Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And yet most smokers don't believe that they are endangering public health with their smoking.
Your post has nothing to do with the topic and is nonsense as another poster correctly noted previously.
FACT of the matter is - in the United States, unlike your country, we have the Constitutional Right - the freedom, to decide if we want to purchase and possess a firearm. This is indisputable.
It is also indisputable that my ownership and possession of a firearm is not any danger to the public. And, if you suggest otherwise, you would be totally misinformed.
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker Except when your personal freedom endangers public safety.
Except it doesn't. This personal freedom prevents untold crimes you would allow, so you can feel safe.
Quote:
I guess you've forgotten all about Custer's last stand?
He was armed wasn't he?
Sure do. Its got zero to do with a population rendering itself helpless. Matter of fact it proves the point that a well armed group of determined people can effectively beat a well trained military force.
Quote:
LoL Wasn't upholding the 2nd amendment not your reason?
It sure isn't mine.
Again, I'm not interested in your opinion beyond the fact that its so easy to poke holes in & proves the folly of gun control for anything beyond public disarmament. It doesn't prevent or reduce crime & you cant say differently, it doesn't create a safer society & you cannot say differently.
So instead you toss out utter foolishness. I thank you. Well if ya already know that every government can turn bad arming yourself with a few gun's sure won't help any.
Quote:
LoL you’re contradicting yourself.
Either you trust your government and don’t need the 2nd amendment or you don’t trust it and require the 2nd amendment. What you mean to say is that you only trust your government as long as they uphold the 2nd amendment.
Why would I trust them if, as they are doing, they violate the contract with the people they swore to uphold?
What I trust is our system will eventually right the wrongs currently in place. See, in a country with a Constitution there are limits & there is recourse when those bounds are overstepped.
You might go along with whatever idiotic idea some elected moron comes up with, but then you have never lived in a free country anyway.
And yet most smokers don't believe that they are endangering public health with their smoking.
How off topic can you get? Theres several threads on this subject right now TD. Take a look, theres nothing proving second hand smoke is anything beyond offensive. You are simply a weak willed control freak.
The main point that anti gun activists can't grasp is that anti gun legislation only keeps guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Criminals will still have guns.
The whole anti gun thing comes from the liberal belief that you don't have the right to defend yourself.
I have no idea where you are coming from. Most of the people I know are what you would call liberals, and I do not know a single one who is "anti-gun" as a national policy, although most of them are "anti-gun" in their own pesonal household---they don't want one anywhere near them. I have never met a person who believes the 2nd Amendment ought to be repealed, or who believes that any law-abiding person ought to be denied the right to own firearms. If you can find a website of "anti-gun nuts", I can assure you that they are just as out of touch with reality as the "gun nuts'" websites, if not more so.
There is also no liberal who would state that you have no right to defend yourself. However, no doubt there are some liberals who believe that 10,000 rounds of ammo arouses suspicion that you envision yourself doing more than protecting yourself from a prowler. There are also liberals who believe shooting-to-kill overstates the warning against trespassing on your property.
I invite you to find me a quote from any American, liberal or otherwise, who unequivocally states that every American ought to have all of his firearms removed from his possession, by force if necessary. Until you can make such a demostration, it is highly inappropriate for you to take the default position that "every liberal wants to take everybody's guns away from them" and to base your entire agrument on that fallacy.
Liberals are not absolutists, and are perfectly willing to meet you part way on this. All they want is for the general public to have some kind of assurance that if a person does have a firearm, he also has a willingness to understand responsible use for a device that can have such awrul consequences if misused. If you are sane and responsible and more-or-less law-abiding, you have no liberals to worry about.
Believe me, if your firepower is ever needed to repel the abusive excesses of a police state, the Liberals will be there first, and glad to have you defending them.
FACT of the matter is - in the United States, unlike your country, we have the Constitutional Right - the freedom, to decide if we want to purchase and possess a firearm. This is indisputable.
What you seem to keep ignoring is that constitutional rights can be given and be taken away.
As long as it is done democratically.
So if the majority of the people vote against the 2nd amendment it goes away.
This simply is how a democracy works.
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker
Quote:
Except it doesn't. This personal freedom prevents untold crimes you would allow, so you can feel safe.
Being armed does nothing to stop or prevent crime. It will only ensure that the criminals will invest in superior firepower.
Quote:
Sure do. Its got zero to do with a population rendering itself helpless.
Apparently you didn't get it at all; Custer was more concerned with preventing the escape of the Indians than with fighting them.
He didn't expect that the Indians were prepared to fight back.
He also made incorrect assumptions as to the number of Indians he would encounter. So it has everything to do with numbers.
What you seem to keep ignoring is that constitutional rights can be given and be taken away.As long as it is done democratically. So if the majority of the people vote against the 2nd amendment it goes away.This simply is how a democracy works.
Ah, no. That is not how the 2nd Amendment would "go away"
Sorry but, your ignorance on the United States Constitution, and how our laws work, are clearly shown by the above statement.
No I don't, simply because all democracies work on a similar basis.
Whenever a society disagrees with its government and the government is unwilling to change you simply get a revolution.
No I don't, simply because all democracies work on a similar basis.Whenever a society disagrees with its government and the government is unwilling to change you simply get a revolution.
Oh yes you do have more studying to do on the way the United States operates for you have clearly shown you are not as well versed in our system of government as you have tried to lead everyone to believe you were.
And please - our government, and our form of government, while not absolutely perfect (then again there is no perfect government), has operated, with all of its faults, quite well for well over 200 years.
In that time - how many different constitutions has your country had?
And our Constitution is what guides our Nation TD - a concept you cannot handle.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except when your personal freedom endangers public safety.
I guess you've forgotten all about Custer's last stand?
LoL Wasn't upholding the 2nd amendment not your reason?
Well if ya already know that every government can turn bad arming yourself with a few gun's sure won't help any.
What you mean to say is that you only trust your government as long as they uphold the 2nd amendment.
So it has everything to do with numbers.