There's always 2005. Urge your legislator to send through a clean bill.
Would you like to give us yet another issue for the election ? Please feel free to do so. I'm sure that the dems coming out against it would do well.
The bill was fine and it passed no problem. But because you agree with the judge it's o.k. The judge's decision will more than likely be overturned as it should.
it says that your faith in God doesn't extend to His personal protection.
it's like the Pope riding around in a bulletproof glass cage.
You really have little idea what you're talking about here.
Just because you believe in God doesn't mean he's going to protect you from someone elses actions. He gives people free will and they can choose good or evil.
it says that your faith in God doesn't extend to His personal protection.
Just because you believe in God doesn't mean he's going to protect you from someone elses actions.
From what I gathered you were saying that if someone was a real believer that they wouldn't need it because God would protect them. You said to Jethro essentially that when you said
so, you are saying He won't protect you?
okay.
Next post.
real solid faith you have there.
Some might believe that they can cross a busy street without looking because God will protect them. It's not advisable though. Someone might believe that God will protect them from someone shooting them again, not advisable. If you understood most people's beliefs you'd realize that most would not fall into that category. It's not that their faith isn't strong, they realize that God gave people free will and with it they can take a life do good and bad. Saying that they don't believe enough or their faith is somehow in question is ludicrous.
Now I'd actually agree that bringing a gun to church is probably not warranted and silly IMO. The church as private property can decide whom they do and whom they don't want to have guns on their premisis.
The point is that the lawsuit was brought to end conceal and carry. So now you're suddenly o.k with religion in politics ? Hmmm, Interesting. Aren't you also the same guy who goes on nonstop about how people should be allowed to do drugs because it's their choice?
John Caile, president of Concealed Carry Reform Now!, which lobbied for passage of the new law, called the ruling "a bit disingenuous."
"Time has eroded the credibility of all these people who oppose concealed carry, and who predicted all these horror stories that never came true," he said. "We have a year of this law under our belts. Everybody has pretty much behaved, so there is nothing to complain about."
Since the new law took effect last year, the number of permits issued in Minnesota increased more than 70 percent — up to 22,100 from roughly 12,800 in 2002. Yet that was less than half the 50,000 permits lawmakers predicted for the first year.
The new statute eliminated a requirement for people to demonstrate a need to carry a handgun for their job or personal safety. But it also toughened some existing requirements: Permit holders no longer could take their guns onto school grounds, and people convicted of certain violent felonies, such as murder or sexual assault, were prohibited from obtaining permits.
what is freedom, bodine...and do you believe in it?
we have had that discussion before crabs. your definition of freedom amounts to anarchy. you don't understand what freedom means in the DOI or the Constitution and never will.
and my definition of freedom isn't anarchy either. Yes it is. It i pretty much whatever the individual wants to do and collective society has no input.
that you can't define freedom isn't a big surprise if you see a definition of it and think it's anarchy. Like I said we went through this before. Freedom, as it is meant in the DOI and as implemented in the Constitution, is the ability to participate in the political process. That you cannot remember what I wrote before is your problem. Maybe it is all the brain cells you killed doping it up.
freedom: 1 : the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another
What's wrong with having it on the ballot?
What's wrong with having it on the ballot?
Do I get to vote on spending issues? Abortion? Pollution control? State Education?
You're being absurd, Rick.
If you think this is in the bag, and it's what people want I wouldn't think it would be a problem.
or:
There's always 2005. Urge your legislator to send through a clean bill.
Keep deflecting the issue, Rick.
I'm done chatting with you on this matter.
You can't even be honest about it.
There's always 2005. Urge your legislator to send through a clean bill.
Would you like to give us yet another issue for the election ? Please feel free to do so. I'm sure that the dems coming out against it would do well.
The bill was fine and it passed no problem. But because you agree with the judge it's o.k. The judge's decision will more than likely be overturned as it should.
taking a gun to church...what does that
say about your faith?
In the movies, there was a table at the front of the church where the gunslinger had to leave his holster. The Padrewas strict about that.
You're being intellectually dishonest here, Rick.
Rick? No can't be!
taking a gun to church...what does
that
say about your faith?
It says nothing.
it says plenty
then enlighten us, crabs, what does it say?
it says that your faith in God doesn't extend to His personal protection.
it's like the Pope riding around in a bulletproof glass cage.
trying to determine if this couldn't have been more obvious
it says that your faith in God doesn't extend to His personal protection. You do know how idiotic that sounds, don't you?
Â
what?
the idea of taking a gun to church with you?
yes, it sounds very idiotic indeed.
More stupidity from you, crabs. Don't you get tired of being so damned stupid?
don't you ever get tired of name-calling instead of saying something remotely interesting?
it says that your faith in God doesn't extend to His personal protection.
it's like the Pope riding around in a bulletproof glass cage.
You really have little idea what you're talking about here.
Just because you believe in God doesn't mean he's going to protect you from someone elses actions. He gives people free will and they can choose good or evil.
Â
why not?
He's God, isn't He?
whatever happenes is His will, isn't it?
BTW Luv, these two things say the same thing...
so if I know little, so do you.
don't you ever get tired of name-calling instead of saying something remotely interesting?
The truth is always interesting.
He's God, isn't He? It is apparent that you know nothing of God, crabs.
so, you are saying He won't protect you?
okay.
I can't say what God will do at any given time. He may intervene He may not. He has his reasons for what He does.
Free will, Crabby.
Free will allows nutjobs to firebomb Churches.
real solid faith you have there.
Luv, I like you're new avatar.
Very cool!
:-)
and so your Faith is helpless. I see.
You need to reconsider your statement, because that's not helpless in the least.
Free will is the beauty of it.
if you can't see the absurdity of arming yourself for church, I can't help you.
real solid faith you have there.
It is also apparent that you have no understanding of faith.
BTW Luv, these two things say the same thing...
From what I gathered you were saying that if someone was a real believer that they wouldn't need it because God would protect them. You said to Jethro essentially that when you said
so, you are saying He won't protect you?
okay.
Next post.
real solid faith you have there.
Some might believe that they can cross a busy street without looking because God will protect them. It's not advisable though. Someone might believe that God will protect them from someone shooting them again, not advisable. If you understood most people's beliefs you'd realize that most would not fall into that category. It's not that their faith isn't strong, they realize that God gave people free will and with it they can take a life do good and bad. Saying that they don't believe enough or their faith is somehow in question is ludicrous.
Now I'd actually agree that bringing a gun to church is probably not warranted and silly IMO. The church as private property can decide whom they do and whom they don't want to have guns on their premisis.
The point is that the lawsuit was brought to end conceal and carry. So now you're suddenly o.k with religion in politics ? Hmmm, Interesting. Aren't you also the same guy who goes on nonstop about how people should be allowed to do drugs because it's their choice?
Â
Â
Â
THX 1138 7/14/04 10:49am
Thanks :) I had to crop the hell out of it for size limitations.
if you can't see the absurdity of arming yourself for church, I can't help you.
You're the one that needs help.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/local/9147700.htm
John Caile, president of Concealed Carry Reform Now!, which lobbied for passage of the new law, called the ruling "a bit disingenuous."
"Time has eroded the credibility of all these people who oppose concealed carry, and who predicted all these horror stories that never came true," he said. "We have a year of this law under our belts. Everybody has pretty much behaved, so there is nothing to complain about."
Since the new law took effect last year, the number of permits issued in Minnesota increased more than 70 percent — up to 22,100 from roughly 12,800 in 2002. Yet that was less than half the 50,000 permits lawmakers predicted for the first year.
The new statute eliminated a requirement for people to demonstrate a need to carry a handgun for their job or personal safety. But it also toughened some existing requirements: Permit holders no longer could take their guns onto school grounds, and people convicted of certain violent felonies, such as murder or sexual assault, were prohibited from obtaining permits.
from what I've gathered, you can't see the absurdity of taking a gun to a church.
no, I never even mentioned politics. I was talking about how absurd it is for womeone to need to take a gun to a church.
as long as it isn't interfering with the rights of another, people can have whatever they like. I never said different.
People have a right to be as absurd as they like as long as it doesn't harm someone else.
People have a right to be as absurd as they like as long as it doesn't harm someone else.
And that would be a good thing for you. No wonder you adovacte such a thing.
I tolorate you, don't I?
I advocate such a thing because it's freedom
I realize you don't believe in this concept, but I tolorate you anyway.
just what do you think freedom is, anyway?...if not the right to do whatever one pleases as long as it doesn't hinder another's freedom?
"Time has eroded the credibility of all these people who oppose concealed carry,"
No, it hasn't.
"and who predicted all these horror stories that never came true,"
I'm glad it wasn't horrible.
"We have a year of this law under our belts. Everybody has pretty much behaved, so there is nothing to complain about."
If you think unconstitutional legislation is nothing to complain about. I think giving into fear is always unfortunate.
no, crabs, it is becuase you are utterly absurd that you support such a thing.
If you think unconstitutional legislation is nothing to complain about.
Unconsitutional legislation: a term that has been abused by liberal judges for 50 years.
what is freedom, bodine...and do you believe in it?
conceealed carry is about being ashamed to show the world that you are afraid of it.
See what I mean, crabs, utterly absurd.
what is freedom, bodine...and do you believe in it?
we have had that discussion before crabs. your definition of freedom amounts to anarchy. you don't understand what freedom means in the DOI or the Constitution and never will.
nope, that's not a definition.
and my definition of freedom isn't anarchy either.
that you can't define freedom isn't a big surprise if you see a definition of it and think it's anarchy.
anarchy has no concern fro preventing the removal of rights by another.
and my definition of freedom isn't anarchy either. Yes it is. It i pretty much whatever the individual wants to do and collective society has no input.
that you can't define freedom isn't a big surprise if you see a definition of it and think it's anarchy. Like I said we went through this before. Freedom, as it is meant in the DOI and as implemented in the Constitution, is the ability to participate in the political process. That you cannot remember what I wrote before is your problem. Maybe it is all the brain cells you killed doping it up.
what "input" are you suggeting?
but yes, freedom is an individual's right to do whatever they want as long as they don't with someone else's rights.
nope, that's called democracy, now that's certainly a tool used to help insure people's freedom...but it's not freedom itself.
try again.
crabgrass 7/14/04 2:09pm
conceealed carry is about being ashamed to show the world that you are afraid of it.
No, it's about not advertising, or drawing attention to ones self. It's really about the right to protect yourself in privacy.
freedom: 1 : the quality or state of being free: as a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another
now, bodine...are you for FREEDOM?