arma virumque cano (et alia)
Apathy doesn't look so bad right about now.
Apathy is always bad. Ending apathy doesn't fundamentally taking things in the direction that this man went. His answer to ending apathy was to choose evil. Mine is to choose good.
Greg, I'm afraid you have more in common with him than you care to admit, especially if we turn the clock back one week. You were both just guys practicing your Constitutionally protected natural human rights.
Oh? And just where have I expressed any hatred for any ethnic group? Where have I expressed a belief that one group is superior to another by virtue of its genes?I do say that this man had the right to own weapons and to associate with such people as he wished. He had the right to his opinions. When he crossed over into killing, he stepped outside the boundaries of his rights.The trouble is that since your side has no clear definition on what are rights or what is right, you can't see the difference in those things. You have no principles other than safety, a sheep's ideology.
Hate groups and "citizen militias" are just domestic terror groups. Despite the many, many acts of violence they keep being implicated in, they are nonetheless allowed to exist. Other countries see them for what they are and take steps to force them underground and disarm them. Not here. Their "freedom" to spew hate and violence is somehow put above the welfare of our people.http://newtrajectory.blogspot.com/2012/05/timeline-of-militia-murders-plots-and.html
Oregonian, let's count up the constitutionally protected rights that you now wish to take away:Free speechAssemblyKeep and bear armsSome groups get together to plot taking away the rights of others--and yes, I include Ceasefire Oregon in that--while others talk about their beliefs. The fact that you can't tell the difference is a good reason why no one should listen to your proposals.
Baldr's side wants to keep bad guys from having guns, not free speech or assembly or religion.Your side wants to let all the bad guys have guns, including assault rifles and large capacity magazines and body armor, and your side also wants to take away voting rights.Seems like your side are the bad guys. Your side is responsible for a lot of dead kids, murdered spouses, victims of mass killings, including Aurora Colorado.How do you look at yourself in the mirror? Is THAT why you have to fail so badly at critical thinking - in order to engage in self-deception so you can live with yourself? Sad.
How do I look at myself in the mirror? The same as everyone. Light waves reflect off the surface of the glass and hit my retinas.1. I say that rights are rights. This is the argument that drew me to the gun rights position in the first place. If you can pick and choose which rights to take away, ultimately, so can others, and they may go after rights that you care about.2. My side wants to take away voting rights? Apparently, you don't read my comments. You establish that you're an adult citizen and a resident of the area in question, and you get to vote. I'll even go along with ex-cons voting, so long as all rights are restored.3. You say "a lot," but I keep showing you how the numbers are actually small and getting smaller. You ignore that. You focus on guns, as though the tool used is the only thing that matters, but the rate of homicides of all kinds is going down. It's your obsession with control that blinds you.4. On your next comment, perhaps we should enquire as to whether this killer was a member of other hate groups like the Brady Bunch. Perhaps he was a member of the NAACP. The latter organization even gives a discount to prisoners. You seem to think that groups with open membership are bad, except when they're groups on your side of the political spectrum.
Who is going to be the first to post it, I wonder, if and more likely WHEN it turns out this guy was an NRA'er?