So what if I own ten AR's and have a hundred full capacity magazines and they limit ownership to two and ten? Legislation turns the law-abiding into a criminal. That is wrong.
And again most gun control was written by the evil NRA. Fact.
So what if you own a bazooka or an a bomb and are limited to two?
Look, we already know we disagree on the gun thing but what about the prison business? I thought we were talking about solutions but I guess I was mistaken. OK.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
I repeat.....The government is NOT going to take people's guns. Most likely they will not even pass the assault rifle ban. If they do. Big f'n deal. I will just buy an illegal weapon and so will many like me. FACT.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
I repeat.....The government is NOT going to take people's guns. Most likely they will not even pass the assault rifle ban. If they do. Big f'n deal. I will just buy an illegal weapon and so will many like me. FACT.
This sounds like an accurate assessment, whg although I'm still unclear as to why a citizen would have need of a weapon designed solely for killing large numbers of people. Think how many cool vinyl records that money would buy! Or other things that would bring joy to peoples lives instead of carnage!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
I have sold most of my vinyl collection. I just was over it. Been collecting for 15 years. Realized it just takes up space. My digital media is so much easier, and despite what some may think, it sounds just as good, if not better.
As to the weapons.....I don't think people need lots of things, but I don't think we should ban them. Why do civilian cars need to go over 80mph? I drive 55-60 and get to where i'm going just fine.
I hate to say this, but i would definitely support a ban on handguns way before "assualt" rifles
I have sold most of my vinyl collection. I just was over it. Been collecting for 15 years. Realized it just takes up space. My digital media is so much easier, and despite what some may think, it sounds just as good, if not better.
As to the weapons.....I don't think people need lots of things, but I don't think we should ban them. Why do civilian cars need to go over 80mph? I drive 55-60 and get to where i'm going just fine.
I hate to say this, but i would definitely support a ban on handguns way before "assualt" rifles
WH. Handguns are easily concealed and without a doubt, the weapon of choice for street thugs.
However... my father carried a sidearm when hunting. I handled it. I shot it. I understood the value of it as it pertained to hunting. As such... I would never want to deny a responsible and avid hunter the right to carry a sidearm when he is in the bush. With that said, I feel that to get a permit for a handgun... one would need a thorough background check and meet the highest of 'standards' before being issued a license for one. Not just any scrubbydub! As well... handguns have no place in the city unless it is just passing through to get to the forest.
To me, the assault rifles just aren't practical unless one is going to war or looking to kill lots of people in little time. It's a rare person that hunts with such a weapon and given the destructive potential in the mass setting... in my opinion, the 'fun factor' isn't enough to outweigh the risk. The fact that they are really cool at the range just doesn't justify hanging in the Big 5 Sporting Goods store ready for purchase to anyone who wants one. If 'protection' is the justification... a 12 gauge shotgun certainly fits the bill and is a gun that one might hunt with as well- perfect for the typical citizen! And... people should be permitted to own such a gun if their background checks out!
I have sold most of my vinyl collection. I just was over it. Been collecting for 15 years. Realized it just takes up space. My digital media is so much easier, and despite what some may think, it sounds just as good, if not better.
As to the weapons.....I don't think people need lots of things, but I don't think we should ban them. Why do civilian cars need to go over 80mph? I drive 55-60 and get to where i'm going just fine.
I hate to say this, but i would definitely support a ban on handguns way before "assualt" rifles
WH. Handguns are easily concealed and without a doubt, the weapon of choice for street thugs.
However... my father carried a sidearm when hunting. I handled it. I shot it. I understood the value of it as it pertained to hunting. As such... I would never want to deny a responsible and avid hunter the right to carry a sidearm when he is in the bush. With that said, I feel that to get a permit for a handgun... one would need a thorough background check and meet the highest of 'standards' before being issued a license for one. Not just any scrubbydub! As well... handguns have no place in the city unless it is just passing through to get to the forest.
To me, the assault rifles just aren't practical unless one is going to war or looking to kill lots of people in little time. It's a rare person that hunts with such a weapon and given the destructive potential in the mass setting... in my opinion, the 'fun factor' isn't enough to outweigh the risk. The fact that they are really cool at the range just doesn't justify hanging in the Big 5 Sporting Goods store ready for purchase to anyone who wants one. If 'protection' is the justification... a 12 gauge shotgun certainly fits the bill and is a gun that one might hunt with as well- perfect for the typical citizen! And... people should be permitted to own such a gun if their background checks out!
Dude, great post man. i knew you had it in you. i agree with you one hundred and ten percent on people needing to pass background checks to buy a gun. i would disagree with you on the not allowing them in the city because, depending on what city you're in, that might be the place you need it the most.
i also completely see your side of the assault rifle debate. i get it and you're right, technically we don't need them. yes indeedy a shotgun will work just fine for home defense. but imo, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of people that own them and don't kill people with them. so as an assault rifle owner, it feels like i'm being "punished" for the actions of a fraction of a fraction of gun owners out there.
again great post, i enjoyed reading it.
if you think what I believe is stupid, bizarre, ridiculous or outrageous.....it's ok, I think I had a brain tumor when I wrote that.
Dude, great post man. i knew you had it in you. i agree with you one hundred and ten percent on people needing to pass background checks to buy a gun. i would disagree with you on the not allowing them in the city because, depending on what city you're in, that might be the place you need it the most.
i also completely see your side of the assault rifle debate. i get it and you're right, technically we don't need them. yes indeedy a shotgun will work just fine for home defense. but imo, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of people that own them and don't kill people with them. so as an assault rifle owner, it feels like i'm being "punished" for the actions of a fraction of a fraction of gun owners out there.
again great post, i enjoyed reading it.
It took several proofreads to get all the 'boners' and 'idiots' out of my passage.
I should probably clarify what I meant when I suggested no handguns within city limits. Owners should be able to store their handguns at their homes... but they shouldn't have them on their person while going to 7-11 or shopping. I see too many problems allowing that type of freedom: theft, a poor decision made out of a moment's anger; accidents; etc.
If you go back to several of my original posts... I have suggested the only 'fair' way to move forward is to grandfather in licenses for assault weapons. You, as an owner, wouldn't be punished (as you put it). The idea should be to eventually have the guns removed from your towns and cities by not introducing any more for consumers to purchase.
My view is so different then yours. I think that carrying a side arm into the woods(nature) is ridiculous, unless you are taking it for protection from people.
Why do you want to ban something that has the ability to kill many people but relatively kills only a few, instead of going after the guns that kill 75% or more of the fatalities?
the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
...
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
...
That would not be a problem... if everyone that owned a gun was 'well regulated' in the 'security of a free state'. Even then, there are issues... mainly, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were self 'well-regulated' in the use of the firearms in their possession... so were the people barricaded in Mt. Carmel and Adam Lanza. They were all proficient in the use of their firearms.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I've said this before and I'll say it again: The most powerful weapon the founding fathers could imagine was a cannon. Not a musket and not something smaller. There is not a chance in hell that any one of them would have sat idly by if the masses started buying cannons and putting them in their front yards. Not a chance. The right to bear arms was important, yes, but even when that right was put to paper there were limits. That the meaning of their words is twisted so that people today can play with assault weapons like they are toys is a real shame.
How many people died last year from "assault" weapons?
Why are you so afraid of them?
How many were killed by them in Newtown?
I am scared of them because they serve no other purpose than to kill human beings. Handguns, as dangerous as they are and as abused as they are, do serve another purpose. I think keeping a handgun in your home for defense is in keeping with the spirit of the second amendment. I don't believe the same can be said for an assault rifle.
I do not interpret that as meaning only a militia can own weapons. To me it is saying that a militia is important to the security of a free state.
And those who wrote the 2nd would think it preposterous to speak of rifle bans rather than handguns. Handguns are worthless in combat.
...
A 'Well-Regulated militia' was originally drafted because the early states needed to cobble a regular army in case it was needed. Those soldiers were farmers and regular people who needed to be well-regulated... or trainned in military tactics. It does not mean a standing armiy, such as the one we have today. and it certainly does not mean the militia that Timothy McVeigh adhered to. Simply, people... citizens who were trained to defend the land of theirs and their neighbors from standing armies in other parts of the world... in 1779.
...
That being said... WHO... are you defending your home and family from? The L.A. Street gangs thatwear red or blue? The other armed gangs that wear black or brown? The other gang that wears multicam or digital Marpat? Who?
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
I do not interpret that as meaning only a militia can own weapons. To me it is saying that a militia is important to the security of a free state.
And those who wrote the 2nd would think it preposterous to speak of rifle bans rather than handguns. Handguns are worthless in combat.
...
A 'Well-Regulated militia' was originally drafted because the early states needed to cobble a regular army in case it was needed. Those soldiers were farmers and regular people who needed to be well-regulated... or trainned in military tactics. It does not mean a standing armiy, such as the one we have today. and it certainly does not mean the militia that Timothy McVeigh adhered to. Simply, people... citizens who were trained to defend the land of theirs and their neighbors from standing armies in other parts of the world... in 1779.
...
That being said... WHO... are you defending your home and family from? The L.A. Street gangs thatwear red or blue? The other armed gangs that wear black or brown? The other gang that wears multicam ot digital Marpat? Who?
The gang in the Blue Helmets that your Socialist Kenyan Muslim president is going to bring in to take away all our guns!! :shock:
A few people go wacko......out of the millions of people that own guns and everyone gets Paranoid?
the media feeds you and you do exactly what they want you to do by giving up your rights. We can't protect ourselves against tyranny with a hand gun...
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
A few people go wacko......out of the millions of people that own guns and everyone gets Paranoid?
the media feeds you and you do exactly what they want you to do by giving up your rights. We can't protect ourselves against tyranny with a hand gun...
...
Think about it.. in realistic terms...
This 'tyranny' you are so afraid of... when they come after you, what are they going to be armed with? What are you going to arm yourself with, in order to 'defeat' them?
As an example: They took out your Jesus of Waco with an armored personel carrier... that never fired its main weapon. And your Jesus Koresh had 2... yes, 2 .50 caliber machine guns. Do you know what a .50 caliber machine gun is?
Here is what one looks like:
This is what they shoot:
And your hero had 2 of those fuckers... and the tyranny stomped them like roaches.
What is this 'tyranny' going to do to you and your pathetic little AR-15?
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Also... the most moronic thing in opposition to gun control is trying to bring up Hitler and the Nazis.
There is this idiotic arguement that if the Jews in Germany were armed... things might not have ended up the way they did.
...
Do the people know who the Nazis were?
It took the United States, England, Russia and basically, the rest of the world (except Italy and Japan)... 4 years and tanks and B-17s and P-47s and P-51s and hundreds of thousands of soldiers and the Russian Winter to defeat them.
The Jewish professor with a .38 revolver wasn't going to stop them... unless he was armed with a U.S., British, Russian and rest of the world army in his home.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
A few people go wacko......out of the millions of people that own guns and everyone gets Paranoid?
the media feeds you and you do exactly what they want you to do by giving up your rights. We can't protect ourselves against tyranny with a hand gun...
...
Think about it.. in realistic terms...
This 'tyranny' you are so afraid of... when they come after you, what are they going to be armed with? What are you going to arm yourself with, in order to 'defeat' them?
They took out your Jesus of Waco with an armored personel carrier... that never fired its main weapon. And your Jesus Koresh had 2... yes, 2 .50 caliber machine guns. Do you know what a .50 caliber machine gun is?
Here is what one looks like:
This is what they shoot:
And your hero had 2 of those fuckers... and the tyranny stomped them like roaches.
What is this 'tyranny' going to do to you and your pathetic little AR-15?
They are NOT my hero....where do you get that from?
he methodology of tyranny
The methods used to overthrow a constitutional order and establish a tyranny are well-known. However, despite this awareness, it is surprising how those who have no intention of perpetrating a tyranny can slip into these methods and bring about a tyranny despite their best intentions. Tyranny does not have to be deliberate. Tyrants can fool themselves as thoroughly as they fool everyone else.
Control of public information and opinion
It begins with withholding information, and leads to putting out false or misleading information. A government can develop ministries of propaganda under many guises. They typically call it "public information" or "marketing".
Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers
It doesn't matter which of the two major party candidates are elected if no real reformer can get nominated, and when news services start knowing the outcomes of elections before it is possible for them to know, then the votes are not being honestly counted.
Undue official influence on trials and juries
Nonrandom selection of jury panels, exclusion of those opposed to the law, exclusion of the jury from hearing argument on the law, exclusion of private prosecutors from access to the grand jury, and prevention of parties and their counsels from making effective arguments or challenging the government.
Usurpation of undelegated powers
This is usually done with popular support for solving some problem, or to redistribute wealth to the advantage of the supporters of the dominant faction, but it soon leads to the deprivation of rights of minorities and individuals.
Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force
The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of "protecting" the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.
Militarization of law enforcement
Declaring a "war on crime" that becomes a war on civil liberties. Preparation of military forces for internal policing duties.
Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform
Internal spying and surveillance is the beginning. A sign is false prosecutions of their leaders.
Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers
When people who try to uncover high level wrongdoing are threatened, that is a sign the system is not only riddled with corruption, but that the corruption has passed the threshold into active tyranny.
Use of the law for competition suppression
It begins with the dominant faction winning support by paying off their supporters and suppressing their supporters' competitors, but leads to public officials themselves engaging in illegal activities and using the law to suppress independent competitors. A good example of this is narcotics trafficking.
Subversion of internal checks and balances
This involves the appointment to key positions of persons who can be controlled by their sponsors, and who are then induced to do illegal things. The worst way in which this occurs is in the appointment of judges that will go along with unconstitutional acts by the other branches.
Creation of a class of officials who are above the law
This is indicated by dismissal of charges for wrongdoing against persons who are "following orders".
Increasing dependency of the people on government
The classic approach to domination of the people is to first take everything they have away from them, then make them compliant with the demands of the rulers to get anything back again.
Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them
When the people avoid doing things like voting and serving in militias and juries, tyranny is not far behind.
Use of staged events to produce popular support
Acts of terrorism, blamed on political opponents, followed immediately with well-prepared proposals for increased powers and budgets for suppressive agencies. Sometimes called a Reichstag plot.
Conversion of rights into privileges
Requiring licenses and permits for doing things that the government does not have the delegated power to restrict, except by due process in which the burden of proof is on the petitioner.
Political correctness
Many if not most people are susceptible to being recruited to engage in repressive actions against disfavored views or behaviors, and led to pave the way for the dominance of tyrannical government.
Avoiding tyranny
The key is always to detect tendencies toward tyranny and suppress them before they go too far or become too firmly established. The people must never acquiesce in any violation of the Constitution. Failure to take corrective action early will only mean that more severe measures will have to be taken later, perhaps with the loss of life and the disruption of the society in ways from which recovery may take centuries. http://constitution.org/tyr/prin_tyr.htm
Americans will have to fight AGAIN for our freedom...the freedom our fathers, sons, mothers, great Grandfathers fought for. Bravery will have to make a come back and good people will die. Those that are cowards will side with the enemy but they will also die by the psycho that tries to rule this country and the world.......
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
The key is always to detect tendencies toward tyranny and suppress them before they go too far or become too firmly established. The people must never acquiesce in any violation of the Constitution. Failure to take corrective action early will only mean that more severe measures will have to be taken later, perhaps with the loss of life and the disruption of the society in ways from which recovery may take centuries. http://constitution.org/tyr/prin_tyr.htm
Americans will have to fight AGAIN for our freedom...the freedom our fathers, sons, mothers, great Grandfathers fought for. Bravery will have to make a come back and good people will die. Those that are cowards will side with the enemy but they will also die by the psycho that tries to rule this country and the world.......
...
Okay. Tell you what. YOU take up arms against this 'tyranny', teach your kids to fire your AR-15 and barricade yourself in your home, shooting at the Police and Sheriffs with your small arms fire. The rest of us will watch as your home goes up in flames from the tear gas cannister and your failure to adequately secure a fire suppression system. We will later find out how you shot your kids in the head before taking your own life.
And we'll all sit around the next day and talk about that psycho, anti-government, gun nut that killed his own kids.
...
P.S. Those "cowards will side with the enemy"? They are called 'Cops' and 'Army soldiers' and 'Marines' and 'Air Force pilots'.
Post edited by Cosmo on
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Do we know what a 50cal is? I got 2 man. U forget who you talking to? The resistance is alive and well.
...
Well... from everything I see... the resistance isn't doing shit except talking about how everyone else 'should rise up and fight'.
...
Also... you have the same number of M2s as the Branch Davidians did in Waco. I hope your fate is not going to be the same as theirs.
Hint: When they tell you to, "Come out with your hands up"... come out with your hands up. It'll be a better ending.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,084
Do we know what a 50cal is? I got 2 man. U forget who you talking to? The resistance is alive and well.
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
Sincerely,
The Borg
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.” Variously credited to Mark Twain or Edward Abbey.
My view is so different then yours. I think that carrying a side arm into the woods(nature) is ridiculous, unless you are taking it for protection from people.
Why do you want to ban something that has the ability to kill many people but relatively kills only a few, instead of going after the guns that kill 75% or more of the fatalities?
Do you even care about the dying?
You should know my response.....I don't.
You've obviously never hunted in deeper Canadian forests where there are several occasions to feel a measure of relief that you carry an additional weapon. Cougar and bear attacks are rare, but nonetheless... it's a precaution against a predatory animal. A 'tool' in the true sense of the word.
Your idea of a weapon is to use it against people: government, robbers, and other 'bad' guys. Canadians don't have that view- we have a better perspective for what a gun is best used for. Sorry- I'm not sure how else to explain it.
And what kind of question is 'do you even care about the dying'? Why the fuk do you think I encourage your country to get your gun problem under control?
As for your response to your own question... let's just say the pro gun crowd loses much credibility on this forum with such nonsense.
A few people go wacko......out of the millions of people that own guns and everyone gets Paranoid?
the media feeds you and you do exactly what they want you to do by giving up your rights. We can't protect ourselves against tyranny with a hand gun...
A few people go wacko......out of the millions of people that own guns and everyone gets Paranoid?
the media feeds you and you do exactly what they want you to do by giving up your rights. We can't protect ourselves against tyranny with a hand gun...
Do we know what a 50cal is? I got 2 man. U forget who you talking to? The resistance is alive and well.
...scares me much more than rhetorical tyranny does.
A 'fresh' perspective.
What's more 'real': a crazed government looking to enslave all its citizens... or a nutjob opening fire on a bunch of civilians in the public setting with a wicked weapon?
Enslave :? which came first the slave or the owner?
Governments control people, they are supposed to represent but it is changing.
Uncontrolled people are a threat.
They control in what ever way they have to. If citizens get pissed at the government
and how they are trying to control or what their intentions are,
the government will have to take action against that.
Passing laws to control makes it easy to confine those citizens willing to take a stand against.
Using force against those willing to fight is a real possibility.
The masses though, most are docile sheep, unaware freedoms are lost or just don't care.
We got lots just being cared for. Enough money for food, cable TV(owned by the government) and a roof...
the new American dream of the next century.
I new breed of slave one dependent on the government. I'd rather loose my life fighting that cause that's not living.
you guys are so cute talking about how you are going to defend yourselves against the big bad government who is coming to take away your guns and your freedom..
just know that you all are committing sedition by threatening the government...
good luck in court.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Comments
So what if you own a bazooka or an a bomb and are limited to two?
Look, we already know we disagree on the gun thing but what about the prison business? I thought we were talking about solutions but I guess I was mistaken. OK.
This sounds like an accurate assessment, whg although I'm still unclear as to why a citizen would have need of a weapon designed solely for killing large numbers of people. Think how many cool vinyl records that money would buy! Or other things that would bring joy to peoples lives instead of carnage!
As to the weapons.....I don't think people need lots of things, but I don't think we should ban them. Why do civilian cars need to go over 80mph? I drive 55-60 and get to where i'm going just fine.
I hate to say this, but i would definitely support a ban on handguns way before "assualt" rifles
WH. Handguns are easily concealed and without a doubt, the weapon of choice for street thugs.
However... my father carried a sidearm when hunting. I handled it. I shot it. I understood the value of it as it pertained to hunting. As such... I would never want to deny a responsible and avid hunter the right to carry a sidearm when he is in the bush. With that said, I feel that to get a permit for a handgun... one would need a thorough background check and meet the highest of 'standards' before being issued a license for one. Not just any scrubbydub! As well... handguns have no place in the city unless it is just passing through to get to the forest.
To me, the assault rifles just aren't practical unless one is going to war or looking to kill lots of people in little time. It's a rare person that hunts with such a weapon and given the destructive potential in the mass setting... in my opinion, the 'fun factor' isn't enough to outweigh the risk. The fact that they are really cool at the range just doesn't justify hanging in the Big 5 Sporting Goods store ready for purchase to anyone who wants one. If 'protection' is the justification... a 12 gauge shotgun certainly fits the bill and is a gun that one might hunt with as well- perfect for the typical citizen! And... people should be permitted to own such a gun if their background checks out!
Dude, great post man. i knew you had it in you. i agree with you one hundred and ten percent on people needing to pass background checks to buy a gun. i would disagree with you on the not allowing them in the city because, depending on what city you're in, that might be the place you need it the most.
i also completely see your side of the assault rifle debate. i get it and you're right, technically we don't need them. yes indeedy a shotgun will work just fine for home defense. but imo, there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of people that own them and don't kill people with them. so as an assault rifle owner, it feels like i'm being "punished" for the actions of a fraction of a fraction of gun owners out there.
again great post, i enjoyed reading it.
It took several proofreads to get all the 'boners' and 'idiots' out of my passage.
I should probably clarify what I meant when I suggested no handguns within city limits. Owners should be able to store their handguns at their homes... but they shouldn't have them on their person while going to 7-11 or shopping. I see too many problems allowing that type of freedom: theft, a poor decision made out of a moment's anger; accidents; etc.
If you go back to several of my original posts... I have suggested the only 'fair' way to move forward is to grandfather in licenses for assault weapons. You, as an owner, wouldn't be punished (as you put it). The idea should be to eventually have the guns removed from your towns and cities by not introducing any more for consumers to purchase.
Why do you want to ban something that has the ability to kill many people but relatively kills only a few, instead of going after the guns that kill 75% or more of the fatalities?
Do you even care about the dying?
You should know my response.....I don't.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
...
That would not be a problem... if everyone that owned a gun was 'well regulated' in the 'security of a free state'. Even then, there are issues... mainly, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were self 'well-regulated' in the use of the firearms in their possession... so were the people barricaded in Mt. Carmel and Adam Lanza. They were all proficient in the use of their firearms.
Hail, Hail!!!
And those who wrote the 2nd would think it preposterous to speak of rifle bans rather than handguns. Handguns are worthless in combat.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Why are you so afraid of them?
How many were killed by them in Newtown?
I am scared of them because they serve no other purpose than to kill human beings. Handguns, as dangerous as they are and as abused as they are, do serve another purpose. I think keeping a handgun in your home for defense is in keeping with the spirit of the second amendment. I don't believe the same can be said for an assault rifle.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
A 'Well-Regulated militia' was originally drafted because the early states needed to cobble a regular army in case it was needed. Those soldiers were farmers and regular people who needed to be well-regulated... or trainned in military tactics. It does not mean a standing armiy, such as the one we have today. and it certainly does not mean the militia that Timothy McVeigh adhered to. Simply, people... citizens who were trained to defend the land of theirs and their neighbors from standing armies in other parts of the world... in 1779.
...
That being said... WHO... are you defending your home and family from? The L.A. Street gangs thatwear red or blue? The other armed gangs that wear black or brown? The other gang that wears multicam or digital Marpat? Who?
Hail, Hail!!!
The gang in the Blue Helmets that your Socialist Kenyan Muslim president is going to bring in to take away all our guns!!
the media feeds you and you do exactly what they want you to do by giving up your rights. We can't protect ourselves against tyranny with a hand gun...
Think about it.. in realistic terms...
This 'tyranny' you are so afraid of... when they come after you, what are they going to be armed with? What are you going to arm yourself with, in order to 'defeat' them?
As an example: They took out your Jesus of Waco with an armored personel carrier... that never fired its main weapon. And your Jesus Koresh had 2... yes, 2 .50 caliber machine guns. Do you know what a .50 caliber machine gun is?
Here is what one looks like:
This is what they shoot:
And your hero had 2 of those fuckers... and the tyranny stomped them like roaches.
What is this 'tyranny' going to do to you and your pathetic little AR-15?
Hail, Hail!!!
There is this idiotic arguement that if the Jews in Germany were armed... things might not have ended up the way they did.
...
Do the people know who the Nazis were?
It took the United States, England, Russia and basically, the rest of the world (except Italy and Japan)... 4 years and tanks and B-17s and P-47s and P-51s and hundreds of thousands of soldiers and the Russian Winter to defeat them.
The Jewish professor with a .38 revolver wasn't going to stop them... unless he was armed with a U.S., British, Russian and rest of the world army in his home.
Hail, Hail!!!
They are NOT my hero....where do you get that from?
he methodology of tyranny
The methods used to overthrow a constitutional order and establish a tyranny are well-known. However, despite this awareness, it is surprising how those who have no intention of perpetrating a tyranny can slip into these methods and bring about a tyranny despite their best intentions. Tyranny does not have to be deliberate. Tyrants can fool themselves as thoroughly as they fool everyone else.
Control of public information and opinion
It begins with withholding information, and leads to putting out false or misleading information. A government can develop ministries of propaganda under many guises. They typically call it "public information" or "marketing".
Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers
It doesn't matter which of the two major party candidates are elected if no real reformer can get nominated, and when news services start knowing the outcomes of elections before it is possible for them to know, then the votes are not being honestly counted.
Undue official influence on trials and juries
Nonrandom selection of jury panels, exclusion of those opposed to the law, exclusion of the jury from hearing argument on the law, exclusion of private prosecutors from access to the grand jury, and prevention of parties and their counsels from making effective arguments or challenging the government.
Usurpation of undelegated powers
This is usually done with popular support for solving some problem, or to redistribute wealth to the advantage of the supporters of the dominant faction, but it soon leads to the deprivation of rights of minorities and individuals.
Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force
The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of "protecting" the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.
Militarization of law enforcement
Declaring a "war on crime" that becomes a war on civil liberties. Preparation of military forces for internal policing duties.
Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform
Internal spying and surveillance is the beginning. A sign is false prosecutions of their leaders.
Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers
When people who try to uncover high level wrongdoing are threatened, that is a sign the system is not only riddled with corruption, but that the corruption has passed the threshold into active tyranny.
Use of the law for competition suppression
It begins with the dominant faction winning support by paying off their supporters and suppressing their supporters' competitors, but leads to public officials themselves engaging in illegal activities and using the law to suppress independent competitors. A good example of this is narcotics trafficking.
Subversion of internal checks and balances
This involves the appointment to key positions of persons who can be controlled by their sponsors, and who are then induced to do illegal things. The worst way in which this occurs is in the appointment of judges that will go along with unconstitutional acts by the other branches.
Creation of a class of officials who are above the law
This is indicated by dismissal of charges for wrongdoing against persons who are "following orders".
Increasing dependency of the people on government
The classic approach to domination of the people is to first take everything they have away from them, then make them compliant with the demands of the rulers to get anything back again.
Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them
When the people avoid doing things like voting and serving in militias and juries, tyranny is not far behind.
Use of staged events to produce popular support
Acts of terrorism, blamed on political opponents, followed immediately with well-prepared proposals for increased powers and budgets for suppressive agencies. Sometimes called a Reichstag plot.
Conversion of rights into privileges
Requiring licenses and permits for doing things that the government does not have the delegated power to restrict, except by due process in which the burden of proof is on the petitioner.
Political correctness
Many if not most people are susceptible to being recruited to engage in repressive actions against disfavored views or behaviors, and led to pave the way for the dominance of tyrannical government.
Avoiding tyranny
The key is always to detect tendencies toward tyranny and suppress them before they go too far or become too firmly established. The people must never acquiesce in any violation of the Constitution. Failure to take corrective action early will only mean that more severe measures will have to be taken later, perhaps with the loss of life and the disruption of the society in ways from which recovery may take centuries.
http://constitution.org/tyr/prin_tyr.htm
Americans will have to fight AGAIN for our freedom...the freedom our fathers, sons, mothers, great Grandfathers fought for. Bravery will have to make a come back and good people will die. Those that are cowards will side with the enemy but they will also die by the psycho that tries to rule this country and the world.......
Okay. Tell you what. YOU take up arms against this 'tyranny', teach your kids to fire your AR-15 and barricade yourself in your home, shooting at the Police and Sheriffs with your small arms fire. The rest of us will watch as your home goes up in flames from the tear gas cannister and your failure to adequately secure a fire suppression system. We will later find out how you shot your kids in the head before taking your own life.
And we'll all sit around the next day and talk about that psycho, anti-government, gun nut that killed his own kids.
...
P.S. Those "cowards will side with the enemy"? They are called 'Cops' and 'Army soldiers' and 'Marines' and 'Air Force pilots'.
Hail, Hail!!!
Well... from everything I see... the resistance isn't doing shit except talking about how everyone else 'should rise up and fight'.
...
Also... you have the same number of M2s as the Branch Davidians did in Waco. I hope your fate is not going to be the same as theirs.
Hint: When they tell you to, "Come out with your hands up"... come out with your hands up. It'll be a better ending.
Hail, Hail!!!
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
Sincerely,
The Borg
You've obviously never hunted in deeper Canadian forests where there are several occasions to feel a measure of relief that you carry an additional weapon. Cougar and bear attacks are rare, but nonetheless... it's a precaution against a predatory animal. A 'tool' in the true sense of the word.
Your idea of a weapon is to use it against people: government, robbers, and other 'bad' guys. Canadians don't have that view- we have a better perspective for what a gun is best used for. Sorry- I'm not sure how else to explain it.
And what kind of question is 'do you even care about the dying'? Why the fuk do you think I encourage your country to get your gun problem under control?
As for your response to your own question... let's just say the pro gun crowd loses much credibility on this forum with such nonsense.
This...
...scares me much more than rhetorical tyranny does.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
A 'fresh' perspective.
What's more 'real': a crazed government looking to enslave all its citizens... or a nutjob opening fire on a bunch of civilians in the public setting with a wicked weapon?
Governments control people, they are supposed to represent but it is changing.
Uncontrolled people are a threat.
They control in what ever way they have to. If citizens get pissed at the government
and how they are trying to control or what their intentions are,
the government will have to take action against that.
Passing laws to control makes it easy to confine those citizens willing to take a stand against.
Using force against those willing to fight is a real possibility.
The masses though, most are docile sheep, unaware freedoms are lost or just don't care.
We got lots just being cared for. Enough money for food, cable TV(owned by the government) and a roof...
the new American dream of the next century.
I new breed of slave one dependent on the government. I'd rather loose my life fighting that cause that's not living.
just know that you all are committing sedition by threatening the government...
good luck in court.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."