Russia and the NRA

I was viewing the conversation in a broader context; providing for the safety, security, and well being of your wife and kids... Always... It's not just a priority if/when things get to that metaphorical "everything's gone to ***t" point.

Sort of like the way my grandparents raised my parents, my parents raised me and my siblings, my wife's parents raised her, and I have raised my kids (2 of whom are pretty much on their own now). The time, energy, money, and emotion that was not expended on preparing for the apocalypse was directed into more tangible and beneficial areas.

Plus, if you're not hording penicillin and super antibiotics, you're not really prepared anyway.

I'm not surprised that you viewed a conversation completely different than what it was.
 
Last edited:
I was viewing the conversation in a broader context; providing for the safety, security, and well being of your wife and kids... Always... It's not just a priority if/when things get to that metaphorical "everything's gone to ***t" point.

Sort of like the way my grandparents raised my parents, my parents raised me and my siblings, my wife's parents raised her, and I have raised my kids (2 of whom are pretty much on their own now). The time, energy, money, and emotion that was not expended on preparing for the apocalypse was directed into more tangible and beneficial areas.

Plus, if you're not hording penicillin and super antibiotics, you're not really prepared anyway.

I don’t understand why you think it’s an either or. Having a storm shelter installed at your house doesn’t mean you missed all of little Jimmy’s baseball games. First aid kits and emergency plans doesn’t constitute child neglect. Our own faultless goverment encourages us to have a plan. Have you heeded their advice?
 
I was viewing the conversation in a broader context; providing for the safety, security, and well being of your wife and kids... Always... It's not just a priority if/when things get to that metaphorical "everything's gone to ***t" point.

Sort of like the way my grandparents raised my parents, my parents raised me and my siblings, my wife's parents raised her, and I have raised my kids (2 of whom are pretty much on their own now). The time, energy, money, and emotion that was not expended on preparing for the apocalypse was directed into more tangible and beneficial areas.

Plus, if you're not hording penicillin and super antibiotics, you're not really prepared anyway.

lol, since when is teaching your kids to take care of themselves not a tangible or beneficial to all? We could all use more knowledge on how to grow our own food, how to survive on our own without society. heck thats great one on one time with the kids. get them away from the screen and out into nature.
 
I don’t understand why you think it’s an either or. Having a storm shelter installed at your house doesn’t mean you missed all of little Jimmy’s baseball games. First aid kits and emergency plans doesn’t constitute child neglect. Our own faultless goverment encourages us to have a plan. Have you heeded their advice?

It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.

You Bruce Lee?
 
It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.

Now you’re putting words in my mouth. Within the discussion context of extended civil unrest which is what we were having yeah if you are not armed I absolutely believe you will be at risk. Do not try to extrapolate that case to the general case crap you just posted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.

I haven't seen anyone take that stance. Can you quote the specific post(s) that did so?

However, I will say this, in the context of this current *htf conversation... If things ever did go seriously sideways, and you aren't armed, you and yours are in serious trouble--especially in a metropolitan area such as, I don't know, the greater Atlanta area.
 
It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.

Until you’re staring down the barrel of one pointed at you and your family.......

I bet one of your analogies will stop them in their tracks. If not, use a circular argument, gift wrapped in the second amendment and how it is oft misinterpreted.

You go, luther. Never change.

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I haven't seen anyone take that stance. Can you quote the specific post(s) that did so?

However, I will say this, in the context of this current *htf conversation... If things ever did go seriously sideways, and you aren't armed, you and yours are in serious trouble--especially in a metropolitan area such as, I don't know, the greater Atlanta area.

It's like the guy has never watched the Walking Dead........
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.

I don’t care what you have in your house. Do whatever you want. Likewise don’t worry about what the rest of us are doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
It's like the guy has never watched the Walking Dead........

lol...I watch it religiously. The funny thing is, when I'm watching it I often think "it's like some of the PF posters actually think this scenario is not only likely but probable."

It's a fantasy show guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I haven't seen anyone take that stance. Can you quote the specific post(s) that did so?

However, I will say this, in the context of this current *htf conversation... If things ever did go seriously sideways, and you aren't armed, you and yours are in serious trouble--especially in a metropolitan area such as, I don't know, the greater Atlanta area.

Are you joking? You go back and search if you wish. You can start with the hysterically funny stretch of posts where people were talking about coming to my house to take my TV. That one still cracks me up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Are you joking? You go back and search if you wish. You can start with the hysterically funny stretch of posts where people were talking about coming to my house to take my TV. That one still cracks me up.

There's a very good argument that one has handicapped their ability to defend themselves, their family and their possessions if they don't own firearms. However, I still don't remember anyone taking it to a moral level, or question your living up to familial responsibilities.
 
lol...I watch it religiously. The funny thing is, when I'm watching it I often think "it's like some of the PF posters actually think this scenario is not only likely but probable."

It's a fantasy show guys.

WUT? Zombies taking over the world is fantasy?

Seriously, pick up the book One Second After by William Forstchen this is a much more likely scenario.
 
It's not an either or and yes I have contingencies for various possibilities.

Like most everything, it's about the degree to which you take it.

Many on here seem to want to imply that if you do not have guns in your house, you are rendering yourself incapable of protecting your family and by extension, not doing your job as a protector and provider. I view that stance as utter and total nonsense.
Absolutely not.

Protect yours however you see fit. If you think it's covered, more power to you.

"The degree" is and should be left up to the individual. Not whether you agree with them or they agree with you. Thats not for someone else to decide.
 

VN Store



Back
Top