GUNS!!!!!!!!

**fez** · 03-19-2009, 09:46 AM

where the fuck were you people when most of the protections of the other items in the bill of rights were taken away? why the hell is the 2nd amendment the only one you fucks hold sacred? dont you realize that allowing bush/cheney et. al. destroy the bill of rights only provides the dems the power to finish the job???

**summit** · 03-19-2009, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by fez

where the fuck were you people when most of the protections of the other items in the bill of rights were taken away? why the hell is the 2nd amendment the only one you fucks hold sacred? dont you realize that allowing bush/cheney et. al. destroy the bill of rights only provides the dems the power to finish the job???

While many describe the 2nd as one right to protect all the others...

You are a frigging idiot. Many of us were really pissed off about what the W admin did. And the Clinton admin before him...

Our freedoms have been eroding on all fronts ever since I started watching because too many people aren't paying attention or have drank the "we must be 'safe' at all costs" koolaid. The majority of Democrats and Republicans both want to take our rights away, but they sometimes disagree on which rights to focus on stealing. These statists have been moving us towards a nanny state every year.

**fez** · 03-19-2009, 10:24 AM

im sorry, but you;re the idiot.

we dont have freedom, we have liberty. from liberty, freedom is derived. it is our liberty that is being emasculated. i realize the difference between liberty and freedom is a subtle one, but until you can understand the difference and use the terms appropriately, you have little business calling anyone an idiot.

**summit** · 03-19-2009, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by fez

im sorry, but you;re the idiot.

we dont have freedom, we have liberty. from liberty, freedom is derived. it is our liberty that is being emasculated. i realize the difference between liberty and freedom is a subtle one, but until you can understand the difference and use the terms appropriately, you have little business calling anyone an idiot.

if you think semantics is the way to win this fight... you are sorely mistaken... if you can't take the meaning from any statement otherwise... that is sad

**fez** · 03-19-2009, 10:26 AM

if you think the difference between freedom and liberty is semantics, you're the one who is sorely mistaken.

idiot.

**summit** · 03-19-2009, 10:31 AM

you: "you guys don't care about any rights except gunzzzzz!!!1111 W is teh devilz!!!!!"
me: "the 2nd is one right we care about. freedom is being eroded. this is a nonpartisan issue in the traditional sense. all our rights are under threat."
you: "we don't have freedom, we have liberty!"
me: "way to keep the discussion on track and relevant!"
you: "go read a dictionary!"

who is the idiot here?

I think you are having an emotional problem with the fact that gun rights supporters can hate bush and that Democrats can support 2A.

**fez** · 03-19-2009, 10:37 AM

you are.

all i want to know is why is the 2nd amendment the only one so-called 'conservatives' seem to care about?

if the second amendment is the one to protect the others, what did it do to protect the rest of them from bush/cheney?

**coreshot-tourettes** · 03-19-2009, 10:46 AM

Fez, I'm not a conservative. And I've been against torture, against speech restrictions, against warrantless wiretapping, against war, and for gay marriage from the beginning. Perhaps, fez, if you joined us agitating for gun rights you would probably gain understanding and a few allies.

And the reason 100 million gun owners haven't marched on Washington is, of course, that gun owners are as a whole pretty practical and conflict avoidant people who know that words should be tried first before violent action. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, THEN ammo box. If we thought like you and jumped straight to the ammo box, we'd discredit ourselves and our peaceful nature. I abhor people that say things like "Well, why aren't you people using your 2nd Amendment rights to defend my 1st Amendment rights?!?" as if the first reaction to someone being put in a "free speech zone" is immediately to start shooting. How utterly immature. Have some fucking patience for the political process to work, we gunnies are more your allies than you think.

As an aside, I would love to see openly carrying a holstered, visible, and loaded pistol classified as "free speech".

**brotherofedg** · 03-19-2009, 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by fez

im sorry, but you;re the idiot.

we dont have freedom, we have liberty. from liberty, freedom is derived. it is our liberty that is being emasculated. i realize the difference between liberty and freedom is a subtle one, but until you can understand the difference and use the terms appropriately, you have little business calling anyone an idiot.

Liberty (with a capital L) is a concept personified as a woman, so emasculating her would be difficult. Emasculating 'liberty' the concept is impossible. Even if it was possible the way you've used it that sentence still makes no sense. Seems pretty idiotic to me. Maybe you meant 'immaciated'.

Either way freedom is derived from liberty, liberty is the freedom to do things. They are essentually synoyms given as 'liberty' is derived from the latin 'liber' meaning (guess what) 'free'. It's a subtle point but I hope it clears things up for you.

**fez** · 03-19-2009, 11:03 AM

i never for a second said i was against gun rights. i do think there need to be some restrictions on guns and there are some really bad gun laws proposed in various state legislatures right now, but as far as the second amendment is concerned, i dont have a problem with it.

all i want to know is why does the right get it's panties in a knot when anyone tries to put any sort of restrictions on gun ownership while keeping nearly silent when any other portions of the bill of rights is assailed. in the name of 'safety', we've had our bill of rights trampled and all the republicans care about any more is guns and abortion.

**summit** · 03-19-2009, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by fez

you are.

all i want to know is why is the 2nd amendment the only one so-called 'conservatives' seem to care about?

Again, you are over simplifying this in an emotional response. It is the same as asking "why is socialism all 'liberals' seem to care about?"

While more 2A supporters may be on the "conservative" side, there are lots of anti-2A Republicans. McCain was. Once he said "if you want to use guns, join the military." There are also lots of pro-2A Democrats.

Lot's of GOP voters did NOT approve of how the W admin did with the erosion of rights. If you read pro-gun forums, you would have seen the outcry over things like the Patriot Act. And that is what my post tried to say: I am disgusted with both parties eroding all rights.

I'm more Libertarian than Dem or GOP. I voted for McCain. I didn't want McCain to be president. I knew Obama would win CO. I wanted to decrease the spread to decrease the sense of mandate the winning party had. (Of course, the TOTAL absence of spread didn't stop the W admin from acting like they had a mandate...).

if the second amendment is the one to protect the others, what did it do to protect the rest of them from bush/cheney?

The BoR doesn't grant rights. We already had them. It just dictates what the government may not restrict. With respect to preservation of rights and prevention of tyranny, the 2A was meant as a last resort as well as a constant deterrent. Indirectly, the 2A is meant to ensure that the adage "the government should fear the people. The people should not fear the government" stays true. Unfortunately it is trending towards that.

Another adage: "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."

Unless you were ready to have an armed rebellion, the 2A wasn't going to stop W directly, but rather temper him while the other boxes did their jobs. The framers made sure that violence was to be last as the other amendments must be exhausted first.

Look at what amendment serves what method of preserving our rights:

Always there: 3A, 4A, 9A, 10A, (13A), (14A)
Soap box: 1A
Ballot box: (12A), (15A), (17A), (19A), (23A), (24A), (26A)
Jury box: 5A, 6A, 7A, 8A, (14A)
Ammo box: 2A

Of course, 2A serves more purpose that simply deterring tyranny, but in the framing of your discussion, I am most glad that we did not have to use 2A to commit violence against our own countrymen. Hopefully it never comes to that. Indeed, we were able to use the soap, ballot, and jury boxes to stop much of W's agenda and eventually his team got the boot. Unfortunately the replacement just wants to take away different rights, but that could describe any candidate.

**fez** · 03-19-2009, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by brotherofedg

Liberty (with a capital L) is a concept personified as a woman, so emasculating her would be difficult. Emasculating 'liberty' the concept is impossible. Even if it was possible the way you've used it that sentence still makes no sense. Seems pretty idiotic to me. Maybe you meant 'immaciated'.

Either way freedom is derived from liberty, liberty is the freedom to do things. They are essentually synoyms given as 'liberty' is derived from the latin 'liber' meaning (guess what) 'free'. It's a subtle point but I hope it clears things up for you.

nice try, but fail.

the subtle point is that freedom and liberty are separate concepts and not essentially synonyms. the neo-cons have tried to make them synonyms, but that is not the case.

as paul hartman said
"Freedom is the exemption from control by some other person, or from arbitrary restriction of specific defined rights like Worship, or Speech. Liberty is the sum of the rights possessed in common by the people of a community/state/nation as they apply to its government, and/or the expectation that a nation's people have of exemption from control by a foreign power.

Freedoms are things that people EXTRACT from their government; Liberty is less derivative, more formative; a thing GRANTED by the people to the people in common. The ability to Assemble, for instance, while commonly thought of as a freedom, is really an aspect of liberty.

Freedoms end when they encounter a contrary freedom of another person. You are free to smoke, until you encounter my freedom not to inhale your smoke. Liberty lacks that distinction: my liberty never contradicts or limits yours."

you're right however, i did need to clarify my statement a little better. how about this:
our liberties are being threatened by the emasculation of the bill of rights.

while technically and literally that would be an illogical anthropomorphism of the bill of rights, the word emasculation has come to have a metaphorical meaning beyond it's literal definition.

**coreshot-tourettes** · 03-19-2009, 11:18 AM

Originally Posted by fez

i never for a second said i was against gun rights. i do think there need to be some restrictions on guns

What restrictions do you favor?

all i want to know is why does the right get it's panties in a knot when anyone tries to put any sort of restrictions on gun ownership while keeping nearly silent when any other portions of the bill of rights is assailed.

Because they're not concerned about freedom any more than the left is. Freedom means being OK with other women getting abortions, other men fucking each other in the ass, AND other people owning capable small arms like semi-auto versions of assault rifles with full capacity 30 round magazines.

**brotherofedg** · 03-19-2009, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by fez

nice try, but fail.

the subtle point is that freedom and liberty are separate concepts and not essentially synonyms. the neo-cons have tried to make them synonyms, but that is not the case.

as paul hartman said
"Freedom is the exemption from control by some other person, or from arbitrary restriction of specific defined rights like Worship, or Speech. Liberty is the sum of the rights possessed in common by the people of a community/state/nation as they apply to its government, and/or the expectation that a nation's people have of exemption from control by a foreign power.

Freedoms are things that people EXTRACT from their government; Liberty is less derivative, more formative; a thing GRANTED by the people to the people in common. The ability to Assemble, for instance, while commonly thought of as a freedom, is really an aspect of liberty.

Freedoms end when they encounter a contrary freedom of another person. You are free to smoke, until you encounter my freedom not to inhale your smoke. Liberty lacks that distinction: my liberty never contradicts or limits yours."

you're right however, i did need to clarify my statement a little better. how about this:
our liberties are being threatened by the emasculation of the bill of rights.

while technically and literally that would be an illogical anthropomorphism of the bill of rights, the word emasculation has come to have a metaphorical meaning beyond it's literal definition.

Rookie error there fella. You and your retard source have confused positive and negative rights (the two concepts of liberty) with two distinct conepts which you've labelled 'liberty' and 'freedom'. It's an easy mistake to make, try reading Isiah Berlin's The Two Concepts of Liberty and things will be much clearer.

I'm not going to go back over why they're synonomous, you can get a dictionary out and see for yourself. The Romans had a word for freedom, the Fench took it and so did we it's just we already had a germanic one (frei). It' the way words work. Deal with it.

As for illogical anthropomorphism I don't see it as illogical to personify the bill of rights. That's not what you were doing, you were personfiying Liberty, something regularly done and allways a girl. Emasculate is a metaphorical term and it does not mean what you were trying to say.

So to sum up, A- for effort (could have tried harder with the source) but for content a most epic fail.

**Spats** · 03-19-2009, 11:52 AM

Originally Posted by fez

where the fuck were you people when most of the protections of the other items in the bill of rights were taken away?

Where was I? I was here, being told I was paranoid and anti-American when I posted about the Bush administration's torture, warrantless wiretapping, starting a war based on known lies, Soviet-style destruction of science in the name of politics, and probable foreknowledge of 9/11.

Just for starters:
http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55667
http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130762
http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89519
http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108417
http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21493

Where were you?

**brotherofedg** · 03-19-2009, 11:56 AM

oh and by the way. What I meant to say before getting caught up in your pseudo intellectual posturing was surely you can make a new thread for this? This thread was meant to be about cool pics and gun stoke, at least respect that rather than cunting it up with stuff that would get a C at most in a freshman politcal thought class.

**summit** · 03-19-2009, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by brotherofedg

oh and by the way. What I meant to say before getting caught up in your pseudo intellectual posturing was surely you can make a new thread for this? This thread was meant to be about cool pics and gun stoke, at least respect that rather than cunting it up with stuff that would get a C at most in a freshman politcal thought class.

HEY FEZ
New Thread Here:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s....php?p=2314706

Smokey McPole · 03-19-2009, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by fez

where the fuck were you people when most of the protections of the other items in the bill of rights were taken away? why the hell is the 2nd amendment the only one you fucks hold sacred? dont you realize that allowing bush/cheney et. al. destroy the bill of rights only provides the dems the power to finish the job???

You are a moron. You FAIL at life.

Why don't you go post on somebody's heli-skiing TR about how they shouldn't be risking thier lives skiing in avalanche terrain or how helis pollute the ecosystem and conrtribute to GLOBAL WARMINGS!!!?

Seriously - you are a loser.

Oh, but thanks for the heads up on Bush/Cheney Captain Obvious.

goddamn you're one dumb mutherfucker..

**arild** · 03-19-2009, 06:06 PM

Don´t cunt up the gun stoke thread! Make your own fucking thread in the otherwise useless Political Asshattery.

**TNKen** · 03-19-2009, 07:49 PM

Original Cadillac Gauge Stoner 63A

**gatorboy** · 03-19-2009, 08:47 PM

Anybody shoot something like this?

I hope it's not a repost

**DeepHelmet** · 03-19-2009, 10:12 PM

YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. JONGs at a firing range. One of my favorite things to watch.....on video. Lean into it you fucking pussies. That's a funny video. I've never seen that much of it.

**Tippster** · 03-19-2009, 10:22 PM

The .577 Tyrannosaur or .577 T-rex is a cartridge developed by A-Square in 1993 for the hunting of large game in Africa. The .577 contains a .585-inch (14.9 mm) diameter 750-grain (49 g) Monolithic Solid Projectile which when fired moves at 2,460 ft/s (750 m/s) producing 10,180 foot-pounds force (13,800 J) of energy.[1]

I bet you that thing would kick the fuck outta you too... not all of those guys were JONGS. Lotsa dislocated shoulders and possible broken collarbones in that vid. The one Arab guy who holds it with the stock's point against his clavicle is painful to watch.

**Rubicon** · 03-19-2009, 10:55 PM

Good grief! I had only seen a clip of one of those guys.

That gun, with the right load, develops more than 10,000 ft-lb of energy.

That thing isn't a rifle. It's a cannon with a butt plate.

Edit: Tippster beat me to it.

**DeepHelmet** · 03-19-2009, 10:59 PM

I never said it wouldn't kick my ass. However, touching off a round from a rifle that generates recoil that you are obviously not prepared for while using bad form, then either dropping the rifle or falling down, all the while being totally unable to control where the muzzle is pointing = JONG. The last guy in the video was obviously not a JONG.

That rifle would kick the shit out of me, no doubt, but I wouldn't drop it or point it in an unsafe direction. I'm not totally unfamiliar with Mongo sized rifles, although I've never fired the 557 T-Rex. I also probably wouldn't fire more than one round. Once bitten....