Colin Goddard Speaks for 32

[fightthegoodfightnow]

THIS POST IS BEING MADE ON THIS BOARD BECAUSE IT'S A SAFE HAVEN TO 'Discuss gun control laws, the Second Amendment, the use of firearms for self-defense, and the use of firearms to commit crime and violence.'

The Va Tech mass murder by Cho involved the use of fire arms to commit crime and violence and potentially threatens those who oppose gun control laws (with the prospects of legislative reform as reported by many in the media).

Thank you Showtime for a GREAT movie:

http://www.sho.com/site/movies/movie.do?seriesid=0&seasonid=0&episodeid=139425

Or from the movie sight:

http://www.livingfor32.com/

You have done them honor.

I hope you are successful in getting your very modest proposed changes in gun laws.

[ileus]

1. The last pistol and rifle I bought as were Blacksburg.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

7. Good for you.

I'm sure you think you might be the only one to do so.

[pipoman]

2. Complete self appointed nonsense..

Colin Goddard Speaks for 32

Simply because he was at a place with these 32 doesn't give him liberties with their wishes, or their voice. This is illogical as if, say, we were at a political rally for a candidate when gunfire rings out killing me, and 31 others would give you liberty to speak for me, or the opposite, for me to speak for you. I think it is self-aggrandising to suggest such tripe.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

8. Nonsense

It's simply illogical of you to assume that what killed someone will be defended by the person killed.


But heh....living in lala land has it's benefits.

[eqfan592]

15. I saw him make no such assumption.

However, you DO appear to be making an assumption about what those people would or would not defend.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

17. No surprise

I'm sure every single person shot and killed agrees with you.

[pipoman]

27. If even one wouldn't agree,

he is an ass for asserting his beliefs on someone who can't speak for themselves...there is no way to know. Maybe, one or more know that the gun didn't kill them, that a mental case who didn't have adequate access to mental health services killed him. For you to assume you know what the victims would or wouldn't approve of is self-aggrandising...hang onto your chair...get ready...there are plenty of people who disagree with you..I know it's hard to believe and all..

[AtheistCrusader]

51. How do you know it's not 32 people who wish they'd had a gun that day as well?

Well, maybe 31, the Canadian teacher seemed pretty 'against' guns, so i'll give you one.

[DWC]

86. You have no concept of reality.

When actually faced with virtually certain death, the potential victim is hoping for ANYTHING that will stop the threat. So yes, I hold that the victims (at least those not willing being victimized) wanted guns- really BIG guns. And bullets - LOTS of bullets; and other law abiding people with guns and bullets to STOP THE MURDER who was KILLING THEM.

It doesn't matter if the murderer is using a gun, or an axe, or a baseball bat, or a machete or a ... the unwilling victim wants the best, most effective tool possible to stop the threat and nothing beats a gun in the hands of a law abiding individual trained to use it.

Welcome to the real world.

Semper Fi,

[fightthegoodfightnow]

87. Right

Using your ridiculous logic, someone who doesn't want a gun has no one to blame but themselves.

The perception you are facing certain death is often a false one (can anyone say Zimmerman).

I've experienced first hand my boss attempting to use his gun to defend himself in a robbery. He got killed and I didn't. Certainly not worth dying for.

Guns give people a false sense of security. Just ask the mother who kept her gun under a pillow only to have her son get accidentally shot by that same gu.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

88. How Ironic

You own a gun to overcome your fear of 'certain death' and I live without a gun knowing living in fear is not living.

[DWC]

93. You still have not located reality

The actual irony is in your id fight-the-good-fight-now when you actually promote cower in the corner and hope the bad people don't hurt you or that someone else will risk their life trying to defend yours.

By any other name a coward is still a coward.

Semper Fi,

[fightthegoodfightnow]

95. LOL

Too funny.

So now I'm a coward because I don't like guns. Ok- so you need a gun to define what constitutes bravery. I don't.

Irony of irony.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

102. Really

What's illogical is the notion those killed by guns would support your point of view.

[pipoman]

112. Only illogical for someone with your point of view..

again I ask, would you want me to be a mouth piece for you if I was the survivor and you were a fatal victim? I didn't think so, and I wouldn't want you speaking for me. So again I say, Goddard is an ass for making such a stupid assertion..

[fightthegoodfightnow]

115. Trust Me

Last edited Sun Apr 8, 2012, 09:12 PM - Edit history (1)

....he's absolutely NOT speaking for you....LOL.

For the record: You are wrong. You can say anything you want about me when I am dead.....you do anyway when I'm alive.

A lot of people are asses but TOS limit my ability to call it as I see it. But you go for it.....

[Clames]

3. Collin Goddard speaks...

...for the Brady Campaign and not much else. Wonder how much they are paying him to be a professional victim?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

9. So .....

Let's be clear....did you watch the whole movie?

Didn't think so.

[Clames]

10. Let's be more clear...

...I don't need to watch it to know it's a self-righteous load sponsored by the Brady Campaign.



Clear enough for you?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

12. Yea...

Got it....God forbid you actually opened your mind to give someone a chance to express their point of view when you already know it's wrong before you have watched one frame or heard one word.

Yea...it's pretty clear. I know exactly who you are.

[eqfan592]

16. lol, oh yes, not listening to the same tripe we've heard form the same and different sources...

... all over again, in its entirety, is clearly a sign that somebody is not willing to "open their mind."



Nice try. Maybe next time you'll bring something new to the table.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

18. So

...you can come to conclusions about a film you have never seen but I can't about what people killed by guns think about guns.

[eqfan592]

28. Tell me, do you need to watch every single one of Rick Santorums rally speeches...

...to have an idea of what his politics are? There comes a point where you've seen the same thing over and over again from the same people that you get a good picture of where they stand on an issue.

The same cannot be said for assuming what the dead would believe.

And even if I were being a complete hypocrite as you imply, that would not excuse your own hypocrisy.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

55. Didn't answer the question

.

[eqfan592]

64. Yes, actually, I did.

Unless you are just choosing to be as obtuse as humanly possible.

Which of course, I'm sure you are.

[AtheistCrusader]

52. Dead people don't think.

Something seems to have fucked up your sense of past/present/future.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

53. Wow

Seriously.....do you really think if someone killed by a gun could rise on Easter they would be a fan of guns?????

I guess you're not stupid either if you are dead.

[AtheistCrusader]

58. I don't believe in metaphysical nonsense.

Nobody 'rises' ever.

Imagine the implications. Would they have 'considered' anything during the elapsed time, or does time resume when they arise? blah blah blah.

I don't know why you would assume that such a hypothetical 'person' would blame the firearm (a tool) and not Cho himself, and/or the lack of VA state law that would have required the mental health reporting to prevent him from buying a fairly mundane pair of pistols, with 'standard' or 'acceptable' mag capacities.

Fairly presumptuous of you. What if they just wished they had a gun themselves?

Would a person hit and killed by an automobile, driven in an intentionally dangerous manner to intentionally kill the victim, be a fan of cars if they 'rose' on such and such date? If they weren't, would that opinion matter more or less than anyone elses?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

59. Right

You call it metaphysical.
I call it delusional.

But you seem to be making the presumption they would support you so I' m not a fan of what presumptions you think I am making.

[AtheistCrusader]

60. I offered you what if's. I am not the one pretending to be speaker for the dead.

Entirely too presumptuous for me, for exactly the 'what if' scenarios I just listed. (scenarios you did not address at all)

[Air Marshal8]

62. Well, it's your own opinion...if you think it's delusional, nobody I know will disagree.

[Clames]

19. Keep bringing the funny...

...you posts are almost as humorous as Hoyt's....


Yeah, I have a very open mind but I have little patience to listen to some paid parrot of the usual anti-gun hysterics. You are as transparent as they come hon...

[fightthegoodfightnow]

20. Right

...you can judge a movie without seeing it.

Got it. Now own it.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

22. Heh....look

...you don't want to watch the movie...watch the credits.

At least you might know what you are talking about.

[Clames]

32. I've seen the trailers...

...and read enough reviews. I know more about the subject at hand than you do, vastly more.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

36. Nothing

In fact if you actually had an open mind and actually saw the movie you would know that.

[Clames]

42. He's an assistant director...

....in the organization and he is compensated (read: paid) for his preaching. If you actually had the ability to do your own research you would know that.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

48. Right because it's so clear that's what it's all about

.....money......anything but .......GUN REFORM.

[Clames]

50. Gun reform?

Please explain how any of his (read: Brady Campaign) propositions will have any impact whatsoever on the criminal use of firearms. Sorry, somebody who lies about their "military service" to push their agenda isn't concerned with gun control with the aim to actually deter criminal use.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

54. Nonsense

Someone who lied about their military service? Who are you talking about? Citation please.

The film shows people illegally buying guns. THAT is a crime ....".as in criminal activity."

[gejohnston]

56. film shows people illegally buying guns

for example? I don't have cable, so don't tell me "see the movie"

[fightthegoodfightnow]

57. Ok

See it when you can and where you can but until then you don't know the whole story.

[gejohnston]

61. I'm guessing you don't either

but if you are talking about Bloomburg studying at the James O'Keefe school of video editing, no point in bothering. If guns were purchased illegally, why didn't Bloomburg turn the unedited video over to the ATF?

[Clames]

63. Citation is from...

...the paid parrot himself.

“I have exercised my Second Amendment rights numerous times through hunting, going to the range, and I was in the Army for two years."
- Colin Goddard

That part I bolded for you, is a lie.

[rl6214]

65. From what I have found he was in the

Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (AROTC) at Virginia Tech for two years, that is not the same as being in the Army.

http://www.wallsofthecity.net/2011/01/did-colin-goddard-really-serve.html

[fightthegoodfightnow]

69. REALLY?

Give me a break

http://www.goarmy.com/rotc.html

What part of GO ARMY are you NOT seeing in the ROTC program

PATHETIC. But heh way to demonize a patriot.

Hardly what you call a person who has an aversion to use a gun to defend his country.

[gejohnston]

73. he was not sworn in on active duty

that means he was not in the army.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

74. Right

....and he's so anti gun he wasn't prepared to use one for his country.

Subterfuge ...nothing less.

A complete non issue....typical...can't fight on the merits so make a nonissue THE issue.

[gejohnston]

76. no

he lied about military service, that is a big issue to some people.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

77. No

....he didn't lie. It's an ARMY program and you completely missed or ignored the point....he has no aversion to using a gun to defend his country. That's the big deal.

[gejohnston]

78. it is an Army program

but, he had no rank, did not have to follow any of the rules, all he had to do is go to the ROTC class. My son was in JROTC in high school, which is also an Army program, but he was not in the Army. Perhaps he did not lie, in the sense that he does not know how to tell the difference.
I agree with the second part.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

81. At least that's an honest interpretation

I think if he bought into the program he thought he was on the team.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

121. Any of the rules?

To stay in the ROTC program, you don't have to follow any of the rule?

[gejohnston]

131. go to class

wear the uniform properly that day. They are not subject to the UCMJ, they have no rank. A private out ranks an officer candidate.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

135. And that's all folks.....

LOL

[AH1Apache]

141. You are absolutly correct

that is a big issue to this retired army chopper pilot.

[rl6214]

79. Do you really have to act like a jackass ALL the time?

All I did was post a link to a story I found. I did not make a comment one way or the other, just posted what I had found. In NO WAY did I in any way "demonize a patriot". Quit being so damn snarky all the time. Pathetic. Give ME a break.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

80. There You Go Again

Can't talk about guns, so you throw out this personal attack on someone who has no issue with using a gun all to cal into question his honor and integrity.

Pathetic indeed. And that so called link of yours is nothing more than a smear campaign.

[rl6214]

82. Can't take anything at face value, can you?

"Can't talk about guns," The question was raised, all I did was provide a link that disputed the question.

Please show me anywhere i called into question his honor or integrity, I'll wait. Please show anywhere I "throw out this personal attack" in that post, again I'll wait.

The only thing pathetic here is YOU, attacking anyone that has an opposing view to yours.

You are disrespectful to anyone that has an opposing view to yours. You don't like the message, you instantly attack person that made the post or the source.

I stand by what I said.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

84. Right

Because you think I called you a jackass....oh wait.?. I didn't do that.....that's what you called me.

Seems like attacking him and now me is something you do well. Petty.

His work is amazing and the film is great. You disagree? Fine.....but stick to his work or the movie.


From that article:

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

[rl6214]

122. Read it again bucko, yes, I did call you bucko

I didn't call you a jackass, I said you acted like a jackass.

You still can't point out where I attacked him, I'm waiting...You also can't reply to the other post where I found the same thing in an Aol/Huffington post article. Are you going to attack that source also and say they are attacking him?

"Fine.....but stick to his work or the movie."

Are you running this board now? I didn't know you had taken it over from Skinner.

"The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check. "

Just a flat out LIE. They are not dealers, they have not license to sell, they are not businesses and pay no taxes. They are not dealers but you cannot be honest enough to admit that.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

125. Restraint

I'm going to keep my response to that portion of your post where you actually talk about guns.

My post: "The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check. "

Your response: 'Just a flat out LIE. They are not dealers, they have not license to sell, they are not businesses and pay no taxes. They are not dealers but you cannot be honest enough to admit that.'

Did you see the movie? Ok, let's assume what you say is true.......what's your position on individuals selling guns to others without asking names or doing ground checks? You know...straw sales that circumvent the law also known as a loop hole.

[friendly_iconoclast]

132. So did he turn over his unedited videos to the ATF? If not, why not?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

134. Ask him

Or make your own movie.

So to be clear, you think the ATF does a good job with such investigations?

[rl6214]

138. So you're backing away from all your baseless accusations now?

And my position on individuals selling guns "without asking names or doing ground checks" (I assume you mean background checks) is that individuals are not able to do background checks because the system does not allow private individuals (non dealers) to perform those checks.

How are YOU going to work out a system where individuals (non dealers) can access the system without infringing on the privacy of any potential buyers? How would any law that requires private sellers do background checks be enforced when there is no record of any private sale?

"You know...straw sales that circumvent the law also known as a loop hole."

You do know what a straw sale is don't you because an individual selling a gun without asking a name or doing a background check is not a straw sale therefore...no loophole.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

139. Tying knots must have been hard to make that loop.....

Possible Solution----sell only to authorized dealers?

[rl6214]

83. Another link here: Aol/Huffington post

"he enrolled in ROTC, training with M-16s, before deciding the military life wasn't for him."

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/31/colin-goddard-virginia-tech-shooting-survivor-fights-to-tighte/

Tell me again how I am attacking him and how it's a smear campaign.

[friendly_iconoclast]

89. Goddard's lie about having been in the Army is one of those "higher truths" beloved of improvers.

Another example would be the claim that Republicans prevented self-rule for the District of Columbia, when it was
actually Democratic Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton.

The holy cause is more important than verfiable fact, for some.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

107. Huh?

LOL

[beevul]

128. Well said.

"Another example would be the claim that Republicans prevented self-rule for the District of Columbia, when it was actually Democratic Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton."

This is a truth that our resident DC anti-gun types would seem very eager to forget.

It would seem guns - more specificly, clingling to ones ability to deal with guns according to ones biases - ranks higher than voting rights for all DC citizens...to some people.

Odd, that we never hear so much as a peep about it from our resident DC anti-gun posters.


I wonder...who are the real extremists among us...

[fightthegoodfightnow]

68. Documentation?

.

[Clames]

129. Here you go.

Maybe you can figure out how to use this yourself in the future.


http://bit.ly/IdvZls

[fightthegoodfightnow]

130. Of Course

That's what your take away is.......

[Clames]

133. Of course...

....you go and assume things, facts need not apply for you.

[X_Digger]

4. *yawn*

Man is shot by a person who passed a background check, lobbies for changing a law that would have done fuck-all with his own shooting, also pimps for restrictions on magazine sizes, which had no impact on his own shooting.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

11. You obviously didn't watch movie

Are you seriously suggesting this nut case should have had a gun simply because he passed a back ground check?

And what exactly do you mean by 'changing a law that would have done fuck-all with his own shooting'?

And since when is lobbying for change 'pimping'?

Unless of course someone is pimping for the gun lobby.

[X_Digger]

23. I've seen him in person, thanks. Have you?

Colin is pimping for the Brady Campaign- they're paying him to speak- to advocate for a change in the law that would have had fuck-all to do with the tragedy Goddard experience at VT.

Brady Talking Points that Goddard talks about:
1. 10 round caps on the size of magazines. -- Even though Cho used 10 round magazines in his rampage.
2. Prohibiting private sales between individuals. -- Even though Cho passed a background check and did not purchase his firearm from a private seller.

Hell, it's even in the description for the flick on sho.com

This documentary tells the inspiring true story of Colin Goddard, a survivor of the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre in which a disturbed student murdered 32 of his classmates, who becomes a gun control advocate trying to close a legal loophole that allows a buyer to purchase a weapon from a private dealer with no background check.

That make it clearer for you?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

24. Ah

...and still you haven't seen the movie.

Have you?

[X_Digger]

29. I caught it at UVA last spring. Same place I saw him in person.

I'm sure I'll catch it on showtime in May, refresh my memory.

He's been trying to sell it for 18 months.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

100. No

He's done MUCH more.

He's shown the lie and loop holes in back ground checks and straw purchases.

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

[gejohnston]

103. gun owners can not do background checks even if they wanted to

I doubt these were FFLs. If they were FFLs, they were violating federal law. If so, he should have turned the unedited video to the ATF. Or is it real video or a James O'Keefe edit?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

104. Right

...a loop hole.

What evidence do you have the video is a fraud?

Have you even seen the movie?

[gejohnston]

108. not the technical definiton of a loophole

since it was intentionally placed in the law. If you are a private person who calls the, unlisted, number your conversation with the FBI will be something like this....

FBI "FFL number please"
You "private seller wanting to be a responsible seller"
FBI "how did you get this number?"
You "I just want to do the right thing"
FBI "Sorry, can't help you" Click

Evidence do I have the video is a fraud? If you could get an FFL to lose his license and go to prison, wouldn't you turn it in? Isn't witnessing a crime and not reporting it also a crime? VPC could have taken the video to the ATF field office. An ATF inspector would go pay the FFL a visit.
It is either a fraud or he is accessory to a federal crime.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

109. Huh?

Oh good grief. What the f@ck are you talking about?

You go after him (evidence your issue is not the intent of the law or his compliance with any law but his political beliefs).

Tell me...why haven't you reported it as a fraud and him as an accessory to a crime?

Isn't not reporting a crime a crime? LOL........such is your hypocrisy.....

so......again.......have you even seen the film or should I just interpret your non responsiveness as evidence of your circular and delusional logic?

[gejohnston]

114. fraud in this case

would be best described as fake.
I have no idea of his political beliefs other than this,
I never said he committed a crime.
If it is one of the MAIG videos, I've seen them. No, it is not circular nor delusional logic.

If you are in the area, can you stop in and ask why they have an FFL? It is a class 1 dealers license. I would like to know.
1730 Rhode Island Ave NW #1014

https://www.atfonline.gov/fflezcheck/fflSearch.do;jsessionid=0af8c08cce5b72d22c80555420aa633b52b530dcdf7.o75KqAfDmlaLaNuImlfA-BfMnk5N-ArJrxCNaN0Lcybtah0Iah8N-x4TawSLc3yInh9ymkiT-x4Kak4PchmKaxmK-wOSa30K8N4KnNyKb6PDn5XDmlaLaNuIo75KqAfDmlaLaNuImlfA-BfMnk5N-ArJrwaLahuOaN0Rax8T8OexnAnGnlDxo6jxoMbynknvrkLOlQzNp65In0__

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Sugarmann

[fightthegoodfightnow]

116. You wrote

You wrote : 'It is either a fraud or he is accessory to a federal crime.'

Fraud is a crime.

You now state: 'I never said he committed a crime.'

Right. Humorous indeed.

You imply someone at 1730 Rhode Island Ave NW #1014 is committing a crime.

AGAIN......call it in. As you so clearly state, knowing about a crime and not reporting it is a crime.

Laughing my mother f@cking &ss off.

[gejohnston]

118. joking right

only by definition number one, I was using definition number three

fraud
? ?[frawd] Show IPA
noun
1.
deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.
2.
a particular instance of such deceit or trickery: mail fraud; election frauds.
3.
any deception, trickery, or humbug: That diet book is a fraud and a waste of time.
4.
a person who makes deceitful pretenses; sham; poseur.
Origin:
1300–50; Middle English fraude < Old French < Medieval Latin fraud- (stem of fraus ) deceit, injury

Related forms
fraud·ful, adjective
fraud·ful·ly, adverb
an·ti·fraud, adjective
pre·fraud, noun

see above

I actually changed the subject. I implied no such thing. I am asking out of curiosity. You either don't know who that is or you don't get the irony. I can't help but wonder why the VPC would have a license to sell guns. Since you live there, you can ask.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

119. Ok

....according to you he committed fraud or was an accesory to a crime and like him....you didn't report it.

Got it.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

120. Hello

Are you saying fraud is not a crime?

Oh never mind....I get it ....ypu're joking...ha ha.

[X_Digger]

140. That's what I said he did. Cho passed a background check.

Derp.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

142. Good for Chow

....how did his documented mental health issues work out?

Oh...right....he didn't have any....thanks to .........

[X_Digger]

143. Are you just bumping this thread without actually reading any replies?

The state of Virginia "lost" Cho's (not Chow) records, and didn't submit them to NICS as they were required to do.

Your lack of knowledge is showing again.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

144. Right

But heh....keep opposing the efforts of states to keep and share such information and then gosh.....blame the state.

[X_Digger]

145. Guess that answers that question.

Guy gets shot by a person who passed a background check, and then proceeds to push for a law that wouldn't have mattered in his situation.

How stupid is that?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

146. Oh I'd say it's as stupid as ........say.....

......'opposing the efforts of states to keep and share such information and then gosh.....blame the state.'

[X_Digger]

147. Consider this my last post on the subject.

Until you can actually respond with something substantive, instead of replying to yourself (repeatedly) to bump up your own thread, or regurgitating the same straw men that don't address what a poster actually said- I consider your posts as nothing more than baiting.

Have fun talking to yourself. You're not fooling anyone, just making yourself look more and more desperate and shrill.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

148. Oh Good

...you found the ignore button....available to all DU members. Now, you should feel good about your decision.

You've got a lot of unsubstantiated accusations there but, for now, I'll accept you at your word....I'll consider that to be your last post in response to anything I say on the subject of guns.

LOL......very loud.

[Johnny Rico]

5. Given that you describe his proposed guns laws as "very modest", what do you advocate?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

13. View the film

...if you truly want to know.

[Johnny Rico]

21. When you described the proposals in the film as "very modest", that implies

that you are in favor of less modest proposals. What would those be, exactly?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

25. Watch the movie

...and then you'll know.

[Johnny Rico]

26. All that would tell me is which proposals you characterize as "very modest".

I'm curious which proposals you advocate that the film does not.

Why are you so reticent?

[friendly_iconoclast]

30. We know what Goddard advocates. What do *you* advocate?

You seem...reluctant to discuss your proposals.

[Straw Man]

33. So ...

Watch the movie

...and then you'll know.

You have no interest in discussing the issues, and are merely here to shill for the movie. Got it.

Some might call it pimping.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

70. The issues are raised in the movie

You should already know them.

[Straw Man]

71. Yes.

The issues are raised in the movie

You should already know them.

I do know them, as do most of the other posters here. Tell me again why we're supposed to see this movie.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

75. You're smart

Last edited Mon Apr 9, 2012, 12:08 AM - Edit history (1)

Figure it out

[fightthegoodfightnow]

101. Closing the Loop Holes

.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

6. and ?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

14. So?

LOL

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

34. clever!

[fightthegoodfightnow]

99. Smart

We can do this forever.....the depth of the discourse arguably matches the intellect of some.

[friendly_iconoclast]

31. Any good reason to value Goddard's testimony over that of Suzanna G. Hupp?

Or should they carry equal weight?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

37. You watch

You decide.

[friendly_iconoclast]

43. Why do I need to see the movie for you to answer the question? Stop shilling.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

46. Decide Yourself

In post 31 you asked 'Any good reason to value Goddard's testimony over that of Suzanna G. Hupp?
Or should they carry equal weight?'

I responded watch the movie and you decide.

Now you write 'Why do I need to see the movie for you to answer the question? Stop shilling'

Have you heard his testimony?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

98. More Film

What's your reaction to this

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

[pipoman]

35. If Goddard really wanted to effect change which may have helped this situation

he wouldn't be pushing for revisions which, even in place at the time wouldn't have effected a single aspect of this incident. He would be pushing for easy access to mental health services and addiction services, opposing the current system of zero access unless one can pay for the services or is ordered into a facility by a court. When will one of these victims of the insane push for change which could have helped?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

38. Who says he is not?

Have you seen the entire movie?

[X_Digger]

39. You've called it a 'great' movie.. does that mean you've seen it?

If so, where did YOU see it?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

40. See Post 1

Already answered.

[X_Digger]

41. No, you called it a great movie.

I can call 'War Horse' a great movie- without even having seen it.

Have you seen it, or not?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

44. Good grief

Yes I've seen it. You may call movies great, bad or whatever without ever seeing them. I don't.

As to where I saw it, see original post.......on Showtime on Demand.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

45. YES

Have you?

[X_Digger]

47. Yes, at UVA last spring.

It doesn't show up in my 'on demand' yet, and the next showing on showtime is in May.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

49. Good

At least you have seen it.

I saw it on OnDemand through Showtime...Comcast carrier.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

97. Film

What's your response to this

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

[pipoman]

113. What in the hell does this have to do with my post?

The guy is an idiot for appointing himself the mouth of the dead, he is an idiot for chasing a solution which had dick to do with his situation, he is an ass for being a mouthpiece for the bloominidiots band of fools..

[fightthegoodfightnow]

117. Right

Got it...you think he's an ass.

Let me know when you are in DC and I'll tell you what I really think in person since I can't do so without violating TOS....and I promise to do so without the need of having a gun to defend myself.

Tell me do you always call people you disagree with .....an ass and an idiot which has dick to do with anything.

[DanTex]

66. A brave man.

In contrast to the gunslinging vigilante wannabes that the NRA crowd likes to glorify, here is a man who exhibits actual courage. Standing up to the NRA, knowing all the right-wing smears that are going to be hurled in his direction, takes some courage.

I can't say that I would want to be the object of disdain for hordes of militant gun fanatics, but his experience narrowly surviving a gun massacre has obviously given him the conviction to stand up for what is right. Which is a good thing. The fight against gun violence and against the the NRA is not the easiest struggle at the moment. But it is an important one, since guns still take 30,000 lives every year in this country, far more than the rest of the industrialized world combined.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

67. Agree Completely

Thank you for posting. It's nice to see someone appreciate what he's done rather than demonize him.

[Straw Man]

72. Disagree partially.

In contrast to the gunslinging vigilante wannabes that the NRA crowd likes to glorify, here is a man who exhibits actual courage. Standing up to the NRA, knowing all the right-wing smears that are going to be hurled in his direction, takes some courage.

I agree that he is a brave man who has the courage of his convictions. I think he is wrong and misguided, but that doesn't diminish his courage. I think his real courage lies in his willingness to continue to confront what must have been a horrifying experience, rather than in his willingness to endure having his feelings hurt by those nasty NRA meanies.

What I disagree with is the calumny you continue to heap on people who successfully defend themselves against violent assault. Your insinuation that their courage isn't "actual" is mealy-mouthed and hypocritical. You are quite content to have your lifestyle protected by an armed military and police force, but would begrudge individuals the right to bear arms in their own defense.

Did I hurt your feelings? Courage, man! You can take it.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

85. Interesting

Last edited Sun Apr 8, 2012, 04:38 PM - Edit history (1)

Sound arguments and for that I can appreciate this post.

You write:'You are quite content to have your lifestyle protected by an armed military and police force, but would begrudge individuals the right to bear arms in their own defense. '

Let's talk about the differences:
Let's talk about the professionalism and training each gun community has in armory-one consistent and one irregular.
Let's talk about the differences in who the enemy is- presumably external enemies and internal enemies and why there are different standards.
Let's talk about with who claims the authority to use force between armies and individuals.
Let's talk about how those arms are kept, stored, deployed and used.
Let's talk about the difference between crime and war.
The standard you say is to treat each as equal.

They are not.

[Straw Man]

124. Thanks, but don't put words in my mouth.

The standard you say is to treat each as equal.

They are not.

Obviously there are differences between the training and authorization to use deadly force between the military, law enforcement, and private citizens. The legal system codifies these distinctions. However, the fundamental right to use deadly force in defense is held in common. Some would eliminate the individual right. I am not fond of the phrase "state monopoly on the use of deadly force." Yes, the use of deadly force should be subject to the rule of law, but to propose that only the agents of the state should be authorized to use it is to take a giant step toward fascism.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

126. Nonsense

If someone is going to use guns to overthrow their notion of a facist government, they really shouldn't expect their government's permission.

[Straw Man]

127. I may be called Straw Man, but ...

... that doesn't give you carte blanche to put words in my mouth.

If someone is going to use guns to overthrow their notion of a facist government, they really shouldn't expect their government's permission.

That's not at all what I'm talking about, but thanks for playing.

I'm talking about governments that deny their citizens the right to defend themselves against crime. A government that subordinates individual rights to a spurious "greater good" is essentially a fascist government. It's what I call the "take one for the team" mentality.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

96. Amen

Agree completely and thank you for standing up for what you believe.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

90. How does...

..."The Va Tech mass murder by Cho..." "...threaten(s) those who oppose gun control laws..."

I oppose some gun control laws. I don't feel threatened.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

91. Good for You

You don't feel threatened....no doubt you have a gun......for hunting.....and not because fear for your life.

From the same link that says Goddard was not in the Army but the ROTC states:

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

92. To set the record straight...

...I don't "have a gun....for hunting" nor do I have showtime.

BTW, thanks for the prompt reply.

Is there any new or specific info in this production?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

94. So...

....you have a gun for self defense predicated on the assumption you fear that without it you will not survive an assault or violent crime. Is that a fair statement?

My experience is different.

What's your reaction to

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

105. re: "...you have a gun for self defense predicated on the assumption you fear..."

Let me steer you in the right direction. I don't own a firearm of any description. I don't carry a firearm owned by another for my employment.

Your experience is "different" than what?

My reaction to:

The film later goes along with Goddard to gun shows in Ohio and Texas. There, using a hidden camera, he captures dealers and gun owners more than willing to sell him firearms without so much as asking his name, let alone running a background check.

...is, (not knowing the if the laws of OH or TX require private sales to (somehow) run a background check) ... AND??? If the question is "Should private sales be subjected to background checks?" then I would say that's certainly reasonable but up to the legislatures of the state in question.


My reaction to:

"Living for 32" is a "great educational tool" to demonstrate why the gun show loophole that allows anyone to buy a firearm from a private seller without a background check must be closed, he said.

...is that I'm unable to comment specifically since I don't subscribe to showtime. Having said that your question mentioning the "gun show loophole" is misleading as there is nothing specific to a gun show about the sale of firearms between private individuals. I believe the mayor's group has begun referring to this more correctly as the "private sale issue" or something like that. I would find it acceptable for any state to mandate an NICS check by law enforcement or an FFL provided privacy is maintained and cost is low.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

106. Good

After all that we agree the law should be changed. Correct?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

110. Some of them...

...should be changed. Which particular law are you asking about? The private sales law maybe?

[fightthegoodfightnow]

111. Agree

You state regarding private individual sales.....'acceptable for any state to mandate an NICS check by law enforcement or an FFL provided privacy is maintained and cost is low.'

Agree......except the part about costs. The cost in human life is lready too high....any cost for such a check would be less.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

123. re: "agree"

I was asking a question. Is it the private sales issue you are asking about?

It seems to be, so as I said, if the legislature passes the law I'm okay accepting it. I am neither for nor against it. The NICS system is designed to give a "yeah/nay" on a purchase within seconds in 90% of all cases. I don't see how it's fair to charge more than $2/minute.

If you encourage a high cost system, people will deliberately circumvent the law.

[PavePusher]

136. You are arguing with another bowl of Jello.

This one seems a different flavor from our Northern variety, but only in verbiage. The texture remains the same.

Somewhere, a pair of knitting needles was abused, methinks.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

137. I had a...

..Dutch Uncle who, as a child, had a Belgian Hare, but that's another story.

His opinion was that red jello, regardless of its heritage, (raspberry, strawberry...) was all the same, as well.

[fightthegoodfightnow]

149. Different Flavor

What are you talking about?

Eatting jello with knitting needles?

Oh never mind.....back to guns.

[PavePusher]

150. Oh dear FSM...

[fightthegoodfightnow]

151. Oh darling Pavepusher.....

....did you say something?

About guns?

Didn't think so.