Indiana Senator introduces bill for training requirements

[Mark 1911]

I think there is a much more realistic need to train Democrats than to train gun owners, especially Democrat senators.

 

[IndyDave1776]

What I see is that the hard liners will have a sisyphean task convincing the majority of gun owners on this "no mandatory training" position. I wish I could say "good luck", but I don't agree with you.

Hard liners? Understanding the difference between a right and a conditional privilege makes us hard liners? With people like you (supposedly) on our side it is no wonder the country is in the deplorable state it is in regarding adherence to the Constitution.

 

[KS1956]

Ideologically, you have a firm hand on the tiller of the 2A (at least in your mind), yet you concede to authority and file 4473's on purchases and pay the state, fingerprint yourself, etc to obtain your LTCH.

I wonder how you've navigated hypocrisy to get to where you are……..

 

[IndyDave1776]

Ideologically, you have a firm hand on the tiller of the 2A (at least in your mind), yet you concede to authority and file 4473's on purchases and pay the state, fingerprint yourself, etc to obtain your LTCH.

I wonder how you've navigated hypocrisy to get to where you are……..

There is a difference between hypocrisy and dealing with what is forced upon you. I suppose you have an alternate solution which does not involve insurrection or commission of felonies, given that most of us do not care to be in the position to worry about dropping the soap.

 

[KS1956]

I recognize that you are tilting at windmills.

Welcome to the 21st Century.

 

[88GT]

88GT: I attempted to respond to you on your slavery example with Dred Scott/13thA & 14thA, and Plessy v Ferguson/Brown v Bd of Educ. You slammed that response and I felt further dialogue was fruitless. I leave that as your issue, not mine. Point/Counterpoint is the way things should go. Not Point/Shin Kick.

So your idea of a counterpoint on my end is an argument you think you can defeat? When faced with a counterpoint that you have no response to, it's a shin kick? IOW, someone call the whaaaaaambulance because 88GT isn't letting you get away with the inane logic you've attempted to use, so you're going to accuse her of not playing by a certain set of rules.

Your response on slavery had nothing to do with the question I asked you. I didn't ask for the legal history of slavery in the U.S. I asked if you would defend slavery with the same standard you defend current laws. Plessy and Brown do not answer that.

I wish all of you well with your laws and I hope that no one in Indiana is left with the guilt of a bad shoot. Lord knows there are too many because people who refuse to own the responsibility that comes with the 2A.

Passive aggressive. I am not surprised.

 

[88GT]

Ideologically, you have a firm hand on the tiller of the 2A (at least in your mind), yet you concede to authority and file 4473's on purchases and pay the state, fingerprint yourself, etc to obtain your LTCH.

I wonder how you've navigated hypocrisy to get to where you are……..

Says the subject to the citizens. I hope your chains rest easy.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I recognize that you are tilting at windmills.

Welcome to the 21st Century.

Are you telling us that the Constitution is irrelevant on account of its age or that as 'modern' folks we should simply accept its being disregarded as an arcane relic rather than the contract between the government and the governed which it was intended to be in perpetuity? Then again, perhaps you simply take the path of least resistance. In either case, you offer little to recommend yourself as a free citizen of the republic.

 

[KS1956]

Hyperbole and hypocrisy. Does that really work here in Indiana? Disagree with you and I'm no longer qualified to be a citizen?

I find your comments offensive.

 

[Bill of Rights]

I did smoke, I quit because it was not good for me. I get sick from the smell now. I would not eat at some restaurants that didn't have good ventilation.

It frosts me that laws forbidding property owners from allowing their customers to smoke if they like. Now short shanks is wanting to outlaw e cigarettes in the same way.

Personally I wish that all smokers would quit.

I wish all gun enthusiasts would get the best training they are able.

That said, I am not a statist. I may start calling myself a minarchist. Thanks Bill.

Glad I could help, but the term is not mine.
You can read where I read it at Big Head Press - Thoughtful Stories, Graphic Novels Online And In Print - The Probability Broach: The Graphic Novel, by L. Neil Smith and Scott Bieser

This is the free graphic novel version available online, but it's pretty faithful to the book as well.

Enjoy!
Blessings,
Bill

 

[Bill of Rights]

Im just curious what option you present to filling out a 4473 or obtaining a LTCH.

While we do have the uninfringed right to purchase in a private party sale and this avoid the former, there is no lawful method in Indiana to carry a handgun at all without the LTCH. This is an infringement that occurred prior to most of us being politically aware, let alone active, but we continue to work diligently within the law to change what is unjust. Would you recommend carrying without the license to spite the law? Or would you have us all simply surrender the ability to lawfully exercise our rightsto the all-powerful, yet intellectually lacking law books?

Blessings,
Bill

Ideologically, you have a firm hand on the tiller of the 2A (at least in your mind), yet you concede to authority and file 4473's on purchases and pay the state, fingerprint yourself, etc to obtain your LTCH.

I wonder how you've navigated hypocrisy to get to where you are……..

 

[Bill B]

Ideologically, you have a firm hand on the tiller of the 2A (at least in your mind), yet you concede to authority and file 4473's on purchases and pay the state, fingerprint yourself, etc to obtain your LTCH.

I wonder how you've navigated hypocrisy to get to where you are……..

Your premise of a binary solution set is incorrect. Do I obey the laws as written? Yes, while working to change them. See, while I do "submit" to them, I do not "concede" to the laws.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Hyperbole and hypocrisy. Does that really work here in Indiana? Disagree with you and I'm no longer qualified to be a citizen?

I find your comments offensive.

Not exactly. My point is that you apparently do not understand the difference between a citizen of a free republic and a subjective of a statist government. You are rightfully a free citizen by birth, you just don't appear to understand the nature of it.

As for dropping the 'offensive' card, I, for one, do not consider that to be the argument-stopper it is in more left-leaning circles. I find it offensive that people like you are willing not only to give up rights in exchange for nothing, but that you have reached the point of, at least to a noticeable extent, denying that such rights exist in spite of being plainly stated, and that you are willing to accept the notion of our system of government defaulting to a nine-person oligarchy regardless of the actual text of the Constitution. I find this extremely offensive for those who worry about offensiveness.

 

[KS1956]

Your premise of a binary solution set is incorrect. Do I obey the laws as written? Yes, while working to change them. See, while I do "submit" to them, I do not "concede" to the laws.

The terms are synonyms. You are splitting the atom here.

Concede:
1. to acknowledge as true, just, or proper; admit, often grudgingly: He finally conceded that she was right.2. to acknowledge (an opponent's victory, score, etc.) before it is officially established: to concede an election.
3. to grant as a right or privilege; yield.
v.i.
4. to make concession; yield; admit.

 

[KS1956]

Not exactly. My point is that you apparently do not understand the difference between a citizen of a free republic and a subjective of a statist government. You are rightfully a free citizen by birth, you just don't appear to understand the nature of it.

As for dropping the 'offensive' card, I, for one, do not consider that to be the argument-stopper it is in more left-leaning circles. I find it offensive that people like you are willing not only to give up rights in exchange for nothing, but that you have reached the point of, at least to a noticeable extent, denying that such rights exist in spite of being plainly stated, and that you are willing to accept the notion of our system of government defaulting to a nine-person oligarchy regardless of the actual text of the Constitution. I find this extremely offensive for those who worry about offensiveness.

What you fail to recognize is that this is a democratic republic and that the Constitution is a living document. You are a reactionary, sir, with no hold over the truth greater than any other. The majority of the citizens don't hold to your views. Perhaps it is you who needs to reappraise.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The terms are synonyms. You are splitting the atom here.

No, he is making the point that there is plenty of room between ignoring the law and/or engaging in armed insurrection and dropping his pants, grabbing his ankles, and accepting it as right and proper. You appear to be suggesting that these are the only two alternatives.

 

[ATM]

Your premise of a binary solution set is incorrect. Do I obey the laws as written? Yes, while working to change them. See, while I do "submit" to them, I do not "concede" to the laws.

As the logical fallacies have gained little ground here, the fact that the position she's adopted rests upon nothing more than "feeling good" becomes more evident.

If not to her, certainly to the many readers considering the whole of the subject with an open mind as they develop and reach their own conclusions.

 

[IndyDave1776]

What you fail to recognize is that this is a democratic republic and that the Constitution is a living document. You are a reactionary, sir.

How did I know this was going to come up eventually? The entire 'living document' nonsense is nothing but a quiet way to nullify the Constitution by declaring that it means whatever someone in a position of power wants it to mean at any given time. You have just clearly demonstrated your position. My guess is that you are also unable to comprehend the difference between a republic and a democracy and the implications of this distinction regarding the difference between limited and unlimited government.

 

[KS1956]

You are falling into the black hole of believing your own drivel. Good day.

 

[ATM]

...I said good day.