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.
Because every good Christian needs a murder weapon in church? Guess Christianity is not a peaceful religion. Jesus would be proud.
What the heck is a murder weapon? Like do you mean a weapon that's been used in a murder? Doesn't the police lock those away when they are doing the murder investigations? Am I not aware of how these murder weapons are getting back onto the streets and into Churches????
Man, I need to start locking my doors! All these Churches and their murder weapons!
As it's been characterized before, our country has become like a strip club full of bouncers but no girls. When 4th Amendment protections were systemically legislated away, where was the armed uprising? Oh, that's right. To firearm fetishists, the 2nd Amendment was written to protect itself! Hell, half the time, they're the ones cheering on the Fascist State, JUST AS LONG AS I CAN KEEP MY TRUSTY SKS THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree with you that many rights have been eroded. Framers were concerned that future generations would get complacent and let go of many rights, which you are right again -- this has happened.
Yet, incremental small changes, accumulated over a long period of time, at one point will bring dramatic events. Never in history has this not been the case.
It is these climactic events that the right to bear arms was intended for.
I agree with you that many rights have been eroded. Framers were concerned that future generations would get complacent and let go of many rights, which you are right again -- this has happened.
Yet, incremental small changes, accumulated over a long period of time, at one point will bring dramatic events. Never in history has this not been the case.
It is these climactic events that the right to bear arms was intended for.
We live in a country where police can set up a roadblock, pull over all traffic and forcibly sodomize people on the side of the road, all under the guise of 'law' and 'searching for drugs' and 'stopping drunk driving' ; a country where police work has become an 'action career' for dumb, testosterone driven adventurists who wind up throwing flash bang grenades into baby cribs and/or forcibly invade the wrong house with automatic weapons at the ready... or even when they do get it right, they're doing so because someone said there were 'drugs' in the house. Where shooting the mentally ill has become like a sport.
We live in a country where a man did years in prison for importing lobsters in bags instead of boxes and that was all there was to the case.
We live in a country where 20 miles inside the US Border, roadblocks are set up to check peoples immigration status.
We live in a country where writing this internet post is considered 'signals intelligence' to people with the authority to peer deep into the details of your life.
Where was the 2nd Amendment?
No country is perfect but seriously, the 2nd Amendment wasn't written to be the last tantrum, like a dead-mans trigger that only when things get so totally horrific, well, you can go out in a blaze of glory instead of being marched into the oven. It was meant to empower the people to stop all this **** that has already occurred but as we see, all its really empowered are a few Walter Mitty characters to play Army Man at the range on the weekend and lots and lots of kooks who talk a big game about freedom but couldn't be bothered to write a letter in opposition to the PATRIOT act (they may have sent an email or signed an online petition, though!)
Sorry man. The 2nd Amendment had the right idea, in theory. What the founders failed to account for was what happens when anyone can have a gun but the only people with the balls to use them in any sort of consequential circumstance are criminals with nothing to lose. All those other clowns, they have families and mortgages to think of!
You answered 1 of 7 questions. I am still waiting for any lib to answer the other six. But I won't hold my breath.
But I will answer your only question, point blank. You asked:
Yes, it is your right to ridicule others' faith. That is your 1st Amendment right. Guess which Amendment guarantees your 1st Amendment rights!
But, know this. If you think like a Marxist, if you talk like a Marxist, you are a Marxist. Ridicule of the opponent is a major weapon Marxists employ in their propaganda. You are in lockstep with the rest of them. But, do you know that Lenin called your ilk "useful idiots?"
Equating a call for stricter gun laws with Marxism is absurd. In that case other successful capitalist countries such as Germany, Japan, the UK, France are 'Marxist'. What risible rubbish.
Equating a call for stricter gun laws with Marxism is absurd. In that case other successful capitalist countries such as Germany, Japan, the UK, France are 'Marxist'. What risible rubbish.
Why don't you answer the other 6 questions, but deflect?
Surely, we can talk about guns and those countries. I'd be happy to. But you also need to get educated about the political systems of these countries so we can discuss them intelligently.
But, first, go answer my questions you have left unanswered.
No country is perfect but seriously, the 2nd Amendment wasn't written to be the last tantrum, like a dead-mans trigger that only when things get so totally horrific, well, you can go out in a blaze of glory instead of being marched into the oven.
Disagree. Framers also set up processes and governance to address our vices politically, and make corrections accordingly, without the call to arms, and the upheaval of the civil society. 2nd Amendment wasn't designed to solve problems, such as usurpation of a right, without first going through a peaceful process.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaba
Sorry man. The 2nd Amendment had the right idea, in theory. What the founders failed to account for was what happens when anyone can have a gun but the only people with the balls to use them in any sort of consequential circumstance are criminals with nothing to lose. All those other clowns, they have families and mortgages to think of!
Although students and childless adults have been instrumental and driving force of several revolutions, history is filled with men with kids and mortgages / debts to have driven armed societal conflicts. You can't exclude them, although their fuse will be longer than a 22 year old kid screaming for liberty.
Disagree. Framers also set up processes and governance to address our vices politically, and make corrections accordingly, without the call to arms, and the upheaval of the civil society. 2nd Amendment wasn't designed to solve problems, such as usurpation of a right, without first going through a peaceful process.
Then there goes the 'liberty's teeth' argument, or that the 2nd Amendment has a tempering effect (ie, 'defends the other amendments') argument, if you're willing to accept that every time an essential right is undermined or even removed all together within the (perverted) ambit of law, it remains a political matter.
If you're willing to make the case that the 2nd Amendment is merely a dead-mans trigger or a 'last resort' option, than I'm willing to make the case that it's an anachronism and can be done away with all together, if that is its primary role in the modern age.
I realize people tend to suck at comprehending probability so Jaws remains probably the single most influential film on human behavior ever made and yes, there are people who deeply believe that Red Dawn is a warning or that Obama is trying to hide FEMA coffins to prepare for a UN-Muslim-Russian takeover but on balance and back here in reality, the 2nd Amendment loses pretty much all its ideological steam if its only role is as a mechanism to empower futile, violent tantrums.
Quote:
Although students and childless adults have been instrumental and driving force of several revolutions, history is filled with men with kids and mortgages / debts to have driven armed societal conflicts.
We live in a country where police can set up a roadblock, pull over all traffic and forcibly sodomize people on the side of the road, all under the guise of 'law' and 'searching for drugs' and 'stopping drunk driving' ; a country where police work has become an 'action career' for dumb, testosterone driven adventurists who wind up throwing flash bang grenades into baby cribs and/or forcibly invade the wrong house with automatic weapons at the ready... or even when they do get it right, they're doing so because someone said there were 'drugs' in the house. Where shooting the mentally ill has become like a sport.
We live in a country where a man did years in prison for importing lobsters in bags instead of boxes and that was all there was to the case.
We live in a country where 20 miles inside the US Border, roadblocks are set up to check peoples immigration status.
We live in a country where writing this internet post is considered 'signals intelligence' to people with the authority to peer deep into the details of your life.
Where was the 2nd Amendment?
No country is perfect but seriously, the 2nd Amendment wasn't written to be the last tantrum, like a dead-mans trigger that only when things get so totally horrific, well, you can go out in a blaze of glory instead of being marched into the oven. It was meant to empower the people to stop all this **** that has already occurred but as we see, all its really empowered are a few Walter Mitty characters to play Army Man at the range on the weekend and lots and lots of kooks who talk a big game about freedom but couldn't be bothered to write a letter in opposition to the PATRIOT act (they may have sent an email or signed an online petition, though!)
Sorry man. The 2nd Amendment had the right idea, in theory. What the founders failed to account for was what happens when anyone can have a gun but the only people with the balls to use them in any sort of consequential circumstance are criminals with nothing to lose. All those other clowns, they have families and mortgages to think of!
Do you hate guns, want to disarm the people or are let down because law abiding citizens aren't gunning each other down in the streets...Dodge City style? Do you think less of people who own and/or carry a firearm if they don't pull it and aim at people and shooting a couple?
Your assumption of only owners of firearms rising up against a rogue government is priceless. The majority of the population is looking for the portion who keep and bear arms to protect them.
If you want to know when arms are necessary look at what you feel you need to defend yourself against. Some other person(s) with a gun. Their guns won't be regulated so they have standard capacity magazines. Theirs are "assault weapons" while ours are "defense weapons". They are the ones with flash or percussion grenades, not the public. They also have huge armored vehicles capable of ramming through the front of your house.
Truth be known, it takes balls not to use a firearm.
Do you hate guns, want to disarm the people or are let down because law abiding citizens aren't gunning each other down in the streets...Dodge City style? Do you think less of people who own and/or carry a firearm if they don't pull it and aim at people and shooting a couple?
Your assumption of only owners of firearms rising up against a rogue government is priceless. The majority of the population is looking for the portion who keep and bear arms to protect them.
If you want to know when arms are necessary look at what you feel you need to defend yourself against. Some other person(s) with a gun. Their guns won't be regulated so they have standard capacity magazines. Theirs are "assault weapons" while ours are "defense weapons". They are the ones with flash or percussion grenades, not the public. They also have huge armored vehicles capable of ramming through the front of your house.
Truth be known, it takes balls not to use a firearm.
This was rather difficult to follow along with.
My contention is that the grand delusion of the 2nd Amendment as being the 'defender of all the rest' has demonstrated itself to be complete and utter bull****, given the status of things and how they've unfolded over the past 40 years but particularly since 9/11.
As far as hopping between premises- one gets shot down, so change to a new premise till that one gets blown out of the water, then on to another premise- that's usually what people do who are trying to maintain a **** position and that's what you're doing when the 2nd Amendment as 'liberty's teeth!' is discarded as the 2nd Amendment to arm- and arm against- home invaders.
Let me clarify myself.
I support gun rights in the USA because I comprehend the gun situation in the USA. It's permanently dysfunctional. There is nothing legislators can write on a sheet of paper on Washington, DC that's going to vaporize 300,000,000 unregistered firearms.
If there were, I would totally support that but since we live in the world of reality, in this country, guns are a reality, they will always be here so may as well just say uncle and let good people have them because bad people will too. Other countries- for example, Britain- are (and were, at the time they passed the strictest gun control laws) in a totally different situation so trying to compare us to them while ignoring the difference in scale is childish. Gun control may work in a small country with a handful of registered firearms. It won't work here and no, "WE MUST TRY TO DO SOMETHING!!!" is not an adequate justification for doing something pointless.
With that said, the 'gun rights' community is a complete ****show. Kook central. Not all, not even most, but far,far more than a random member of the population. They sincerely believe in dumb ****, they over-emphasize - to the point that it's the sole occupying purpose of their entire lives- incredibly unlikely scenarios. You point out how absurd it all is, they wave you off and dig into their emotional (and sometimes, actual) bunkers, insisting that the day will come when they'll show you!!!! WOLVERINES!
Choosing between the stridently anti gun rights and the stridently pro gun rights communities is having to choose between naive ninnies who suck at understanding facts versus deluded *******s who suck at assessing probability. In a perfect world, we could just kill them all but since we can't, may as well just accept the mass shootings as they occur and err on the side of letting people be free.
Why don't you answer the other 6 questions, but deflect?
Surely, we can talk about guns and those countries. I'd be happy to.But you also need to get educated about the political systems of these countries so we can discuss them intelligently.
But, first, go answer my questions you have left unanswered.
'Get educated'? Considering I'm originally from the UK I think I'm reasonably familiar with the political system there. I also lived in Japan and suspect that any 'enlightenment' on your part re Japanese politics would be of little consequence. I'm still struck with the fatuity of equating being pro stricter gun laws with Marxism, particularly when all the other rich developed countries that thrive on capital and free enterprise have stricter gun laws than the US.
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.
