Highjacked!
This is actually a thread for calling each other names. If you can't be an absolute jerk please participate elsewhere.
[:D]
There might be a real advantage to a government, bent on controlling its population, in respecting the 2nd Amendment. Completely doing away with any regulations concerning the RTKABA could be a grand propaganda coup.
A significant part of the population would perceive itself as being empowered again and stop "agitating" over the injustices of gun control. The political establishment could crow loudly about how it had restored the rights of Americans and claim whatever mandates it wanted to from the political capital it would reap.
While day to day safety from criminals would increase with the citizenries ability to personally protect themselves, their ability to protect themselves from their government would be hardly any different than it was with gun control. Government is always going to have a technological and organizational edge over its citizens. While there may be a few gun owners who would be able to organize themselves and afford technology that would be on a par with LE and the military, they will be the exception. Bread and circuses will be enough to distract most of the population from even bothering with firearms.
[:D]
There might be a real advantage to a government, bent on controlling its population, in respecting the 2nd Amendment. Completely doing away with any regulations concerning the RTKABA could be a grand propaganda coup.
A significant part of the population would perceive itself as being empowered again and stop "agitating" over the injustices of gun control. The political establishment could crow loudly about how it had restored the rights of Americans and claim whatever mandates it wanted to from the political capital it would reap.
While day to day safety from criminals would increase with the citizenries ability to personally protect themselves, their ability to protect themselves from their government would be hardly any different than it was with gun control. Government is always going to have a technological and organizational edge over its citizens. While there may be a few gun owners who would be able to organize themselves and afford technology that would be on a par with LE and the military, they will be the exception. Bread and circuses will be enough to distract most of the population from even bothering with firearms.
0
-
Well if you really don't mind I will. You asked.[:D] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Hunter Mag
Well if you really don't mind I will. You asked.[:D]
Yeah Hunter but we all know you can do better than that. Please elaborate so I understand why I am an idiot (armed idiot [:p] that is)0 -
Chaos;
Well ..you got a good start, there.
The problem I see, from MY perspective is ..the Second Amendment is only the anvil I beat continually ..as the most important of the varied Rights we are accorded from God.
The INSTANT that Right is fully recognized ..then we turn our attention somewhere else ..Emanate Domain, the Budget, corruption, road blocks..
There will be NO `honeymoon' given the government just because they decided to obey the Constitution in ONE area.
Grasp the concept of what I am saying ?
Pardon me, also, if I stridently disagree with your analysis of quote:"Government is always going to have a technological and organizational edge over its citizens. While there may be a few gun owners who would be"..
For I believe that is EXACTLY why we are not total servants of the Elites today ..they are not positive YET that they can win an all-out war with an aroused, infuriated citizenry..with the outmoded, limited weaponry we still have today.0 -
I agree with you on an all out scale. I was referring more to their being able to deal with anything regional or even more localized. On a large scale they would lose a lot of their "troops" since many of them are our sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, etc,... 0 -
Ahh, Chaos;
There is where you make a mistake...IN MY OPINION ONLY !!
quote:I agree with you on an all out scale. I was referring more to their being able to deal with anything regional or even more localized.
You get Americans pissed off enough..and 'all out' is the ONLY way they know how to kick azs.
While Gun Rights would surely kick off the fuss, if they were banned, say...LOTS of people are ticked off about multitudes of things being pushed in this country.
Heard about 160 thousand parents in California ordered to send their children to the propaganda camps ? Just another nail in somebodies coffin...Somewhere, somehow, there would be the spark that will ignite the passions of REAL Americans...and the Second is just a part of it.0 -
I believe in public flogging, a properly publicly flogged criminal will learn his/her lesson unless they like it, when that happens they should be informed that floggings are free and you do not have to commit a crime. Now many don't like this idea but this fundamental right is part of the first amendment which is number one for a reason, and it should be protected at all cost, the second amendment is second for a reason, if the first amendment is in jeopardy then we have the second amendment to back it up. I tend to get a bit fuzzy with migraines so ignore this if it doesnt suit you. 0 -
There are times I wish you could flog idiots too, but there isn't enough flog manufacturing capabilities in the U.S. to keep up with demand.. 0 -
quote:There are times I wish you could flog idiots too, but there isn't enough flog manufacturing capabilities in the U.S. to keep up with demand..
[:D][:D][:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by chaoslodge
quote:Originally posted by Hunter Mag
Well if you really don't mind I will. You asked.[:D]
Yeah Hunter but we all know you can do better than that. Please elaborate so I understand why I am an idiot (armed idiot [:p] that is)
I was trying to be nice, you don't know how hard that is.[:D]0 -
the Second Amendment is only the anvil I beat continually ..as the most important of the varied Rights we are accorded from God.
Gun rights from God? LMAO!!!!
Show me in your Bible. One which day did God invent guns?
I thought the Chinese invented gunpowder.
Besides, there is no God. Or Tooth Fairy. Or Easter Bunny. Hell, there's not even a Santa Claus.0 -
Triple223tap;
Interesting name you pick for yourself.
Using a pipsqueak round, you are forced to shoot repeatedly.generally missing the first dozen or so shots.
Much like what happens in what you call a `brain' .. really just a mass of protoplasm that quivers now and again to stimulus from without. Being a small, weak `organ' ..I use that term loosely, in your case.it is unable to form a coherent argument ..and must resort to all sorts of bluster and blow to distinguish itself.
Being imprinted with various and sundry liberal, secular humanist, socialist pathways, it is no wonder occasionally it will lash out at those with the capacity to actually think for themselves..0 -
quote:Originally posted by triple223tap
the Second Amendment is only the anvil I beat continually ..as the most important of the varied Rights we are accorded from God.
Gun rights from God? LMAO!!!!
Show me in your Bible. One which day did God invent guns?
I thought the Chinese invented gunpowder.
Besides, there is no God. Or Tooth Fairy. Or Easter Bunny. Hell, there's not even a Santa Claus.
For a person whom spends time critcizing the bible, and God given rights, YOU never spent a day reading the bible have you? OBVIOUSLY not. There are MANY instances where the people WERE armed. Even in the New testament, Jesus' follwers were armed.
Perhaps IF you read the bible and had ANY level of reading comprehension, you would then understand. Yet, I belive you can't meet that criteria.
If you DON'T want to believe in God OR Jesus, then thats all well and fine with me. HOWEVER, to understand where the FOUNDERS got the glorious idea of our rights and the sacred documents of this country, you MUST understand the bible as well.
Simple enough, you don't READ, therefore you don't UNDERSTAND.0 -
Freemind -
If God had wanted you to fly, he'd have given you wings.
If he'd wanted you to have guns...LMAO!
Say...what did Jesus carry? I've heard Glock, but I don't believe it. God wouldn't have picked a furrin' gun, he'd have chosen American. What did God arm him with? 1911? Bazooka? LMAO!
God given rights? Guns? What's that, the Jehovah auto? The Yahweh pump? BBWWWHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
to understand where the FOUNDERS got the glorious idea of our rights and the sacred documents of this country, you MUST understand the bible as well.
Huh? What do Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Franklin have in common?
Hint: Not one Christian among them. They'd have, and did, wipe their arses with your Bible. LMFAO!!0 -
quote:Originally posted by triple223tap
Freemind -
If God had wanted you to fly, he'd have given you wings.
If he'd wanted you to have guns...LMAO!
Say...what did Jesus carry? I've heard Glock, but I don't believe it. God wouldn't have picked a furrin' gun, he'd have chosen American. What did God arm him with? 1911? Bazooka? LMAO!
God given rights? Guns? What's that, the Jehovah auto? The Yahweh pump? BBWWWHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Read the bible you pinhead. They carried swords. That WAS as far as modern weaponry had advanced at the time. IF there had been modern weaponry that WE have availible, they would have carried that.
The premise of self defense/self preservtion is MORE than evident.
To say yet AGAIN "Simple enough, you don't READ, therefore you don't UNDERSTAND".
Take you useless tripe somewhere else. You obviously have nothing of substance to add here on this forum.0 -
"Simple enough, you don't READ, therefore you don't UNDERSTAND".
Really, freemind? How about you READ this -
"The Christian right is trying to rewrite the history of the United States as part of its campaign to force its religion on others. They try to depict the founding fathers as pious Christians who wanted the United States to be a Christian nation, with laws that favored Christians and Christianity.
This is patently untrue. The early presidents and patriots were generally Deists or Unitarians, believing in some form of impersonal Providence but rejecting the divinity of Jesus and the absurdities of the Old and New testaments.
Then this-
George Washington, the first president of the United States, never declared himself a Christian according to contemporary reports or in any of his voluminous correspondence. Washington Championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion.
Then this -
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." -- Thomas Jefferson (letter to J. Adams April 11,1823)
Then this -
James Madison, fourth president and father of the Constitution, was not religious in any conventional sense. "Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise."
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
Then this -
Ethan Allen, whose capture of Fort Ticonderoga while commanding the Green Mountain Boys helped inspire Congress and the country to pursue the War of Independence, said, "That Jesus Christ was not God is evidence from his own words." In the same book, Allen noted that he was generally "denominated a Deist, the reality of which I never disputed, being conscious that I am no Christian."
Then this -
Benjamin Franklin, delegate to the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, said:
As to Jesus of Nazareth, my Opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the System of Morals and his Religion...has received various corrupting Changes, and I have, with most of the present dissenters in England, some doubts as to his Divinity; tho' it is a question I do not dogmatize upon, having never studied it, and think it needless to busy myself with it now, when I expect soon an opportunity of knowing the Truth with less trouble." He died a month later, and historians consider him, like so many great Americans of his time, to be a Deist, not a Christian.
And this -
The words "In God We Trust" were not consistently on all U.S. currency until 1956, during the McCarthy Hysteria.
And this -
The Treaty of Tripoli, passed by the U.S. Senate in 1797, read in part: "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." The treaty was written during the Washington administration, and sent to the Senate during the Adams administration. It was read aloud to the Senate, and each Senator received a printed copy. This was the 339th time that a recorded vote was required by the Senate, but only the third time a vote was unanimous
And finally, try reading the US Constitution -
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
So, pinhead, Jeebus freak, how can you possibly claim, as you do -
HOWEVER, to understand where the FOUNDERS got the glorious idea of our rights and the sacred documents of this country, you MUST understand the bible as well.
They sure as Hell didn't get it from Christianity.
Go back to school and get your GED, ignorant person. Maybe then you'll be able to keep up with the conversation. For now, you're an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
*attribution, of course to the Wms. Faulkner & Shakespeare0 -
Gosh, Triple..that well researched, well written post has convinced me of the error of my ways.
I have one tiny thing bothering me, tho ..perhaps you will deign to enlighten me.
Where did the Bill of Rights come from;..In other words, what is the meaning of it ?
And does it place any limits on the government ?0 -
Gosh, Triple..that well researched, well written post has convinced me of the error of my ways.
Glad to be of help. Educating the ignorant is always useful.
I have one tiny thing bothering me, tho ..perhaps you will deign to enlighten me.
Where did the Bill of Rights come from;..In other words, what is the meaning of it ?
And does it place any limits on the government ?
You could always do a little research to learn what you should have been taught in grammar school - you know basic History and Government courses.
The Bill of Rights? It's limits on government are pretty plain, aren't they? They were instituted by the founders to prevent abuses of power which they had experienced. After all it is written in English. Questions sometimes still may arise - when that happens, the SCOTUS settles them.0 -
Well this thread has taken a serious turn, consider it now hijacked. religion and government can be considered good things, it is what people do with them that makes them such a pain in the ass. Now I once almost shot two Jehovah's when they interupted my sleeping time, and I dislike the notion of peddling religion on your doorstep, and a absolutely will not stand for anyone telling me the errors of my ways in terms of god... That I agree with triple about (in reference to the Christian right).
Oh and as far as the bible peddlers, I just had gotten home from a 3 month mission, and had been awake for nearly 50 hours. I answered the door wearing boxer shorts, a sig p239, and a really grumpy expression...
I also did not live in the best of neighborhoods. It might be wrong to admit that my weapon did not get discharged because that would mean a longer intervention of my sleep by police....0 -
So..just trying to understand, here.. quote:Bill of Rights? It's limits on government are pretty plain, aren't they? They were instituted by the founders to prevent abuses of power
Since man instituted the BOR..Man can change them..sorta at will. Hm ?0 -
The Bill of rights ought not be fiddled with, does this happen? hell yea
Each and every one of them is pretty important (the quartering of soldiers is a bit out of touch, but it was important at the time)... Those who are in power the career politicians will fiddle with our rights we have on paper because they can, but these rights have been cut a little deeper than what is in the parchment. We were born with these rights and only we can give them up, whether by ignorance, or fear ....0 -
Since man instituted the BOR..Man can change them..sorta at will. Hm ?
It is true, the constitution can be amended. Indeed that is where the BOR came from, they are the first ten amendments. Here's the procedure, right from 8th grade Civics class -
The Amendment Process
There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.
The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).
The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.
Amendments can be made, and later repealed. Remember Prohibition?
Is there an adult education program near you?0 -
True we have an amendment process but what happens when politicians start farting around with them... Power corrupts, and those who like that have had tendencies to whittle away on the things that constrict their authority... 0 -
So the Second pretty clearly states "Shall Not Be Infringed"...
What do you make of 20,000++++ Gun laws ?0 -
Highball if you were a congressmen then "Shall not" would be "why not"
I see guns as more of a hazardous material and should be trained how to use them correctly... Rather than banned
Oh BTW what would happen if we banned all guns tomarrow (including ammo)
economically over a million would be without jobs, and we would loose billions in tax dollars... how bout them apples?0 -
Wow,
I go away for a weekend to get my RSO certification and look what happens to my thread.0 -
It's been nice sitting here beating around the threads looking at gun stuff I cant afford. Apparently I am no cheap date when it comes to guns... 0 -
So the Second pretty clearly states "Shall Not Be Infringed"...
What do you make of 20,000++++ Gun laws ?
To tell the truth I don't know what to make of it. What do you make of exceptions to the 1st, amd especially the 4th, which Bush is violating 100,000 of thousands of times?
As far as the 2nd, that is now before the SCOTUS, and there should be an answer by about June. They have the question whether there can be exceptions to the 2nd or not. It's squarely on their plate.
Unfortuntely this SCOTUS has a history of ruling for big government and big business, and against individual rights.0 -
quote:Originally posted by crash2usaf
Highball if you were a congressmen then "Shall not" would be "why not"
I see guns as more of a hazardous material and should be trained how to use them correctly... Rather than banned...
Ok. Who decides the criteria? Ted Kennedy? I could design a "training"/qualification program that NO ONE (who wasn't politically connected) could pass.
That's a big problem with many of the "May Issue" CCW States. There is no objective criteria. If you aren't connected, you don't pass.
Now, if you are going to try the old "Drivers License" ploy, well, I've got a treat for you - I published an article about that very thing back during the Clintoon administration which utterly shreds that argument... because it would GUARANTEE that I could carry my CCW in NYC/DC/Chicago - AND it would GUARANTEE that I could carry my gun WITHOUT A LICENSE pretty much anywhere else.
Think about it for a minute, and you will understand.0 -
quote:Originally posted by triple223tap
Almost. I'll admit that I will not vote for any republican. If Obama's the dem, I'll vote for him.0 -
So, Triple;
quote:As far as the 2nd, that is now before the SCOTUS, and there should be an answer by about June. They have the question whether there can be exceptions to the 2nd or not. It's squarely on their plate.
I tire of this...I take it back about you converting me. Didn't really happen, you see.
What is going to occur is if the Supremes come down on the side of 'No Personal Right' to own firearms is...on the day the government requires you to 'turn them in'...you will turn them in.
Force of law...for you there is no higher authority...and you and TR and Slumlord and the 4 million members of the NRA...and 90 % of gunowners WILL TURN THEM IN !!
I, on the other hand, recognize that there is INDEED a higher authority then government...I was given INALIENABLE Rights by that authority ..and I will resist until dead.
You are now free to go back to practicing your secular humanism on more gullible people.
Btw...the quotes you throw about with gay abandon can be countered by other quotes...all day long. You have proved nothing.
Then there is TR fFox ..who persists in his childlike attacks about how professing that there is a higher authority then government as being Taliban like.
Children ..some of them get to be 65 years old and never grow up.
See ..I will point to just ONE difference ..for the intellectually challenged.
We that espouse a return to the Constitution ..many if not most of us appear to be Christian (perhaps not so funny, that) DEMAND a strict accounting for personal behavior that crosses the line into harming other people.
Misuse a gun ..get slapped with SERIOUS consequences ..not the crapola administered today.
I have absolutely no desire to force anybody to do ANYTHING.save leave me and mine alone.
Most of YOU, on the other hand ..you anti-gunners ..delight in forcing an an entire population to do your bidding.
Why ? I expect because fear rides with you constantly ..ever moment of every day ..the fear that you cannot handle a situation. You desire the government to handle it.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
51 comments