Well, this, according to the majority of Americans, is what the "right to bear arms" is really about: to be able to point them at government if government gets uppity. Like trying to organize a rescue.
Yes, F. I was venting. I wasn't looking for a debate. I was looking to vent. Events here in the country I currently call home are quite distressing enough for me, and that's without natural disasters added.
I locked the comments because I was using my journal for venting, as is the prerogative of those utilising LJ. I use it rarely, but when I do I have reasons. Often those reasons aren't my close-mindedness and wanton desire for killing, torture and violence against others... despite what you may think (or at least intimate to others).
One day we may have an in-depth conversation about firearms, people, stupidity, violent crime and all that, but it's not going to be while I am stressing over friends and family in Louisiana and Alabama. Any rational and resonable person knows that's not the best time to try to. So please lay off the "I cannot say that this further evidence of openness and rationality makes the thought of American "right to bear arms" any more comfortable to me", and let's have agree to have this debate another time. Deal?
No, I'm afraid, no deal. However much it may annoy you. Because the point is that anyone who owns a people-killing tool owns it all the time: when he is happy and when he is sad, when he is optimistic and when he is depressed, when he is angry or when he is calm. And in any mood, in any circumstance, the only thing that the people-killing tool does is kill. Or at least injure. I have said what I have said because I live in another country and there is an ocean between us. If I were in the US, I would not feel very happy about saying it in a country where there are more guns than people and not all the people are quite sane.
And I would point out that if you use your LJ to vent, a right I do not in the lest deny you, you are a bit unreasonable in not expecting me to use mine to vent from my point of view. Those people who shot on the rescue helicopters were not terrorists. They were normal Americans trying to get out - and using force to get their way.
Quite right. That's why I didn't post my vent in your LJ. I knew you were making an observation of your own and may not have been looking for a debate on the matter, only venturing your view. I vented in mine because I knew I wasn't going on all-thrusters logic and reason. I was in a bad mood already, made none the better because people were shooting at rescue helicopters in a disaster zone, and I just had to get it out of system before it made me feel worse. I did it on my own dime, not yours.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-01 11:24 pm (UTC)I locked the comments because I was using my journal for venting, as is the prerogative of those utilising LJ. I use it rarely, but when I do I have reasons. Often those reasons aren't my close-mindedness and wanton desire for killing, torture and violence against others... despite what you may think (or at least intimate to others).
One day we may have an in-depth conversation about firearms, people, stupidity, violent crime and all that, but it's not going to be while I am stressing over friends and family in Louisiana and Alabama. Any rational and resonable person knows that's not the best time to try to. So please lay off the "I cannot say that this further evidence of openness and rationality makes the thought of American "right to bear arms" any more comfortable to me", and let's have agree to have this debate another time. Deal?
no subject
Date: 2005-09-02 12:01 am (UTC)And I would point out that if you use your LJ to vent, a right I do not in the lest deny you, you are a bit unreasonable in not expecting me to use mine to vent from my point of view. Those people who shot on the rescue helicopters were not terrorists. They were normal Americans trying to get out - and using force to get their way.
no subject
Date: 2005-09-02 12:13 am (UTC)