07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 161162163164165 ...
tools
  1. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    What I find humorous about those that will scream until they're blue in the face about their 2nd amendment rights is when they pretend that they're the last bastion of freedom in this country because they help keep the government at bay with their 20 rifles and hand guns. Back when the original document was drafted people only had access muskets and cannons for the most part. The amount of firepower the government had access to wasn't much better than the amount the ordinary citizen could possess. Most of what a citizen has access to today can't even compare to some of the weapons our government has access to, thus it's beyond me why people think that their access to a rifle or a gun is a match for the government's slew of tanks, airplanes, nuclear and biological weapons.

    What I've noticed from some of the staunchest gun rights supporters I know is that they tend to use their ownership of a gun as some form of expression of manhood (albeit a sad one). Some of the people I've had heated discussions regarding gun rights weren't the best physical example of what it means to be a man and I think therein lies part of the problem and part of the reason that some people are so passionate about it. If you take a sampling of those people that are the staunchest supporters of gun rights, you find a pattern, mostly middle to older aged men. You can't really blame them for fighting for their right to carry around something that to them is an expression of their manhood during a time in their life where the things we as a society identify as "Manly" are on the decline.

    Typically when I mention my observations on this topic to some of my 2nd-amendment friends, I can practically see the blood pressure build in their eyes and the name calling tends to begin, which all it does is reinforces my belief that maybe I'm onto something.
    Find humor in it if you will, but don't underestimate how much conventional firearms can play into first of all, the decision making process of a government (hypothetically) turning on its people. Do you want to destroy your own country to push by our agenda? Do we use non conventional weapons on our on soil that we have to inhabit? Do we want people incited to the point where we become targets? Its not as simple as send in the drones. If there were no guns, then there would definitely be no option.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    12-18-2013 08:08 AM
  2. anon8126715's Avatar
    So, by your logic, the government should have access to your email and should be able to listen to your phone calls. Neither one of those existed when the constitution was written, and you shouldn't be able to have freedom of speech through either one of those outlets either.


    And maybe people get upset with you trying to take away one of their rights like a 6 year old because you don't like something. That's like me trying to outlaw vehicles because I don't like them.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    I'm not exactly sure where you draw the comparison to the advanced weapons available to ordinary citizens today (and not available to them) and Email/Telephone. If I may be a little clearer with my assertion, the 2nd amendment, as translated today by those 2nd amendment fundamentalists states that a citizen can keep and bear arms as a way to keep the government in check, so to speak. My assertion is that if the spirit of the amendment was written to ensure that a citizen could arm themselves to protect themselves from the tyranny of government, then by default that amendment has already been mostly neutralized in the fact that a private citizen cannot buy weapons capable of dealing with the firepower of our government. I've heard that some retired law officers may have access to some higher grade weapons such as missile launchers, etc., but for the most part everyday Joe isn't going to be able to buy anything that is going to come close to keeping the government at bay. Look at what happened at the Branched Davidian Waco facility. If the government wants you, I hate to break it to you but they're going to get you.
    12-18-2013 08:11 AM
  3. anon8126715's Avatar
    Find humor in it if you will, but don't underestimate how much conventional firearms can play into first of all, the decision making process of a government (hypothetically) turning on its people. Do you want to destroy your own country to push by our agenda? Do we use non conventional weapons on our on soil that we have to inhabit? Do we want people incited to the point where we become targets? Its not as simple as send in the drones. If there were no guns, then there would definitely be no option.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    I'm not convinced that there would be no option in this day and age. I even think there are a few industrialized nations that have proved it's possible to have a democratic society free of an armed group of citizens.

    Also, just as a note, I can't say that I'm for an all out ban on all weapons, but I do think the arguments posed by the 2nd amendment gun people are a little far fetched and a little dated.
    palandri likes this.
    12-18-2013 08:20 AM
  4. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    I presume you walk everywhere then? :

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    I presume if someone has a gun to your head, you'll want to tell them that they can't do that because what they are doing is illegal.

    Actually, I like vehicles, I just used it as a hypothetical question.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    12-18-2013 08:27 AM
  5. anon8126715's Avatar
    I presume if someone has a gun to your head, you'll want to tell them that they can't do that because what they are doing is illegal.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Or he can just run over them with his equally illegal car?!?!
    12-18-2013 08:32 AM
  6. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    Or he can just run over them with his equally illegal car?!?!
    If vehicles are outlawed because someone wants to act like a 6 year old, then yes

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    12-18-2013 08:34 AM
  7. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    I'm not exactly sure where you draw the comparison to the advanced weapons available to ordinary citizens today (and not available to them) and Email/Telephone. If I may be a little clearer with my assertion, the 2nd amendment, as translated today by those 2nd amendment fundamentalists states that a citizen can keep and bear arms as a way to keep the government in check, so to speak. My assertion is that if the spirit of the amendment was written to ensure that a citizen could arm themselves to protect themselves from the tyranny of government, then by default that amendment has already been mostly neutralized in the fact that a private citizen cannot buy weapons capable of dealing with the firepower of our government. I've heard that some retired law officers may have access to some higher grade weapons such as missile launchers, etc., but for the most part everyday Joe isn't going to be able to buy anything that is going to come close to keeping the government at bay. Look at what happened at the Branched Davidian Waco facility. If the government wants you, I hate to break it to you but they're going to get you.
    You're not looking at the overall big picture. It is never as simple as my gun is bigger than yours. Remove the guns and no one has to consider consequences. History is full of instances where the underdog isn't defeated.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    12-18-2013 08:43 AM
  8. palandri's Avatar
    I have to laugh every time I hear the argument of protection from a rogue government, because I think of a picture I saw of a Somali pirate pointing a RPG at a French warship. That warship could have turned him into kibble & bits dog food from 200 miles away.
    Fairclough likes this.
    12-18-2013 08:43 AM
  9. anon8126715's Avatar
    If vehicles are outlawed because someone wants to act like a 6 year old, then yes

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    What would you say is your interpretation of the 2nd amendment and how do you think it is relevant today when compared to the spirit of how it was written by the original framers?

    I still think they wrote it in reaction to what took place just a few years prior with British soldiers occupying individual homes. I wonder what our reaction would be as a country if we were in an occupied country (Iraq/Afghanistan/etc) and that country's leadership made it a law that every citizen had a right to carry a weapon and/or explosives in their homes as a measure of protecting their families in direct response to our occupation of their country. Sometimes I can't help wonder if we think too highly of ourselves as Americans.
    palandri likes this.
    12-18-2013 08:51 AM
  10. Fairclough's Avatar
    Mm what country will I have to be in the get a gun to my head because where I am the only gun I've seen drawn in public has been from an TRG officer doing a raid on a drug lab?

    With the right restrictions criminals would not have access to guns. Simple.

    - Android Central App. N'oublions jamais l'Australie, Villers-Bretonneux. Prepare for January 26.
    palandri likes this.
    12-18-2013 08:52 AM
  11. anon8126715's Avatar
    You're not looking at the overall big picture. It is never as simple as my gun is bigger than yours. Remove the guns and no one has to consider consequences. History is full of instances where the underdog isn't defeated.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    I'm mostly applying it in reference to some of the claims made by those that think the 2nd amendment is there to ensure against the tyrannies of government. I agree with your statement. We've recently seen some governments toppled despite the fact that their country doesn't have the gun culture that's prevalent in the U.S.
    12-18-2013 08:55 AM
  12. anon8126715's Avatar
    I have to laugh every time I hear the argument of protection from a rogue government, because I think of a picture I saw of a Somali pirate pointing a RPG at a French warship. That warship could have turned him into kibble & bits dog food from 200 miles away.
    I would've figured it being a FRENCH warship, it would've surrendered....
    12-18-2013 08:56 AM
  13. palandri's Avatar
    Find humor in it if you will, but don't underestimate how much conventional firearms can play into first of all, the decision making process of a government (hypothetically) turning on its people. Do you want to destroy your own country to push by our agenda? Do we use non conventional weapons on our on soil that we have to inhabit? Do we want people incited to the point where we become targets? Its not as simple as send in the drones. If there were no guns, then there would definitely be no option.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    Here we go again with the Zombie Army theory. The government and what Army? I am a veteran and I would never turn my weapon on civilians. Ask any of the other veterans that post back here if they would; their answer would be no.
    12-18-2013 09:05 AM
  14. anon8126715's Avatar
    Here we go again with the Zombie Army theory. The government and what Army? I am a veteran and I would never turn my weapon on civilians. Ask any of the other veterans that post back here if they would; their answer would be no.
    One might say we've already been turned on by our government with the NSA's domestic spying. If anything, it only demonstrates to me that the government can and will take what it wants. It reminds me of that movie iRobot where the "logic" is that we're too violent for our own good so all our freedoms have been stripped from us.
    12-18-2013 09:18 AM
  15. llamabreath's Avatar
    Here we go again with the Zombie Army theory. The government and what Army? I am a veteran and I would never turn my weapon on civilians. Ask any of the other veterans that post back here if they would; their answer would be no.
    Who needs veterans when we have drones? A tyrannical government doesn't need anybody except for a few button-pushers (aka: geeks) to achieve what we're talking about here. Talk about revenge of the nerds, smh...



    This is a signature.
    Scott7217 likes this.
    12-18-2013 09:30 AM
  16. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    Two types of people in this discussion. It will never happen to me or you never can tell. I don't trust the government which puts me in the second category.

    Sent from my XT1060 using AC Forums mobile app
    12-18-2013 09:56 AM
  17. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    Here we go again with the Zombie Army theory. The government and what Army? I am a veteran and I would never turn my weapon on civilians. Ask any of the other veterans that post back here if they would; their answer would be no.
    I'm sure the German people thought the same

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Live2ride883 and Scott7217 like this.
    12-18-2013 10:46 AM
  18. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    What would you say is your interpretation of the 2nd amendment and how do you think it is relevant today when compared to the spirit of how it was written by the original framers?

    I still think they wrote it in reaction to what took place just a few years prior with British soldiers occupying individual homes. I wonder what our reaction would be as a country if we were in an occupied country (Iraq/Afghanistan/etc) and that country's leadership made it a law that every citizen had a right to carry a weapon and/or explosives in their homes as a measure of protecting their families in direct response to our occupation of their country. Sometimes I can't help wonder if we think too highly of ourselves as Americans.
    From what I have read from the founding fathers writings is they did not want this country turning into an oppressive government, and to protect yourself and country from other countries intent on doing harm.
    I agree that we do think too highly of ourselves and that's why I refuse to be in a pre 911 and pre ww2 mindset.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    12-18-2013 10:51 AM
  19. Serial Fordicator's Avatar
    I have to laugh every time I hear the argument of protection from a rogue government, because I think of a picture I saw of a Somali pirate pointing a RPG at a French warship. That warship could have turned him into kibble & bits dog food from 200 miles away.
    There again, Look at the afghans against mighty Russia with just ak47s

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    Live2ride883 and Scott7217 like this.
    12-18-2013 10:53 AM
  20. JohnnytheK's Avatar
    That's good advice, NoYankees44. I'm just wondering how displaying a weapon without firing it can save lives.
    I think only when you have a real weapon to back it up. Not sure most people can bluff that good.

    What about a stick? Every person I've seen carrying a stuck is left alone.

    PS in most places warning shots are illegal and considered an ND (negligent discharge) and careless.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
    12-18-2013 02:18 PM
  21. NoYankees44's Avatar
    I think only when you have a real weapon to back it up. Not sure most people can bluff that good.

    What about a stick? Every person I've seen carrying a stuck is left alone.

    PS in most places warning shots are illegal and considered an ND (negligent discharge) and careless.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
    That's not what Joe Biden says... Sorry but they really need to lock him in a closet somewhere and gag him when he has to go into public. He has said some of the stupidest things...

    And on a related note. If you live outside of city limits(as i have most of my life), most places you can shoot all you want as long as it stays on your property, does not endanger others, ect.
    Tall Mike 2145 and JohnnytheK like this.
    12-18-2013 02:52 PM
  22. KiwiGrrl's Avatar
    I presume you walk everywhere then? :
    I found this amusing, given what the Queensland government has done recently. They may not have removed peoples legal right to ride a motorcycle, but they've severely limited the ability of certain groups to ride their motorcycles as they like and as a result, affected the ability of others to enjoy their motorcycles as they see fit. With all that, I don't really think it's too far fetched for them to extend that to cars/trucks/SUV's if they feel they need to, and considering how quickly they pushed through VLAD and the associated bills, it could literally happen overnight without any discussion with ordinary tax paying, law abiding citizens.

    Also, did you know that Australia has a Constitution but it doesn't have a Bill of Rights? No, I'm not being cheeky asking that. I know a few Aussies that aren't aware of it and only learned themselves when researching VLAD.

    Its possible to put the genie in the bottle. We were in the exact same spot. The difference is we changed our view of what gun use is acceptable for, what we can obtain it for and limited access to weapons which fire rapidly and those which did for cattle farmers limited the rounds.
    You keep saying this, but it's still not exactly true. Australians have never had a constitutional right to gun ownership and there has always been gun control. Sure, it was decided by the States (well, the Colonies first) and not at a federal level, but gun ownership was never as pervasive and it was always restricted to certain groups. I know you think it's Little America* over there, but it's not. They are not the same country and they don't have the same issues. And sure, you're statistically less likely to have a gun to your head on the streets of Sydney, but it's not an absolute impossibility. The only way to truly eradicate gun violence is to completely eradicate guns from society.

    *I'm curious about this. Only time I've ever heard it referred to as that was when John Howard found a surefire way to push his pro-US agenda with Ol' Dubya ... and it wasn't meant as a compliment, if ya know what I mean.

    What I've noticed from some of the staunchest gun rights supporters I know is that they tend to use their ownership of a gun as some form of expression of manhood (albeit a sad one). Some of the people I've had heated discussions regarding gun rights weren't the best physical example of what it means to be a man and I think therein lies part of the problem and part of the reason that some people are so passionate about it. If you take a sampling of those people that are the staunchest supporters of gun rights, you find a pattern, mostly middle to older aged men. You can't really blame them for fighting for their right to carry around something that to them is an expression of their manhood during a time in their life where the things we as a society identify as "Manly" are on the decline.
    *Looks down at her manhood* ...

    Though I'm not really a huge 'supporter' persay. There are parts of the second amendment argument that drive me a little nuts, but I certainly reserve my right to be able to pack my little pistol in my little leather fanny pack and ride off in to the sunset with it if I want.
    12-18-2013 03:26 PM
  23. alexlam24's Avatar
    Our government needs a department of common sense and logic.

    Sent from HTC Note Ultra Pro on T-Mobile
    12-18-2013 04:58 PM
  24. anon8126715's Avatar
    From what I have read from the founding fathers writings is they did not want this country turning into an oppressive government, and to protect yourself and country from other countries intent on doing harm.
    I agree that we do think too highly of ourselves and that's why I refuse to be in a pre 911 and pre ww2 mindset.

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
    I have some friends that would argue that we're already there. Some states impose check-points to check for drunk driving which I argue is an illegal search, the NSA spies on us with what it calls "meta-data" (a glaring loophole to deprive us of our right IMO), and if the area you live in is anything like the area I live in, I was once pulled over for speeding but the officer pulled over the wrong vehicle. I took the case to court and argued that he pulled over the wrong vehicle. We get to court and he didn't bring anything to prove that he clocked the right vehicle. It was essentially his word against my word. I was found guilty with no evidence presented, so the whole "innocent until PROVEN guilty" is for the most part a joke. So as far as trying to ward off an oppressive government, I guess you guys aren't packing big enough guns or something.....

    *Looks down at her manhood* ...

    Though I'm not really a huge 'supporter' persay. There are parts of the second amendment argument that drive me a little nuts, but I certainly reserve my right to be able to pack my little pistol in my little leather fanny pack and ride off in to the sunset with it if I want.
    My assertion isn't meant as a blanket statement. I actually thought about some of the women I know that have aligned themselves with the very adamant 2nd amendment guys in a show of support. I liken it to some of the women that live in Saudi and support the oppressive conditions. "Well my husband doesn't believe a woman should be given the right to drive, thus I am in complete agreement". I understand wanting to be a supporter, but I don't think women are as emotionally invested in the subject, as you stated.
    12-18-2013 05:01 PM
  25. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    Yes, we've had nuclear weapons since 1945, and bombers and fighters and high powered rifles and cannons and machine guns, etc., since long before that. However (not that this has anything to do with civil liberties our any other good and lawful thing) but a guy with a gun shot and killed a President in 1963, and another guy with a pistol shot and wounded another president in 1981. So yes, it's totally true that the branches of the U.S. military do outclass the citizenry in terms of numbers and capabilities of weapons, but that doesn't in any way invalidate the points that 2nd Amendment advocates make.

    (Just sayin'...)
    12-18-2013 05:04 PM
4,617 ... 161162163164165 ...

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