2nd - T3chlady
3rd - Tigercub8189
Bubble - GMOGolf
Congratulations to Tomservo2 on his 33rd NPP victory!
Congratulations to LittleRedElf for qualifying for the NPP Final in December.
Also another congratulations is in order for RJmech, who won the Firekeepers Casino's Labor Day Poker Tournament! He also won a substantial amount in the cash games. Great job RJ!
Here is Faldo's reply to the liberal lawyer who wants a Gun Violence Summit to come up with solutions.
First, thank you for taking the time to respond to my email.
Second, I will also take to the bank that we have a common
ground in constitutional rights, safety and security for all Americans, and as
2nd Amendment advocates.
Third, I did not
mixed terms - necessarily. The proof is below from an on line dictionary.
Summit – (n) a conference,
discussion – usually heads of state
Debate – (n) a formal discussion on
a particular topic in a public meeting
You assumed I used the term ‘debate’ in a verb sense. But you
are correct in assuming that as your summit will turn into a debate - (v)
argument. There is no doubt it will, as emotion is all the ammo the
Left-socialists-communists have. Facts destroy their mantra.
Forth, my ‘rhetoric’, ‘labeling’ and ‘name-calling’ is
rooted in truth and fact. The ‘massive gun shootings’ and ‘senseless violence’
is nothing but the Left’s ‘crisis’ vehicle to carry them to the elimination of
the 2nd Amendment and nothing more.
Now back to your desire for a summit to ‘roll up the sleeves
and get to work’ and ‘shape public policy’ and ‘make recommendations to the
powers that be.’
You cannot have a summit that will meet your goal of
‘reducing senseless violence’, for one simple reason: it’s impossible.
People have hurt
other people since the beginning of time. You cannot change that. No
policy, recommendation or rolling up the sleeves will change that fact. The
reasons that people hurt other people are too varied. I won’t even attempt to
list them all.
You need to break your goal up into different sections for
the reasons the violence happens.
Once you do that, you will soon see how impossible and
flawed your original premise is.
If you pick one ‘cause’ of violence, such as mental illness,
you might have a chance to lower that cause. Note, I did not say eliminate! But
at least better access to mental health care would help. You would need to
graduate a lot more psychiatrists and a lot less lawyers! LOL
I problem solve for a living! It is how I earn money. So let
me give you this scenario.
If you want to “end senseless violence” you have to find
methods that have reduced it in the past. You need to benchmark the best
current process. A possible solution has already popped up. Let’s stop there
for now on that.
If you want to eliminate World Hunger, you would first look
to where there is the least hunger on the planet. Then you would simply copy that
method as a starting point (benchmarking). So, who has the fattest people on
the planet? Who has no one dying of hunger in their streets - ever? Who throws
away more food in a day than some countries eat in a week?
Well that answer is the capitalist – most sacred individual
rights held by citizens - United States of America.
To cure World Hunger, you make every nation capitalist.
Problem solved. Ok, we have the solution. Now, hold a ‘summit’ to discuss this
solution and see how well you are received. LOL
Heck, you would have senseless violence done to you for
suggesting that solution in San Francisco …or Ann Arbor. The Left is the home
of senseless violence. They are anarchists.
Now back to your goal: Where has ‘senseless violence’ been
reduced?
Well the answer to that is also the capitalist – most sacred
individual rights held by citizens - United States of America.
The media is not telling us, but violent crime is down in
the United States. Liberal hell holes still have issues (which also have the
most restrictive gun laws – so we know what does not work), but over all –
violence of all types across the United States is down.
How was this accomplished? Simple, the gun sales explosion
since the communist – America hating Obama election, and the constant drum beat
of Left-socialists-communists discussing taking away the 2nd
Amendment. Liberals scared people into buying more guns! Imagine that.
More citizens with protection – less violence happens. Hmmm,
maybe protected schools would not get attacked as often. Ya think?
Solutions are there, but implementing what works runs into
dictators who want no part of those solutions. Dictators like the Democrat/Socialist/Communist
Party of the United States. Or the UN on World Hunger.
As you see, solutions are possible to ‘reduce’ some types of
‘senseless’ violence, but it flies in the face of those who wish to rule. I
agree that more gun ownership is not a ‘solution’. But it is a deterrent.
Victims, slaves or subjects are people who are not able to defend themselves.
Try as you might, that is where this discussion, summit,
debate - always ends up.
Does this make sense?
Thanks for your time.
Faldo
No comments:
Post a Comment