Jump to content
DaveICURN

DaveICURN

Registered User
advertisement

Activity Wall

  • DaveICURN last visited:
  • 27

    Content

  • 0

    Articles

  • 864

    Visitors

  • 0

    Followers

  • 0

    Points

  1. DaveICURN

    The Violence in our Schools

    No it was a direct question to your statement. I was simply seeking clarification. I also think that the term "American Christians" is disingenuous to the whole. The bad apples spoil the bunch for sure, but there is an important thing that we are fellow Christians must do. Call out the outliers and denounce them. Lumping all Christians together just covers those who make the exception. If we all can stand together and say, "These people don't speak for us!" then we are addressing the problem.
  2. DaveICURN

    The Violence in our Schools

    So that makes it okay?
  3. DaveICURN

    Progressive Income Taxation.

    How does that work again? So Grumpy, greetings as I don't believe we have formally been introduced. Second, are you a proponent of Marx and his teachings? But Jesus was denouncing Ceasar and his role as Emperor as being apart of the materialistic side of the world. Jesus was not against money, as long as it was not changed in the temple, He was against the sin of greed. He advocated for all give freely and not place their love of wealth before the Lord my God.
  4. DaveICURN

    The Violence in our Schools

    I think you have hit the nail on the head. NO ONE, outside of a religious based family/group, is teaching children that we should nice to each other without fear of force. Church is the one place that children learn that its okay to be different, its okay to have problems, it's okay to be who you are, as long as you believe in the Lord my God. And then guess what? The church teaches us to go and spread this message to others! "Hey gay person. I disagree with your lifestyle. If you are willing to come to church and learn about my faith, which includes denouncing homosexuality, then great. But if you don't them i'm still going to be civil with you if you are civil with me." This is the message from every church I've attended. The outliers incite the media and make the whole look bad. On the flip side, schools are cramming compliance and tolerance into children so much that to have a differing opinion is ostracizing to children. "Jimmy was expelled because he called a boy wearing a dress weird and it hurt zir's feelings." Guess what, kids are being told that their entire upbringing (religion) is a lie and they should feel bad about it as it makes some people uncomfortable. How does that make them feel? While were at it, how about the attack on White Men? You are a White Man with Privilege and you should be ashamed of your manly tendencies and demeanor. How dare you teach you son and daughter Harmful Gender Steryotypes! I am offering the most beneficial thing I can to people I will never see. The prayers to the highest of highs that they are giving peace. What else am I to do? "Well you should elect to take away the rights and freedoms of others." Bump that,
  5. DaveICURN

    The President Donald Trump Thread

    I think the most important thing to remember is that not all conservatives agree stock and barrel with the policy agenda. Conservatives cover a wide swing of the right of center, and don't necessarily stick to hard party lines. The main sticking point I find with angry conservatives is the constant grouping of all conservatives at "The Right". That's not to say that conservatives are innocent of this either. But the connotation is made that there is "The Left" and the "Far Left Crazy Ideologues" in conservative circles. I personally believe that the majority is either left or right of center and often times agrees with laws/policy on either side. The most important thing is to have the open communication and exchange of ideas. To continue to call each other Libtards and Trumpsters just demeans people and lessens the opinion of the person saying it.
  6. DaveICURN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Your cause is not futile, but the logic is flawed. You stated, "Think of all of the children's lives saved by such a law" You ask for X= saving children, then we must have Y= stricter gun legislation. You offer no room for compromise in the middle. You assert, through indirect means, that anyone who doesn't agree doesn't care about children. This it not so. This only means that people have various ways of approaching a solution to a problem. On further inspection of data you are correct. I apologize for the wrongful information and have learned something new in the process. Because this is the name of the laws you want to pass. If I don't believe in what the meaning of those words are in this context how can I know if I agree? It is legally relevant to define common sense if you want to pass laws in it's name. Then why are you here? If you are not ready to stand and defend your own cause, then why bother? I have been nothing but respectful and courteous but I am to be cast off? Once again I am here to broaden my own understanding of the debate. I am under no delusion that I am here to change anyone's mind. I just want to have a good dialog with people of opposing viewpoints. Punished how and to what degree? If we are going to dislocate families and throw kids into foster care for an unfortunate accident, then should there be terms and conditions? But responsibilities are taught, not forced. Teaching responsibility is a hard thing to do to a free mind. The threat of force will not make lasting lessons on the person, it takes constant education and reinforcement of positive and negative feedback to make happen. How then do we encourage good and just responsibility, instead of just fining and condemning? Completely agree that this should be a parents number one priority, not the Governments. As are you and I thank you again for sharing you thoughts and feelings on this subject. Where would go to find out more information on your organization?
  7. DaveICURN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Of course baloney, glad to have ya! My major issues with this sentiment, is that it's very open to interpretation. If we are going to talk legality I would like to see something a little more concrete. I would counter that our Government was not meant to keep the population safe from the inside threats but larger global threats. This is why the Second Amendment was formulated. To allow the people to protect themselves against "...a long train of abuses and usurpations...". Agree completely and would support additional formation of agency to ensure this happens.
  8. DaveICURN

    Domestic Terrorism

    No one? You can personally agree on your word that no one wants a total ban? I'm not trying for a gotcha here, I just want to be sure that the implication that you are asserting that no one in Moms wants a total ban. With that said, would you support for a total ban on all fire arms? What about non sport weapons? Just want to get a sense on the scope of your idea of policy. You miss understand. I think proper storage and safety is an important measure that should be taken. I'm saying that some of the legislature proposed places litigation and blame on the owner if an incident occurs in the form of penalties up to jail time. These arguments, to be blunt, are a false trail. If X then Y is never the base for a solid argument. This is also an interesting line of reasoning. Then do you propose that all house place accidents are child abuse? Fell off trampoline and broke arm? Swallowed pills left on floor? Climbed banister and fell onto floor? The acts are awful emotionally jarring and serious events. But these incidents happen every day. You are attempting to protect from the very nature of humans. We are too curious for our own good. I agree that the fault falls on the un-careful parents, but to impose legal action, such as child abuse, is too far. "Sorry you lost your child, here's a $5000 fine and we're taking your other children." I encourage you to watch these series on DefCon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48HUctXZUNw&ab_channel=Christiaan008 These outline the susceptibility to attacks on a variety of safes. Once again, I'm not saying they don't serve a purpose in the home. I'm pointing out the futility of punishing people if their firearms are stolen and used illegally. Why not? It's the Government's job to protect the Second amendment. Why then insulate Government taught children from safety lessons about firearms? Studies have shown that this lessens the curiosity and intrigue in the educated children, thus lessening the chance of a firearm related accident in the home. NRA is a private company and not a part of my concerns. Similarly is the dealing of Moms not my concern. I don't give either money so it doesn't concern me. But it is. The current laws list conditions by a persons family that would initiate an inquiry that would lead to the seizure. Now with the various manifestos and pre-planned messages from mass shooters, some states are now looking into letting teachers, councilors, co workers, even other student submit an official inquiry to allow a search of a suspect. Does it stop at the child/adult in question? Oh no, it encompasses all in the household as well. So if some of these more extreme Red Flags come into play, it will be exactly as you describe. Do you support this? So then do you agree that it is reasonable to, if legal, conceal a firearm on your person if you believe you are entering an area that may be deangerous on your life? I'm wondering how we bring the common sense of the every-man into the legal purview. How can I be judged based on what my neighbor would do, etc. I know it's a cliche, but can I have some sources? Preferably in APA format. :) No madam, everyone is tired of this. However, everyone who want to impose regulations are failing to capture the consent of the people through the omission of one simple problem. Nearly all of the mass shooting are committed by illegal guns. These are not card carrying, regulation following, gun lock using, safe storage, background passing people. These are mentally ill people who use the best tool around for the most harm. And until you can convince America you are not punishing the legal firearm owners, then the cause is a futile one.
  9. DaveICURN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Great! That means we can have a productive discussion about what we don't agree with and attempt to find more common ground. Sensible according to whom? I only ask because I believe this to be the cornerstone of disagreement with both sides. Who gets to define sensible? Would you not agree that there are those out there who would view total ban as sensible? I certainly understand that there are those who would view tanks and automatic weapons as a sensible weapons. Once again, whose common sense are we using. As i'm sure we can all agree from a healthcare perspective, people are not always the brightest in their decision making. So are you, and by extension your organization, saying you know better than they? Well, to be frank, yes they should. According to Giffords law center, https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/child-consumer-safety/safe-storage/; "The features listed below are intended to provide a framework from which policy options may be considered. All firearms are required to be kept disabled with a locking device except when an authorized user is carrying it on his or her person or has the firearm under his or her immediate control." Bolding is my doing. This requirement is not a suggestion. Failure to meet this requirement has the threat of law behind it. This in no way protects the owner, neigh it holds the owner solely responsible for action with said firearm in the event of an accident or theft. Do I think these are good ideals? Absolutely, I have most of the safety features outlined on my own weapons. However I feel this will not change to state of illegally bought and sold guns on the market. I think people in general should be worried by red flag laws. This gives anyone the power to completely disrupt your own life, and safety by reporting you to the authorities as a person of interest. You then lose your Second amendment rights for up to a year while you are investigated. So, your solution to maintain safety is giving people, not professionals mind you, the ability to remove someones rights if they feel its prudent? Yes, this is fine. No qualms here. Interesting though that my state of Oklahoma will be a constitutional carry state starting Nov. 1st. I also have no problem with this law either. But it makes it no less true. I am open for an that will overthrow this line if thinking. Just wondering what number do you consider a mass shooting? I believe most polls place it at 3? Again I agree. One thing I can't get over is how no one is addressing education at home or school? In my elementary days we had hunter safety training once a year in grades 1-6. This is where I was taught the safety and respect for firearms. Would you be against government sponsorship for school age children about gun safety? Thanks in advance for the reply!
  10. DaveICURN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Yes to more mental heath should be the key to this discussion. The disjointed nature of our mental health system leave much to be desired in the day to day activities of people who are in need of those services. It is my belief that many of the mental health issue suffer from a breakdown at the primary level. How are we encouraging people to deal with personal mental health issues when the culture of today is one of, "I want to see results now!". This has led to an increase of patients not continuing medication regiments, sending them into regressive depression. Another attributable factor is the constant self administration of endorphins through group assurance. We can now surround ourselves with those who affirm us and make us feel good. We are slowly taking away our ability to handle negative and stressful situations by insulating ourselves from the things , and people, we don't like. The tools that are used in acts of evil are not themselves evil. To stand on these children's graves and push for "something to be done!" is only a veiled attempt to remove the thing you don't like. Be it guns, knives, hammers, etc.
  11. DaveICURN

    Weight Loss Challenge

    Just remember that your LDL and Chol with rise sharply. If you are at risk for vlockage or already have these issues be aware. I am doing a modified Keto at 60-80 G CHO/Day myself. So far lost 37 lbs in lack 6 months with a cheat day every 2 weeks. My Chol jumped from 86 to 116 in 2 moths. Donating blood next week to see how it has changed.
  12. DaveICURN

    We the people?

    Trump has said release it. His supporters say release it. Everyone is saying release it Not one layperson, not in Washington, is against releasing the documentation that doesn't reveal US secrets. The Right want to settle this matter once and for all, and the Left wants to find the smoking gun. So what the issue? If they do release it, great! All will be seen. If they don't, then the Left revamps the Russian Collusion story for the next 5 years.
  13. DaveICURN

    Net Neutrality is Virtually Dead and That's Very Bad

    Checking in at end of year. No major backlash or issues. It feels pretty pre NN in here.
  14. DaveICURN

    NRA is at it again

    In complete honesty. I don't understand how this is the NRA's fault. They advocate for maintaining a right, they didn't kill these people.
  15. DaveICURN

    NRA is at it again

    My apologies, I was referencing the physicians paper in the NRA story. Of course we don't ignore it, but neither too can we force them to quit. Any abuse of drugs and alcohol all nurses wish would stop. We all recognize that its a problem. However we can't pull the bottle from their lips, or meth out the pipe. So we do what we can, educate. We advocate for understanding of the health risks and benefits of stopping the behavior.
×