User Profile: 1FreeVoice


Member Since: December 28, 2012


123 To page: Go
  • [5] October 7, 2015 at 3:53pm

    The US is the last best hope.

    Any other country is likely to be less free to start with… and more vulnerable to economic (or even military pressure) if the US “goes dark”. You can’t run; there is no place to run TO that is safe. Stand for freedom or fall (farther) under someone else’s power – this is it.

  • October 6, 2015 at 7:58pm

    I scan the article first to see if it will be worth my time.

    Inexperienced guy… he should have had a list of questions, and not kept hitting her with the same one. He gave her plenty of time to come up with a decent answer that would play well with her people. Still, she should be better at thinking on her feet. In this case she didn’t really have to. .

  • [2] October 6, 2015 at 7:53pm

    Think she will get visits from a staff color co-ordinator while in the penn? You know that even if she goes to prison it will be a country club variety, not hard time with scary gals running the cell block.

  • October 6, 2015 at 7:50pm

    The perfect peaceful society is bound to be invaded, even if only by a new generation bored with their parents singalong. Every society is invaded with a new generation not yet taught their cultural norms and valuing them as their own.

  • [1] October 6, 2015 at 7:42pm

    “My message is to the American people. It is time that we stood up together for common sense gun safety measures to end the epidemic of gun violence.

    “My message is to the American people. It is time that we stood up together for common sense safety measures to end the epidemic of human violence. ”

    Violence has been a part of the human human story since the dawn of man. We have been blessed to live in a time and place where such things are seen as terribly abnormal, not just part of a terrible reality. It may be impossible to eliminate all human violence, but much can be done to encourage self-control & self discipline rather than rely on external controls, and we can impose penalties for carelessness and lost tempers in our schools even when no one is hurt.

    We can teach that it is not good to have self esteem that embraces all actions and choices without regard to whether or not they are good choices. We can tell our teachers that it is OK to stop trying to call everyone a winner . People who have issues with self control, with anger, with carelessness and thoughtlessness should not be encouraged to feel good about themselves because if everything is fine, why go through the effort – and it is an effort- to change bad habits?

    Rather than just blaming people for being flawed, we need to offer them help improving themselves, examples of success to show what is possible, and respect for every successful change – not for talking about how hard it is.

  • October 6, 2015 at 1:35am

    How did a kid with behavior problems get that gun?
    What were the PINs? (Pre Incident Indicators)

    The Gift of Fear by Gavin DeBecker
    Should be required reading for school officials and teachers. …
    The kid was reported for lesser offenses. Could anyone have seen this coming?
    If someone, anyone, saw this kid becoming a real threat before he detonated… what options were available BEFORE he killed anyone?

  • October 6, 2015 at 1:05am

    Hitler was not responsible for all of Germany’s gun laws, he just took advantage of them. His goons accessed the files collected by a previous administration, knew who had what guns and could come in force to collect them at a time of their choosing. What were folks going to do, die fighting a loosing battle and leave their kids dead or orphaned at the mercy of THOSE people? Hide the weapons and try to claim they didn’t know where they were? Surely they would be arrested on gun charges for improper storage/illegal sale or whatever other charge they wanted to slam them with. Want to bet that gestapo interrogation was something to be avoided at all costs?

    The current administration would probably not act like that. What would the administration be like in 50 or 300 years? What kind of leader might we have consolidating power after promising to make America great again and bring back our sense of safety after something has gone terribly wrong (over a long enough time frame SOMETHING will go seriously wrong).

    The IRS was weaponized against perceived political dissidents. Once we would have thought that impossible, right? Think the ATF can’t be politicized too?

  • October 5, 2015 at 11:56pm

    Require her bodyguards to carry them for at least 5 years before the law would apply to anyone else…

    In fact that might be a nice check on DC if all laws applied to themselves first to check the fit before imposing them on anyone else. (wishful thinking)

    Hayek’s idea of separating the lawmaking apparatus from the planning … What rules should be in effect from plans on how to use the materials under the government’s control is quite good and more practical. See Law Legislation and Liberty ( vol 3, I think ). Having the same people in charge of deciding how to spend the governments money & in a position to vote themselves more of our cash has not worked well.

    It would require a constitutional amendment, but in the long term that’s do-able. (Article 5)

  • [1] October 5, 2015 at 11:42pm

    And if they are as competent as the guys who set up the Obamacare website, you can look forward to having your weapon hacked too.

  • [3] October 5, 2015 at 11:36pm

    If you are giving out free guns, give free weapons training for 1 year prior. Include coverage of weapons laws fed/state, weapon safety, accuracy, and so on. Include everything that would be required for a concealed weapon permit.

    Pay instructors for the training available for at least a year prior to giving out any free guns. Anyone who does not have a certificate of completion can still get a weapon, but must sign a form acknowledging that they are still fully responsible for abiding by all the laws even if they did not take the class to learn what the laws are that they are to abide by.

    If a shortage of trained instructors has made it difficult to get everyone qualified, then an extension offering training to those who did not make it by the cutoff may be considered. Otherwise, the form should include a reminder that the government is no longer responsible for paying any of their instructors.

    I like his suggestion: mandatory +5 years on top of the penalty for the crime itself if a gun was involved, and handing all other gun law back to the states to decide for themselves. Combine your idea with his and it should certainly have an impact on crime. :-)

    Responses (1) +
  • [7] October 5, 2015 at 1:13pm

    I know trouble is coming

    I don’t want to be one of the sheep
    I am still not prepared, not really

  • [4] October 5, 2015 at 1:08pm

    re: Fortunately Hillary and the Democrats
    will take away all our guns, so we’ll all be safe!

    With all these law abiding
    home invaders
    someone might wonder why anyone ever thought they needed a gun, except to get a cheap dinner when the meat at the stores was priced out of reach.

  • October 5, 2015 at 12:33pm

    “re: I do think there is some danger in our society of Christians forcing Christian opinions through governmental action”

    The sort of law you seem concerned with has grown by leaps and bounds. Anything that can be considered good or bad for you may have a law attached to encourage or discourage it.

    From what you are allowed to eat (restricting the sale of everything bad for you) to limiting innovation in seat belt design (use this or else), to whether or not you are allowed to shoot a home intruder without first trying to escape and give him your house… the government has intruded almost everywhere already. It is sensible to think that may continue and that different people will think different things are good/bad for you.

    If you are concerned about C. values being forced on you, then you are concerned about the growth of government into far too much of your life. This is Big Government or Totalitarian Government and comes in many flavors from religious fundamentalism to atheist dogma.

    Small gov. supporters are often religious, so you may think abortion is a counter example. Many who oppose the pro-life arguments have not studied them; many are not bible-based at all, just bible consistent.

    Good reads:
    6 Great ideas by Mortimer J Adler
    God State and Self by Elshtain
    In Our Defense the bill of rights in action
    by Ellen Alderman & Caroline
    Law Legislation and Liberty v 1-3

  • October 5, 2015 at 12:27am

    I think you would appreciate a book called:

    If God Is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil
    by Randy Alcorn

    It tackles the keystone of atheism: If god is so all-powerful and all-knowing, then why is there so much evil and suffering in the world?

    There is a study guide also.

    The kindle version lacks a couple of reference elements at the back of the hardcopy; they are also missing from the large print version.

    Note: I agree that America should not become a theocracy, even a secular theocracy. I think that the government should not support any particular religion, including atheism. Some Atheists ( such as FFR ) are militant about it and eager to proselytize and spread their faith while attempting to restrict the freedom of others to talk as openly about their faiths.

    It’s as unfair ( and kind of creepy) as if some Christian sect claimed that no other religion ( or sect ) had the right to put up public displays or show their faith in word or deed on public grounds. (In public schools or courthouses etc.)

    If their position is not faith based then agnosticism… an ‘I do not know’ position… would be more honest. An ‘I do not know, have seen no reason to think ___ is true, & it’s your afterlife not my business ‘ would not be faith based.

    To claim that they KNOW for certain God does not exist IS faith based.

    To claim that they should not be offended by hearing dissenting views
    is supremely …

    Which (of your) dissenting views are next?

  • [2] October 3, 2015 at 10:35pm

    “You don’t see these kinds of mass shootings all over the world on a consistent basis like you do in the United States.”

    Substitute “mass killings” for “mass shootings”
    and ask how he got a High School diploma
    with such a shaky grasp of human history and current events.

    EPIC fail.

  • October 3, 2015 at 10:29pm

    Gun deaths are not the issue or they would be looking for things the majority of gun deaths have in common ( such as illegal drugs/gangs), or in the case of mass shootings mental health ( and suicide by cop ). Even cases where kids are shot by accident are removed from contributory factors and assumed to be applicable anywhere there are kids.

    Cause and effect are effectively separated.
    Something in the middle (an inanimate tool )
    is demonized and people are taught:
    1. to fear a thing
    2. only government action can address the problem
    of misuse of tools … by banning them.

    More people are killed by blunt objects than by rifles legally owned.
    More people are killed by handguns than long arms

    No one has seriously suggested banning rocks or hammers etc
    and baby-proofing the planet.

    Small arms are less of a problem for politicians; anyone angry or desperate enough to assassinate one of them would have to get relatively close. The guns that seem to scare them the most are the ones that could harm them from a distance.

    Those are the guns politicians focus on, and NOT the guns that are used every week in “gun free zones” like Chicago. Places like this hardly make a bleep on the media, regardless of the accumulated body count.

    If long term objectives include future laws that could stir civil war…

    That’s going too far, isn’t it?
    What else fits?

    Ideas anyone?

  • [1] October 2, 2015 at 6:37pm

    They are free to make choices based on their on priorities without enforcing their values on others. Instead of passing laws to make air quality a few parts per billion cleaner, they can move away from the city to where the air is clean.

    People have made other choices, even sacrifices, when one thing was significantly more important than others:
    Turning down a promotion that would mean way more time away from their family,
    accepting negative effects on friendships and the kids growing sense of community to move across the country to a job that paid a lot more
    taking a lower paying job in order to be available to care for an aging parent or sick child.
    Paying a fair bit more for organic food
    or building with more expensive materials to avoid health issues from toxins real or feared.
    Giving up meat because it involves the suffering of animals….
    giving up dating to devote more time to career ( at least for a while)
    Changing plans on the fly to accommodate a sudden addition to the family.

    The list could get quite long and involve values and choices others support or disagree with.

    If it matters so much to them…
    they are free to go at any time.

  • [2] October 2, 2015 at 6:14pm

    Not all Atheists are d___.

    There are Christians who give us a bad rap too. That doesn’t make all Christians ___, it just means that the ones who are ___s get all the press. Most of us are too boring to get on tape being normal and nice.

    Kind of like the way reporters seem to find a stupid fat lady in curlers to stick a microphone in front of after a hurricane or tornado. There may be hundreds of other people around, but she’s more colorful or entertaining in some way. The oddball gets the prime time whether Christian or Atheist.

    While Christians and others are free to speak about their faith, it is only fair that Atheists can proselytize theirs also. We just shouldn’t give them free reign to push every other faith out of the public sphere.

  • [1] October 2, 2015 at 6:01pm

    If you take the bit about shepherds watching their flocks by night as accurate, then he was born in the spring lambing season.

    A census could have taken a long time back then. April to May? It takes the modern USA longer to do a census.

    Sapphira is correct. There was no exact date for Christ’s birth, and they didn’t need one. They just needed a celebration to cover the winter solstice season, and picked that one. It is the day chosen on which to celebrate something, not the day it happened. Also Christ has been called “the light of the world” and the dark of winter, the shortening of days turned into the lengthening of daylight hours may have seemed fitting.

  • October 2, 2015 at 4:40pm

    Sparky didn’t block that well; it should have been more than one paragraph. Try this:

    I was raised in the church and some of my best friends came from that setting through life. Growing up, I usually had two sets of friends, the school and the church. They rarely intersected until I got to high school and was a more rural setting.

    But before that, my really good friends who went to camp, amusement parks, hiking trips, and retreats were from the church. It gave me a way to interact with a lot of people who I would have never met had I been an atheist.

    Atheists are now starting to realize that people of the church have something they desperately want. Atheist groups who want that same social interaction are buying up old churches and starting their own social groups. And you know what, the IRS will give them a 301c Non-profit religious exemption #. That’s right, the IRS now classifies the atheists as a valid religious organization.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love