[Dark_crow]

we are up the creek .

That's what I'm talking about, if there was a military attempt at take-over... I know it's been a long time since the last one... but blindly assuming it won't happen flies against history.

[ETWolverine]

This is a curious argument, the entire rationale of an individual right to keep and bear arms is to defend against a tyrannical central government; the militia, or National Guard as it is now called is that defense. But somehow, you see nothing wrong with turning control of the National Guard to that supposed tyrannical government.

That's right. Because once the population, who outnumber the national guard on the order of several hundred to one, are armed, the national guard is no longer a tyranical threat. Even if the government decided to use them against the population, the population would still be the stronger force. So if we are all armed, why would I be worried about anything the government does with the national guard, or even the whole Armed Forces of the United States? That is the entire point of the 2nd Amendment.

Elliot

[Dark_crow]

That's right. Because once the population, who outnumber the national guard on the order of several hundred to one, are armed, the national guard is no longer a tyranical threat. Even if the government decided to use them against the population, the population would still be the stronger force. So if we are all armed, why would I be worried about anything the government does with the national guard, or even the whole Armed Forces of the United States? That is the entire point of the 2nd Amendment.

Elliot

Ohhh Mr. Wolverine, how you go on, as young as I am I know 1 trained, and 1 untrained only comes out equal on the adding machine, problem is, that is only on paper. ;)

[speechlesstx]

What a selective memory you have…remember when I suggested you must come from a Recluse family because you were somehow ignorant of racism when you grew-up, and did not know it existed around you, even though Texas had just intergraded the large city school systems and had a long history of violent racism.

Good grief Charlie Brown, my memory is fine, too. How is yours? You're still under the impression that we were "ignorant" of racism, apparently having led an overly sheltered life which was never my point. Plain and simple DC, I grew up integrated into a predominantly Hispanic community and race was never an issue for us. We all got along just fine, a beautiful brown, black and white rainbow of friends. That's not "reclusive," it was (dare I say it) "progressive."

So far as the comment about sounding like David Duke, that was directed at your…you right, saying, “Red Neck Crackers", not me, I never called you that.

So you see, I was right in both instances and you do owe me an apology for getting up-tight over a perceived insult that did not take place.

I can only conclude that you are blinded by your own far right extremism.

For someone that just said my "arguments are awful" you aren't making much sense. Do I really have to spell it out? They were questions, asking you to put yourself in my shoes. The only thing pointing at you was that "you should understand why the "Red Neck Crackers" remarks were offensive" - not assigning blame to you.

When I have something to apologize for I will do so, I'm a bigger man than to ignore my missteps. But in this case the only thing I may need to even marginally apologize for is not kissing your feet over accepting your apology, apparently "fair enough" and a smile wasn't good enough. Meanwhile, you've since criticized my arguments, the way I think and accused me of being a blind far right extremist. I guess I should apologize for taking offense at that as well?

[Dark_crow]

Good grief Charlie Brown, my memory is fine, too. How is yours? You're still under the impression that we were "ignorant" of racism, apparently having led an overly sheltered life which was never my point. Plain and simple DC, I grew up integrated into a predominantly Hispanic community and race was never an issue for us. We all got along just fine, a beautiful brown, black and white rainbow of friends. That's not "reclusive," it was (dare I say it) "progressive."



For someone that just said my "arguments are awful" you aren't making much sense. Do I really have to spell it out? They were questions, asking you to put yourself in my shoes. The only thing pointing at you was that "you should understand why the "Red Neck Crackers" remarks were offensive" - not assigning blame to you.

When I have something to apologize for I will do so, I'm a bigger man than to ignore my missteps. But in this case the only thing I may need to even marginally apologize for is not kissing your feet over accepting your apology, apparently "fair enough" and a smile wasn't good enough. Meanwhile, you've since criticized my arguments, the way I think and accused me of being a blind far right extremist. I guess I should apologize for taking offense at that as well?

Ohhh Mr. Speechless, how you go on. But don’t let me put you off, I don’t know anything about politics; but my Auntie told me I learned fast. So you just go on doing whatever it is you people do and don’t pay any attention to me, I’ll just tag along and see what I can pick-up.

[speechlesstx]

Ohhh Mr. Speechless, how you go on. But don’t let me put you off, I don’t know anything about politics; but my Auntie told me I learned fast. So you just go on doing whatever it is you people do and don’t pay any attention to me, I’ll just tag along and see what I can pick-up.

Dark, isn't this getting a little silly? Yes it is, and I appreciate your contributions to the discussion of the real issues here, so can we just get past the personal stuff?