Personally, I value freedom a great deal more than safety, so yeah, I’d be willing to accept some loss.
Phil Reads
Enjoy the Decline
Firearms Links
- Alien Gear Holsters
- .308 Ammo Aggregator
- Ammo For Sale
- Ammo Gunbot
- Ammoman.Com
- Ammunition Store
- Boomershoot!
- Brownells
- Cheaper Than Dirt
- Collectors Firearms
- CrossBreed Holsters
- Discover the Network
- Ed Brown 1911 Parts
- FindTheBest Guns
- Front Sight
- Fulton Armory
- Galco Gunleather
- Gould & Goodrich Gunleather
- Hart Rifle Barrels
- IOR – Valdada Optics
- J & G Sales
- Kimber Firearms
- Lucky Gunner ammo and more
- McMillan Rifle Stocks
- MidwayUSA
- Myths About Gun Control
- Natchez Shooters Supplies
- Numrich Gun Parts
- PrepareNOW Outfitters
- Southern Ohio Gun Int’l Inc
- Springfield Armory
- Thunder Ranch
- Triple K Gunleather
- Washington Arms Collectors
- Wilson Combat
- Wolff Gunsprings
Second Amendment
- The Sentinel
- JPFO
- Students for Concealed Carry on Campus
- Civilian Marksmanship Program
- Neal Knox
- Pink Pistols
- Self Defense: A Basic Human Right
- Cold, Hard Facts About Guns
- Students for the Second Amendment
- National Shooting Sports Foundation
- National Rifle Association
- Gun Owners of America
- Online Carry Training
- NSSF Blog
X2. I’m right there with you.
A: Seems trite to a lot, but freedom ISN’T free; every so often gets paid for in blood.
And even if you gave the weenies all they wanted as far as government control, every so often the bad guys will get lucky or smart.
I’d accept that only if we kill the perpetrators dead, dead, dead.
Toastrider has the right of it. If we kill enough of them, their relatives will remember for a few hundred years why you don’t F*** with the bull… And if the all have to die, well, that’s THEIR choice.
Almost forgot.That’s from The Atlantic, so the writer is probably figuring that it won’t be him and his friends who do the every-now-and-then necessary dieing.
Why would he think that, considering the folk who died on 9/11 were a pretty broad slice of American (and foreign, excluding the perpetrators) life?
It seems to me the article refers not to serving military personnel so much as just regular folks… and we already know a crashing jetliner doesn’t discriminate between a blue collar worker and an ivory-tower intellectual.
The author was talking about civilians, not the people who choose to stand on the line and be put at risk.
This is definitely a John Robb (http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/) worthy thread. Loss can be mitigated by making the target resilient. When the unpredictable occurs the resilient community responds as a fluid network both minimizing the effect and responding to overwhelm the threat.
Petey:
The problem is that people seem to have confused resiliant with hardened, primarily because everyone is so incapable of assessing and evaluating risk.
As a country, we can be resiliant to attack without becoming a despotic bunker.
Think of it as a fist fight, if you are unwilling to even accept that the other guy is going to hit you and have it hurt, then why did you even stand up when he called you a bitch?
Petey: The only way to prevent bullying is to beat the shit out of bullies.
The next terror attack on the US should be replied to with nukes.
One for each city that each of the terrorists hail from. Even if said cities are in Pakistan or Saudi.
And if they come from Cleveland, Ohio? Toronto, Canada? Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany? Bethlehem, Israel?
Let’s remember we live in a real world and not in fantasy video game land where you can vaporize continents without repercussions, OK?
No matter whom we elect the United States is not going to start indiscriminately nuking cities. Not even little nukes. REAL options, not hyperbole and hallucination, would be much preferable.