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.
Your format of reply is difficult to comment on. But I will try.
1- Do no misrepresent -- no one said that now in 2014, Britain has a tyrannical regime. In 18th century, it surely did. Many subjects were content with Tyranny. Some weren't, and those came to America.
Religious liberty was not the sole motivation for the War of independence. In fact, some would argue that other factors, such as economical and political were stronger, much stronger motivation.
As subjects of a former tyranny, we learned that arms are a powerful tool in overthrowing such tyrannies. We chose another historical path than British subjects.
2- "conjecture" of whether French Partisans or worse, Jews, would have been armed??!! You need to read and get educated on the history of French resistance, and Jewish resistance, during WWII to really comprehend how important armement was for them.
"Dangerous"?? Tens of millions were killed during WWII, yet, you argue that things would have been better if resistance to Hitler was less, or even non-existent. Are you kidding me??!! Your logic is really unfathomable, at this day and age, and what we know.
So what's the moral of your story -- do not **** off tyrants, because they might kill even more??
3- In 1930s, despite Japan's rapid industrialization, Japan's society, still transitioning from a feudal society into a capitalist one, this society was still a big laggard to western societies in terms of political structures, governance, legislative sophistication, judicial systemic strength.
Likewise, today Saudi Arabia or Dubai economies are industrialized and extremely modern, yet their societies are still primitive in comparison to the Western ones.
With "harakiri" I do not mean kamikaze. I do mean "harakiri." I thought you knew about Japan. Harakiri is a strong Japanese institution. It means "suicide."
4- You also state that Europe has experienced other periods of peace, longer than 60 years, which were under American protection and supervision. Ok. Give us an example.
I will turn the question to you -- give us an example of a CIVIL society, armed, and with rights to bear arms, when such Civil society has caused atrocities, commensurate with atrocities of Tyrants.
Your format of reply is difficult to comment on. But I will try.
1- Do no misrepresent -- no one said that now in 2014, Britain has a tyrannical regime. In 18th century, it surely did. Many subjects were content with Tyranny. Some weren't, and those came to America.
Religious liberty was not the sole motivation for the War of independence. In fact, some would argue that other factors, such as economical and political were stronger, much stronger motivation.
As subjects of a former tyranny, we learned that arms are a powerful tool in overthrowing such tyrannies. We chose another historical path than British subjects.
2- "conjecture" of whether French Partisans or worse, Jews, would have been armed??!! You need to read and get educated on the history of French resistance, and Jewish resistance, during WWII to really comprehend how important armement was for them.
"Dangerous"?? Tens of millions were killed during WWII, yet, you argue that things would have been better if resistance to Hitler was less, or even non-existent. Are you kidding me??!! Your logic is really unfathomable, at this day and age, and what we know.
So what's the moral of your story -- do not **** off tyrants, because they might kill even more??
3- In 1930s, despite Japan's rapid industrialization, Japan's society, still transitioning from a feudal society into a capitalist one, this society was still a big laggard to western societies in terms of political structures, governance, legislative sophistication, judicial systemic strength.
Likewise, today Saudi Arabia or Dubai economies are industrialized and extremely modern, yet their societies are still primitive in comparison to the Western ones.
With "harakiri" I do not mean kamikaze. I do mean "harakiri." I thought you knew about Japan. Harakiri is a strong Japanese institution. It means "suicide."
4- You also state that Europe has experienced other periods of peace, longer than 60 years, which under American protection and supervision. Ok. Give us an example.
I will turn the question to you -- give us an example of a CIVIL society, armed, and with rights to bear arms, when such Civil society has caused atrocities, commensurate with atrocities of Tyrants.
Can you explain why the 2nd amendment has been interpreted to only be firearms? Why has my right to bear all arms been taken away, but this perception of allowing firearms means my 2nd amendment has not been infringed upon?
The argument makes perfect 'sense' but I can understand why an ideologue might struggle with it.
2nd Amendment proponents rationalize their eternal inaction and unwillingness to accept the grave individualized consequences that would arise from their actually using their 2nd Amendment rights in the manner which it was intended as being a matter of timing; that whenever a government passes a law that undermines a fundamental right, it's OK because we can always pamphleteer and petition for a reversal of the law.
You argument - since we have forfeited several rights to the Government, we might as well surrender, forfeit them all, especially the right to arms as last resort -- Sorry, again, I find this argument irrational, illogical, defeatist, and gravely perilous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaba
Got anything since the advent of the telegraph? Because if the basis for your position are 'historical grounds' that need more than one century to cite a working example, your position has reality problems.
Why one century? Since Revolutionary War, our society has not had any other armed, non-military societal uprising, fortunately, so, of course, no one can find you examples of when "men with kids and mortgages" carried out a revolution in America since the advent of telegraph!!.
Can you explain why the 2nd amendment has been interpreted to only be firearms? Why has my right to bear all arms been taken away, but this perception of allowing firearms means my 2nd amendment has not been infringed upon?
Why? Because, 2nd Amendment has been under attack for more than 100 years. Of course, it is not a coincidence, but rather a long-term strategy of Liberals / progressives.
Why? Because liberalism, progressivism, which in and of itself are subversive confiscations and usurpations of the term, after you take off that thin veneer of modern lives, after you scrape of its camouflaging paint -- if you expose it to bare metal -- you will see that Socialism is nothing else than another form of Tyranny.
Same-old same-old tyranny that has plagued civilization for over 5000 years.
People say "hey, what about Europe? Europe does not have guns and is not tyrannical. See, taking the guns does not mean tyranny."
Yet, these what Lenin called "useful idiots" do not comprehend, or do not tell you that Europe is dying, its societies are dying, literally and demographically.
When we pull our troops out of Europe, when we stop being the Protector of Europe, which is coming BTW, -- we'll see how Europe can stand on its own two feet, with its welfare, while its getting old, and more dependent.
We'll see then how Europe withstands Tyrants when they appear again, which they always do. Europe's day of reckoning is coming fast.
Why? Because, 2nd Amendment has been under attack for more than 100 years. Of course, it is not a coincidence, but rather a long-term strategy of Liberals / progressives.
Why? Because liberalism, progressivism, which in and of itself are subversive confiscations and usurpations of the term, after you take off that thin veneer of modern lives, after you scrape of its camouflaging paint -- if you expose it to bare metal -- you will see that Socialism is nothing else than another form of Tyranny.
Same-old same-old tyranny that has plagued civilization for over 5000 years.
People say "hey, what about Europe? Europe does not have guns and is not tyrannical. See, taking the guns does not mean tyranny."
Yet, these what Lenin called "useful idiots" do not comprehend, or do not tell you that Europe is dying, its societies are dying, literally and demographically.
When we pull our troops out of Europe, when we stop being the Protector of Europe, which is coming BTW, -- we'll see how Europe can stand on its own two feet, with its welfare, while its getting old, and more dependent.
We'll see then how Europe withstands Tyrants when they appear again, which they always do. Europe's day of reckoning is coming fast.
So you can't answer the question, but rather chose to create a partisian political sheeple answer? Can your political party beat up the other? Does your political party have all the answers to solve the countries issues? What has your political party done for Americans to address this issue that I cannot have all forms of arms? What other examples do you have of positive things your political party has done to help Americans? Remember, it was you that placed all blame on another party without citing even a single example of what occurred. Why can not I have a nuclear bomb, and what legislastion did this liberal political party pass that had zero support of the party you support. I do know that the Assualt weapons ban of 1994 had support of several Republicans including Reagan. Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I wish you liberals would defend the 2nd as aggressively as you do the 1st, because one day you can say all you want, but you will not be able to do anything other than talk.
You want to blame a chunk of wood, steel and plastic for all the problems in the world instead of looking at the problem, which is nut jobs who should have been locked up, or kids who are drugged out because some Dr said they had a problem, when they are being kids, or parents that have no idea what their kids are doing because they are not involved with them and expect the schools to raise their kids.
Murder is Murder, does not matter if it is done with a gun, knife, club, hammer, car or what ever. The latest nut job killed 3 with a knife, but no one seems to care about that, just the 3 that were shot.
Why is it gun violence, but not knife violence ? or hammer violence ?
I wish you liberals would defend the 2nd as aggressively as you do the 1st, because one day you can say all you want, but you will not be able to do anything other than talk.
You want to blame a chunk of wood, steel and plastic for all the problems in the world instead of looking at the problem, which is nut jobs who should have been locked up, or kids who are drugged out because some Dr said they had a problem, when they are being kids, or parents that have no idea what their kids are doing because they are not involved with them and expect the schools to raise their kids.
Murder is Murder, does not matter if it is done with a gun, knife, club, hammer, car or what ever. The latest nut job killed 3 with a knife, but no one seems to care about that, just the 3 that were shot.
Why is it gun violence, but not knife violence ? or hammer violence ?
I'm here to defend the 2nd amendment. Why did you allow my right to bear all arms against tranny? Why can't I have all arms our military possesses? Your political ideals have weakened my rights, so can you explain why this was allowed?
So you can't answer the question, but rather chose to create a partisian political sheeple answer? Can your political party beat up the other? Does your political party have all the answers to solve the countries issues? What has your political party done for Americans to address this issue that I cannot have all forms of arms? What other examples do you have of positive things your political party has done to help Americans? Remember, it was you that placed all blame on another party without citing even a single example of what occurred. Why can not I have a nuclear bomb, and what legislastion did this liberal political party pass that had zero support of the party you support. I do know that the Assualt weapons ban of 1994 had support of several Republicans including Reagan. Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I belong to and support no party. GOP is complicit too in our slide away from our constitutional liberties.
Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 was again another curtailment of 2A. However, you should really tell us how this Ban had a 10-year expiration, for accuracy's sake. Next, you should also provide a unbiased source and context how Reagan supported this.
Why? Because, 2nd Amendment has been under attack for more than 100 years. Of course, it is not a coincidence, but rather a long-term strategy of Liberals / progressives.
Why? Because liberalism, progressivism, which in and of itself are subversive confiscations and usurpations of the term, after you take off that thin veneer of modern lives, after you scrape of its camouflaging paint -- if you expose it to bare metal -- you will see that Socialism is nothing else than another form of Tyranny.
Same-old same-old tyranny that has plagued civilization for over 5000 years.
People say "hey, what about Europe? Europe does not have guns and is not tyrannical. See, taking the guns does not mean tyranny."
Yet, these what Lenin called "useful idiots" do not comprehend, or do not tell you that Europe is dying, its societies are dying, literally and demographically.
When we pull our troops out of Europe, when we stop being the Protector of Europe, which is coming BTW, -- we'll see how Europe can stand on its own two feet, with its welfare, while its getting old, and more dependent.
We'll see then how Europe withstands Tyrants when they appear again, which they always do. Europe's day of reckoning is coming fast.
Again we have an absurd reference to 'socialism' re the gun debate. Again by that insane argument, every other rich developed country in the world is 'socialist'. The UK - whose capital is arguably the world's leading financial center is 'socialist'. Germany - whose car exports America would love to have is 'socialist'. Japan - the third largest economy in the world, and one of the most technologically advanced is 'socialist'. By the same 'reckoning' due to his lobbying for stricter gun laws former NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg (who some might suggest is a fat cat capitalist), is also a socialist. What patent rubbish.
They don't even try to join because they wouldn't get accepted. They're too old and fat.
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.
