Defense Law

[BruceH]

Let's get back on track here:

Soylent Green is people!

Edited April 9, 2008 by BruceH

[Dan Gould]

Let's get back on track here:

Soylent Green is people!

Wasn't there a Phil Hartman sketch on SNL of a series of Soylent Green sequels ...

Soylent Blue is PEOPLE!

Soylent Yellow is PEOPLE!

etc.?

[BruceH]

I think so. Hartman did a great Heston.

[Ted O'Reilly]

Editorial cartoonist Signe Wilkinson has the answer to the Heston Question...

http://www.uclick.com/feature/08/04/07/wpswi080407.gif

[rostasi]