In which case, the State gets to rape the mother again before granting the abortion.
EAA bans guns at OSH
- Thread starter Tom-D
- Start date
Sure, then it's all a-ok, choice and such
.It's just that the same people who swing around their bible and tell me that their god wants women to have non-viable babies, have no problem with either the death penalty or shooting potential future trespassers on sight
.jesse
Touchdown! Greaser!
Sure, then it's all a-ok, choice and such
It's just that the same people who swing around their bible and tell me that their god wants women to have non-viable babies, have no problem with either the death penalty or shooting potential future trespassers on sight
Personally I prefer the government stay out of people's business - which means let people believe what they want, let women do what they want, let gays do what they want, and let me do what I want with my airplanes, guns, or software. The less problems they try to solve the happier I am.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
I'm starting to like you more and more.
roncachamp
Final Approach
That "choice" is the right to choose to end the life of another.
jlwilson
Pre-takeoff checklist
RyanShort1
Final Approach
I almost agree with that. The only problem is that I believe that there is a mandate for a limited government that punishes legitimate crime. The issue there is that you have two basic choices when you get to that point: either some form of consensus or majority-based (democratic) morality, which is dangerous if a consensus are wrong (Germany, 1940s), or a higher standard. The higher standard that I believe is accurate indicates that abortion and sodomy are both crimes...
Ryan
How can aborting something that has not even been issued a birth certificate be a crime
... And I believe the Catholic church has the market cornered on that sodomy thing and will resist any competition in that arena.
Ok... Lets switch to politics..
.. Personally I think voting in Chicago is not corrupt.
Last edited:
gprellwitz
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2005
- Messages
- 12,762
- Location
- Romeoville, IL
- Display Name
Display name:
Grant Prellwitz
Just to fix something, I mistyped it earlier. Skiles IS NOW in charge of the museum. So he IS the one to ask.
And Bob Noel said "What hasn't happened is someone providing a coherent reason for the EAA choosing to ban firearms."
denverpilot
Tied Down
Thread's still going? I feel a need to shoot something.
airguy
Cleared for Takeoff
jtheune
Ejection Handle Pulled
How can aborting something that has not even been issues a birth certificate be a crime
Ok... Lets switch to politics..
If the end of life is defined as the cessation of brain wave activity then how can the beginning of life be defined any other way? that makes a fetus "alive" after about 3 months.
Ghery
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Messages
- 10,903
- Location
- Olympia, Washington
- Display Name
Display name:
Ghery Pettit
Yes, but the museum is private and if I remember the original post (many pages ago
) the prohibition was in the museum.Because they can.
For a young whipper-snapper he's coming along quite well.
Boy this thread is getting close to SZ material.
airbornejohnny
Line Up and Wait
Maybe in money it costs nothing, but if you are a moral person, taking a human life will definitely cost you. Even in flat out warfare, let alone the ubiquitous "good" shoot. Living with it for the rest of your life is the other side of the bargain nobody seems to think about until after it happens.Unless you are in Florida. You make sure every witness is dead and claim that 'he atttacked me'. Costs you nothing
Avionics are not as easy to remove and use as a firearm locked in a case. Bolt cutters will easily defeat most padlocks.
...and per Wisconsin's law, they therefore (by banning even legal ccw firearms) assume all liability in the case someone were to be assaulted on their property.
I did not look at these links because these all have a clear lack of responsibility at the hands of the gun owners based on the wording of the links. Guns are tools capable of both evil and good. Fatal and permanent injuries also occur from knives, hammers, automobiles, aircraft, rocks, chairs... An adult who would prey upon a child IMO is a coward, but can do so with practically any tool, not just a firearm.
Pertaining to firearms, owning and carrying both, whether in conjunction with each other or individually, while are rights under 2A, carry with them responsibility. All the kids who grew up around me whose parents owned guns, even some whose did not (including mine) learned from a very young age to respect guns. Respect is not fear, just as fear is not respect.
So far as Airventure is concerned, to me it would be no different than the state I grew up in, but that does not mean I have to agree with it any more than a criminal would have to obey the law. It also does not mean that in the unlikely chance one is faced with a deadly threat that they are unable to defend themselves at all, it just means the scale is tipped in favor of the aggressor.
RyanShort1
Final Approach
Ah, two very interesting subjects, but we should leave that off, eh?How can aborting something that has not even been issued a birth certificate be a crime
I support the EAA's right to ban guns on their property, but it sours my opinion of their judgment.
Ryan
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,034
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
I, for one, knew what you meant. Typos like that one are pretty easy for the reader to spot.
roncachamp
Final Approach
How can aborting something that has not even been issued a birth certificate be a crime
Scene: Delivery room
Obstetrician: "It's a girl!"
Mother: "Damn it, I wanted a boy! Kill it."
The doctor dutifully complies with the mother's directive. No birth certificate has been issued, is there a crime here?
MSPAviator
Cleared for Takeoff
You can injure someone you love with your gun. You can threaten someone you love with your gun. You can injure someone you don't know with your gun. You can threaten someone you don't know with your gun. You can injure someone you like with your gun. You can threaten someone you like with your gun. You can injure someone you dislike with your gun. You can threaten someone you dislike with your gun. You can injure someone you distrust with your gun. You can threaten someone you distrust with your gun.
You can be threatened by someone you distrust with your gun. You can be injured by someone you distrust with your gun. You can be threatened by someone you dislike with your gun. You can be injured by someone you dislike with your gun. You can be threatened by someone you like with your gun. You can be injured by someone you like with your gun. You can be threatened by someone you don't know with your gun. You can be injured by someone you don't know with your gun. You can be threatened by someone you love with your gun. You can be injured by someone you love with your gun.
Someone you love can injure someone you love with your gun. Someone you love can threaten someone you love with your gun. Someone you don't know can injure someone you don't know with your gun. Someone you don't know can threaten someone you don't know with your gun.....
Do you really insist on the whole set? I have to come back to this, there just isn't enough energy to list them all now.
roncachamp
Final Approach
None of those can happen to me.
Tom Gresham
Pre-Flight
You also can replace "with a gun" with any number of other objects. The instrument is irrelevant, unless one is spring-loaded to hate or fear firearms.
Can, might, what if, could, etc.
You can also save your life, and the lives of your children and your family, with your gun.
Americans use guns to stop crimes more than two million times per year, according to multiple university studies.
Rough numbers: 30,000 people die from gunshot wounds each year. Half of those are suicides, which are not dependent on the mechanism. (Note: Japan has essentially no firearms, but has twice the suicides of the U.S..) Of the 15,000 deaths remaining, most are criminal-on-criminal actions.
According to the CDC, accidental firearms deaths of children number fewer than 100. All are tragic, but this is far fewer than die in pools, falls, and other accidents.
The National Safety Council has tracked accidental firearms deaths for more than 50 years, and the current number is the lowest (note: not the rate -- the actual number) since they have been tracking this. More people. More guns. The fewest number of accident firearms deaths.
People are saving lives with their personal firearms. Every day.
For the most recent of such studies: http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/WP-Tough-Targets.pdf
You are also one of the pilots who would never have an accident in a general aviation aircraft then ?
Anthony
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 18,478
- Display Name
Display name:
Anthony
Well said Tom.
Again, people out of pure emotion demonizing the inanimate object instead of focusing on the real cause of any harm, the person.
Guns, knives, stairs, pools, hammers, bathtubs, scissors, etc do not cause anything. It is people's misuse or carelessness that cause harm.
Again, people out of pure emotion demonizing the inanimate object instead of focusing on the real cause of any harm, the person.
Guns, knives, stairs, pools, hammers, bathtubs, scissors, etc do not cause anything. It is people's misuse or carelessness that cause harm.
The CATO institute is not a university. It is a PR agency funded and organized by the Koch family to promote libertarian ideas.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
It's really a funny thing. I talk about my University, which has a longstanding firearm-free policy save the campus police. A couple someones immediately put up links to the horrible Va Tech tragedy, which happened on an unarmed campus with it's own police force. No one says anything, including me. That tragedy is a fair example of what can happen to an unarmed group in the presence of a malefactor.
Someone asks point blank what sort of thing can happen if you have a gun that can't happen if you don't. I Google "gun tragedy" and post up the first half dozen things I find. Basically, the same thing. The sorts of hting sthat can happen when a firearm is around. But when I do it, I'm bad and no one has respect for me. Forgive me, but isn't that just a tad bit hypocritical?
That wasn't the question asked.
Yeah, right.
I've respected you. Possibly don't always agree, though.
nddons
Touchdown! Greaser!
Oh, GREAT.
Skiles is from the People's Republic of Madison. 38 square miles surrounded by reality. This puts this whole issue into perspective.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
From the EAA forums -- Hal is a EAA moderator of the forums.
Hi everyone - Here's what I learned after talking to some key people here:
EAA and AirVenture have always had a policy of no firearms allowed on the grounds. There is no change to that long-standing policy. Under the new Wisconsin concealed-carry law, those facilities and events with such a policy must now post it to prevent any confusion.
- Hal
Hi everyone - Here's what I learned after talking to some key people here:
EAA and AirVenture have always had a policy of no firearms allowed on the grounds. There is no change to that long-standing policy. Under the new Wisconsin concealed-carry law, those facilities and events with such a policy must now post it to prevent any confusion.
- Hal
denverpilot
Tied Down
airguy
Cleared for Takeoff
Tom Gresham
Pre-Flight
I don't believe anyone said the CATO institute is a university.
The studies connected to Duke, Yale, University of Chicago, and Florida State University are some of the scholarship on this. See Lott, Kleck, Cook & Ludwig, etc. Researchers on both sides of this issue arrive at basically the same numbers. When longtime anti-gun researchers Cook and Lugwig set out to disprove the 2.5 million defensive gun uses (DGU) per year number, they got grants, did the research, and came up with their own number . . . 3.2 million. Ooops. They then spent four pages of their own study to explain that their own numbers were not accurate.
The National Crime Victimization Survey comes up with lower numbers, widely believed to be due to a quirk/glitch/failure in the methodology of the questioning. If you answer "no" to the question "Have you been a victim of a crime," the researcher then skips the entire section about using a firearm to stop a crime or protect yourself of others. Many/most people who successfully stop a crime or defend themselves would answer that they were not victims, and thus are denied the opportunity (in this survey) to even report a successful DGU.
Anthony
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 18,478
- Display Name
Display name:
Anthony
Epic Fail.
I love how others who don't trust themselves to act properly, want to force their personal restrictions on those of us who do.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
I don't believe anyone said the CATO institute is a university.
The studies connected to Duke, Yale, University of Chicago, and Florida State University are some of the scholarship on this. See Lott, Kleck, Cook & Ludwig, etc. Researchers on both sides of this issue arrive at basically the same numbers. When longtime anti-gun researchers Cook and Lugwig set out to disprove the 2.5 million defensive gun uses (DGU) per year number, they got grants, did the research, and came up with their own number . . . 3.2 million. Ooops. They then spent four pages of their own study to explain that their own numbers were not accurate.
The National Crime Victimization Survey comes up with lower numbers, widely believed to be due to a quirk/glitch/failure in the methodology of the questioning. If you answer "no" to the question "Have you been a victim of a crime," the researcher then skips the entire section about using a firearm to stop a crime or protect yourself of others. Many/most people who successfully stop a crime or defend themselves would answer that they were not victims, and thus are denied the opportunity (in this survey) to even report a successful DGU.
I've read some of these studies, and been massively underwhelmed with the lack of critical thinking and the lack of care in data analysis. Most can't even make it into the peer-reviewed sociological journals, which is already scholarship lacking in the sort of rigor I need to publish.
But let's use our critical thinking abilities for a moment. I am told there are 80 million firearm owners in the US, a number I have no reason to doubt. At the rate of 3 million firearm uses a year, everyone who owns a firearm will pull it once every 25 years. That means just about every firearm owner who reads this will have had to use their firearm (on average) at least once. Everyone will have had to use their firearm at least two or three times during their lifetime. Everyone.
The folks I know personally who own firearms have never used them defensively ever. I know LEOs who have never had to draw their sidearm ever. I strongly doubt 3 million uses to be the case. The FBI estimates I've read are an order of magnitude lower. I don't know their methodology, though it couldn't possibly be worse than the sociological studies I read. I do have some intrinsic faith (possibly misplaced) in the FBI. I don't believe poorly conducted science that defies common sense.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,448
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
I don't give a crap whether people carry or not but that is ridiculous. Some objects are inherently more dangerous than others. That's why we don't let children play with razor blades or loaded guns. You can't hurt someone either intentionally or accidentally with a shovel at 100 feet.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
Forgive me Anthony, I do not want to force anything on anyone. I am as strong a gun-rights advocate as you will ever find. I am also an advocate for truth and critical thinking.
All I pointed out was that there can be negative consequences to gun ownership, just as there can be negative consequences to no owning a firearm. To deny such a thing is ludicrous. There are over 30,000 firearm related deaths a year. I doubt that all 30,000 of those firearm owners purchased their weapon so they could be used in tragedies. It truly can happen to anyone, just as any of us can crash an airplane if Murphy strikes.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,034
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
30,000? What is your source for this?
(I think you may have confused injuries with fatalities)