Do 2A Supporters Make the Same Mistake?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are we going after Bin Laden. No we are in Iraq. Instead of going after the bad guys we change our whole history by preemptively going to war with another country. And we do it with fewer troops than the Joint Chiefs requested.
We now have an Illegal war that has killed several thousands of our children, mothers and fathers. And the injured return to a VA system that has been gutted to pay for tax breaks of those who make millions a year and frankly don't need the cuts.

Now the only way to put an end to George's War is to move the required troops into Iraq thereby forcing the submission of the trouble makers. If it means another 100,00 troops then so be it. We cannot do anything in Iraq with the few people we have there other than DIE. So do we commit the troops to get the job done or do we hang around and let these fine people die. If it was my decision there would be another 150,000 on the way.
 
I'm really growing tired of people politicizing the war. (see above)

Your petty politics do nothing but give aid and comfort to the enemy while putting my family at increased risk. George's War? Wake up and smell the Jihad. It's our war, and our war to lose if we listen to the defeatists in our midst.
 
well said

Thanks, .41Dave. I'd buy the second round for you. We'll hoist a round to the Founding Fathers ;)

Springmom
 
Well you didn't read my entire post did you and I wish you had and then maybe you and others would have understood what I was saying. Now I hate to inform you but all wars are political. I will also defend the rights of others to speak against this war with as much energy as I would in protecting my rights and yours to own a firearm. When debate and discussion is shut down then we are no better than our foe.

Freedom is a harsh mistress. If you want it you have to fight and die for it if neccesary. You also have to put up with people you don't like as Freedom applies to ALL, not those YOU deem should have it.

dragongoddess
SSG US Army
1981-1994

reason for leaving
damage to C-spine,T-spine,L-spine,both knees, right elbow, right hand,both ankels, feet and head injury during performance of duty.
 
I’ll be blunt. I would rather every day be September 11th than have to pass through even one government “security” checkpoint.

To quote another misunderstood phrase: “Freedom isn’t free.”

~G. Fink
 
How hard are Benjamin Franklin's words to understand? "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Click to expand...

Hey, some of us understand this and we try to convience others also. The problem is, most americans want the latter. I try to stay positive but I see America as a dying country, slow to its death. Bleeding from within. :(
 
I still stand by the last thing I said. As long as the government trusts me to be armed, I'll trust them to be my government. The fact that you have a government at all means you have to live with varying levels of regulation of ALL rights. I don't think for one second that those who wrote the Constitution intended for it to be used against us by our enemies.

Find them. Be aggressive. Play dirty. Use every means in the book. Kill them. Do it quickly. I don't mind using aggressive policies to do so, AS LONG AS THEY ARE EFFECTIVE. And yes, I want them used to eradicate ALL threats to America, for as long as it takes.

I very much disagree with the poster who said they would rather every day was 9-11 than pass through one government checkpoint. Peace is the absence of conflict combined with the presence of justice.

Someone wondered if I agree with the standing British policy of allowing "Fruit of the Poisoned Tree" into evidence in Britain. In Britain? Sure. That doesn't mean I think the precedent in America needs to be overturned. I just roll my eyes when I have heated discussions in other forums with Europeans who both criticize the Patriot Act and don't realize that their existing laws are more oppressive than America's.
 
The problem is, we've got all kinds of people running around thinking about things that are none of their business.

You have no right to know what I say to whom or what happens to reside inside any one of my numerous orifices, I don't care if you support it with notions of anti-terrorism or not, until I commit an actual crime with said objects or until you get a legal warrant from a court with checks and balances, too bad.

My guns are none of your business, period. I don't care if banning them saves Bambi, some kid, some gang banger or 5000 victims of some terrorist shooting spree, The RKBA is not about combating crime, or surviving a rape or hunting deer or hogs, the Second Amendment serves to provide a means to counter the inequity in power between federal powers with a standing federal army and the common citizen of this country. All other benefits such as defending against assault or rape or hunting are purely secondary.

Just because you can justify it or rationalize it doesn't mean it makes you right, if you think about anything long enough you can justify it, history has no rivall when it comes to teaching that particular lesson. Everything has boundaries that are not to be broken, the Bill of Rights illustrates those boundaries when it comes to the liberty of every American citizen.
 
I still stand by the last thing I said. As long as the government trusts me to be armed, I'll trust them to be my government. The fact that you have a government at all means you have to live with varying levels of regulation of ALL rights. I don't think for one second that those who wrote the Constitution intended for it to be used against us by our enemies.
Click to expand...

They trust you to be armed because they know they can swoop down on you in the middle of night, one at a time.
 
Let me add something else.

My first post asked the question "Does this actually help solve the problem?" As some of you pointed out, this is incomplete at best, and at worst it could lead to the worst of abuses and atrocities.

So next, we need to consider "Do we really want to be what we have become?" OK, you can solve the problem by doing X, but do you really want to be a society that does X? You can solve speeding by summary executions on the side of the road- nobody would DARE speed, since they would have friends for whom a moment's inattention meant the end of life. But you don't want to live in a society like that.

Any conversation about the surrender of rights, be it temporarily or permanently (sometimes rights have been given up for a time only to be restored, sometimes they have provided a foundation for further oppression) needs to wonder about the end result. Yes, giving up some freedoms might save a given society from a given threat. But, is the society that results one in which people wish to live?

We can point to the current war on terror, war on drugs, war in Iraq, or any of a number of other political footballs, but we can also discuss this hypothetically without resorting to namecalling or other derogatory terms ("George's War").

So, I put the question to you: Do we, as a people, when requested by the government (or demanded, as is more often the case) to surrender a right, consider what we are becoming? Some obviously do consider that, but more don't. Many don't care, and that is truly frightening.

If we go to great lengths to save a nation, we really need to ask ourselves if what will be left is really worth saving.

If we give up our right to bear arms, our right to free speech, our freedom from illegal search and seizure, and more (and we have already suffered infringements on those rights!), at what point have we lost, no matter how many terrorist attacks we have prevented? We might not subject our women to burkhas or everybody to Shari'a law, but if we lose the freedom that makes the USA unique, then we have indeed lost.
 
If we give up our right to bear arms, our right to free speech, our freedom from illegal search and seizure, and more (and we have already suffered infringements on those rights!), at what point have we lost, no matter how many terrorist attacks we have prevented? We might not subject our women to burkhas or everybody to Shari'a law, but if we lose the freedom that makes the USA unique, then we have indeed lost.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

You know, as horrifying as terror attacks may be, people die every day in America. About 195,000 people die annually here from hospital errors, at least according to a study done recently. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=11856

Over 166,000 die from a variety of external (mostly accidental) causes of various and sundry sorts.
http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm

Now, every individual life has value. However, do we REALLY want to commit suicide as a nation when we're more likely to be killed by falling down stairs than by terrorists? Is it really worth throwing away all that Americans have lived and died for since the 1770s, so we can pretend that we're 100% safe, which we can never be, anyway?

I fully support a vigorous and serious war against Islamofascism. But let's not be so eager to fight a war against ourselves as a proxy for that war.
 
Last edited:
Without the 2nd Amendment the Constitution and all of its Amendments have no meaning. An armed citizenry is the bedrock of freedom. It's that plain and it's that simple. It is the only guarantee that we have as a nation of law abiding citizens that we will still be free tomorrow.

Go read the Declaration of Independence. In it you will find that its every citizens "Civic Responsibility" to overthrow their government if things get really really bad. Thats amazing. A total shock. That one of our founding documents places this responsibility on each and every citizen. Therefore there shold be no law infringing a law abiding citizen from owning the weapon of his choice.
 
Over the next 75 years, the risk to my children and grandchildren from trashing the Bill of Rights would be FAR greater than the threat from Al Qaida and every other terrorist group in the world.

America can't be destroyed by taking down a few buildings, or even leveling a few cities. But America CAN be destroyed by turning it into a police state.
 
You may trust Bush with these powers but would you trust the people who will come after him with the same powers?

Like Hillary?
Click to expand...
Yes--the point is that NOBODY should be trusted with those powers. Whoever is in office should abide by the same basic rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Situational libertarianism
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
griz
G
F
  • Locked
UK - Recent LA Press Release
Replies
16
Views
888
Jim K
J
O
  • Locked
Your papers, please- yet again...
Replies
1
Views
452
PATH
P
R
  • Locked
Blair defeated over terror laws
Replies
3
Views
426
Don Gwinn
D
B
  • Locked
How did the Iraq War affect civil liberties and RKBA?
Replies
8
Views
542
Solinvictus70
S
Back
Top