BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

tesoronut · Joined: 02 Nov 2007 Posts: 145 Location: Southern Virginia

Whenever a racial "powder keg" such as Jackson, or Al Sharpton wants to blame whites, or guns, or anything other than the REAL PROBLEM, I always attempt to contact them and refer them to a website that deals with accurate criminal statistics and racial matters. Of course, they never respond back to my attempts, because they know that they are wrong. The real problem is not guns. If you take away the guns, knife sales will increase. Criminal intent will always be there. Anyway, if you are interested in viewing this info, go to www.vdare.com and enter the word "crime" in the search box. Then study the links and subject matter. If gun advocates are going to be pushed into the corner, we need to come out swinging. Factual information is a good tool to use in this kind of fight. Of course, when you are fighting idiots, they still refuse to "get it".

cam69conv · Joined: 22 Oct 2006 Posts: 651 Location: Summit, IL

As far as weapons go, All you have to do is look at England and Australia's crime rates. After the outlawing of weapons ownership there, the violent crimes went UP not DOWN. Its a simple fact, if someone wants to hurt you, they can find a way. Gun ownership is one way of deturring criminals. If a criminal knows you are a gun owner then he will more than likely avoid messing with you. Since the simple fact is, they are 99% of them cowards and dont wish the conflict.

jfrench · Joined: 31 Jul 2007 Posts: 486 Location: New Hampshire

Cam's right. If you're a criminal (mugging, theft, break-ins) it's a job in a way. They're going to want to get what they can and get out without getting hurt. There going to get a sentence and a trip to the ER or worse if they get shot, not a workman's comp claim. If this theory of eliminating guns would eliminate violence, then we would have gotten rid of our nuclear arms when we signed our treaty with Russia. Hell, maybe we should relieve our military of there rifles, and issue miracle bubbles and bubble wands. Everybody could blow bubbles all day, laugh, and be merry. Right? It wouldn't work on a broad scale, because it does not work on a small scale. I wonder how many of these anti-gunners own a firearm for there own safety? I'm sure alot do. And those in power probably have an armed guard. HMMMM.

expatriate · Joined: 26 Oct 2002 Posts: 1248 Location: Alaska

Jesse Jackson relies on victimization for his salary. I sometimes wonder if his interest in gun control is aimed at dearming the law abiding and thus keeping crime rates high among his constituency. If he was about empowerment he'd be advocating for the rights of people to police themselves and take back their communities, rather than making them dependent on a protector.

Discussing Jackson is a powder keg, to be sure, but it's not about race; it's about liberalism. Liberals want people dependent on government, which is why they embrace victimhood so highly and deny individual initiative and responsibility. If there are no helpless victims, then people don't need big brother to take care of them.

tesoronut · Joined: 02 Nov 2007 Posts: 145 Location: Southern Virginia

You have a point. But what concerns me is Political Correctness when it comes to certain issues. There are ALOT of "incidents" and shocking crimes that you will rarely hear about on the 6 o'clock news, due to the ethnic backgrounds of the perpetrators. Now, when the situation is similar to the Duke Lacrosse Hoax, it's be all over the news. Anyway, I get mad when I think about these things, and shouldn't have started this thread, because it's no need to make other folks mad, too. But you do raise a good point .

jasonkdailey · Joined: 26 Aug 2005 Posts: 46

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are 2 of the most racist, hot-air-blowing people in the world. They blame anything they can on anyone else. What about the attack on Imus? Trying to force him to apologize. Where was sharptons apology to the duke lacross players when they were found innocent, and sharpton said those white boys are guilty. Funny though, they blow hot air on everyone on the air, but yet when Howard Stern tries to get them both on his Sirius Satellite Radio show, they wont go because they know he won't back down from them like Imus did. They are scared!

SoCoKHntr · Joined: 18 Dec 2006 Posts: 525 Location: Pueblo Colorado

tesoronut wrote: Whenever a racial "powder keg" such as Jackson, or Al Sharpton wants to blame whites, or guns, or anything other than the REAL PROBLEM, I always attempt to contact them and refer them to a website that deals with accurate criminal statistics and racial matters. Of course, they never respond back to my attempts, because they know that they are wrong. The real problem is not guns. If you take away the guns, knife sales will increase. Criminal intent will always be there. Anyway, if you are interested in viewing this info, go to www.vdare.com and enter the word "crime" in the search box. Then study the links and subject matter. If gun advocates are going to be pushed into the corner, we need to come out swinging. Factual information is a good tool to use in this kind of fight. Of course, when you are fighting idiots, they still refuse to "get it".

I'm no fan of Jesse Jackson, but in the spirit of honesty and factual debate instead of insidious insinuation let me ask you a few questions? What exactly did you read with 'interest' about Jackson? Please provide a reference to this thing you read which prompted you to post this.

What exactly has he blamed on 'whites' and or 'guns'? Again, I would love a link to a quote of his or other action where he blamed whites or guns for some incident.

In reference to your gun control assertion, I've said this before and I will say it again. I own many guns and I hunt so, I am not in favor of any idiotic gun control legislation. That being said I believe most who are in favor of some forms of gun control are not extremists who want to take everyones guns away.

Rather I think after incidents like the Virgina Tech Massacre or Columbine they would like some measures put into place so mentally ill or mass murdering intent people can't easily get their hands on high capacity killing machines and succesfully kill high numbers of innocent people.

How would you honestly feel if one of your loved ones died in a needless manner like one of those horrible incedents.

I may not fully agree with gun control legislation but I can't help but to understand how some people have their views based on the right to free thought.

Instead your tactic is to paint anyone who doesn't agree with your unlimited or restrained access to weapons as evil minority liberals who just wish to take away 'all your guns'.

Further Jackson and Sharpton don't speak for every minority or person who might want gun control anymore then Rush, Limbaugh, Coulter, speak for every white Republican.

CVC · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 1138 Location: Kansas

Wow, so desparate to pick a fight you're responding to a post from 2007 ::-k :laugh:

SoCoKHntr · Joined: 18 Dec 2006 Posts: 525 Location: Pueblo Colorado

CVC wrote: Wow, so desparate to pick a fight you're responding to a post from 2007 ::-k :laugh:

CVC, it popped up fresh on the front page. I didn't refresh it so I thought it was new. Well, if I am desperate it's only to give my view point on what I see as narrow minded attacks (Democrats/liberals want to take your guns and for everyone to be dependent on the state). I read misleading viewpoints left and right that paint people who might disagree :](*,) with a broad bush and when I speak up against them I am labeled as the one who wants to 'pick a fight'.

SoCoKHntr · Joined: 18 Dec 2006 Posts: 525 Location: Pueblo Colorado

CVC wrote: Wow, so desparate to pick a fight you're responding to a post from 2007 ::-k :laugh:

CVC, it popped up fresh on the front page. I didn't refresh it so I thought it was new. Well, if I am desperate it's only to give my view point on what I see as narrow minded attacks (Democrats/liberals want to take your guns and for everyone to be dependent on the state). I read misleading viewpoints left and right that paint people who might disagree :](*,) with a broad bush and when I speak up against them I am labeled as the one who wants to 'pick a fight'.

Edit: CVC looks like someone posted before me on Saturday the 5th 08. Just felt like pointing that out since you made it a point to make it seem I was stirring up old stuff. ::-k

CVC · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 1138 Location: Kansas

Yeah, I saw that - it is a new person. They are dredging up lots of old posts.

They're new so it wouldn't be fun to give them any guff. You on the other hand :D

SoCoKHntr · Joined: 18 Dec 2006 Posts: 525 Location: Pueblo Colorado

CVC wrote: Yeah, I saw that - it is a new person. They are dredging up lots of old posts.

They're new so it wouldn't be fun to give them any guff. You on the other hand :D

Yeah, it's cool. What would you do without your friendly neighborhood liberal to poke fun at? :laugh:

CVC · Joined: 04 Mar 2006 Posts: 1138 Location: Kansas

SoCoKHntr wrote: CVC wrote: Yeah, I saw that - it is a new person. They are dredging up lots of old posts.

They're new so it wouldn't be fun to give them any guff. You on the other hand :D

Yeah, it's cool. What would you do without your friendly neighborhood liberal to poke fun at? :laugh:

Hey, even Hannity has Colmes.

Whelland · Joined: 16 Jan 2007 Posts: 504 Location: Kingston, MI

Since this started with an old post, I'll bring up some old news:

On August 28, 2007 Rev. Jesse Jackson organized an anti-gun protest in up to 25 cities nationwide. Not willing to lay the blame for crime on criminals, Jackson and his cronies claimed, "people who buy guns from gun shops kill people." Since the sale of every firearm from every licensed gun dealer is subject to a background check, it is unclear how the millions of law-abiding Americans who go through this mandated check and legally "buy guns from gun shops" are responsible for killing people. Then again, though, Jackson is never one to let the facts get in the way of a misguided PR opportunity.

This isn't a right vs. wrong (oops, I mean left) argument. It's just meant to be information in which one can draw their own conclusions.

For the record. differing viewpoints is part of the reason why I like Hannity and Colmes.

expatriate · Joined: 26 Oct 2002 Posts: 1248 Location: Alaska

Narrow minded attacks...HA. Narrow minded in SoCo's mind means exposing flaws in facts and logic. Of course, in his world refusing to answer challenges to his position doesn't make him "narrow minded." He's so busy railing on the Right that he doesn't realize how incapable of discourse he's become.

Here's his playbook:

1. Repeat liberal rhetoric.

2. Substitute emotion for facts.

3. When faced with a question about his position's validity, attack the questioner instead of defending his position. This consists of either a) attacking the questioner's intelligence; b) accusing the questioner of being unable to think for himself; c) twisting the debate to try to pigeonhole the questioner and thus shift the debate away from the subject at hand.

4. If #3 fails, claim victimization for being on a crusade to rid the world of closed-mindedness.

5. Repeat.

The important thing to remember in the process is to never actually engage an opponent point for point.