Roosevelt defeats Republican Incumbent

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

Probably an election headline somewhere in November of 1932. Within 13 months of the election, Democrats led the repeal of prohibition. Roosevelt had ratification in five states within his 1st 100 days.


AND WHERE ARE WE NOW? Going down the same 90 year-old path that ended in prohibition.
Now that same party that said it was wrong to prohibit alcohol says it's okay to prohibit guns.

What changed? Alcohol and drug problems are sucking the life from millions. We want alcohol to remain legal and we want to legalize pot.

Firearms laws are at an all time high and still we need more. We have evidence that cops in major cities DON'T EVEN KNOW THE EXISTING LAWS and we still need more laws.

:rant:

Those who do not learn from past mistakes are doomed to repeat them. Would you like that? Fine! Do it somewhere else and move the he!! out of my country.
Take all the money you want to waste advertising against the NRA and contributing to unindicted FELONS like Bloomberg and buy an island.
I am willing to meet you as you leave and repeat the suggestion of Max Yasgur and even give you a hammer and a bucket of sand.

[gejohnston]

1. before the 18 A

the mob could barely afford junk pistols let alone silk suits and submachine guns. Same with the war on drugs. I remember when street gangs had only tire chains and switchblades. If they had a gun, it would be a homemade zip gun or some something made be Clerke or RG that someone threw away. Then drugs became more profitable. The best way to take guns out of the hands of gangs is to take away their money. I think 74 years is enough time to figure out that pot prohibition is a waste.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

2. free enterprise

Supply and demand are natural forces in all economies. Wall Street and the black market of drugs and gun runners operate the same way. If you try to choke off supply, demand will remain the same and the price will go up. We saw it with alcohol during the twenties. Drugs are no different. Well, I guess they are a bit. The high that was a fifth of whiskey may be equivalent to an ounce of pot. Harder, stronger drugs are lighter and more compact, therefore easier to smuggle and transport.

These offer greater profits. The more the profit, the higher the motivation. Eliminating competition and protecting the business can be accomplished with firepower. The profit motive will always be there as long as anything is illegally traded (drugs or whatever).

We need to let up with some of the drug laws. That will make a serious dent.

[cleanhippie]

3. I have a better idea.

Why don't YOU move the hell out of MY country?


Oh, don't like it when someone says that shit to you? Tough nuts. "I am willing to meet you as you leave and repeat the suggestion of Max Yasgur and even give you a hammer and a bucket of sand."





Who do you think you are to tell ME to leave MY country? This is MY country just as much as it yours.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

4. Puzzled

First, I can take anything I (or you) can dish out.

Second, the OP was about the futility of banning things and how counterproductive it becomes.

Finally, I thought you were pro-gun, aren't you?

[cleanhippie]

6. I am not trying to make you "take" anything.

Nor am I trying to have a pissing contest with you. I am taking offense to the words you used in your OP. Maybe I am missing something in what you are trying to say, I will read it again, but I am having difficulty getting past the "if you don't like it you can leave" nonsense, as regardless of which side of this or any other issue we discuss here, we ALL belong in this country, every single one of us, pro-gun and anti-gun. This country belongs to us ALL and no one will EVER be forced to leave or told get out. Not on my watch. Not ever.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

9. I sure didn't mean to strike a nerve.

Sorry. I would never have anyone forced to leave the USA.

I do feel rather strongly about the Bill of Rights.
I also have a decided fondness for the words of Samuel Adams:
"Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can."

Also, a very grateful thank you for your service. Have a good weekend.

[cleanhippie]

10. On that, I couldn't agree with you more.

Adams knew what he was talking about.

But you DID, in you OP, tell people to leave, and I took offense to it.

I think on this issue (Second Amendment) we are on the same side, so we need to remain united.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

11. Adams knew what he was talking about. :)

Yes to that.

As far as telling people to leave, I considered that more of an invitation than an imperative.

My point of view is that, just as the RKBA is an attribute of individuals, I view the protection of our RKBA by our government to be attributes of our country. My view of government is that its most important function is to protect our citizens; their lives, property, privacy and liberties.

If misguided individuals want to change government's role from being a guardian of liberties to being hostile to those same basic liberties, they are cordially "invited" to go. My preference would be that they see the error of their ways and stay.

Have a good holiday.

[gejohnston]

5. I remember that phrase from the 60s and 70s

Those days are gone man. Let's go to the range and burn a few boxes then chill over a couple of beers or a couple of bottles of vintage Annie Green Springs.

[cleanhippie]

7. See post #6

You have an Air Force logo for your avatar. I assume you served too. Telling another American the s/he should just leave if they don't like it, regardless of the issue or what side it is, is NOT what I gave 21 years of my life for, and I would hope you didn't either.

[gejohnston]

8. same here and agree.