Excellent questions in terms of the video content. My opinion on one is that setting age limits via Government is useless at best. And you have made that point in a way, that literally one second too early and you go to jail, one second later and you're fine. It's the same with any age limit. I say, get the Government out of this, leave it up to the parents to decide for their kids. If not, well heck, there's already young teenage gang members out there "packing heat" as we speak.
The right to bear arms is absolute. Why can a 7 year old child go in to a hardware store and buy a hammer which he can use to kill someone while they sleep? Regulating every part of peoples lives is a slippery slope and goes against everything America was founded for, thats why I believe guns should not be regulated at all. They are tools which can be used in any way, for good or evil, government has no place in this matter, the responsibility is in the hands of the people to use tools safely.
As with everything else that the government tries to control, I believe the solution is not with control or prohibition but with education. If every single person on earth had a gun and knew how to use it, the phrase "the strong vs the weak" would not exist for humans. For those who don't get it, who would be the stronger between two people with guns?
@tatman8509 actually you are responsible for others if u shoot me walking down the street because you don't know how to safely handle a weapon you get charged with man slaughter. I never once said i was anti gun i'm quite pro gun but responsible gun ownership. If a person owning a gun is a danger to them self and others in my view that's wrong and if you cant safely handle a firearm in my eyes you are a danger to your self and others.
@longstar550 "IF" is a really big word... Forcing people to comply with rules made by people that base their entire argument on IF is the reason for the sorry state of humanity in it's present state. Mommy, I want to play outside. Sorry son, what if.... Pure idiotic fear mongering. What you don't seam to fathom is that prohibition starts with limitation. Rules and restrictions DO NOT prevent accidents. Your point is based on the fear of something that may or may not happen. Scared much?
@tatman8509 there's a if as in maybe i should wear a jacket if it rains or a if i might get shot randomly by people not handling potentially lethal weapons. You choose to take a very close minded stand point and only look at extreme ends of the spectrum. Im not saying ban all guns. I'm saying make responsible gun ownership mandatory.
@longstar550 ok, sure, the minute you get criminals to agree with the same requirements... Again, fear is NO reason to base a position that affects everyone else. I don't give a shit how safe you want to feel, you do NOT have the right to require ANYTHING of me or anyone else. If I hurt you I go to jail, with or without requirements, I still go to jail. So why if the sentence is the same would you make people pay for licensing so you could feel some illusion of safety?
@tatman8509 if you shoot and kill me by mistake please tell my family that you hard the right to irresponsibly own a firearm. why should owning a firearm be different from driving a car? We don't consider it unjust that we have to take a test to drive why should guns be different?
@longstar550 did you have to go to a family class to start one? I would think that maybe knowing how to be a responsible parent would be more important than knowing how to drive. Or how about using a hammer? Or maybe a shovel? Are these not dangerous items if used improperly? Your argument is based on the fear that something may or may not ever happen, and that is asinine. Speaking of driving... Did I miss the report that said there are NO accidents caused by licensed drivers?
@longstar550 or how about you show me proof that you went through a culinary school, otherwise you may hurt yourself or others if you start a fire or don't know how to use a chef's knife. Sound asinine enough for you yet? Or how about registering your thoughts, you may be thinking about hurting someone and thus should prove you are not a threat by going to a school and paying for a license to think those thoughts. That is the basis of your argument... Sad, pathetic and naive.
Ok first the age limit im 15 I am responsible but I agree with the law because there are irresponsible kids ok weed when I used drugs I carried a gun with me never shot anyone that includes weed and pills also I have cp and distonia and if I was having a bad day I don't leave the house
Age doesn't matter, if you are under 18 then it would be the parents decision whether or not to have their kid have a gun. Until you give a reason why you shouldn't own a firearm, commit a crime, or a doctor sees that a person is a danger to society, then everyone should have the right to protect themselves. A person who is sick and is prescribed medicine shouldn't be banned from protecting themselves, and what, rely on the police, yeah f-en right.
Everyone has the right to bear arms. Maybe someone with the "shakes" wouldn't want a gun because he doesn't want to accidentally shoot himself. People who are a danger to themselves are with or without a gun, and that is why most have a sort of guardian to look after them, and wouldn't allow gun ownership. Druggies, if and when they commit a crime with or without a gun, their right to own one is gone.
@patruick94 Also, one would argue emphatically, that sport/competition are two things that help the human race survive and get along. As such, there are fire-arms that are geared for very specific purposes of target shooting. The utilization of these kinds of fire-arms in every day life would be impractical.
So, uh, yes, guns do have more than on specific purpose and again, you'd be a buffoon to argue otherwise.
@patruick94 A hammer has but one purpose, maybe two, if it has claws. That is, to drive nails into things and pulls nails out. A tool is not designated a tool, because of the varied uses you may or may not get from it, so please quit trying to be obtuse about it.
A gun is a tool. Killing for food and killing to defend yourself and your family from harm, are two very valid reasons for something to exist. You're a buffoon if you wish to argue otherwise.
I'm 16 and I personally think the gun law regarding age is perfectly fine. I highly doubt many teens are ready to own a gun yet, but for the ones that are, I prefer the idea of giving them legal permission to own a gun at the consent of the parents. The parents know how responsible their kid is, you don't need to impose a test for everyone. Granted, there are exceptions, but no rule or law is perfect.
You can have a CCW and drink alcohol, which makes you ten thousand times more prone to violence than dope. Either make the law consistent and ban CCW holders from being able to drink, or cease your injurious legislation.
I don't mind some regulation of weapons by the government, and the idea of testing for competency seems reasonable. Implementation...that's tricky.
I don't believe people under 21 should be in the military. If this society won't trust them with a handgun or a bottle of Scotch, then don't expect them to fight for you. They shouldn't be exploited like that. Btw most of my friends are perpetually stoned and own guns without incident.
I don't like gun laws and I wouldn't mind giving guns to everyone who is of age, but the person with Parkinson's disease needs to be able to make a call as to whether they can or can not effectively use a gun without endangering others.
All these gun laws need to be loosened up, if everyone had a gun to protect themselves I believe there would be less crime in the world, but since these laws have taken over, some people cant own a firearm, and it would be easier to create an unlawful act against someone who cant defend themselves, in other words "if they outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns." we have a right to defend ourselves with a firearm and since the 2nd amendment supports that we need to support it.
I believe that a person has the right to own a firearm such a handgun but the must be able to understand the implications of that firearm at all times such as when they are on a controlled substance, or they happen to forget to take medication. If they are incapable of thinking in such a way they should not have this right. I understand my logic is full of holes such as know when a person truly understands.
@cutlerylover totally unrelated, there is a show beginning on Tuesday night on the national geographic network titled, "doomsday preppers". Didn't know if u had heard, thought u might be interested
The most exciting thing it's asking yourself about all that questions. I dont like people who just accept what other people tell them without questioning things...
@TacticalFleshlight The RIGHT to defend yourself and your family NEVER goes outdated. The right to be ready against an abusive government or hostile body NEVER gets outdated.
I'd also like to know how the 3rd amendment is "outdated". I think you're going to take it for dumbest Canadian I've talked too.
The people should own firearms, the government should be disarmed. We can handle ourselves, well, that is unless your scared. In that case, only the strong survives (strong willed, minded etc..). The men would be tough again, as well as the women. We'd defiantly be more free. Over the past couple of centuries, we as men and women have become weakened and more docile..pretty much, domesticated..and placed in big cages, molded like clay, into the visions of the power elites to play with.
I feel everyone has the natural right and oblligation to defend themselves. Though this is common sence, I'm glad its explicitely spelled out in the 2nd amendment as a reminder to our natural rights.
I feel everyone has the natural right and oblligation to defend themselves. Well, pot lady with the gun can get/employ a bodyguard with a machinegun I guess thought it will probably break her budget.
@patruick94 If a "gun" is a tool, used to kill, then that would make it an "arm" would it not? The same arm that is supposed to be available for people to keep and bear.
Strictly speaking the bill of rights and the constitution limit what the federal government can do but each state can make any law they want to restrict anything. If the people don't like it they can vote with their feet.
@PilgrimLad the constitution is the grand law of the land, and in it you will find Article 6 Section 2 that requires all states to hold the constitution as the grand law of the land. So the states are in violation of the constitution when they infringe on our rights to keep and bear arms.
@TheHossUSMC True our rights should be absolute but they are not in practice. My point is that the States have greater power and less limitations than the Feds, well that was until some of the Nation States decided to separate themselves form their prior union agreement but that didn't work out too well for them. Anyway I'm for as little govt' as possible. Go Ron Paul!
I do not mean to offend anybody by the following. I believe that to buy a firearm you should have a backround check and phsyc evaluation no matter what. The fact that someone has a disease or takes a certain drug should not decide wether or not they are allowed to purchase or use a firearm. If a person can claim and prove that they are responsible enough to handle the responsibility than they should definatly be able to have a firearm.
@XxZ3NYxXIII So firearms are to keep the government in fear of the people, yet you want that very same government to decide who gets one? Sounds smart.
@TheHossUSMC I mentioned the government nowhere in my comment and my point was that normal people are totally entitled to it no questions asked but felons and people with handicaps should have to prove to the company or retailer that they are responsible
I think that 18 should be the limit. As well as I think 15 should be the driving age without all the hoops they make kids jump through these days to drive at 16. The other day on my motorcycle going 70 on the freeway a very elderly person nearly killed me when he cut me off going around 40. He never even realized that I nearly rearended him and landed on his hood despite my honking, despite my lights, despite the speed limit was 70 and the flow of traffic was going around. Young people get hosed
on the marijuana issue I think they should not be striped of there rights I think it should be left to them... if they feel that they can handle the firearm wile one the meds thats great but if there worried they can leave it behind wile on the meds..i know thats not a great carry practice taking it and leaving it but for this situation i feel that this should up to the user .. and if they do mess up they will most likely be tried and a judgment will be placed on the individual
What we think or what actual neurological doctors know or even what psychologists know. We the citizens do not make the laws, we have no part whatsoever in deciding what laws we want in our country.
We live in a democracy which is the same as a monarchy it's just called different and we pretend to elect the head king who will save us all and so on.
@2011movietrailers "We the citizens do not make the laws, we have no part whatsoever in deciding what laws we want in our country." Viva la Revolution?
jeff plain and simple.. there should be no gun laws, treat guns like you treat cars, after all there are more killings with cars then guns in america, and if people want to kill themselfs let them, freedom has a price and that price is you might not like what someone does but they and you are free to do it, one restriction leads to more
@bigmilk2003 Does this apply to convicted felons? Just curious. What about children, can a 8 year old own a weapon? In my opinion freedom is not the right to do whatever the fuck you want, it is the right to do what you want as long as it does not infringe on another's freedoms. I really don't have a particular problem with most of what your saying but comparing guns to cars is silly. Cars can be used as tools for transit, guns have no alternative use other than as a weapon.
@rawrified101 yes it applies to convicted felons, look at the big picture, felons that have access to guns would force everyone else to have them , also what if the fellons are felons for non violent crimes? dont they deserve to protect themselvs? and if everyone is armed that means less crime because more bad guys get killed, as for kids dont they have to lern sometime? do rights go into effect at a certin age? and guns serve as a deterent and a tool for frrding yourself..
@bigmilk2003 It seems that your opinion on more gun ownership equaling more dead bad guys is based in two premises the first being that good guys are more capable of using fire arms and the second being that if all restrictions are removed more good people will own fire arms. Do you honestly believe that both of these things are true (as i believe they would be for your theory to hold water). How does this theoretical world bode for those who cannot operate fire arms due to physical inability?
@rawrified101 we would give people who had no hands and could not hold the gun a mind controled laser, free of charge, and yes no gun laws means everyone is armed, its how it was for centuries before everything got legislated, so what im saying is not a theory but an actualy fact that was in place and got us to this point we are at now, fact is criminals are criminals because there are to many light sentences and stupid laws now, less crime in olds says when they got hung in publi
Walk into Philly, into areas where the criminal element is thick and see if that "allowed" sequence has any relevancy what so ever.
Police hardly venture into some neighborhoods, much less want to stop certain people in those neighborhoods, so the term "allowed" is irrelevant.. heh.
A gun is a tool. A hunting device, or a self defense device.
Whether it means killing is or not is really irrelevant. Hammers were made, to aid in building shelters and other things, to help humans survive.
Guns and other devices were made to aid in obtaining food and materials, to help humans survive, as well as made to aid in defending against attackers, again, helping in survival.
Actually, that's not exactly what all prescribed medications say. There are quite a few that say don't operate a motor vehicle until you know how it affects you.
Quite a big difference in wording and thus, meaning there.
ANYONE WHO IS IMPAIRED SHOULD NOT BE HANDLING A FIREARM. PERIOD. PRESCRIBED OR NOT, IF YOU THINK ITS A RIGHT THAT THEY SHOULD THEN OKAY, SO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO DRINK ALCOHOL AT 21 BUT ITS ILLEGAL FOR ME TO DRIVE WHILE DRUNK??? AND CARRY CONCEALED, ONCE YOU TAKE A SIP OF ALCOHOL AND YOU ARE CARRYING CONCEALED YOU ARE ALREADY BREAKING THE LAW NO ONE SHOULD EVER HANDLE A FIREARM WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANYTHING THAT WILL IMPAIR JUDGMENT
@361VSE Uh no, one is not necessarily breaking the law if they take a sip of alcohol while carrying, openly or concealed.
Want a real shit kicker? I can open carry and go have a beer, here in PA and there's not much you shouting, sensitive types can do about it, but eat shit and shut the fuck up about it.
@361VSE Driving's not a right, it's a privilege granted you by the commonwealth, where in you are allowed usage of public through-ways, after proving you meet certain criteria. Ignoring or not meeting that criteria instantly revokes your right to be on public highways.
Owning a fire-arm, however, is a right.
With that said, if someone acts dangerously with a fire-arm, that is when one should be concerned... Not whether they are intoxicated or not.
There were no need for footnotes to the 2nd Amendment when it was originally written. Why does there have to be now?? There weren't drunks, potheads, 8 year olds, and mentally retarded types back in the 1700's??? THINK!
I dont think we can compare now to the 1700's they had muskets and other peashooter rifles we cant compare that to an AR15 or a Avtomat kalashnikov 47 laying down 15-30 rounds on a hair trigger
@fullm3taldoc I know this is a little late, but your reasoning is flawed. You're right, they had muskets, and so did the government they were fighting. Are you seriously not aware that they no longer have muskets? So are you suggesting that we use muskets instead of AR 15's to fight the enemy that is using high tech weapons we supplied at one point or another? If revolution were to happen, would you not want to be as well armed as your enemy?
I defiantly agree that it should be based on maturity not age but i don't know how they could test that. I am 15 and my local gun shop owner wants me to take over his shop when i am 21 or bc he is wanting to retire
about six years ago i was told i was bi polar, two years ago i quit taking my meds and i do have my good and bad days. but my point is iv been brought up around guns my whole life , hunting ,target shooting and useing a gun for any thing other than that has never crossed my mind. my point being i think it would have to be done on a case by case basis.
@HumbleWillis to be a controlled substance a drug has to be on the governments controlled substance schedule which antibiotics are not, so no they are not a controlled substance.
A couple of thoughts. First, the Bill of Rights pertains to the protection of human rights. A government permit is not about providing those rights; it is about denying those rights and replacing them with a privilege for select people. Also, the Founders believed all people have these rights, not just American citizens.
Second, children and mentally retarded people have guardians who are responsible for them. So hold them responsible. Why does the gov't need to get involved?
We need to be very careful saying a certain group should not longer be able to have firearms because the same laws will be used against all of us. My rule would be you can have a firearm unless you abuse the privilege.
Retardation is an ambiguous term. Not every person with a mental deficiency is prohibited from owning a gun. When it comes to mental disorders such as bipolar disorder, I think it's important to look at what level, be it 1 or 2, of bipolar disorder these people are afflicted with. Also, there is no way to ensure that these people are taking their medication.
no they cant carry a gun the number one sidaffect of pot is paranoia i dont want some guy that smoke abunch of pot shoot me cause he thought i was following him
@synRdave and you know this how? Have you ever smoked pot? The number one side effect is relaxation. Paranoia is generally associated with caffeine, nicotine, speed, and cocaine. Get your drug stereotypes right next time you try to bash potheads.
@tatman8509 Paranoia is also readily associated with Marijuana..There is more than ample evidence through experience and scientific study to establish this as fact. Scientific study shows that THC acts differently in different parts of the brain and does, indeed, cause paranoia. So, next time you try to defend potheads from drug-stereotypes, you might want to make sure YOU get it right.
@illogicalmethod what scientific study? Oh, you mean the one conducted by the people who make it illegal... Really? I have been smoking for 30+ years now and never, and I mean NEVER have I been paranoid. Paranoia is fear and anxiety, and anyone that would experience that from smoking weed has a fundamental fear of not feeling normal... Thus, when experiencing change from any drug interaction, they fear the unknown parable and become paranoid or fearful of the outcome.
@tatman8509 Oh bother, why do people with logic problems attempt to argue facts, based upon their personal experiences? How many times you've smoked and "not been paranoid" is completely irrelevant to the actual facts of the situation. As for what personal experience means.. For every brain cell you pop, trying to argue this point, I can get at least 10 people who legitimately felt paranoia after consumption of THC and marijuana in general.
@tatman8509 You see, different parts of the brain react differently. Yes, at lower levels, THC does, indeed, produce a calming effect. However, at higher levels and interactions with different parts of the brain, weed, does, indeed, cause paranoia. These studies were and are done by chemists that don't give a flying fuck about the legality of it, but were and are purely curious as to how it actually affects someone.
You're free to go find these studies, once you decide to remove your head...
@tatman8509 .. from your ass and use logical deduction and not simply formulate an argument based upon your inability to relate "cause/effect" and concluding that because you've never personally felt "paranoia" that, therefore, it must be an anomaly or a flaw with the user.
Of course, you're free to completely ignore all scientific evidence and formulate your own theory, however, only an idiot would attempt to equate that unsubstantiated nonsense as anything remotely resembling truth.
@tatman8509 ... and F.Y.I. I think Marijuana should be legalized, so do the vast majority of my friends and family. Some of those are law enforcement, doctors or certified EMT's..
Each one of them, thinking it should be legal, will still tell you it can and does, cause paranoia.
There are many active users, who've been using it, at least as long as you, if not more so, that tell you paranoia can come from usage. So, cut it with the bullshit strawman arguments please.
@illogicalmethod site one, just one study that it causes paranoia in a person that does not suffer that same effect with any other drug. And to you sir I say you are full of shit... You formulate your words in a way that makes you sound intelligent, but you still lack proof. I have used, observed and questioned, but because I don't have a Phd, you dismiss my findings over a source you never produce? Try again troll, talk to me when you aren't so wet behind the ears and have lived a little.
@tatman8509 Wow, there is so much wrong with your argument.
Neuropharmacology- Daniela Parolaro. There's one study for you, you're free to look it up.
Now, here's what's wrong with your theology "you have used.."
Yes and you think you're the only one?
"observed..."
Not the only one.
"questioned..."
Here's the difference. I've done all of the above and there is scientific study to back up what I'm saying. You, on the other hand, use personal experience to formulate a standard that is...
@illogicalmethod you have got to be about the longest winded douchebag ever... Do you touch yourself why thinking up these narcissistic diatribes? What are you, like 23, 24 maybe. Do you think trying to talk down to me will convince me that my years upon years of experiences is wrong just because you read a couple of articles you looked up on google? Explain will you how people in these "test groups" given placebos exhibit signs of paranoia? You do know what a placebo is right?
@illogicalmethod hahaha, you are a fucking joke dude. You mean the study published by a company with ties to arms dealing? Oh wait, that wouldn't have something to do with government ties would it? They tested fucking rats you MORON, but I guess that makes sense to a guy with a brain the size of a rat....Try again douchebag...
@tatman8509 ... draw a conclusion that is very similar to humans. Hell, what do you think they test drugs on BEFORE they get tested on humans? MORON. I'll give you a hint, it isn't human.
"..but I guess that makes sense to a guy with a brain the size of a rat..."
You have no clue about the world, do you? For someone who's proclaimed to spend so much time traveling abroad, you must of done all that while your head was lodged firmly in your ass-crack.
@illogicalmethod and how many commercials do you see daily from attorneys with lawsuits against the very same people who say that it's been tested on animals? I would say you have no clue about the world except what you have read about it from the safety of your parent's home. Try again shill, you are a pathetic excuse for a man, that get's his jollies trolling my postings. If I died today, I would still have more of a life than you would have in 2 lifetimes.
@tatman8509 "and how many commercials do you see daily from attorneys with lawsuits against the very same people who say that it's been tested on animals.."
More correct question would be, how does a lawsuit negate the fact that things are tested on animals, or for that matter, how does a lawsuit show that reactions displayed in test animals aren't also displayed in humans?
@tatman8509 Sorry, the "test groups" of what I cited, didn't have any placebos... Why don't you actually look up the frikkin study I cited, than come back to me. If you have trouble reading it, perhaps I can find you a tutor in the English language.
@illogicalmethod no placebos?... wow, so there was no counter study to disprove their findings, how convenient. You are just another dumbass, grasping for straws to support your dumb ass views. Go fuck yourself buddy.
@tatman8509 "You do know what a placebo is right"?
Sure I do, placebo's are irrelevant.
Plenty of people who smoke weed, do not simply exhibit signs of paranoia, they act out-right paranoid. Studies on the effects of the actual different parts of the brain, showed behavioral patterns very similar to paranoia. You are the ONLY moron in the world, that argues Marijuana doesn't cause paranoia..
@illogicalmethod "Paranoid thoughts are our way of trying to understand things. They are attempts to make sense of events. It's perfectly natural to try to understand the world around us - and the way we feel inside. But when we're stressed and feeling low or anxious or irritable our explanations are likely to be pretty negative. We think the worst - and often we think the worst of people around us." - Institute of Psychiatry
@tatman8509 ... frankly, ridiculous. You know why, in trials, medicine is given to a large group of people and the results and effects of MULTIPLE people, are recorded? Do you know why medicines may cause a reaction in some, but not others? Or are you too stupid to understand this basic principal... Different people have different sensitivities and may react differently to chemicals.
@tatman8509 You've not once produced any other source, but yourself. You are a hypocrite, demanding behavior of others that you, yourself, do not exactly really want to follow. All the information is readily available for you to find, yet you refuse to find it and stick to your little bubble.
The problem is, however, is that I'm not saying anything bad about marijuana, I'm just saying that it can, indeed, cause paranoia. Something you seem extremely butt-hurt over...
@illogicalmethod I would guess the amount of effort you have put into all your writing would show you are the one that is all butt-hurt... boo hoo, did somebody's wittle feeling hurt that you feel this need to try and put me in my place? You do realize that I have been laughing at you the whole time... The only people that get paranoid are scared little shits like you, I don't give a fuck what you say. Being scared of being caught does not count as paranoia, it's self preservation. So fuck you.
@illogicalmethod again, I don't get paranoid, so I have no guilt, or are you too fucking stupid to get that. You are the scared little bitch, not I. You and your friends are the ones that feel paranoia or FEAR when using an illegal substance for fear of being caught by the authorities, otherwise what exactly are you paranoid of when you tried it? Maybe you are just scared of everything and need something to blame for your fears. Maybe you should dwell on that for a few and get back to me, pussy.
@tatman8509 "I don't get paranoid, so I have no guilt."
Guilt is not necessary for the feeling of paranoia.
"You and your friends are the ones that feel paranoia or FEAR when using an illegal substance.."
Nice try, except you neglected something here.
First, is that we didn't feel it all the time, whether we felt it or not, was contingent upon how much we smoked and the quality there in of what we smoked.
Second, you'd have to assume that anytime we used, was illegal or that there...
Self preservation indeed. However, that's irrelevant, as that's highly different than flipping shit over every single little noise and being so on edge, that it ruins it for everyone.
@tatman8509 Would you care to cite where I said I hung out with pill poppers and crack-heads? Oh right, I didn't. Nice, when facts don't present what you want them too, go right to making shit up. Sorry, YOUR PERSONAL OPINIONS DO NOT EQUATE TO REALITY.
@tatman8509 "You didn't say it, but yet you don't deny it.."
I don't need to deny anything for it to be false, champ. There are likely many things alleged about me, if I don't deny it, does it make it any more or less truthful? Hardly.
"FACT: a theory is an opinion, not a fact."
Actually, a theory, as defined, is a coherent group of tested general propositions. Commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction.
When you have people using marijuana, one expected, not uncommon occurrence is the exhibition of paranoia. There's a reason that many people(even stoners, imagine that) relate paranoia when depicting the usage there-of.
@tatman8509 As far as this, you seem to think that I am speaking out against weed. Sorry, it should be legalized.
When I used to smoke it, the reactions it would cause with me, would vary, depending on HOW MUCH I smoked, as well as the quality of the weed. If I smoked too much, I would get paranoid. Otherwise, yes, it would be relaxing. The same kind of experience has played out with many friends, family and people I've hung/smoke with through-out the years.
@illogicalmethod if it was FACT it would be absolute, and seeing as you stated earlier that not everyone experience's the same effects, it is not absolute...So, it's not fact, but a theory or opinion. Keep drinking the koolaid buddy.
@tatman8509 "if it was FACT it would be absolute, and seeing as you stated earlier that not everyone experience's the same effects, it is not absolute."
This couldn't be anymore of an absurdity. However, just in case, let's look into some other things.
Anaphylaxis or Anaphylactic shock is an allergic reaction to certain things. However, the things that cause Anaphylaxis in some humans, don't cause them in others. However, this does not negate the fact that those things absolutely cause it.
@tatman8509 Migraines:: See, certain things can trigger severe headaches and other problems, called Migraines. These triggers WILL trigger a headache, however, they will not always trigger a migraine and they will not cause a headache with everyone, especially people who are not afflicted by the genetic disorder of migraines. So, no, when discussing chemicals and how they react with people and under what circumstances they cause or don't cause something...
@tatman8509 An absolute reaction in the same individuals, or in multiple individuals, is not expected nor required, in order to attribute a certain reaction as being caused by said chemical. Thus the reason why any medication ever prescribed is given with a list of possible reactions, with the list of minor reactions and more severe reactions. With more severe reactions that would require going off that medication and seeking medical intervention. If those reactions were "absolute" they...
@tatman8509 ...wouldn't prescribe those medications for treatments, would they? No, they wouldn't. Sorry, try again.
"Keep drinking the koolaid buddy".
What kool-aid are you alleging I'm drinking? What falsification do you believe I'm falling prey too? How, if I am for the legalization of marijuana and how, if I don't think it's bad, like some people allege it is, am I falling prey to anything?
@illogicalmethod is the world flat? Is the Earth the center of the Universe? These were once science facts,so was Vitalism, Phlogiston, Spontaneous Generation, and the list goes on... But then again, if you had lived long enough to see that what was once thought of fact can be disproved later with advances in science and technology. Wrap your little brain around that... I don't care what your position is on the legality of Cannabis, you base your facts on an ever changing science and ignorance.
@tatman8509 "you base your facts on an ever changing science and ignorance."
So, uh, you don't base any of your beliefs in science? Yes, science can change, if there is something to absolutely change that. However, there are things in science that are absolutes and enough to base a belief in.
Gravity, theory of relativity... Etc.
Perhaps you would care to show me how some things changing negates other beliefs or makes it absurd to put a belief in science....?
@illogicalmethod look... I am done with your double talking little punk ass. Say what you will, you are still a bitch, and NO MATTER what you think or say will change that. I could go on and on about this or that and you would refute me just to be a little bitch, truth or not. Grow the fuck up. I give you examples and you choose not to address them, thus meaning you are guilty of the same shit you accuse me of, talk about being a hypocrite. Do you believe in GOD? I bet you do...pathetic
A stoned guy with a gun will be alot less dangerous than someone who is drunk with a gun, or on heavy pain meds
shitfuckershit 1 week ago
Excellent questions in terms of the video content. My opinion on one is that setting age limits via Government is useless at best. And you have made that point in a way, that literally one second too early and you go to jail, one second later and you're fine. It's the same with any age limit. I say, get the Government out of this, leave it up to the parents to decide for their kids. If not, well heck, there's already young teenage gang members out there "packing heat" as we speak.
DemonHide 2 weeks ago
i say the pre ban should be gone to many guns are hidden from the public by that
jjbros195 2 weeks ago
but im a bipolar, very responsible 15 year old.... o.O
reply to this
redeyethor1 2 weeks ago
The right to bear arms is absolute. Why can a 7 year old child go in to a hardware store and buy a hammer which he can use to kill someone while they sleep? Regulating every part of peoples lives is a slippery slope and goes against everything America was founded for, thats why I believe guns should not be regulated at all. They are tools which can be used in any way, for good or evil, government has no place in this matter, the responsibility is in the hands of the people to use tools safely.
WarThug13 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from cutlerylover 3
As with everything else that the government tries to control, I believe the solution is not with control or prohibition but with education. If every single person on earth had a gun and knew how to use it, the phrase "the strong vs the weak" would not exist for humans. For those who don't get it, who would be the stronger between two people with guns?
MrCaleb 3 weeks ago
@MrCaleb the better shot...
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 actually you are responsible for others if u shoot me walking down the street because you don't know how to safely handle a weapon you get charged with man slaughter. I never once said i was anti gun i'm quite pro gun but responsible gun ownership. If a person owning a gun is a danger to them self and others in my view that's wrong and if you cant safely handle a firearm in my eyes you are a danger to your self and others.
longstar550 3 weeks ago
@longstar550 "IF" is a really big word... Forcing people to comply with rules made by people that base their entire argument on IF is the reason for the sorry state of humanity in it's present state. Mommy, I want to play outside. Sorry son, what if.... Pure idiotic fear mongering. What you don't seam to fathom is that prohibition starts with limitation. Rules and restrictions DO NOT prevent accidents. Your point is based on the fear of something that may or may not happen. Scared much?
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 there's a if as in maybe i should wear a jacket if it rains or a if i might get shot randomly by people not handling potentially lethal weapons. You choose to take a very close minded stand point and only look at extreme ends of the spectrum. Im not saying ban all guns. I'm saying make responsible gun ownership mandatory.
longstar550 2 weeks ago
@longstar550 ok, sure, the minute you get criminals to agree with the same requirements... Again, fear is NO reason to base a position that affects everyone else. I don't give a shit how safe you want to feel, you do NOT have the right to require ANYTHING of me or anyone else. If I hurt you I go to jail, with or without requirements, I still go to jail. So why if the sentence is the same would you make people pay for licensing so you could feel some illusion of safety?
tatman8509 2 weeks ago
@tatman8509 if you shoot and kill me by mistake please tell my family that you hard the right to irresponsibly own a firearm. why should owning a firearm be different from driving a car? We don't consider it unjust that we have to take a test to drive why should guns be different?
longstar550 2 weeks ago
@longstar550 did you have to go to a family class to start one? I would think that maybe knowing how to be a responsible parent would be more important than knowing how to drive. Or how about using a hammer? Or maybe a shovel? Are these not dangerous items if used improperly? Your argument is based on the fear that something may or may not ever happen, and that is asinine. Speaking of driving... Did I miss the report that said there are NO accidents caused by licensed drivers?
tatman8509 2 weeks ago
@longstar550 or how about you show me proof that you went through a culinary school, otherwise you may hurt yourself or others if you start a fire or don't know how to use a chef's knife. Sound asinine enough for you yet? Or how about registering your thoughts, you may be thinking about hurting someone and thus should prove you are not a threat by going to a school and paying for a license to think those thoughts. That is the basis of your argument... Sad, pathetic and naive.
tatman8509 2 weeks ago
Ok first the age limit im 15 I am responsible but I agree with the law because there are irresponsible kids ok weed when I used drugs I carried a gun with me never shot anyone that includes weed and pills also I have cp and distonia and if I was having a bad day I don't leave the house
marlbororman111 4 weeks ago
The brain(frontal lobe) hasn't developed fully at 15...it fully develops around 22-23 years old. Gun ages are fine atm IMO.
Jsmooth7444 4 weeks ago
most european countries took the easy way out of this disaster :D so there are just no guns allowed at all...
mr1hanky 4 weeks ago
Age doesn't matter, if you are under 18 then it would be the parents decision whether or not to have their kid have a gun. Until you give a reason why you shouldn't own a firearm, commit a crime, or a doctor sees that a person is a danger to society, then everyone should have the right to protect themselves. A person who is sick and is prescribed medicine shouldn't be banned from protecting themselves, and what, rely on the police, yeah f-en right.
luminosity2083 4 weeks ago
Everyone has the right to bear arms. Maybe someone with the "shakes" wouldn't want a gun because he doesn't want to accidentally shoot himself. People who are a danger to themselves are with or without a gun, and that is why most have a sort of guardian to look after them, and wouldn't allow gun ownership. Druggies, if and when they commit a crime with or without a gun, their right to own one is gone.
luminosity2083 4 weeks ago
@patruick94 Also, one would argue emphatically, that sport/competition are two things that help the human race survive and get along. As such, there are fire-arms that are geared for very specific purposes of target shooting. The utilization of these kinds of fire-arms in every day life would be impractical.
So, uh, yes, guns do have more than on specific purpose and again, you'd be a buffoon to argue otherwise.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@patruick94 A hammer has but one purpose, maybe two, if it has claws. That is, to drive nails into things and pulls nails out. A tool is not designated a tool, because of the varied uses you may or may not get from it, so please quit trying to be obtuse about it.
A gun is a tool. Killing for food and killing to defend yourself and your family from harm, are two very valid reasons for something to exist. You're a buffoon if you wish to argue otherwise.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
I'm 16 and I personally think the gun law regarding age is perfectly fine. I highly doubt many teens are ready to own a gun yet, but for the ones that are, I prefer the idea of giving them legal permission to own a gun at the consent of the parents. The parents know how responsible their kid is, you don't need to impose a test for everyone. Granted, there are exceptions, but no rule or law is perfect.
TheLPsyche 4 weeks ago
You can have a CCW and drink alcohol, which makes you ten thousand times more prone to violence than dope. Either make the law consistent and ban CCW holders from being able to drink, or cease your injurious legislation.
I don't mind some regulation of weapons by the government, and the idea of testing for competency seems reasonable. Implementation...that's tricky.
ToothpickMcBrainy 1 month ago
I don't believe people under 21 should be in the military. If this society won't trust them with a handgun or a bottle of Scotch, then don't expect them to fight for you. They shouldn't be exploited like that. Btw most of my friends are perpetually stoned and own guns without incident.
INbredMonarchy 1 month ago
can you show us tose display cases in the background?
djbutch123 1 month ago in playlist More videos from cutlerylover
I don't like gun laws and I wouldn't mind giving guns to everyone who is of age, but the person with Parkinson's disease needs to be able to make a call as to whether they can or can not effectively use a gun without endangering others.
Masterofdisaster151 1 month ago
I want your oppinion!!!!!
RWW124 1 month ago
All these gun laws need to be loosened up, if everyone had a gun to protect themselves I believe there would be less crime in the world, but since these laws have taken over, some people cant own a firearm, and it would be easier to create an unlawful act against someone who cant defend themselves, in other words "if they outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns." we have a right to defend ourselves with a firearm and since the 2nd amendment supports that we need to support it.
coyote545454 1 month ago
hey everyone i am having my first knife givaway custom KNIVE GIVEAWAY lol check ot my channel follow the rules and good luck.AND jef y dont u enter?
BPCUTLERY 1 month ago
I believe that a person has the right to own a firearm such a handgun but the must be able to understand the implications of that firearm at all times such as when they are on a controlled substance, or they happen to forget to take medication. If they are incapable of thinking in such a way they should not have this right. I understand my logic is full of holes such as know when a person truly understands.
MantaRay786 1 month ago
@cutlerylover totally unrelated, there is a show beginning on Tuesday night on the national geographic network titled, "doomsday preppers". Didn't know if u had heard, thought u might be interested
dawgpoundsoldier 1 month ago
The most exciting thing it's asking yourself about all that questions. I dont like people who just accept what other people tell them without questioning things...
qnximg 1 month ago
I feel the second is as outdated as the third. In Canada it is a privilege not a right to own a firearm. Pull your head out of your ass america!
TacticalFleshlight 1 month ago
@TacticalFleshlight The RIGHT to defend yourself and your family NEVER goes outdated. The right to be ready against an abusive government or hostile body NEVER gets outdated.
I'd also like to know how the 3rd amendment is "outdated". I think you're going to take it for dumbest Canadian I've talked too.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
I'm legally blind as of 11/7/2009 I gave up my right to drive and had to surrender my permit. But I can still shoot long guns.
TheBuffaloChicken 1 month ago
so someone should have their permit revoked because they just got out of the dentist's office?
FatGuyWithAKatana 1 month ago in playlist More videos from cutlerylover
it should be like 25 atleast
Rimorox 1 month ago
The people should own firearms, the government should be disarmed. We can handle ourselves, well, that is unless your scared. In that case, only the strong survives (strong willed, minded etc..). The men would be tough again, as well as the women. We'd defiantly be more free. Over the past couple of centuries, we as men and women have become weakened and more docile..pretty much, domesticated..and placed in big cages, molded like clay, into the visions of the power elites to play with.
CentralFloridaBoy 1 month ago
I feel everyone has the natural right and oblligation to defend themselves. Though this is common sence, I'm glad its explicitely spelled out in the 2nd amendment as a reminder to our natural rights.
trailkeeper 1 month ago 4
I feel everyone has the natural right and oblligation to defend themselves. Well, pot lady with the gun can get/employ a bodyguard with a machinegun I guess thought it will probably break her budget.
trailkeeper 1 month ago
Shall not be infringed. I wonder what part of that people dont understand.
whiteknightef 1 month ago
shall not be infringed. period.
whiteknightef 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
shall not be infringed
whiteknightef 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
shall not be infringed. period.
whiteknightef 1 month ago
shall not be infringed. period.
whiteknightef 1 month ago
Comment removed
PilgrimLad 1 month ago
My opinion is that the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED for any reason:
"Why not" you say? Well this article spells it out:
"Interesting read: THE UNABRIDGED SECOND AMENDMENT by J. Neil Schulman (Literary Analysis of the 2nd amendment).
Use a search engine to find it. It's a published article on the web.
( w_ _.largo.org/literary.html )
CrypticCRICKET 1 month ago
@patruick94 If a "gun" is a tool, used to kill, then that would make it an "arm" would it not? The same arm that is supposed to be available for people to keep and bear.
TheHossUSMC 1 month ago
Strictly speaking the bill of rights and the constitution limit what the federal government can do but each state can make any law they want to restrict anything. If the people don't like it they can vote with their feet.
PilgrimLad 1 month ago
@PilgrimLad the constitution is the grand law of the land, and in it you will find Article 6 Section 2 that requires all states to hold the constitution as the grand law of the land. So the states are in violation of the constitution when they infringe on our rights to keep and bear arms.
TheHossUSMC 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheHossUSMC True our rights should be absolute but they are not in practice. My point is that the States have greater power and less limitations than the Feds, well that was until some of the Nation States decided to separate themselves form their prior union agreement but that didn't work out too well for them. Anyway I'm for as little govt' as possible. Go Ron Paul!
PilgrimLad 1 month ago
you'd have to be an american to confirm your right to own a gun. we free people don't ask if may...we know we can. many of us do...so can you.
LeonardLeather 1 month ago
niggas, jailmeat, and retards shouldnt be able to.
quadguy112895 1 month ago
gunskinny is stand up guy...
weaponseducation 1 month ago
I do not mean to offend anybody by the following. I believe that to buy a firearm you should have a backround check and phsyc evaluation no matter what. The fact that someone has a disease or takes a certain drug should not decide wether or not they are allowed to purchase or use a firearm. If a person can claim and prove that they are responsible enough to handle the responsibility than they should definatly be able to have a firearm.
XxZ3NYxXIII 1 month ago
@XxZ3NYxXIII So firearms are to keep the government in fear of the people, yet you want that very same government to decide who gets one? Sounds smart.
TheHossUSMC 1 month ago
@TheHossUSMC I mentioned the government nowhere in my comment and my point was that normal people are totally entitled to it no questions asked but felons and people with handicaps should have to prove to the company or retailer that they are responsible
XxZ3NYxXIII 1 week ago
I think that 18 should be the limit. As well as I think 15 should be the driving age without all the hoops they make kids jump through these days to drive at 16. The other day on my motorcycle going 70 on the freeway a very elderly person nearly killed me when he cut me off going around 40. He never even realized that I nearly rearended him and landed on his hood despite my honking, despite my lights, despite the speed limit was 70 and the flow of traffic was going around. Young people get hosed
Ultimatemxcn 1 month ago
on the marijuana issue I think they should not be striped of there rights I think it should be left to them... if they feel that they can handle the firearm wile one the meds thats great but if there worried they can leave it behind wile on the meds..i know thats not a great carry practice taking it and leaving it but for this situation i feel that this should up to the user .. and if they do mess up they will most likely be tried and a judgment will be placed on the individual
laxrat224 1 month ago
I think everyone should carry phazer's with them. And cellphones that beep when you flip them open. Maybe even a spiffy spandex suit.
InstantlyDiscredited 1 month ago
BTW... Oregon is pronounced "Or-eh-gun" with the accent on "Or."
piobrick 1 month ago
Yes, because if not our dumbass government would take it way too far
imdb021 1 month ago
It is totally irrelevant.
What we think or what actual neurological doctors know or even what psychologists know. We the citizens do not make the laws, we have no part whatsoever in deciding what laws we want in our country.
We live in a democracy which is the same as a monarchy it's just called different and we pretend to elect the head king who will save us all and so on.
2011movietrailers 1 month ago
@2011movietrailers actually we live in a constitutional republic.
TheHossUSMC 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@2011movietrailers "We the citizens do not make the laws, we have no part whatsoever in deciding what laws we want in our country." Viva la Revolution?
ToothpickMcBrainy 4 weeks ago
jeff plain and simple.. there should be no gun laws, treat guns like you treat cars, after all there are more killings with cars then guns in america, and if people want to kill themselfs let them, freedom has a price and that price is you might not like what someone does but they and you are free to do it, one restriction leads to more
bigmilk2003 1 month ago 18
@bigmilk2003 well said sir!
TheHossUSMC 1 month ago
@bigmilk2003 In North Carolina if I kill you with my car I get probation go figure that one out.
Fujisuka 1 month ago
@bigmilk2003 Does this apply to convicted felons? Just curious. What about children, can a 8 year old own a weapon? In my opinion freedom is not the right to do whatever the fuck you want, it is the right to do what you want as long as it does not infringe on another's freedoms. I really don't have a particular problem with most of what your saying but comparing guns to cars is silly. Cars can be used as tools for transit, guns have no alternative use other than as a weapon.
rawrified101 1 month ago
@rawrified101 yes it applies to convicted felons, look at the big picture, felons that have access to guns would force everyone else to have them , also what if the fellons are felons for non violent crimes? dont they deserve to protect themselvs? and if everyone is armed that means less crime because more bad guys get killed, as for kids dont they have to lern sometime? do rights go into effect at a certin age? and guns serve as a deterent and a tool for frrding yourself..
bigmilk2003 1 month ago
@bigmilk2003 It seems that your opinion on more gun ownership equaling more dead bad guys is based in two premises the first being that good guys are more capable of using fire arms and the second being that if all restrictions are removed more good people will own fire arms. Do you honestly believe that both of these things are true (as i believe they would be for your theory to hold water). How does this theoretical world bode for those who cannot operate fire arms due to physical inability?
rawrified101 1 month ago
@rawrified101 we would give people who had no hands and could not hold the gun a mind controled laser, free of charge, and yes no gun laws means everyone is armed, its how it was for centuries before everything got legislated, so what im saying is not a theory but an actualy fact that was in place and got us to this point we are at now, fact is criminals are criminals because there are to many light sentences and stupid laws now, less crime in olds says when they got hung in publi
bigmilk2003 4 weeks ago
@bigmilk2003 Agreed.
luminosity2083 4 weeks ago
r u retarded or smth ?
SteleaTube 1 month ago
crime.about(DOT)com/od/gunlawsbystate/a/gunlaws_pa.htm
full list of people who aren't aloud to carry in PA
supercaulin 1 month ago
@supercaulin allowed to carry or not..
Walk into Philly, into areas where the criminal element is thick and see if that "allowed" sequence has any relevancy what so ever.
Police hardly venture into some neighborhoods, much less want to stop certain people in those neighborhoods, so the term "allowed" is irrelevant.. heh.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
A criminal doesn't abide by any rules or laws. You can have 1 million and 1gun laws but who does the law go against, the criminal or the responsible?
warfossil 1 month ago
@chrisadmaley You don't know half the rules and laws you presume to know, do you?
It's not illegal in more than a few states, to carry a fire-arm into a bar.
In PA, I can open carry in a bar, if I so choose.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
Glad to see you're still alive, Jeff.
Ctrlaltdestroy 1 month ago
@patruick94
A gun is a tool. A hunting device, or a self defense device.
Whether it means killing is or not is really irrelevant. Hammers were made, to aid in building shelters and other things, to help humans survive.
Guns and other devices were made to aid in obtaining food and materials, to help humans survive, as well as made to aid in defending against attackers, again, helping in survival.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
no comment!
mad555max 1 month ago
PRESCRIBED MEDICINE HAS LABELS SAYING DO NOT OPERATE A MOTOR VEHICLE WHILE TAKING, SO FOR ALL WHO ARE USING THAT EXCUSE THINK AGAIN
361VSE 1 month ago
@361VSE
Actually, that's not exactly what all prescribed medications say. There are quite a few that say don't operate a motor vehicle until you know how it affects you.
Quite a big difference in wording and thus, meaning there.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
ANYONE WHO IS IMPAIRED SHOULD NOT BE HANDLING A FIREARM. PERIOD. PRESCRIBED OR NOT, IF YOU THINK ITS A RIGHT THAT THEY SHOULD THEN OKAY, SO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO DRINK ALCOHOL AT 21 BUT ITS ILLEGAL FOR ME TO DRIVE WHILE DRUNK??? AND CARRY CONCEALED, ONCE YOU TAKE A SIP OF ALCOHOL AND YOU ARE CARRYING CONCEALED YOU ARE ALREADY BREAKING THE LAW NO ONE SHOULD EVER HANDLE A FIREARM WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANYTHING THAT WILL IMPAIR JUDGMENT
361VSE 1 month ago
@361VSE Uh no, one is not necessarily breaking the law if they take a sip of alcohol while carrying, openly or concealed.
Want a real shit kicker? I can open carry and go have a beer, here in PA and there's not much you shouting, sensitive types can do about it, but eat shit and shut the fuck up about it.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
@361VSE Driving's not a right, it's a privilege granted you by the commonwealth, where in you are allowed usage of public through-ways, after proving you meet certain criteria. Ignoring or not meeting that criteria instantly revokes your right to be on public highways.
Owning a fire-arm, however, is a right.
With that said, if someone acts dangerously with a fire-arm, that is when one should be concerned... Not whether they are intoxicated or not.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
@361VSE YOU DON'T NEED TO LEAVE CAPS LOCK ON, NOT HELPING ANYTHING.
Randomsauce77 4 weeks ago
@Randomsauce77 You mean people wont see it any better???! darn... worth a shot, I at least got one idiot to read it
361VSE 1 week ago
I think when buying a firearm, you should have to pass some kind of competency test as well as a back round check.
decimator22 1 month ago
There were no need for footnotes to the 2nd Amendment when it was originally written. Why does there have to be now?? There weren't drunks, potheads, 8 year olds, and mentally retarded types back in the 1700's??? THINK!
CPTMBrotherRyan 1 month ago
@CPTMBrotherRyan
I dont think we can compare now to the 1700's they had muskets and other peashooter rifles we cant compare that to an AR15 or a Avtomat kalashnikov 47 laying down 15-30 rounds on a hair trigger
fullm3taldoc 1 month ago
@fullm3taldoc
They had muskets.... however, civilians also had cannons.
Anything the citizens had, were what military and militias had.
illogicalmethod 1 month ago
@fullm3taldoc I know this is a little late, but your reasoning is flawed. You're right, they had muskets, and so did the government they were fighting. Are you seriously not aware that they no longer have muskets? So are you suggesting that we use muskets instead of AR 15's to fight the enemy that is using high tech weapons we supplied at one point or another? If revolution were to happen, would you not want to be as well armed as your enemy?
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
What do i think Jeff?! I think i'll think about all of this a bit more and get back to you. Now what lol?
7Ronin49 1 month ago
first off weed is not legal anywhere in usa.. thats where your fucked..
daddyoca69 1 month ago
The way you pronounce Oregon is very odd.
FritoBandito327 1 month ago
I defiantly agree that it should be based on maturity not age but i don't know how they could test that. I am 15 and my local gun shop owner wants me to take over his shop when i am 21 or bc he is wanting to retire
freestyleskier1231 1 month ago
Bi-polar and retards shoud NOT HAVE GUNS ON THEM.
almanacaa 1 month ago
So if someone taking a prescribed medication can't have a carry permit, can they have a drivers lisence?
TheStickey8 1 month ago
about six years ago i was told i was bi polar, two years ago i quit taking my meds and i do have my good and bad days. but my point is iv been brought up around guns my whole life , hunting ,target shooting and useing a gun for any thing other than that has never crossed my mind. my point being i think it would have to be done on a case by case basis.
vexbomer 1 month ago
Antibiotics are a controlled substance. Are we going to let the state tell us we can't carry if we get sick?
HumbleWillis 1 month ago
@HumbleWillis to be a controlled substance a drug has to be on the governments controlled substance schedule which antibiotics are not, so no they are not a controlled substance.
rang3rsunit 1 month ago
A couple of thoughts. First, the Bill of Rights pertains to the protection of human rights. A government permit is not about providing those rights; it is about denying those rights and replacing them with a privilege for select people. Also, the Founders believed all people have these rights, not just American citizens.
Second, children and mentally retarded people have guardians who are responsible for them. So hold them responsible. Why does the gov't need to get involved?
Possumlivingdotcom 1 month ago 4
Its a trick question.
f0rumrr 1 month ago
Grebner is Full-On Retarded and he has Several Guns!
ZombieOrchestra 1 month ago 5
@ZombieOrchestra but there was a reason he was on Tosh.0
infernape425 1 month ago
This video is! A Marijuana Miracle!
seriousamm 1 month ago
@seriousamm im glad im not the only one that cought that lol
vexbomer 1 month ago
We need to be very careful saying a certain group should not longer be able to have firearms because the same laws will be used against all of us. My rule would be you can have a firearm unless you abuse the privilege.
bluev2srt 1 month ago
Very thought provoking. Thanks for the getting this issue some more light. It is refreshing to hear your objectiveness.
hugomontgoery 1 month ago
Retardation is an ambiguous term. Not every person with a mental deficiency is prohibited from owning a gun. When it comes to mental disorders such as bipolar disorder, I think it's important to look at what level, be it 1 or 2, of bipolar disorder these people are afflicted with. Also, there is no way to ensure that these people are taking their medication.
xDEMONIZEDx 1 month ago
no they cant carry a gun the number one sidaffect of pot is paranoia i dont want some guy that smoke abunch of pot shoot me cause he thought i was following him
synRdave 1 month ago
@synRdave and you know this how? Have you ever smoked pot? The number one side effect is relaxation. Paranoia is generally associated with caffeine, nicotine, speed, and cocaine. Get your drug stereotypes right next time you try to bash potheads.
tatman8509 1 month ago
@tatman8509 Paranoia is also readily associated with Marijuana..There is more than ample evidence through experience and scientific study to establish this as fact. Scientific study shows that THC acts differently in different parts of the brain and does, indeed, cause paranoia. So, next time you try to defend potheads from drug-stereotypes, you might want to make sure YOU get it right.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod what scientific study? Oh, you mean the one conducted by the people who make it illegal... Really? I have been smoking for 30+ years now and never, and I mean NEVER have I been paranoid. Paranoia is fear and anxiety, and anyone that would experience that from smoking weed has a fundamental fear of not feeling normal... Thus, when experiencing change from any drug interaction, they fear the unknown parable and become paranoid or fearful of the outcome.
tatman8509 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 Oh bother, why do people with logic problems attempt to argue facts, based upon their personal experiences? How many times you've smoked and "not been paranoid" is completely irrelevant to the actual facts of the situation. As for what personal experience means.. For every brain cell you pop, trying to argue this point, I can get at least 10 people who legitimately felt paranoia after consumption of THC and marijuana in general.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 You see, different parts of the brain react differently. Yes, at lower levels, THC does, indeed, produce a calming effect. However, at higher levels and interactions with different parts of the brain, weed, does, indeed, cause paranoia. These studies were and are done by chemists that don't give a flying fuck about the legality of it, but were and are purely curious as to how it actually affects someone.
You're free to go find these studies, once you decide to remove your head...
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 .. from your ass and use logical deduction and not simply formulate an argument based upon your inability to relate "cause/effect" and concluding that because you've never personally felt "paranoia" that, therefore, it must be an anomaly or a flaw with the user.
Of course, you're free to completely ignore all scientific evidence and formulate your own theory, however, only an idiot would attempt to equate that unsubstantiated nonsense as anything remotely resembling truth.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 ... and F.Y.I. I think Marijuana should be legalized, so do the vast majority of my friends and family. Some of those are law enforcement, doctors or certified EMT's..
Each one of them, thinking it should be legal, will still tell you it can and does, cause paranoia.
There are many active users, who've been using it, at least as long as you, if not more so, that tell you paranoia can come from usage. So, cut it with the bullshit strawman arguments please.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod site one, just one study that it causes paranoia in a person that does not suffer that same effect with any other drug. And to you sir I say you are full of shit... You formulate your words in a way that makes you sound intelligent, but you still lack proof. I have used, observed and questioned, but because I don't have a Phd, you dismiss my findings over a source you never produce? Try again troll, talk to me when you aren't so wet behind the ears and have lived a little.
tatman8509 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 Wow, there is so much wrong with your argument.
Neuropharmacology- Daniela Parolaro. There's one study for you, you're free to look it up.
Now, here's what's wrong with your theology "you have used.."
Yes and you think you're the only one?
"observed..."
Not the only one.
"questioned..."
Here's the difference. I've done all of the above and there is scientific study to back up what I'm saying. You, on the other hand, use personal experience to formulate a standard that is...
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod you have got to be about the longest winded douchebag ever... Do you touch yourself why thinking up these narcissistic diatribes? What are you, like 23, 24 maybe. Do you think trying to talk down to me will convince me that my years upon years of experiences is wrong just because you read a couple of articles you looked up on google? Explain will you how people in these "test groups" given placebos exhibit signs of paranoia? You do know what a placebo is right?
tatman8509 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 lol, older than 24, try again, thanks.
"Do you think trying to talk down to me will convince me that my years upon years of experience is wrong.."
No, I talk down to you because you're a fucking idiot. The fact that YOU'RE WRONG just icing on the cake.
"Explain will you how people in these "test groups" given placebos exhibit signs of paranoia..?"
Ah, so you didn't check the frikkin study I cited, than try and throw something back up in my face. Illiteracy's a bitch.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod hahaha, you are a fucking joke dude. You mean the study published by a company with ties to arms dealing? Oh wait, that wouldn't have something to do with government ties would it? They tested fucking rats you MORON, but I guess that makes sense to a guy with a brain the size of a rat....Try again douchebag...
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "hahaha, you a re a fucking joke dude."
Same could be said for you.
"You mean the study published by a company with ties to arms dealing?"
Oh right, attack the source, not the findings... Ad hominems work much for you?
"Oh wait, that wouldn't have something to do with government ties would it."?
Right, again, ad hominem attacks, attack the source, not the findings..
"They tested fucking rats you MORON.."
You know why they test things on animals, right? Because they can still
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod if the source is not reputable, then neither are the findings.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "If the source is not reputable, then neither are the findings."
Not necessarily so. People of less repute may, indeed, arrive at correct conclusions and findings.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 ... draw a conclusion that is very similar to humans. Hell, what do you think they test drugs on BEFORE they get tested on humans? MORON. I'll give you a hint, it isn't human.
"..but I guess that makes sense to a guy with a brain the size of a rat..."
You have no clue about the world, do you? For someone who's proclaimed to spend so much time traveling abroad, you must of done all that while your head was lodged firmly in your ass-crack.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod and how many commercials do you see daily from attorneys with lawsuits against the very same people who say that it's been tested on animals? I would say you have no clue about the world except what you have read about it from the safety of your parent's home. Try again shill, you are a pathetic excuse for a man, that get's his jollies trolling my postings. If I died today, I would still have more of a life than you would have in 2 lifetimes.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "and how many commercials do you see daily from attorneys with lawsuits against the very same people who say that it's been tested on animals.."
More correct question would be, how does a lawsuit negate the fact that things are tested on animals, or for that matter, how does a lawsuit show that reactions displayed in test animals aren't also displayed in humans?
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "I would say you have no clue about the world, except what you have read about it from the safety of your parent's home."
You can say what you like.
"If I died today, I would still have more of a life than you would have in 2 lifetimes."
If that's what you wish to believe, so be it.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 Sorry, the "test groups" of what I cited, didn't have any placebos... Why don't you actually look up the frikkin study I cited, than come back to me. If you have trouble reading it, perhaps I can find you a tutor in the English language.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod no placebos?... wow, so there was no counter study to disprove their findings, how convenient. You are just another dumbass, grasping for straws to support your dumb ass views. Go fuck yourself buddy.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "You do know what a placebo is right"?
Sure I do, placebo's are irrelevant.
Plenty of people who smoke weed, do not simply exhibit signs of paranoia, they act out-right paranoid. Studies on the effects of the actual different parts of the brain, showed behavioral patterns very similar to paranoia. You are the ONLY moron in the world, that argues Marijuana doesn't cause paranoia..
Well, maybe you have a couple of buffoon friends.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod "Paranoid thoughts are our way of trying to understand things. They are attempts to make sense of events. It's perfectly natural to try to understand the world around us - and the way we feel inside. But when we're stressed and feeling low or anxious or irritable our explanations are likely to be pretty negative. We think the worst - and often we think the worst of people around us." - Institute of Psychiatry
tatman8509 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 ... frankly, ridiculous. You know why, in trials, medicine is given to a large group of people and the results and effects of MULTIPLE people, are recorded? Do you know why medicines may cause a reaction in some, but not others? Or are you too stupid to understand this basic principal... Different people have different sensitivities and may react differently to chemicals.
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 You've not once produced any other source, but yourself. You are a hypocrite, demanding behavior of others that you, yourself, do not exactly really want to follow. All the information is readily available for you to find, yet you refuse to find it and stick to your little bubble.
The problem is, however, is that I'm not saying anything bad about marijuana, I'm just saying that it can, indeed, cause paranoia. Something you seem extremely butt-hurt over...
illogicalmethod 4 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod I would guess the amount of effort you have put into all your writing would show you are the one that is all butt-hurt... boo hoo, did somebody's wittle feeling hurt that you feel this need to try and put me in my place? You do realize that I have been laughing at you the whole time... The only people that get paranoid are scared little shits like you, I don't give a fuck what you say. Being scared of being caught does not count as paranoia, it's self preservation. So fuck you.
tatman8509 4 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "You do realize that I have been laughing at you the whole time.."
Good for you, laughing at me doesn't negate the veracity of anything I've said, so laugh away.
"The only people that get paranoid are scared little shits like you.."
LOL, down-play science by trying to address my personality and what you think I am.
"Being scared of being caught does not count as paranoia.."
Hmm, a bit of guilt here? Who said anything about being afraid of being caught?
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod you are a scared little shit.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 If that's what you wish to think, by all means.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod again, I don't get paranoid, so I have no guilt, or are you too fucking stupid to get that. You are the scared little bitch, not I. You and your friends are the ones that feel paranoia or FEAR when using an illegal substance for fear of being caught by the authorities, otherwise what exactly are you paranoid of when you tried it? Maybe you are just scared of everything and need something to blame for your fears. Maybe you should dwell on that for a few and get back to me, pussy.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 -guilt is not necessary for paranoia.
"You and your friends are the ones that feel paranoia or FEAR when using an illegal substance for fear of being caught by the authorities."
You made a logical leap of feeling paranoid, to being afraid of the authorities, how?
That rides on a lot of assumptions... and what are legal users of marinol afraid of, when they suffer paranoia/anxiety?
"othewise what exactly are you paranoid of when you tried it."-
Seeing as how it...
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "I don't get paranoid, so I have no guilt."
Guilt is not necessary for the feeling of paranoia.
"You and your friends are the ones that feel paranoia or FEAR when using an illegal substance.."
Nice try, except you neglected something here.
First, is that we didn't feel it all the time, whether we felt it or not, was contingent upon how much we smoked and the quality there in of what we smoked.
Second, you'd have to assume that anytime we used, was illegal or that there...
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 ..were authorities around and an actual possibility of being punished for the usage.
By the way, if people using legally prescribed marinol feel paranoia, what are THEY afraid of, as their usage is legal?
"Maybe you are just scared of everything and need something to blame for your fears."
Nice try, except I never proclaimed to be fearful of anything, nor did I blame Marijuana for any fear that I may have.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "it's self preservation."
Self preservation indeed. However, that's irrelevant, as that's highly different than flipping shit over every single little noise and being so on edge, that it ruins it for everyone.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod so you hang out with pill poppers and crackheads, good to know.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 Would you care to cite where I said I hung out with pill poppers and crack-heads? Oh right, I didn't. Nice, when facts don't present what you want them too, go right to making shit up. Sorry, YOUR PERSONAL OPINIONS DO NOT EQUATE TO REALITY.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod haha, so says the King of assumptions. You didn't say it, but yet you don't deny it... FACT: you are a little troll bitch
FACT: a theory is an opinion, not a fact, much like the studies you insist upon.
FACT: you have no FACTS
So, go take your medicine and keep blaming your own inabilities on outside sources.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "You didn't say it, but yet you don't deny it.."
I don't need to deny anything for it to be false, champ. There are likely many things alleged about me, if I don't deny it, does it make it any more or less truthful? Hardly.
"FACT: a theory is an opinion, not a fact."
Actually, a theory, as defined, is a coherent group of tested general propositions. Commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "FACTS: you have no FACTS."
Except for every one that I listed.
When you have people using marijuana, one expected, not uncommon occurrence is the exhibition of paranoia. There's a reason that many people(even stoners, imagine that) relate paranoia when depicting the usage there-of.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 As far as this, you seem to think that I am speaking out against weed. Sorry, it should be legalized.
When I used to smoke it, the reactions it would cause with me, would vary, depending on HOW MUCH I smoked, as well as the quality of the weed. If I smoked too much, I would get paranoid. Otherwise, yes, it would be relaxing. The same kind of experience has played out with many friends, family and people I've hung/smoke with through-out the years.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod and this is attributed to the mindset of the individual and not the drug...
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509
Uh, no, THC interactions with certain parts of the brain actually does cause paranoia and the person's mind-set has nothing to do with that finding.
THC has been actually shown, through actual scientific method, to alter the way the brain functions, in all areas.
THC is a mind altering substance and it alters how one thinks, feels and remembers.
That is fact, argue if you like... Doesn't make it any less so.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod if it was FACT it would be absolute, and seeing as you stated earlier that not everyone experience's the same effects, it is not absolute...So, it's not fact, but a theory or opinion. Keep drinking the koolaid buddy.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "if it was FACT it would be absolute, and seeing as you stated earlier that not everyone experience's the same effects, it is not absolute."
This couldn't be anymore of an absurdity. However, just in case, let's look into some other things.
Anaphylaxis or Anaphylactic shock is an allergic reaction to certain things. However, the things that cause Anaphylaxis in some humans, don't cause them in others. However, this does not negate the fact that those things absolutely cause it.
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 Migraines:: See, certain things can trigger severe headaches and other problems, called Migraines. These triggers WILL trigger a headache, however, they will not always trigger a migraine and they will not cause a headache with everyone, especially people who are not afflicted by the genetic disorder of migraines. So, no, when discussing chemicals and how they react with people and under what circumstances they cause or don't cause something...
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 An absolute reaction in the same individuals, or in multiple individuals, is not expected nor required, in order to attribute a certain reaction as being caused by said chemical. Thus the reason why any medication ever prescribed is given with a list of possible reactions, with the list of minor reactions and more severe reactions. With more severe reactions that would require going off that medication and seeking medical intervention. If those reactions were "absolute" they...
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 ...wouldn't prescribe those medications for treatments, would they? No, they wouldn't. Sorry, try again.
"Keep drinking the koolaid buddy".
What kool-aid are you alleging I'm drinking? What falsification do you believe I'm falling prey too? How, if I am for the legalization of marijuana and how, if I don't think it's bad, like some people allege it is, am I falling prey to anything?
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod is the world flat? Is the Earth the center of the Universe? These were once science facts,so was Vitalism, Phlogiston, Spontaneous Generation, and the list goes on... But then again, if you had lived long enough to see that what was once thought of fact can be disproved later with advances in science and technology. Wrap your little brain around that... I don't care what your position is on the legality of Cannabis, you base your facts on an ever changing science and ignorance.
tatman8509 3 weeks ago
@tatman8509 "you base your facts on an ever changing science and ignorance."
So, uh, you don't base any of your beliefs in science? Yes, science can change, if there is something to absolutely change that. However, there are things in science that are absolutes and enough to base a belief in.
Gravity, theory of relativity... Etc.
Perhaps you would care to show me how some things changing negates other beliefs or makes it absurd to put a belief in science....?
illogicalmethod 3 weeks ago
@illogicalmethod look... I am done with your double talking little punk ass. Say what you will, you are still a bitch, and NO MATTER what you think or say will change that. I could go on and on about this or that and you would refute me just to be a little bitch, truth or not. Grow the fuck up. I give you examples and you choose not to address them, thus meaning you are guilty of the same shit you accuse me of, talk about being a hypocrite. Do you believe in GOD? I bet you do...pathetic
tatman8509 3 weeks ago