virgil

name one... ?Huh?

This is starting to get stupid.

And yet another 2nd grade response... your freedoms have already been taken you just aren't smart enough to see it... carry on puppet. What freedoms are you referring to?

google it- another group of yahoos printing inflammatory nonsense for guys like vjp who are only too happy to spread around and represent it as fact. pure nonsense, zero credibility. same as every other source vjp quotes.

Another ridiculous accusation from another ridiculous source (Pajamas Media, are you serious?). VJP- you're consistent, if nothing else.

While we're on this subject- do you think OJ has found the 'real killer' yet?

I was joking, too. Mostly.

Maybe you can get Plexico Bourris? I hard he is out of jail. After he takes an NRA gun safety course. Sorry if I spelled his name wrong http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/cry.gif[/img] Plaxico Burris is a convicted felon who has already proven to have no respect for gun laws and is a danger to himself and others. Does that eliminate him or make him the perfect candidate?

Dick Cheney is probably available.

I agree that his post was interesting. The gun guys make the point that it's not a lack of gun laws that is the problem, it's the lack of enforcement. I think it's a lack of both. As far as the NRA having a minority spokesperson, I think the NRA knows who their audience is and will be careful to pick someone that their members can identify with.

Careful Toruk. On this site, showing any tolerance for gun control of any kind, and not pledging allegiance to the NRA is likely to get you lumped in with us fence-sitting liberal utopians by the 'cold dead hands' boys. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Virgil, I don't know if you are following the controversy over Hydro Fracking for natural gas. In the Marcellus Shale or if you saw the movie Gas Lands but the EPA is not looking out for our best interest. The Gas Companies are not held to the same standards as local states are, they don't have to follow clean air, water act. Which out Gov't had exempted them from following our beloved hunting areas in NY will be decimated. I never implied that these or any other agencies are perfect. However, their existence does in fact make our lives better and safer. So, what are you proposing? Should we do away with the EPA? Would that make your drinking water safer and cleaner? Or do you have a plan for a more perfect version of the EPA that nobody could find fault with?

Virgil, why don't you tell us why you do trust the government? Do you believe it is your friend? The EPA, FDA, FAA, etc., etc.- all government agencies that make our lives better and safer. Do I have blind faith in anyone or anything, especially government?- of course not. I am a skeptic by nature. I believe in questioning everything. However, I think there's a big difference between being skeptical and being suspicious or paranoid. And, I think there's no difference between the fool who believes everything he's told and the fool who refuses to believe anything. As far as the point about home ownership and taxes- are you saying that you should be able to refuse to pay taxes without consequences? That's absurd. As far as my earlier post not addressing gun control issues- this thread has gotten off topic; my post was in response to Dave's earlier post.

First of all you don't know me to make such a statement. That seems to be what you do, make assumptions. I don't second guess or complain, I am a veteran and I stepped up for this country so don't assume you know me. It's the same Govt just different people that represent us. With Congress having a 17% approval rating more people are complaining than ever . They make the laws and set the policy that I feel is not in the best interest if this country especially the law biding citizens.Who pay the freight!!!!!!!! I never claimed to know you any more than you know me. I've made no more assumptions about you than you've made about me. Try not being so confrontational if you're going to be so sensitive when challenged. I have nothing but respect for anyone who has served this country. However, being a veteran doesn't exempt you from ever being asked to explain your position or back up your statements.

Virgil, read your post you asked what gov't are you referring to, did you not. I didn't think that spell check and punctuation mattered that much on a hunting site. I thought it was the issued, that's how lame your responses are when we are discussing gun ownership and crime. You come up with the crime of poor gramma and run on sentences which at times I must plead guilty. Hope no one else on this site is committing this crime. That is what makes your responses juvenile and childish http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/cry.gif[/img] Who can take you serious?http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img] I only point out your grammar and spelling in response to being called naive and juvenile. I did ask which government you were referring to. Again, I asked this because the government of fifty years ago is not the same as today's government due to the fact that none of the elected officials from years ago are in office today. Again, my point is that you state that you didn't trust the government fifty years ago(Vietnam), you didn't trust the government twenty years ago(Persian Gulf), and you don't trust the government today (Libya). So, maybe the issue is that you simply do not trust the government, no matter who is in charge. Maybe you are just one of those people that second guesses and complains.

As far as I can remember there is only one Gov't in this country. You want reasons, do your homework and you will find the answers if I gave them to you , you wouldn't believe me anyway. Let the facts speak for themselves. I do question the motives of our elected officials, just look what shape this country is in, almost every state is broke. Who got us to this point?http://huntingny.com/forums/Smileys/akyhne/huh.gif[/img]? Elected Officials, the people we should be able to trust, are you kidding me? I don't know how old you are but some of your responses on this thread are very juvenile . You just keep questioning every ones response and have none of your own you like to play the devils advocate. You have to be able to listen to learn, not just react. Noone implied that there is more than one government. However, 'the government' is constantly changing due to the fact that we hold elections and have term limits. My point was that you stated your distrust of 'this government' and then sited three wars spanning fifty years as examples as to why you feel that way. The people responsible for our involvement in Iraq were probably children when we got involved in Vietnam. My point is that you seem to distrust the government no matter who is in charge. And, it is not my posts that are juvenile- it is your response to them that is juvenile. I find it interesting to see how some people fly off the handle when asked to explain their position on something. If find it funny to see how you confuse opinion and propaganda with fact. I think it's even funnier that you call me 'juvenile' and 'naive' while using run-on sentences and mispellings(nieve??). And it's convenient to assume that I'm too young to have a valid opinion. You're wrong again. Simple minds usually seek simple answers. Again, this is why I usually prefer not to respond to your silly posts.

Virgil you brought up the topic of not trusting the Gov't , I just gave some reasons why You didn't give any 'reasons' for anything. And, exactly which government are you referring to when you mention Vietnam, Iraq, and Libya? Each of these conflicts was entered into by three different administrations. Are you referring in general to the government of the USA, regardless of who the elected officials are? Is there any administration in recent history that you found trustworthy, or do you have a general distrust of anyone in charge?

Virgil, did you believe them when we went into Viet Nam, Iraq, Lybia. I don't trust this government but for one thing to waste our money and the lives of our military. Wake up don't be so nieve. Dave, thanks for confirming the obvious. I usually prefer to ignore your posts for exactly this reason.

I know we are never going to change your mind on this, Virgil, but I just ask you to consider what benefit would come form registering them. What benefit could it serve? I am not looking for a response...just asking you to reflect on it. You guys are getting yourselves all wound up again. My mind is not made up. I simply asked for the reasons against it. As I said, registration works for cars- I'm curious as to why there are such strong opinions against it for guns. As far as potential benefit, I think that accountability would be the primary benefit. If registration were ever to be considered, maybe it would involve 'grandfathering' guns manufactured before a certain date. That could protect people who have bought their guns legally before the law went into effect. It sounds to me though that the primary issue on this subject (and many others) for some of you guys is the distrust of the government.

So now we are hot to register ALL guns. That is exactly the escalation that I have come to expect from the anti-gun crowd. I never said that i was in favor- I was asking what all the fuss is about. I don't buy the idea that anyone's guns would ever be confiscated.

The only way that you could control private sales would be to require registration of every gun, accessory, magazine and bullet you own. You want that? Why exactly are so many of you guys opposed to the idea of registering our guns. I wouldn't have a problem with it. But, I've gotten the impression that those opposed to gun laws hate the idea- i'm curious as to why. It seems to work for cars, why not guns?

And yes virgil.. there is a gun problem in America... and it's gotten worse... and keeps getting worse everytime a new gun law is adopted that takes away the ownership right of law abiding American citizens...gun crimes keep rising as new gun laws are adopted... hard to dispute that trend. A trend does not establish cause. You interpret the trend according to your own agenda.

Again, I am not saying there should be no regulation, I am saying that all of the necessary regulation is already in place and that most of the newer gun laws that they are trying to put in place are nothing more than harassment of legal, law abiding gun owners. If all of the 'necessary regulation' is already in place, why do we still have such a problem? or, do you not feel that there is a problem?

No...It seems pretty silly to limit or take away the option of a patient to utilize morphine in a legal way becuse there is illegal use of the drug Nice try- heroin and opium are not the same thing. They are both derivatives of opium. But, heroin is much stronger and much more dangerous. That is why heroin is illegal and opium is legal, but regulated. This is another silly attempt to cause confusion/make a point.

Some of these reply's are cruel and unusual punishment to say the least. No matter what laws are passed the criminals will bypass them that's why they are called criminals. So any laws passed will only affect law biding citizens. ...and some of them are a waste of space. So, then, what's the solution? Should we have no laws whatesoever? Do we apply this logic, or lack thereof, to other issues- like drugs, speeding, etc? Should we legalize heroin and speeding since some people are going to drive too fast or use drugs anyway?