ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
why we still need the 2nd amendment today and why government is better off being smaller rather than larger........
she should be fired immediately for screwing the pooch so badly in the Aaron Swartz case
__________________ “ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
__________________ “ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.
Last edited by IllegalContact; 01-17-2013 at 10:09 AM..
The fact that a federal prosecutor drove someone to suicide due to overzealousness makes this necessary...
No one "drives" anyone else to kill themselves.
You've said so yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IllegalContact
its a really bad analogy in case you didn't think about it........natural disasters are far different from the self-inflicted variety. people committed suicide because they lost their life saving when they invested with madoff.....should we pitch in and give the others their money back so they don't do the same? nope.....nobody told them to ivest with madoff, it was their own fault. just like nobody told people to go get pregnant with kids they did not want.
Aaron Schwartz had a long history of depression. DId his current troubles add to his anxiety and depression? I'm sure they did - but, in the end, he chose to commit the act which led to his arrest.
As you say, there are consequences to our actions which we, alone, are responsible for.
doesn't excuse the acts of an overzealous prosecutor basing their case on a 25 year old computer law. an obvious personal ambition drove this to what it was.
the company (JSTOR) did not even want to prosecutre, but that did not stop the ortiz.
this is completely different from any madoff investor
to correlate, this would be like madoff giving the money back to the investor, but the government takes it away and says 'tough' and then the person killing themselves
Aaron Schwartz had a long history of depression. DId his current troubles add to his anxiety and depression? I'm sure they did - but, in the end, he chose to commit the act which led to his arrest.
As you say, there are consequences to our actions which we, alone, are responsible for.
__________________ “ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.
Last edited by IllegalContact; 01-17-2013 at 10:55 AM..
I heard a taped interview the other day with Aaron Swartz. Wow! The interview took place in the mid 90's, which was of course was when the Internet was fairly new. Aaron was a visionary and was able to nail what the Internet could become. I am always amazed with people that write or create something that is still relevant 100 years later. The Internet still is relatively new, but ranks very high in the world's innovations. Aaron Swartz gave the interview when he was 14 years old.
The Second Amendment is just as relevant today as it was when it was enacted.
1.) Protection from tyranny
2.) Protection from foreign threats
3.) Protection of ones person, family, and home
Having a gun in one's house for protection seems very standard to me. I'm not sure why anyone would not consider it unless there were problems related to that in that household - mental illness, history of violence, alcoholism and situations like those where more careful thought is needed.
Living here in Rhode Island my house has:
Generator, canned goods, bottled water, shovel, snow blower, ice melt, candles, small propane tanks, extra batteries, fire extinguishers, all exterior doors with door knob lock, dead bolts, chains and I have 3 guns - a 38, 9mm and an old double barrel shotgun. If I have enough time my choice will be the shotgun with the others tucked in my clothes. The dead bolts should give me the time I need.
This satisfies my thinking for possible emergencies ... as the man of the house I feel it's my responsibility to protect my family. Whether or not I'll have capacity to do so is a separate discussion ... but hopefully I can react as needed. If someone feels the need to have a semi automatic rifle in their house ... I see no problem with that.
I'm not willing to roll the dice - gambling is not my style I would rather be prepared and thankfully the 2nd Amendment allows me the freedom to protect my family as needed.
I have no problem with tightened restrictions of gun laws, better screening to get them, licensing, training, better protection in the mental health category. But I do think there has been a major over reaction to the Sandy Hook tragedy. if the passion was there on this issue where was it after Aurora or before Sandy Hook? True passion of a cause should not need tragedy to bring about more awareness.
I think many people who already hated guns are using it to strengthen their own gun opinions. it's near impossible to protect for everything and sadly there will be more tragedies that will probably have more creative ways to create carnage. Those intent on mass killings ... especially if they want to kill themselves will just go the suicide vest route if they cannot get a gun. or they may go the car bomb route ... more alertness by ordinary citizens and family members is the answer to reducing violent deaths.
Having a gun in one's house for protection seems very standard to me. I'm not sure why anyone would not consider it unless there were problems related to that in that household - mental illness, history of violence, alcoholism and situations like those where more careful thought is needed.
Living here in Rhode Island my house has:
Generator, canned goods, bottled water, shovel, snow blower, ice melt, candles, small propane tanks, extra batteries, fire extinguishers, all exterior doors with door knob lock, dead bolts, chains and I have 3 guns - a 38, 9mm and an old double barrel shotgun. If I have enough time my choice will be the shotgun with the others tucked in my clothes. The dead bolts should give me the time I need.
This satisfies my thinking for possible emergencies ... as the man of the house I feel it's my responsibility to protect my family. Whether or not I'll have capacity to do so is a separate discussion ... but hopefully I can react as needed. If someone feels the need to have a semi automatic rifle in their house ... I see no problem with that.
I'm not willing to roll the dice - gambling is not my style I would rather be prepared and thankfully the 2nd Amendment allows me the freedom to protect my family as needed.
I have no problem with tightened restrictions of gun laws, better screening to get them, licensing, training, better protection in the mental health category. But I do think there has been a major over reaction to the Sandy Hook tragedy. if the passion was there on this issue where was it after Aurora or before Sandy Hook? True passion of a cause should not need tragedy to bring about more awareness.
I think many people who already hated guns are using it to strengthen their own gun opinions. it's near impossible to protect for everything and sadly there will be more tragedies that will probably have more creative ways to create carnage. Those intent on mass killings ... especially if they want to kill themselves will just go the suicide vest route if they cannot get a gun. or they may go the car bomb route ... more alertness by ordinary citizens and family members is the answer to reducing violent deaths.
I think most Progressives think that the state will be protecting them and the reality is that the police have no obligation to protect individual citizens (unless they have committed to some special relationship).