New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

thoughts on guns in civilized society

JuliefromOhio

President
Supporting Member
I could approach you unarmed, exchange pleasantries, then grab and squeeze the shit out of your testicles. you'd drop to the ground and I'd grab your gun.
 

freyasman

Senator
I could approach you unarmed, exchange pleasantries, then grab and squeeze the shit out of your testicles. you'd drop to the ground and I'd grab your gun.
Are you flirting with me? Seriously, though, what you're talking about is the "process". Predators use various ways to get to a position where they can successfully assault someone. The pretense of innocent behavior is the most common; "hey man you got a light?", or "excuse me, do you have the time?", etc. This gives them an excuse to approach you while at the same time distracting you. If they can't get to that position, or you shut them down early, they will usually break off and move on. The tools you have to defend yourself are not all in your holster. The firearm is for when all ELSE fails, get it?
 

Texas_Jack

Council Member
When Obama 'n his gun-grabbing loonies disarm the terrorists of the world who carry "full utomatic weapons" I might consider giving up my semi-automatic firearms ~~BUT~~ not until..!!
 

fairsheet

Senator
One of THE central tenets of modern (16th-Century on?)social (democratic) philosophy is that by joining into societies, we are conceding our need for coercive authority, to the state.

I don't imagine the top-poster can comprehend this but, the idea is NOT that said concession is a sacrifice on our part. The idea is that turning over the necessity to enforce our own personal "law", is to our decided advantage and frees us up to live our lives to the fuller.
 

freyasman

Senator
One of THE central tenets of modern (16th-Century on?)social (democratic) philosophy is that by joining into societies, we are conceding our need for coercive authority, to the state.

I don't imagine the top-poster can comprehend this but, the idea is NOT that said concession is a sacrifice on our part. The idea is that turning over the necessity to enforce our own personal "law", is to our decided advantage and frees us up to live our lives to the fuller.
How is any of this relevant to the original post?
 

freyasman

Senator
I understand that the connection may be over your head. I also understand that there's nothing I could say that would open your mind. So, I'm not going to waste an effort at doing so.
Uh-huh.... I think you simply don't get it :cool:. And that's why you refuse to engage.
 
Top