Pro-gun message on rock annoys neighbors

MPLS Star & Sickle ^ | 10-18-04 | ap

[Rakkasan1]

GREENWOOD, Ind. -- Some neighbors aren't thrilled with the rock in gun dealer Don Davis's front yard promoting armed protection, but he vows that only a judge can make him move it.

The 8-foot ornamental rock, in front of the home Davis recently built near this Indianapolis suburb, depicts an eagle and the U.S. flag.

The inscription: ``It's better to own a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not own it.''

[Stone Mountain]

You don't see anything wrong with that or you just missed that one? Perhaps you share his views with regards to the HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA and BANNING GUNS?

Well, I don't see what this quote has to do with banning guns. As for his opinion, it's clearly a libertarian/utilitarian view. Utilitarian since he says it would avoid problems with guys and libertarian in that it's none of our damn business who Modernman's daughters choose to sleep with. In any case, it doesn't have anything to do with the homosexual agenda that I can see - it's not like he's saying he supports any agenda - more making a tongue-in-cheek comment about women in college than anything else.

Getting back to the point here, you may call that evidence that Modernman is a libertarian, but I don't see that as evidence that he is a liberal. Of course, if those two terms are the same in your mind, you may come to different conclusions...

[Stone Mountain]

So what's up ther Mr. Stoned Mountain from Kalifornia? You think Modernman's quote in #159 is a Conservative view? Do you agree with that view?

Ok, I answered your question. Now how about you address the point that got me into this conversation in the first place. Do you think it should be just as legal to put up an Osama Bin Laden rock as it was for this guy to put up his rock?

[Stone Mountain]

Gee, ad hominems on my name and state - very persuasive. I hope you'll have more evidence than that one quote you cited before going around calling people liberals...

[Godebert]

"Well, I don't see what this quote has to do with banning guns.

Did you miss the post where another Freeper said he also recalled the thread where Moderman argued in defense of Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban?

"As for his opinion, it's clearly a libertarian/utilitarian view. Utilitarian since he says it would avoid problems with guys and libertarian in that it's none of our damn business who Modernman's daughters choose to sleep with."

So you're saying that only men can transmit STD's? How is it not a father's "business" if his own highschool daughters are engaging in Homosexual acts?

"In any case, it doesn't have anything to do with the homosexual agenda that I can see - it's not like he's saying he supports any agenda - more making a tongue-in-cheek comment about women in college than anything else."

Ya...his view has nothing to do with the homosexual agenda.....just like the hundreds of other Pro-Homosexual Agenda posts he has made in the last few months.

I still say that you have the same agenda that he does.

[Godebert]

"I hope you'll have more evidence than that one quote you cited before going around calling people liberals..."

I have a feeling it wouldn't matter how many quotes I posted. They'd all be just "Utilitarian" or "Libertarian" in your view anyway.

[Stone Mountain]

Did you miss the post where another Freeper said he also recalled the thread where Moderman argued in defense of Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban?

Yes, but I don't necessarily trust one Freeper's report of what another Freeper said. If he said it, I'm sure you can provide quotes...

So you're saying that only men can transmit STD's? How is it not a father's "business" if his own highschool daughters are engaging in Homosexual acts?

I thought we were talking about college min which case we are talking about adults. I don't believe Modernman ever said anything about high school girls.

I still say that you have the same agenda that he does.

Then prove it instead of making these cowardly accusations and ad hominem attacks.

[Stone Mountain]

If that one quote was the best you can do, I understand why you are so reluctant to provide evidence for your claims.

[Godebert]

"Now how about you address the point that got me into this conversation in the first place. Do you think it should be just as legal to put up an Osama Bin Laden rock as it was for this guy to put up his rock?"

Wow....another liberal who says that the Stars & Stripes is as offensive as Osama Bin Laden. If you want to put a big rock in your yard with Osama Bin Laden on it.....Knock yourself out. I'm sure any liberal neighbors wouldn't have any problem with it.

[Stone Mountain]

Wow....another liberal who says that the Stars & Stripes is as offensive as Osama Bin Laden.

Gee, I see why you can't figure any of this out - it's reading comprehension. I never said that or anything close to that. In fact, the whole point of the example is that Osama Bin Laden IS offensive. If I have to explain that, I can see that this example is just going over your head.

If you want to put a big rock in your yard with Osama Bin Laden on it.....Knock yourself out.

No, I don't want to do this. And in case you didn't realize it, I don't like Osama Bin Laden (since if I don't write that, you'll apparently assume the opposite). The point that Modernman and I were attempting to make is that as far as the LAW is concerned, this guy's rock and an Osama rock are equivalent and will get treated the same way under the LAW. It's all political speech, and just because you agree with one statement and not with another doesn't mean they won't be treated equally under the law.

[Stone Mountain]

Here's the original exchange that led to this:

" Would you be defending this guy's "art" if he had a giant "Death To America" sign and a picture of Bin Laden on his rock?"

So you are comparing this guy's American Flag and Eagle to Bin Laden? Somehow I'm not suprised.

The fact that you don't think they can be compared makes mm's point. You aren't defending "art;" you're defending the specific political message the guy is putting out. The comparison is quite apt - if you allow people with rocks to display political messages you like, you must allow for them to display political messages you don't like too...

[Godebert]

"I don't necessarily trust one Freeper's report of what another Freeper said. If he said it, I'm sure you can provide quotes..."

Two Freepers are reporting that he said it. How many Freepers you need?

"I thought we were talking about college min which case we are talking about adults. I don't believe Modernman ever said anything about high school girls."

You don't believe, eh? Here....I'll post his words again:

"...if I ever have daughters, I really wouldn't have a problem with them being lesbians in high school and college."

You still don't believe it?

"Then prove it instead of making these cowardly accusations and ad hominem attacks.

I've already proven that Modernman is a liberal and the fact that you have appointed yourself his defense attorney all but proves that you are one too.

[Stone Mountain]

Two Freepers are reporting that he said it. How many Freepers you need?

You have a problem with providing direct quotes? The fact the two Freepers may be as misguided as you are in attempting to identify liberals isn't good enough for me.

I've already proven that Modernman is a liberal and the fact that you have appointed yourself his defense attorney all but proves that you are one too.

Like I said, if that one quote is the best you can do, he doesn't need a defense attorney. If Modernman and I are such flaming liberals, you ought to be able to show quote after quote that supports your view. As it is, you come up with a tongue-in-cheek comment where Modernman quoted a comedian and that's the best you can do? LOL.

[Godebert]

"The point that Modernman and I were attempting to make is that as far as the LAW is concerned, this guy's rock and an Osama rock are equivalent and will get treated the same way under the LAW. It's all political speech, and just because you agree with one statement and not with another doesn't mean they won't be treated equally under the law."

Bunch of Bull. The fact is... liberals like you and Modernman despise the Stars & Stripes and the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. That's why you get worked up into such a snit when some guy puts them on a rock in his yard.

The fact that you say our Constitution and National Symbols are no different than a Muslim Terrorist who has killed thousands of our citizens is repugnant and disgraceful.

[Godebert]

"As it is, you come up with a tongue-in-cheek comment where Modernman quoted a comedian and that's the best you can do? LOL."

He stated that he agreed with the comedian that he would have no problems with his HIGHSCHOOL daughters engaging in HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR. You don't think that's a liberal view?

[Godebert]

I'm really not suprised that you are defending Moderman's liberal views on Homosexuality. Any Freeper reviewing your recent posts will see that you are drawn to the Homosexual Agenda threads like a moth to the flame. Guys like you and Moderman have gotten fairly skilled at flying under the radar always careful not to step too far over the line into blatant liberalism in your remarks.

Eventually you slip-up and give yourself up. This thread is a perfect example of that.

[thefactor]

and i noticed he has a new ford pick-up in the driveway. i love those things. a lot manlier than the old version. the rock is very tastefully done. it kinda resembles a tombstone, but i am sure up close it is very nice.

[Ragnar704]

I have no idea who this guy is, and I really don't care about his political leanings. So no, whether he supports or opposes gun regulation has no bearing on my opinion. I'm not the type of person who only supports the First Amendment when it's stuff I agree with.

Provided that there is, in fact, a law which prohibits the use of commercial signage on his property, the use of his business slogan on the sign *could* be interpreted as a commercial advertisement.

But I think it's somewhat subjective and open to interpretation. At face value, "It's better to own a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not own it" just sounds like a common sense, down home, saying. I don't think it's anywhere near the same thing as displaying a business name or a telephone number, hours of operation, etc.

What if he were to take the slogan off the sign? Would that change your mind?

[PAR35]

I'm not the type of person who only supports the First Amendment when it's stuff I agree with.

Good. That's a rare position these days. Just on this thread, we see posters that think he has a right to his rock, but his neighbors shouldn't speak against it.

What if he were to take the slogan off the sign? Would that change your mind?

One other fact is missing from the equation. Is such a display prohibited by restrictive convenants to which he voluntarily agreed. If not, then removal of the slogan would change my mind as to how offensive it is.

That being said, I still think that his neighbors have a right to complain.

[montag813]

He has every right to put this up in his front yard. However, he's a jackass for doing so.

Why do people have to muck up the neighborhood with stupid vanity signs? Like vanities on FR...very annoying.

[Stone Mountain]

It's becoming apparent that you are just a troll. Your one pathetic example that you are attempting to smear both Modernman and myself with is incredibly weak - and you continue to misrepresent it by calling college students high school girls. You're the one who brought up the gay quote - not me - it's certainly not me that's drawn to the homosexual agenda. You can't even come up any evidence (because there isn't any) that I'm a liberal so you bluster and accuse. Begone troll.