# Serious question I'd like for Pelosi, Streisand, and other gun grabbers



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

If US adults are not allowed to own firearms in order to defend themselves, and the Supreme Court has ruled that police have no duty to protect people, and a person does not have the money to afford a security fence, armed guards, and security cameras, exactly what is such a person supposed to do in order to protect themselves from a criminal?


Get a dog? Not all places allow dogs; dogs cost money to keep; dogs are a pain to maintain (daily walks, vet bills, food, etc.)


Learn judo or karate? Lessons are expensive and many folks are old and not in great physical shape. Indeed, some are confined to wheel chairs.


Hide in a closet and call 911? The typical criminal will be finished with his burglary, rape, murder, or whatever before the police arrive. 

I would seriously like to know what the wealthy gun grabbers who live in safe neighborhoods, behind tall fences with electric gates, and have body guards think the average person who lives in a $70,000 house in a not-so-safe area is supposed to do to protect themselves.

Or will the gun grabbers admit that they just do not care about the commoners' safety?


----------



## oldasrocks (Oct 27, 2006)

You are not supposed to protect yourself. You must obey and work and pay your taxes so the guberment can tell you what to do and when. They coddle the criminals so they can say "You need us to protect you|"

After they are firmly in control and make us all into slaves they will kill off the criminals so they can be in complete control. Of course they do not see themselves as criminals but caretakers for the rest of us who are too stupid to manage our lives.

As I have said many times. Watch Death of a Nation and see the big picture.


----------



## CKelly78z (Jul 16, 2017)

NRA_guy said:


> Or will the gun grabbers admit that they just do not care about the commoners' safety?


They will NEVER admit that, but it is painfully obvious to me.


----------



## Oregon1986 (Apr 25, 2017)

They simply just do not care about the common peoples safety, just as long as they are safe.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Some may deflect a bit and give you the tall odds of you or your family being in a life or death situation requiring the use of a firearm.
They may also give you, while well meaning (?), dishonest stats pointing out suicides, mass shootings, gun thefts and trafficing, etc that far outweigh in their mind, self defense.
It is a bit of a disconnect, similar to helping the poor, killing babies, etc.
They may have little experience and only cursory knowledge, but a high assumption of intellect and expertise.

It is also becoming somewhat more evident that there is a segment that tends to project their own fears and temperament onto others; in other words, if they are willing to do whatever it takes to force their agenda, why wouldn't they believe a person who owns firearms wouldn't do the same thing?

One could say it is also a fear of self control, a fear of liberty and freedom, little faith in personal responsibility and their fellow man and a disdain for the justice system.
With others, they fear guns, so they fear you.

The one word that will keep coming back into the equation is control.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

I agree GTX63 and everybody else who has posted replies. 

But as the saying goes, "It does not matter that air travel is statistically safe if it's YOUR plane that goes down."

Likewise, it matters a great deal if it's you who gets their front door kicked in late one night or assaulted in the Walmart parking lot.

And, yes, liberals want a government law or regulation to address all decisions and opportunities citizens may have because they do not trust the people to make the "correct" choices.

Correct is, of course, like beauty---it is in the mind of the beholder.

And they do not want those laws and regulations to be enforced against themselves and their close friends. 

One of my favorite sayings: "If it were not for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all."


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

NRA_guy said:


> I would seriously like to know what the wealthy gun grabbers who live in safe neighborhoods, behind tall fences with electric gates, and have body guards think the average person who lives in a $70,000 house in a not-so-safe area is supposed to do to protect themselves.


They don't care about us.
They only care about themselves.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They don't care about us.
> They only care about themselves.


Of course, and we all know that.

But I would like to see them asked the question just to see how they dance around the issue.

I know they would avoid a direct answer and spout some BS like, "Well, if NOBODY had a gun, everybody would be safer and not have to worry about getting shot."


----------



## hiddensprings (Aug 6, 2009)

They are hypocrites and care nothing about the average person. And some of them believe if they outlaw gun, everyone will be safe and happy and the bad guns will suddenly be law-abiding.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

I won't speak for Ms. Streisand so I'll just use her own tweet
_"To be clear, no one is trying to amend let alone revoke the Second Amendment. How many innocent people, especially children, have to die before it’s OK to have sensible legislation?"_

A question for Ms. Streisand- How many people will need to die because they couldn’t defend their lives before you and yours give up the idea that you can make the world safer by disarming the good guys?


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

let me speak for a few of my dead relatives and many more of their countrymen and other Jews Millions of Gun control victims.

"we didn't believe it could happen , we didn't threaten any one , we didn't fight , we had no intention of fighting or harming anyone *we were told registering guns was what civilized societies do that it protects the people. We were wrong it protects the tyrants , the murders and the criminals *, we just couldn't believe it could be happening why would any one want us dead.
*Never register , never give up your guns , it always ends in death ,slavery or starvation.* we have seen it all through out history and yet it is repeated over and over every few generations"


----------



## shawnlee (Apr 13, 2010)

The exact reason for the second is quite clear and it is also the reason a certain segment wants to restrict it...………..end of story.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

the thing is those are fiction about what , the nonfiction , you want scary non fiction.

a book that will shape the way you think , an auto biography 

this book was written by one of only 2 survivors of the Buchenwald

https://www.amazon.com/Was-God-vacation-WWII-autobiography/dp/0964961504

my son agrees now that he had read this book also , this book should be required reading in high school.

one of my colleges was friends with Jack he gave me the book , it will definitely shape how you think.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

^ Thanks, greencoutypete. I will check "Was God on vacation?: A WWII autobiography" out.

Meanwhile, my 19-year old grandson in his college sophomore literature class is required to read and be tested on a fictional book (written by a black female writer) about the evils of slavery in the South. 

The left has taken complete control of our schools.

I am not opposed to students' getting both sides of issues, including the evils of slavery, but the likelihood of students ever reading "Was God on vacation?: A WWII autobiography" are zero.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)




----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

I was reading about the English long bow , this was the medium to long range weapon of choice useful for both war , defense and hunting. a English long bow could pierce armor at 60 yards kill at 100 and wound at 250 yards.

at one point even the English understood the power of an armed citizenry even if they were mainly training all for military service . all sports were banned on Sunday and men age 12-65 were expected to practice their archery skills any household having an income of 2 pounds or greater was expected to own a bow. basically any one who wasn't below the poverty line in today's language.

imports from countries with good Yew were taxed an import tax of 10 yew staves per ton of cargo , Yew was the preferred wood for long bow making. as English Yew was often not suitable for good bows 

the King of France at the same time considered training men in the long bow , but the King was most concerned at the idea of peasants having such powerful weapons and the idea was dropped.

one evil man with a bow is certainly a concern but so much less a concern when a hundred good men of character armed and skilled with the use of a bow stand ready.

this is my take on the quote of Rabbi Hillel who died in 10BC , If you don't do for yourself no one is doing it for you.

his words "If I am not for myself who is for me?"

you could call this , put on your own oxygen mask before helping the passengers around you, but once your mask is on please assist any around you having difficulty.

as long as I am quoting 2K year old wisdom his other quote "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn."


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

Got two dogs.

Skilled in Judo

own firearms.

The only real threat I have is the State of New York.

The rest I can handle.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

JJ Grandits said:


> Got two dogs.
> 
> Skilled in Judo
> 
> ...


Don't sweat the state. You can handle it.

I know that because I know LOTS of New Yorkers who hold the same situational awareness. You're not alone.


Did you see that Californians just got their standard-cap mags back? Even if they are only temporary, Right wins battles sometimes too.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> this is my take on the quote of Rabbi Hillel who died in 10BC , If you don't do for yourself no one is doing it for you.
> 
> his words "If I am not for myself who is for me?"
> 
> ...


I like this one (encourages standing together):
-------------------------------------------
_First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. - Niemöller_​------------------------------------------


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

NRA_guy said:


> I like this one (encourages standing together):
> -------------------------------------------
> _First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
> 
> ...


We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.
Benjamin Franklin


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.
> Benjamin Franklin


That is the problem. Especially in New York.

We are all hanging separately. We have so much power and will not collectively use it.

Our dictator Cuomo (now the highest paid governor in the Country) could have easily been defeated in the last two elections if people who oppose him just got off their fat lazy asses and voted.

The same goes for the rest of the country.

Ever notice how politicians change their tune when everyone gives them the hard stare?

Unfortunately, we do get the government we deserve.


----------



## NRA_guy (Jun 9, 2015)

The problem I have noticed is that conservatives are independent---we are NOT joiners. We do not have the herd mentality. 

Liberals, on the other hand, love to join together in groups. Offend 1 liberal and they all attack you (boycott your product if you are a retailer). 

That basic personality difference is critical in controlling an elected government.

I frequently see general elections in which 1 liberal candidate is running against 2 or 3 conservatives. And the one with the highest vote count goes in. Guess who gets elected because the conservatives split the vote of their base.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

from what I hear mass non compliance is killing the registries in both NY and CA both with only about 5% complying in the most liberal of districts where they know they will be given no quarter by the local law.

if all of you continue to show them how useless their laws are the better. at some point moving banned items over the border to be stored with friends in VT or NH if you think they will get serious.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> from what I hear mass non compliance is killing the registries in both NY and CA both with only about 5% complying in the most liberal of districts where they know they will be given no quarter by the local law.
> 
> if all of you continue to show them how useless their laws are the better. at some point moving banned items over the border to be stored with friends in VT or NH if you think they will get serious.


Laws created like these are long gamers not intended to change anything at once, but rather over time. Transition minds and current thinking and in 10 years or a generation the law won't need to be enforced other than for the outliers.


----------

