07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 157158159160161 ...
tools
  1. Aquila's Avatar
    I'm inclined to disagree with the last few comments. It all depends whether or not the state has the poltical will or not to carry out such action. Sure, if the full force of state is brought down on a few civilians with rifles then the civilians will be crushed, but if the state lacks the political will rifles might actually make a difference, espeicially if the soldiers manning the tanks wouldn't fire on civilians. A tyrant might sieze power but they still have to consolidate it.
    I see where you're going with that, but I think anyone dreaming of such a day would be prudent to build their strategy around a worse-case scenario, such as the internment camps, martial law and house to house raids that Alex Jones is always droning on about. That's 2.5 million soldiers, most state and local police + NATO and UN contributions to the "peace keeper" force.
    jdbii and Scott7217 like this.
    12-11-2013 08:55 PM
  2. llamabreath's Avatar
    I'm inclined to disagree with the last few comments. It all depends whether or not the state has the poltical will or not to carry out such action. Sure, if the full force of state is brought down on a few civilians with rifles then the civilians will be crushed, but if the state lacks the political will rifles might actually make a difference, espeicially if the soldiers manning the tanks wouldn't fire on civilians. A tyrant might sieze power but they still have to consolidate it.
    Think this can only happen 'somewhere else'?




    This is a signature.
    jdbii and Scott7217 like this.
    12-11-2013 09:43 PM
  3. llamabreath's Avatar
    I think bacon should be a right. Oh, and also coffee and beer.
    Yes, yes and yes, but don't forget pizza too.



    This is a signature.
    12-11-2013 09:45 PM
  4. Scott7217's Avatar
    Sure, if the full force of state is brought down on a few civilians with rifles then the civilians will be crushed, but if the state lacks the political will rifles might actually make a difference, espeicially if the soldiers manning the tanks wouldn't fire on civilians.
    Then the government will send in unmanned drones that will kill without any hesitation because they merely follow their programming instead of a moral compass.
    jdbii likes this.
    12-12-2013 02:54 AM
  5. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    Russia lost in Afghanistan against guerrilla warfare. You really don't have to fight soldiers, just the politicians pulling the strings.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    jdbii and Scott7217 like this.
    12-12-2013 06:44 AM
  6. JW4VZW's Avatar
    The 20th amendment gave women the right to vote... therefore it is the reason I vote. Because of the constitution.

    That sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?

    ✌SG3/iPad2
    Now you're being a hypocrite. You said that it's ridiculous that I own guns because of the Second Amendment, which isn't even one hundred percent true, yet you claim you vote because of the Twentieth Amendment. You liberals make no sense!
    12-12-2013 08:02 AM
  7. NoYankees44's Avatar
    I don't buy the concept of: we are out matched by our military, so we should just give up all the defense we have from them and bend over and take it. If someone threatens me or my family, I will fight with everything available to me. I don't care what the power disparity is. I suggest everyone else do the same unless you want to be completely owned by your government.
    12-12-2013 08:27 AM
  8. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    I don't buy the concept of: we are out matched by our military, so we should just give up all the defense we have from them and bend over and take it. If someone threatens me or my family, I will fight with everything available to me. I don't care what the power disparity is. I suggest everyone else do the same unless you want to be completely owned by your government.
    If it ever does turn into a police state, all it takes is for everyone to take out 3 or 4 before you're dead and less and less police or armed forces will be willing to fight.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    12-12-2013 08:46 AM
  9. palandri's Avatar
    ..... I suggest everyone else do the same unless you want to be completely owned by your government.
    I am not trying to pick on you NoYankees44 because many others here have the same view, but why do you think our democracy is going to turn into some evil, tyrannical government? Are Eric Cantor, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell planning this? or is Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid planning this? somebody else? some evil minded globalist?

    I just don't get it.
    Fairclough likes this.
    12-12-2013 08:58 AM
  10. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    I am not trying to pick on you NoYankees44 because many others here have the same view, but why do you think our democracy is going to turn into some evil, tyrannical government? Are Eric Cantor, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell planning this? or is Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid planning this? somebody else? some evil minded globalist?

    I just don't get it.
    You didn't ask me, but if I had to guess, its because if you look at world history. Government always gets too big. If you read a lot of writings from the founding fathers that came from a tyrannical country, they warned of a lot of things we are doing today.
    Every day, we as citizens lose rights every time new laws are passed. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Better to prepare and prevent the worst other than waiting until the worst happens and then try to change it. My question is, how can you not get it?

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    qxr likes this.
    12-12-2013 09:32 AM
  11. UJ95x's Avatar
    Now you're being a hypocrite. You said that it's ridiculous that I own guns because of the Second Amendment, which isn't even one hundred percent true, yet you claim you vote because of the Twentieth Amendment. You liberals make no sense!
    She was being sarcastic...

    Posted via Android Central App
    Fairclough and Waterdroid like this.
    12-12-2013 09:57 AM
  12. NoYankees44's Avatar
    I am not trying to pick on you NoYankees44 because many others here have the same view, but why do you think our democracy is going to turn into some evil, tyrannical government? Are Eric Cantor, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell planning this? or is Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid planning this? somebody else? some evil minded globalist?

    I just don't get it.
    Power is either given or taken away, but it always originates from a source. After it leaves that source, it will never be given back without force.

    We as a society originally gave our government specific powers and limitations to go with them. Now however, the our government is slowly taking more power while our society is becoming more and more complacent.

    Case in point is the supreme court ruling for the ACA. As of that ruling, the federal government can now require the purchase of any good or service as long as it can somehow be justified in name of taxes. But you do not see that headline do you?

    You see, anyone that has power over you has to be kept in constant check. If not, they will slowly believe they have the right to more power over you. They may start to think that they know what is good for you better than you do. They will widdle your rights away in the name of "Protecting" you. Basically exactly what our government has been doing sense it's creation.



    But that all goes a little deeper. To answer your question directly:
    Power is abused every day on all levels. It is only a matter of time until the power that the government has is abused on a large scale. The people that we allow to govern us largely believe that we are ignorant and stupid(and unfortunately it is true many times). Thus they believe that they know best for us. They think that they will never abuse the power that they give themselves. And maybe THEY wont, but the next politician to replace them might, or the next.

    You say "but our government is designed to keep that from happening." You are right. It is. But how easy would it be to change that? I mean you have people complaining about the Constitution and the limits it has and wanting to rewrite it. Those limits are there to protect us. Anyone cannot see that is destined to become a slave to someone else.

    All any president has to do is find some excuse to declare Martial Law. Then everyone's rights are gone indefinitely. With the complacency of the American people today, do you HONESTLY believe that any sort of big uproar would not be immediately silenced after the show of power? We are a country of wusses. A large group of people that want all responsibility taken away from us just to make life easier. This is stupid, but it is exactly how Loki described it in The Avengers. We are a people begging to be ruled.

    All it takes is one mistake and one person to take advantage of it. You say "our military would not do something terrible." Do you think they would if their superiors told them that they were fighting domestic terrorists? If they were lied to? Just like Hitler and the Jewish people. How easy would it be to paint whatever opposing group as a bunch of crazies. It is what has happened to the Tea Party. What other group with libertarian views will be next? How long would it take the soldiers to figure out they were fighting the people they swore to protect? How much damage would be done in that time? How many would never figure it out?

    Specifically, the gun control issue is only an issue to the government in that it means the citizens have less power. The government believes citizens do no need that power. The government should NEVER talk about citizens not needing any kind of power. The government should be terrified of overstepping it's bounds and hesitant to use any power given. Unfortunately it is not. If anything it is the opposite. Citizens are scared of the government.

    Think about all this the next time a cop pulls you over for no reason and fishes for something to get you for. Think about this the next time the fed are caught tracking your personal information on the internet despite you never doing anything wrong.
    12-12-2013 11:38 AM
  13. NoYankees44's Avatar
    You didn't ask me, but if I had to guess, its because if you look at world history. Government always gets too big. If you read a lot of writings from the founding fathers that came from a tyrannical country, they warned of a lot of things we are doing today.
    Every day, we as citizens lose rights every time new laws are passed. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Better to prepare and prevent the worst other than waiting until the worst happens and then try to change it. My question is, how can you not get it?

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Unfortunately, history proves it is a cyclic process. Government gets too large-->Bloodshed and correction-->Repeat
    12-12-2013 11:40 AM
  14. nolittdroid's Avatar
    Now you're being a hypocrite. You said that it's ridiculous that I own guns because of the Second Amendment, which isn't even one hundred percent true, yet you claim you vote because of the Twentieth Amendment. You liberals make no sense!
    You conservatives don't have any sense of humor or sarcasm....

    ✌SG3/iPad2
    12-12-2013 12:32 PM
  15. Scott7217's Avatar
    We as a society originally gave our government specific powers and limitations to go with them. Now however, the our government is slowly taking more power while our society is becoming more and more complacent.

    Case in point is the supreme court ruling for the ACA. As of that ruling, the federal government can now require the purchase of any good or service as long as it can somehow be justified in name of taxes. But you do not see that headline do you?
    I see headlines about the ACA almost every day.

    The US Supreme Court reaffirmed the Second Amendment in two cases. In District of Columbia v. Heller (554 US 570), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm. In McDonald v. Chicago (561 US 3025), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment also applies at the state level, not just at the federal level. Do these rulings mean that the government is taking power away from the American people? I think they strengthen the rights of Americans, but I would be curious to hear your take on them.
    12-12-2013 02:16 PM
  16. Scott7217's Avatar
    I don't buy the concept of: we are out matched by our military, so we should just give up all the defense we have from them and bend over and take it.
    No one is saying that we should give up. We are simply being realistic about our chances fighting against the most powerful military on the planet. If the government has a tank outside someone's house, I wouldn't suggest engaging it with a rifle. We need to find another way. Remember what General Patton said: "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his."
    12-12-2013 02:37 PM
  17. NoYankees44's Avatar
    I see headlines about the ACA almost every day.
    But do you see headlines about the supreme court ruling allowing the federal government to require purchasing a good or service as long as it is a "tax"?
    12-12-2013 02:49 PM
  18. NoYankees44's Avatar
    No one is saying that we should give up. We are simply being realistic about our chances fighting against the most powerful military on the planet. If the government has a tank outside someone's house, I wouldn't suggest engaging it with a rifle. We need to find another way. Remember what General Patton said: "The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his."
    Then lets find another way while we also hold on to every other small advantage. Just because you have a knife and your opponent a gun does not mean you throw the knife away.
    plumbrich and Scott7217 like this.
    12-12-2013 02:51 PM
  19. Aquila's Avatar
    Then lets find another way while we also hold on to every other small advantage. Just because you have a knife and your opponent a gun does not mean you throw the knife away.
    My view is definitely not, "it's impossible, so give up" and would never cross the line of reasoning that one reason for ownership is less valid that previously assumed, therefore ownership as a concept is invalid. I think I'm saying something more in the line of, "if you defense against tyranny is your primary motivation, you may not have yet thought this through." To add some realistic expectations of what exactly it would mean to try to use low grade small arms in a military encounter. Can it be done? Sure, but it's not pretty or glorious or even guaranteed the most remote chance of survival, let alone triumph.

    However, the "disagreement" or clarification on that one point offers no argument for or against other perfectly valid reasons, such as personal/home/family defense, hunting, target shooting, collecting and thus would still never result in a default, "give them up" response. If anything, accepting the relative power positions of the people vs the government and it's resources is, if anything, a cause for reflection on what the actual primary motivations are for each person choosing to go so armed.

    If the sole basis of the argument in favor of civilian ownership was defense against tyranny, then there may be a point in suggesting that the battle implied has already been lost. However, there is no single reason that a person may want to own weapons, we all have different value patterns and as of today's interpretation, regardless of the reasoning, the right to act on that reasoning is protected.

    I would suggest that, from a Constitutional perspective, the right to purchase/own/keep weapons is more protected by the fact nothing in the Constitution allows for disarmament and that this is a fourth amendment issue, than any protection offered directly by the second amendment. Today they both are protections, however if something did change and the second amendment were clarified and excluded the current interpretation, the right to protection from unreasonable search and seizure would still trump any legal ability to confiscate weapons from law abiding citizens.
    12-12-2013 04:09 PM
  20. KiwiGrrl's Avatar
    We actually have big border patrol arguments. Its why our government is in a dispute with Indonesia (besides our embassy being caught tapping their PM's phone and his wife's) because all our illegal immigrants depart from there, with the exception of kiwi's overstaying their visa.

    But no right is lost, you can have a gun for a justifiable reason... Defence is not one of those.

    Didn't you guys say cars are more deadly then guns.. Should of chose a hit n run (seriously don't do that).

    Maybe your society is just so rooted from the belief you need guns any weapon is becoming acceptable! Here having a weapon is not acceptable. Your examples were in a country with guns and yet they weren't used. Now did guns stop your examples, no they didn't.

    A gun is not needed to defend yourself.
    Fairclough, the Australian issue with refugee boat people isn't quite the same thing as having 2 huge, wide open borders one can smuggle people, guns and drugs through any old time they like, pretty much unhindered. Not the same at all. You do know Kiwis don't even need a visa to visit, move to or work in Australia though, right? Hard to overstay something that doesn't exist ;-)

    It's funny, I used to feel like you. Argued long and hard with my husband for the first few years. LOL. Now we live in the US and yep, I carry. Why? My son was shot at during an attempted mugging while walking our dogs. His best friend was murdered in a road rage incident (by a drug dealer who was a convicted felon and not allowed to own guns) and the same week, my in laws house was robbed (they ripped the safe right out of the wall in the closet). I bought a shotgun after that.

    When a friend of mine took a back road instead of the freeway to take her bike in for repairs and had a carload of young men start threatening her and actually trying to pull her off her bike, I bought a handgun and started training left-handed shooting.

    Would I prefer not to feel like I have to resort to that? Of course. But this isn't the same country as the one in which I formed my idealistic beliefs. It's not an island nation of a much smaller size where it's easier to control what comes in and out and what's there already, and where the people are already used to the government having a huge say in their day to day lives. When it comes to it, I'm not going to hope someone else comes along if I'm being harassed out on the road, particularly if I'm in the middle of nowhere. I'm not going to rely on my neighbors or the police to get here first if someone's trying to break down my door. I know whoever's coming at me is likely armed and as far as I'm concerned, defending my life is more than justifiable.

    Edited to add: Figuring out self defense stats is tough because it's all lumped in under gun deaths. Homicide, even justifiable, is still considered homicide and reported as such when it comes to stats. Often, they barely make the news unless there is something fishy about it and even more rarely do they garner national attention.
    jdbii and qxr like this.
    12-12-2013 08:13 PM
  21. Fairclough's Avatar
    Funny bit is...
    Our conservative party in Australia is the liberals. However they did bring in gun control.

    - Android Central App. Remember courage is contagious.
    12-13-2013 06:02 AM
  22. alexlam24's Avatar
    I have a feeling the NSA is looking at this thread and laughing.

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    12-13-2013 06:41 AM
  23. JW4VZW's Avatar
    She was being sarcastic...

    Posted via Android Central App
    I am fluent in sarcasm and hypocrisy. That was definitely the latter and not the former.
    You conservatives don't have any sense of humor or sarcasm....

    ✌SG3/iPad2
    Like I said, I am fluent in sarcasm and hypocrisy. That was definitely the latter and not the former.
    12-13-2013 10:27 AM
  24. JW4VZW's Avatar
    Is it a dream world because where I am no one sees the need to carry a gun for self defence. We have guns for sport and cattle but only 5% of the population owns a gun and we have restrictions so out shootings don't occur. You could step out of your world into mine, it costs about $700 for flights? I don't think you will need a thinking hat even if some concepts are hard to comprehend (see what I did, used your talking to down and used it in a reply ). It would be obvious. Society can get along with out arms.
    Hey, if your country wants to ban guns, that is all good and everything. Here in America, we have a Second Amendment which guarantees our ability to possess firearms.
    We actually have big border patrol arguments. Its why our government is in a dispute with Indonesia (besides our embassy being caught tapping their PM's phone and his wife's) because all our illegal immigrants depart from there
    Didnt Australia deport illegals to Papa New Guinea?

    kiwi's
    Is a racial slur for someone from New Zealand. How is it that you, Fairclough, is allowed to say racial slurs in these forums and not get banned? You have said rednecks before, and now you say kiwis. Not really an accusation, more of a personal curiousity.
    12-13-2013 11:23 AM
  25. palandri's Avatar
    ...Is a racial slur for someone from New Zealand. How is it that you, Fairclough, is allowed to say racial slurs in these forums and not get banned? You have said rednecks before, and now you say kiwis. Not really an accusation, more of a personal curiousity.
    You're wrong:

    Kiwi is the nickname used internationally for people from New Zealand,[1] as well as being a relatively common self-reference. The name derives from the kiwi, a flightless bird, which is native to, and the national symbol of, New Zealand. Unlike many demographic labels, its usage is not considered offensive; it is generally viewed as a symbol of pride and endearment for the people of New Zealand....
    Kiwis/Kiwi - New Zealand Immigration Service

    Kiwi (people) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    12-13-2013 11:29 AM
4,617 ... 157158159160161 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD