Going to Odessa to see my SO WOOHOOOOO!!!!!!!

[Terry&Tigger 4]

I apologize if Terry or Tigger or anyone felt that someone was being personally attacked, threatened, or silenced. I honestly haven't read the whole thread, but I didn't read any sort of attacks. An opinion was expressed and other people expressed a disagreeing opinion. As far as I saw the discussion was structured, civil, and respectful. Unfortunately, the internet can be impersonal and misunderstandings can arise. I don't think any offense was intended.

In the spirit of civil and respectful disagreement, I disagree with your invocation and interpretation of the first amendment. The first amendment is not a carte blanche that says you can say whatever you want and people have to agree with you. That would be both ridiculous and impossible. In the modern world, the greatest threat to free speech is the disbarring of speech that someone deems offensive. The first amendment inherently grants others the right to disagree with you. If not for that, it would cease to exist.

Brad, I am sorry you disagree with the First Amendment as it is written. I never said, nor intended to say, you nor anyone else here were compelled to agree with any point of view. Please understand this, I support the Constitution and will defend it with my dying breath. This is a free country and like everyone else here you have the Right to be wrong any time you may so choose. You also have the Right to misunderstand my meaning; to twist whatever I may say; take things out of context; make assumptions; and to generally make an @$$ of yourself based entirely upon your understanding, or lack thereof. The choice is yours. Life is full of choices and we are all free to make those choices and accept the consequences of decisions made.

I was simply stating, I find it very disappointing, instead of asking for understanding and clarification on a contrary belief, comment or statement EVERYONE seemed to jump to the defensive. Instead of providing facts on ALL sides in support, it all got carried into splinters and tangents in heated emotion. Here was an opportunity for EVERYONE to keep their composure, discuss the topic intelligently and to LEARN from each other. My question is simply this; is it asking too much of "reasonable and prudent men" to request clarificaton and/or further explanation on another person's position or stance on a topic before actually responding? We all have the Right to make ASSUMPTIONS. Wouldn't a truly wise man remove all doubts? In a question of ignorance, even a fool will open his mouth and remove all doubt.

Before I go shoving a loaded gun in my waist band, I'm going to make double damn sure its not loaded, so it doesn't take off my nads because an engineer made a "mistake" in designing the safety. Might be just my youth, but I'd really prefer to keep my equipment in good working order.

Now, if I have offended anyone by sharing these thoughts.... perhaps they should ask questions for clarification before running off "half-cocked" ..... of course the ASSUMPTIONS are entertaining as well.

[LvivLovers 39]

This is starting to get good...thanks!!!

[SMR 368]

Brad, I am sorry you disagree with the First Amendment as it is written. I never said, nor intended to say, you nor anyone else here were compelled to agree with any point of view. Please understand this, I support the Constitution and will defend it with my dying breath. This is a free country and like everyone else here you have the Right to be wrong any time you may so choose. You also have the Right to misunderstand my meaning; to twist whatever I may say; take things out of context; make assumptions; and to generally make an @$$ of yourself based entirely upon your understanding, or lack thereof. The choice is yours. Life is full of choices and we are all free to make those choices and accept the consequences of decisions made.

I was simply stating, I find it very disappointing, instead of asking for understanding and clarification on a contrary belief, comment or statement EVERYONE seemed to jump to the defensive. Instead of providing facts on ALL sides in support, it all got carried into splinters and tangents in heated emotion. Here was an opportunity for EVERYONE to keep their composure, discuss the topic intelligently and to LEARN from each other. My question is simply this; is it asking too much of "reasonable and prudent men" to request clarificaton and/or further explanation on another person's position or stance on a topic before actually responding? We all have the Right to make ASSUMPTIONS. Wouldn't a truly wise man remove all doubts? In a question of ignorance, even a fool will open his mouth and remove all doubt.

Before I go shoving a loaded gun in my waist band, I'm going to make double damn sure its not loaded, so it doesn't take off my nads because an engineer made a "mistake" in designing the safety. Might be just my youth, but I'd really prefer to keep my equipment in good working order.

Now, if I have offended anyone by sharing these thoughts.... perhaps they should ask questions for clarification before running off "half-cocked" ..... of course the ASSUMPTIONS are entertaining as well.

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or Brad (I'm not Brad and never have been), but I'll go ahead and respond for myself.

I'm not quite sure why you've gotten hung up about asking for clarification. This is an internet forum with a moderate turn-around time. If every time I see something written in black and white I respond by asking if you really meant to say that, it's going to become a drawn-out and boring conversation very quickly.

You stated that we were trampling on the 1st amendment when defending the second amendment. I suppose I could have asked you if you really meant that. But since you already said that, I thought that would have been redundant. Up until you started posting, all the discussion in this thread was civil, honest, respectful, and sincere. I saw nothing that suggested a violation of the first amendment. Hence, I disagreed when you claimed that the 1st amendment was being trampled on. An opinion was expressed and opposing opinions were also presented. Nobody tried to silence anyone. You then came and proposed that the 1st amendment was being violated. I see that as a very juvenile and disrespectful response to an otherwise mature and civilized debate.

Up until you started posting, the debate was very logical and had very little to do with heated emotion. I don't think anybody feels threatened and I would like to know what you considered an attack.

You have no idea how comforted I am by the fact that you aren't carrying a loaded weapon.

Brad, I am sorry you disagree with the First Amendment as it is written. I never said, nor intended to say, you nor anyone else here were compelled to agree with any point of view. Please understand this, I support the Constitution and will defend it with my dying breath. This is a free country and like everyone else here you have the Right to be wrong any time you may so choose. You also have the Right to misunderstand my meaning; to twist whatever I may say; take things out of context; make assumptions; and to generally make an @$$ of yourself based entirely upon your understanding, or lack thereof. The choice is yours. Life is full of choices and we are all free to make those choices and accept the consequences of decisions made.

I was simply stating, I find it very disappointing, instead of asking for understanding and clarification on a contrary belief, comment or statement EVERYONE seemed to jump to the defensive. Instead of providing facts on ALL sides in support, it all got carried into splinters and tangents in heated emotion. Here was an opportunity for EVERYONE to keep their composure, discuss the topic intelligently and to LEARN from each other. My question is simply this; is it asking too much of "reasonable and prudent men" to request clarificaton and/or further explanation on another person's position or stance on a topic before actually responding? We all have the Right to make ASSUMPTIONS. Wouldn't a truly wise man remove all doubts? In a question of ignorance, even a fool will open his mouth and remove all doubt.

Before I go shoving a loaded gun in my waist band, I'm going to make double damn sure its not loaded, so it doesn't take off my nads because an engineer made a "mistake" in designing the safety. Might be just my youth, but I'd really prefer to keep my equipment in good working order.

Now, if I have offended anyone by sharing these thoughts.... perhaps they should ask questions for clarification before running off "half-cocked" ..... of course the ASSUMPTIONS are entertaining as well.

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or Brad (I'm not Brad and never have been), but I'll go ahead and respond for myself.

I'm not quite sure why you've gotten hung up about asking for clarification. This is an internet forum with a moderate turn-around time. If every time I see something written in black and white I respond by asking if you really meant to say that, it's going to become a drawn-out and boring conversation very quickly.

You stated that we were trampling on the 1st amendment when defending the second amendment. I suppose I could have asked you if you really meant that. But since you already said that, I thought that would have been redundant. Up until you started posting, all the discussion in this thread was civil, honest, respectful, and sincere. I saw nothing that suggested a violation of the first amendment. Hence, I disagreed when you claimed that the 1st amendment was being trampled on. An opinion was expressed and opposing opinions were also presented. Nobody tried to silence anyone. You then came and proposed that the 1st amendment was being violated. I see that as a very juvenile and disrespectful response to an otherwise mature and civilized debate.

Up until you started posting, the debate was very logical and had very little to do with heated emotion. I don't think anybody feels threatened and I would like to know what you considered an attack.

You have no idea how comforted I am by the fact that you aren't carrying a loaded weapon.

[visaveteran 1]

Well now...a newbie with attitude. OK. Speak right on up. But let me tell you that Brad is one of the more even-handed, reasonable and fair posters. Maybe you've got the wrong guy? But as others have said, I think this is a tempest in a tea pot. Compared to one of our "real" cage matches, this is really softball. Trust me.

One thing I do find distracting and even annoying is when both people in a couple post under the same account. But I wouldn't want to trample on the 1st Amendment...so I'll just muddle through and try to remember which partner is posting.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Brad, I am sorry you disagree with the First Amendment as it is written. I never said, nor intended to say, you nor anyone else here were compelled to agree with any point of view. Please understand this, I support the Constitution and will defend it with my dying breath. This is a free country and like everyone else here you have the Right to be wrong any time you may so choose. You also have the Right to misunderstand my meaning; to twist whatever I may say; take things out of context; make assumptions; and to generally make an @$$ of yourself based entirely upon your understanding, or lack thereof. The choice is yours. Life is full of choices and we are all free to make those choices and accept the consequences of decisions made.

I was simply stating, I find it very disappointing, instead of asking for understanding and clarification on a contrary belief, comment or statement EVERYONE seemed to jump to the defensive. Instead of providing facts on ALL sides in support, it all got carried into splinters and tangents in heated emotion. Here was an opportunity for EVERYONE to keep their composure, discuss the topic intelligently and to LEARN from each other. My question is simply this; is it asking too much of "reasonable and prudent men" to request clarificaton and/or further explanation on another person's position or stance on a topic before actually responding? We all have the Right to make ASSUMPTIONS. Wouldn't a truly wise man remove all doubts? In a question of ignorance, even a fool will open his mouth and remove all doubt.

Before I go shoving a loaded gun in my waist band, I'm going to make double damn sure its not loaded, so it doesn't take off my nads because an engineer made a "mistake" in designing the safety. Might be just my youth, but I'd really prefer to keep my equipment in good working order.

Now, if I have offended anyone by sharing these thoughts.... perhaps they should ask questions for clarification before running off "half-cocked" ..... of course the ASSUMPTIONS are entertaining as well.

To whom are you writing here? I was quite civil in my posts above - and never mentioned the 1st Amendment. Maybe SMR is also Brad? Maybe you confused his response with my post above it? Seriously, when in doubt use the screen handle

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Holy #######! I thought we were talking about the second amendment? we were using the 1st amendment to do so.

As far as shoving guns in waistbands...the engineer was a chap named John M. Browning and the guns I shove in my waistband were designed by him in 1903 and 1905 (altered in 1911) and if there was a flaw in the safety system we would have noted it about 1912. The gun is in the waistband at the small of my back and an accidental discharge may nick my right cheek...yeah, THAT cheek, but my nads are pretty safe. The other ones are double action revolvers that have no safety per se, but who "accidentally pulls" the trigger on a double action?

Anyway, it goes to what I say about confident men with firearms. Some are, some aren't. It is very easy to tell the difference. Even when they don't have a gun.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I was simply stating, I find it very disappointing, instead of asking for understanding and clarification on a contrary belief, comment or statement EVERYONE seemed to jump to the defensive. Instead of providing facts on ALL sides in support, it all got carried into splinters and tangents in heated emotion. Here was an opportunity for EVERYONE to keep their composure, discuss the topic intelligently and to LEARN from each other. My question is simply this; is it asking too much of "reasonable and prudent men" to request clarificaton and/or further explanation on another person's position or stance on a topic before actually responding? We all have the Right to make ASSUMPTIONS. Wouldn't a truly wise man remove all doubts? In a question of ignorance, even a fool will open his mouth and remove all doubt.

Before I go shoving a loaded gun in my waist band, I'm going to make double damn sure its not loaded, so it doesn't take off my nads because an engineer made a "mistake" in designing the safety. Might be just my youth, but I'd really prefer to keep my equipment in good working order.

I thought we were discussing things intelligently and thoughfully? No? Which assumptions were made by whom?

It isn't your youth keeping you from putting a loaded gun in your waistband...it is your inexperience. My nads are perfectly functional.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Gee guys.... thanks for all your help and input in defending my guns....

I do find it rather odd in your haste to defend the Second Amendment your eagerness to trample the First Amendment. Even though I may not agree with Tigger's thoughts on firearms, I do believe she has the right to her own opinions and to express those opinions in an intelligent manner. Many men gave their lives in defense of the Constitution in its entirety..... not just one or two Amendments. Did her comments really warrant the level attacks? Did you honestly (sitting there with your pistols cocked and locked) feel threatened? Really nice way to make someone feel welcome to a new and strange place.

Thanks a million!!

Terry

I am not the least bit threatend and never acted so. Notice that YOUR FIANCEE thanked us for our hospitable behavior and informing her on the issue. #######????????

She came along and gave her unsolicited opinion, which she is free to do and no one complained. Then many people very knowledgeable of firearms gave her direct facts, which she can use or not...it is up to her.

Please do not insinuate that we have a case where Tigger can say whatever she wants and we can only respond "Yes, Tigger, dear" or else Terry will come and slap us around.

You will also notice that when the OP came along and said "Gee I only posted I was going to Odessa" your poor, put-upon Tigger posted "I love this place"! And that was AFTER we had already been discussing the issue. She was doing just fine Terry, dear.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You have no idea how comforted I am by the fact that you aren't carrying a loaded weapon.

Probably a good idea not to, yeah.

[Brad and Vika 129]

Probably a good idea not to, yeah.

[slim 1,525]

Isn't an unloaded weapon just a bulky paperweight?