hcjn84 You should get a gun and a permit, there are plenty of options that your hands could handle. If you think armed citizens do no good please go here Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html.
Happens every day armed citizens fending off vicious attacks by criminals who care not about any laws. As for the 278 permits revoked, you should do more research to see just how many of them were revoked for anything that has to do with a gun last I checked 2. Which also means that over 225,000 of them were not revoked or suspended. They can be suspended for most any violation of the law and the fact that number is so low should show you something. We know the laws, we obey the laws. Far more deaths come via car accidents than guns but I don't hear you or anyone else shouting from the Mountain tops to tighten restrictions on drivers licenses. Trust me making drivers prove, vision, reaction time and sheer competence would save infinitely more lives than any gun control law you could imagine.
Trust me, I've been the victim of someone who had no business on the road but he was......there are much bigger fish to fry in society than this right now.
This is provision number 3 of the new law: "The person is in an establishment that is open to the public, serves alcoholic beverages, wine or beer and is not an establishment that restricts admission to persons who are age 21 years or older by checking patrons' identifications."
So a classic "BAR" or Night club was and is off limits. So the medias constant referencing of this as the "Guns in Bars" bill was a gross misrepresentation of the facts. If you are worried about enforcement, there is really not much to enforce. The only violation is if a permit holder is drinking while carrying. I promise you that will not happen very much, we go through way too much trouble to have our permit to loose it over having a beer. If we are going to drink we will not carry. If someone does not have a permit and carries they are breaking the law to begin with now and before this law. Criminals do not care about the laws....this only effects those of us who do care about the laws. This only effects places such as Chili's and such. Not an actual BAR.
quote by hcjn84: "huh, sooner or later a Handgun Carry Permit owner will end a violent attack. And sooner or later innocent people will be shot in the line of fire by a Handgun Carry Permit owner."
How about we compare the stats of that vs. people shot by criminals the numbers are so staggering your argument is barely worth mentioning. Statistically speaking it just does not happen, I can not remember an example right now and I'm a news junkie. If you know of so many please enlighten us.
Check your facts hcjn84, look up how many HCP holders have committed ANY type of crime at all. One of the most law abiding citizen pools in the entire country.
Picture this a gunman, heavily armed, walks into the restaurant you are enjoying dinner with your family and just starts shooting the place up, everybody he sees. No demands, no hostages, just targets. Your lame hope that he runs out of bullets before he kills you and your family is foolish. Think it does not happen, watch the news. This exact scenario played out in Texas a few years back. If the recent mass shootings prove nothing else it is that anything can happen any time HCP holders are not a danger to society criminals are. If you want to wonder around thinking that you will never win the S. hitting the fan lottery and be a helpless victim if it does, that's your call, and that is just fine.
I don't carry a gun to be a cop, I don't even really have an interest in stepping into the fray in a bad situation. I love my family and if I ever need to defend them, or myself for them (so that I can come home instead of to a funeral home) I will do so. If you think a HCP holder is going to make a bad situation worse why don't you ask the parents of the students at VT, or the families of all of those slain in cold blood in Binghamton NY, or the victims of the recent shooting in Alabama or the families of the 23 that died at Luby's Cafeteria in Texas that day while a permit holder's gun sat in her car because of a similar regulation to the one we just changed left her unarmed. Some like you say that if Suzanna Hupp had had been able to have her gun with her that day she would have just made things worse, just how could she have made it worse? Was she gonna make the shooter angry? 23 people died that day and she would have made it worse....please, please.
If she would have been able to stop that SOB after his first few shots, people like you would be vilifying her for not trying to talk the shooter down, or not waiting for the police. Who knows maybe 20 or so lives could have been saved, including her parents but we will never know because she obeyed the law; George Hennard did not, and her family paid the ultimate price for that law. Make it worse.... how does it get worse than 23 dead.
I pray for your sake that if you are ever unfortunate enough to encounter that bad, dark day that a HCP holder is near by you and can save you. Although, if you like you can tell them that you would prefer to be shot before they stop the action.
Sooner or later a Handgun Carry Permit holder will end a violent attack in one of these establishments, and then the sheep will wake up to realize that this legislation does make sense. People have the right to defend themselves and their family's from evil people. Carrying a gun is an awesome responsibility and HCP holders know this, we just choose to not be victims and have options if the unthinkable happens. Remember when mere seconds mean everything, the police are only a few minutes away. Police try to arrest the bad guys and clean up the mess... unfortunately very rarely to they stop an incident in progress.
People don't expect to get in a wreck when the leave the drive way in the morning, (or they would not go) but that does not stop the overwhelming majority of people from buckling their seat belts (just in case). Criminals commit violent acts at will and in random arbitrary manners, there are 2 choices stick your head in the sand think nothing bad will ever happen and or beg for mercy if the bad guy ever targets you for some reason. Or be prepared to take an active role in your and your family's defense of evil. Think nothing bad happens around you? Commit to watch the 6 and 11 news every day for 2 weeks straight and report back.
Qutoe: "Prolife men should take care of the problem at the source with visectomies (sp) and there would be no need for abortion. Rather than men dictate that a women cannot abort a pregnacy, take care of the problem from the source that is causing unplanned pregnancy and women seeking abortion. Sorry, if this does not make sense to you guys, it does to many women.
Like it or not that is my perspective."
Well you can have your perspective even if it is wrong. Just what is your perspective on that disposable life? Why is your life not disposable? If while in the womb you were given a choice would you have chosen to die?
Just FYI, I do have a vasectomy and unfortunately for her my wife has had to have a hysterectomy so we have no source. However, you have the option to not have unprotected sex and or receive a tubal ligation yourself to cut off YOUR source. As I stated earlier there is no single source of a pregnancy it takes 2 parts. To assert that there is a single source to a pregnancy, well is just stupid. Furthermore, there are plenty of women that are pro-life, millions and millions. So don't hide your lame argument behind your gender.
My wife and I dated through High School and College got married and after 5 years of marriage had our first of 2 beautiful children. We used several methods of birth control over the years, and upon deciding to stop using birth control conceived in one month both times. Point being, had we not been so responsible we would have been pregnant perhaps 10 years sooner. But we were responsible, and never even had a scare not once.
Your assertion that pro-life men should get prophylactic vasectomies and it would solve all unwanted pregnancies is beyond stupid. For one, what about all the men who are like you and don't care how many disposed of fetuses are out there? How about this all females should have an IUD implanted by the government when they have their first period. Then have to apply for removal of it to conceive that, would solve the problem at the source the egg...sounds really stupid doesn't it.... your logic not mine.
Quote: "As a women, I find men trying to dictate whether a women should be mandated to bear children as somewhat perplexing. Women’s organizations should focus on legislation for mandated vasectomies to avoid unplanned pregnancies in the first place? I do not hear men advocating to address the source of the problem."
That is about one of the stupidest things I have ever read. To suggest the source of the "problem" is a non sterile male is beyond illogical. The source of the "pregnancy" is unprotected sex by 2 people, who are equally responsible for the result. Unless he held a gun to your head or a knife to your throat, you allowed that fluid to be placed in your body, and started the chain of events that may allow nature to take it's course. So the female's choices are as much to blame as the non sterile male who made a bad decision along with her. There is no single "source of the problem," rather a complicated sequence of events that leads to a pregnancy. Arguing that there should be mandated vasectomies to stop the problem at the source defies your own pro-choice logic.
The overwhelming majority of abortions are a simple cop out for not wanting to deal with the consequences of the actions and poor decisions that caused the pregnancy. A very dramatic consequence yes, but sometimes very simple mistakes have very dramatic fall out. People are forced to live with the consequences of mistakes and decisions that take just seconds every day.
The problem is once there is a pregnancy it is no longer exclusively "your body." It is now being shared temporarily by another human being.
I think the bigger issue here is that for the pro-choice crowd the baby, that defenseless human, is viewed as an inanimate object, a worthless fetus that can be disposed of at will. You don't have to be even remotely religious to realize that that baby is a life and worthy of the same protection that the Dr. deserved.
If even the smallest percentage of people who are pro-life were like this murderer there would be no abortion Dr's, they would all be dead. Think about it there are millions of people who consider themselves pro-life if even .000001% of them were willing to murder for that ideology, there would simply be no abortion Dr's alive, period. We just happen to believe that the unborn baby has the same right to live as Dr. Tiller, and therefore value life far more than any pro-choice advocates do by definition. Murder is murder, there just happens some forms of it that are currently legal, and because we live in the USA we have to live with that (for now). For a pro-choice advocate the only lives worth protecting are those who have been chosen to not be aborted, wow, kinda arbitrary....what if you had been.
Tennessee: Bredesen mulled other priorities in gun veto defeat
hcjn84 You should get a gun and a permit, there are plenty of options that your hands could handle. If you think armed citizens do no good please go here Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html. Happens every day armed citizens fending off vicious attacks by criminals who care not about any laws. As for the 278 permits revoked, you should do more research to see just how many of them were revoked for anything that has to do with a gun last I checked 2. Which also means that over 225,000 of them were not revoked or suspended. They can be suspended for most any violation of the law and the fact that number is so low should show you something. We know the laws, we obey the laws. Far more deaths come via car accidents than guns but I don't hear you or anyone else shouting from the Mountain tops to tighten restrictions on drivers licenses. Trust me making drivers prove, vision, reaction time and sheer competence would save infinitely more lives than any gun control law you could imagine.
Trust me, I've been the victim of someone who had no business on the road but he was......there are much bigger fish to fry in society than this right now.
Tennessee: Bredesen mulled other priorities in gun veto defeat
This is provision number 3 of the new law: "The person is in an establishment that is open to the public, serves alcoholic beverages, wine or beer and is not an establishment that restricts admission to persons who are age 21 years or older by checking patrons' identifications."
So a classic "BAR" or Night club was and is off limits. So the medias constant referencing of this as the "Guns in Bars" bill was a gross misrepresentation of the facts. If you are worried about enforcement, there is really not much to enforce. The only violation is if a permit holder is drinking while carrying. I promise you that will not happen very much, we go through way too much trouble to have our permit to loose it over having a beer. If we are going to drink we will not carry. If someone does not have a permit and carries they are breaking the law to begin with now and before this law. Criminals do not care about the laws....this only effects those of us who do care about the laws. This only effects places such as Chili's and such. Not an actual BAR.
Tennessee: Bredesen mulled other priorities in gun veto defeat
quote by hcjn84: "huh, sooner or later a Handgun Carry Permit owner will end a violent attack. And sooner or later innocent people will be shot in the line of fire by a Handgun Carry Permit owner."
How about we compare the stats of that vs. people shot by criminals the numbers are so staggering your argument is barely worth mentioning. Statistically speaking it just does not happen, I can not remember an example right now and I'm a news junkie. If you know of so many please enlighten us.
Tennessee: Bredesen mulled other priorities in gun veto defeat
"Although, if you like you can tell them that you would prefer to be shot before they stop the action".
By the bad guy of course. Just thought I'd close that loop before you tried to jump through it.
Tennessee: Bredesen mulled other priorities in gun veto defeat
Check your facts hcjn84, look up how many HCP holders have committed ANY type of crime at all. One of the most law abiding citizen pools in the entire country.
Picture this a gunman, heavily armed, walks into the restaurant you are enjoying dinner with your family and just starts shooting the place up, everybody he sees. No demands, no hostages, just targets. Your lame hope that he runs out of bullets before he kills you and your family is foolish. Think it does not happen, watch the news. This exact scenario played out in Texas a few years back. If the recent mass shootings prove nothing else it is that anything can happen any time HCP holders are not a danger to society criminals are. If you want to wonder around thinking that you will never win the S. hitting the fan lottery and be a helpless victim if it does, that's your call, and that is just fine.
I don't carry a gun to be a cop, I don't even really have an interest in stepping into the fray in a bad situation. I love my family and if I ever need to defend them, or myself for them (so that I can come home instead of to a funeral home) I will do so. If you think a HCP holder is going to make a bad situation worse why don't you ask the parents of the students at VT, or the families of all of those slain in cold blood in Binghamton NY, or the victims of the recent shooting in Alabama or the families of the 23 that died at Luby's Cafeteria in Texas that day while a permit holder's gun sat in her car because of a similar regulation to the one we just changed left her unarmed. Some like you say that if Suzanna Hupp had had been able to have her gun with her that day she would have just made things worse, just how could she have made it worse? Was she gonna make the shooter angry? 23 people died that day and she would have made it worse....please, please.
If she would have been able to stop that SOB after his first few shots, people like you would be vilifying her for not trying to talk the shooter down, or not waiting for the police. Who knows maybe 20 or so lives could have been saved, including her parents but we will never know because she obeyed the law; George Hennard did not, and her family paid the ultimate price for that law. Make it worse.... how does it get worse than 23 dead.
Check this out and see for your self Civilian Gun Self-Defense Blog: http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html might be a bit hard for you to swallow. Armed citizens defending themselves everyday.
I pray for your sake that if you are ever unfortunate enough to encounter that bad, dark day that a HCP holder is near by you and can save you. Although, if you like you can tell them that you would prefer to be shot before they stop the action.
Tennessee: Bredesen mulled other priorities in gun veto defeat
Sooner or later a Handgun Carry Permit holder will end a violent attack in one of these establishments, and then the sheep will wake up to realize that this legislation does make sense. People have the right to defend themselves and their family's from evil people. Carrying a gun is an awesome responsibility and HCP holders know this, we just choose to not be victims and have options if the unthinkable happens. Remember when mere seconds mean everything, the police are only a few minutes away. Police try to arrest the bad guys and clean up the mess... unfortunately very rarely to they stop an incident in progress.
People don't expect to get in a wreck when the leave the drive way in the morning, (or they would not go) but that does not stop the overwhelming majority of people from buckling their seat belts (just in case). Criminals commit violent acts at will and in random arbitrary manners, there are 2 choices stick your head in the sand think nothing bad will ever happen and or beg for mercy if the bad guy ever targets you for some reason. Or be prepared to take an active role in your and your family's defense of evil. Think nothing bad happens around you? Commit to watch the 6 and 11 news every day for 2 weeks straight and report back.
Doctor Tiller
Qutoe: "Prolife men should take care of the problem at the source with visectomies (sp) and there would be no need for abortion. Rather than men dictate that a women cannot abort a pregnacy, take care of the problem from the source that is causing unplanned pregnancy and women seeking abortion. Sorry, if this does not make sense to you guys, it does to many women.
Like it or not that is my perspective."
Well you can have your perspective even if it is wrong. Just what is your perspective on that disposable life? Why is your life not disposable? If while in the womb you were given a choice would you have chosen to die?
Just FYI, I do have a vasectomy and unfortunately for her my wife has had to have a hysterectomy so we have no source. However, you have the option to not have unprotected sex and or receive a tubal ligation yourself to cut off YOUR source. As I stated earlier there is no single source of a pregnancy it takes 2 parts. To assert that there is a single source to a pregnancy, well is just stupid. Furthermore, there are plenty of women that are pro-life, millions and millions. So don't hide your lame argument behind your gender.
My wife and I dated through High School and College got married and after 5 years of marriage had our first of 2 beautiful children. We used several methods of birth control over the years, and upon deciding to stop using birth control conceived in one month both times. Point being, had we not been so responsible we would have been pregnant perhaps 10 years sooner. But we were responsible, and never even had a scare not once.
Your assertion that pro-life men should get prophylactic vasectomies and it would solve all unwanted pregnancies is beyond stupid. For one, what about all the men who are like you and don't care how many disposed of fetuses are out there? How about this all females should have an IUD implanted by the government when they have their first period. Then have to apply for removal of it to conceive that, would solve the problem at the source the egg...sounds really stupid doesn't it.... your logic not mine.
Doctor Tiller
Quote: "As a women, I find men trying to dictate whether a women should be mandated to bear children as somewhat perplexing. Women’s organizations should focus on legislation for mandated vasectomies to avoid unplanned pregnancies in the first place? I do not hear men advocating to address the source of the problem."
That is about one of the stupidest things I have ever read. To suggest the source of the "problem" is a non sterile male is beyond illogical. The source of the "pregnancy" is unprotected sex by 2 people, who are equally responsible for the result. Unless he held a gun to your head or a knife to your throat, you allowed that fluid to be placed in your body, and started the chain of events that may allow nature to take it's course. So the female's choices are as much to blame as the non sterile male who made a bad decision along with her. There is no single "source of the problem," rather a complicated sequence of events that leads to a pregnancy. Arguing that there should be mandated vasectomies to stop the problem at the source defies your own pro-choice logic.
The overwhelming majority of abortions are a simple cop out for not wanting to deal with the consequences of the actions and poor decisions that caused the pregnancy. A very dramatic consequence yes, but sometimes very simple mistakes have very dramatic fall out. People are forced to live with the consequences of mistakes and decisions that take just seconds every day.
The problem is once there is a pregnancy it is no longer exclusively "your body." It is now being shared temporarily by another human being.
I think the bigger issue here is that for the pro-choice crowd the baby, that defenseless human, is viewed as an inanimate object, a worthless fetus that can be disposed of at will. You don't have to be even remotely religious to realize that that baby is a life and worthy of the same protection that the Dr. deserved.
If even the smallest percentage of people who are pro-life were like this murderer there would be no abortion Dr's, they would all be dead. Think about it there are millions of people who consider themselves pro-life if even .000001% of them were willing to murder for that ideology, there would simply be no abortion Dr's alive, period. We just happen to believe that the unborn baby has the same right to live as Dr. Tiller, and therefore value life far more than any pro-choice advocates do by definition. Murder is murder, there just happens some forms of it that are currently legal, and because we live in the USA we have to live with that (for now). For a pro-choice advocate the only lives worth protecting are those who have been chosen to not be aborted, wow, kinda arbitrary....what if you had been.