fix
Member
280plus,
Wow.
As another member likes to say, "We are so screwed".
Wow.
As another member likes to say, "We are so screwed".
Gun Rights Reality.
- Thread starter Kodiak AK
- Start date
- Status
TallPine
Member
No, I am in Montana, where I can walk in and buy any gun I want with just the NICS check. (other than full-auto, of course)
You are in the wrong state (of mind)
Just think about it a while ....
280PLUS
Member
well,,,
if your going to tell me how we are to prove that people have clean records and gun education without issuing some credential to prove it,,,once again,,,i'm all ears
license, permit, permission slip,,,whatever
i got mine,,,no problem,,,happy to do it,,,no big deal
the point is people are getting hurt through their own ignorance or through the ignorance of others
i'd like to try to stop some of that,,,thats the point i wish to make here
you guys are all barking but you got the wrong tree,,,
not only that but none of you have given me any alternatives to the status quo, you just all agree that it's not the best and i'm being a very bad THR member for expressing my honest opinion (sniff sniff)
you really want joe next door to pop down the 7-11 and pick up a .44 knowing he's never had a gun in his hands before in his life?,,,the next round could be through your wall,,,and into your TV for god's sake
if your going to tell me how we are to prove that people have clean records and gun education without issuing some credential to prove it,,,once again,,,i'm all ears
license, permit, permission slip,,,whatever
i got mine,,,no problem,,,happy to do it,,,no big deal
the point is people are getting hurt through their own ignorance or through the ignorance of others
i'd like to try to stop some of that,,,thats the point i wish to make here
you guys are all barking but you got the wrong tree,,,
not only that but none of you have given me any alternatives to the status quo, you just all agree that it's not the best and i'm being a very bad THR member for expressing my honest opinion (sniff sniff)
you really want joe next door to pop down the 7-11 and pick up a .44 knowing he's never had a gun in his hands before in his life?,,,the next round could be through your wall,,,and into your TV for god's sake
280PLUS
Member
now youre saying,,,
this whole conversation doesnt even pertain to you?
this whole conversation doesnt even pertain to you?
fix
Member
...or even...gasp...into your children's room!!!
I think I've heard all this before.
280PLUS
Member
oh,,,
since i got my "license" i can go into anywhere in ct and buy anything i want too, no full auto either though
all i gotta do is fill out the paper that asks me if i'm a felon or on drugs,,,
since i got my "license" i can go into anywhere in ct and buy anything i want too, no full auto either though
all i gotta do is fill out the paper that asks me if i'm a felon or on drugs,,,
280PLUS
Member
again,,,
i'm not saying clean record, gun educated joe
i'm saying never held a gun in his hand before joe
you give joe a few shootin' lessons and heck,,,i'll go WITH him to the 7-11
i'm not saying clean record, gun educated joe
i'm saying never held a gun in his hand before joe
you give joe a few shootin' lessons and heck,,,i'll go WITH him to the 7-11
280PLUS
Member
"...or even...gasp...into your children's room!!!"
no,,,
that would be mike never EVER held a gun in his hands on that side of the house,,,
no,,,
that would be mike never EVER held a gun in his hands on that side of the house,,,
Zak Smith
Member
280Plus,
Following your logic, the government should only issue a "License to Breed" to those couples who pass the "Government Child Raising and Indoctrination Program."
Obviously that is rediculous and tyrannical. So is your proposal.
-z
Following your logic, the government should only issue a "License to Breed" to those couples who pass the "Government Child Raising and Indoctrination Program."
Obviously that is rediculous and tyrannical. So is your proposal.
-z
280PLUS
Member
i never said that, but now that you mention it,,,
awww, i'm just kidding
but i have seen plenty of kids out there that could have done much better with a decent set of parents
awww, i'm just kidding
but i have seen plenty of kids out there that could have done much better with a decent set of parents
280PLUS
Member
you call,,,
trying to educate people to safe operation of firearms and preventing the goblins from getting guns tyrannical and ridiculous?
maybe i AM at the wrong forum,,,
still noone offers any possible alternative solutions,,,
oh,,,in the great frontier days when anyone could own any firearm
most deaths by gunshot were accidental,,,and usually self inflicted
trying to educate people to safe operation of firearms and preventing the goblins from getting guns tyrannical and ridiculous?
maybe i AM at the wrong forum,,,
still noone offers any possible alternative solutions,,,
oh,,,in the great frontier days when anyone could own any firearm
most deaths by gunshot were accidental,,,and usually self inflicted
Zak Smith
Member
I am for people knowing how to use guns safely.
But I am against requiring goverment licenses to "prove" one is "safe." First, if owning arms is a right, then I don't need to ask permission to do it. Second, licensing schemes open the door for government abuse, which will necessarily happen.
-z
But I am against requiring goverment licenses to "prove" one is "safe." First, if owning arms is a right, then I don't need to ask permission to do it. Second, licensing schemes open the door for government abuse, which will necessarily happen.
-z
fjolnirsson
Member
QUOTE]oh,,,in the great frontier days when anyone could own any firearm most deaths by gunshot were accidental,,,and usually self inflicted[/QUOTE]
Ok, I'll bite. Where did you find this information? What is your source?[
Ok, I'll bite. Where did you find this information? What is your source?[
TallPine
Member
280: so where are your numbers to show what a huge problem this is?
BTW, gun accidents have been steadily declining the past few years.
Anyway, you keep changing your problem scenario - first it was some"idiot" wanting to kill his wife or girlfriend, and now it is joe "who never had a gun in his hands before in his life". When you couldn't explain how CCW permits were going to effectively prevent the first one, you slid right on to something else.
If gun safety knowledge is all that you are concerned about, then why not promote an ad campaign to teach basic gun safety rules instead of a restrictive licensing system?
Zak Smith
Member
Those "numbers" only mean something if you agree with the philosophy of Public Utilitarianism (J.S. Mill), as opposed to Inherent Rights of Man (Locke).
The former is roughly stated as "The Most Good for the Most People". It undermines individual rights and justifies socialism.
-z
The former is roughly stated as "The Most Good for the Most People". It undermines individual rights and justifies socialism.
-z
BHPshooter
Member
Hoooooooo boy...
There are a couple of problems with that. First, You want to sacrifice your rights for the imaginery "good" of humanity? Fine. But forcing me to is wrong -- it is a form of tyranny. Aren't you also forgetting that giving up YOUR rights won't do anything? In order for the "good of humanity" illusion to take place, you've got to burn the rights of ALL of us at the stake.
Second, Who's to say that infringing your rights actually makes us safer? That's an assumption on your part, and an asinine one.
Doublethink is when a person holds two opposing ideas in their head without recognizing the conflict between them. In other words, you're contradicting yourself, but don't realize it.
Whoa there, buddy... I think you better hit the brakes and pull over to think this one out. Positions like yours are what got people like Ted Kennedy elected, and got the country into this mess.
Gun control is a fallacy. We know this. But to assume that "you don't want complete gun control, just a little," Is another contradiction.
After sliding so far with delusions of grandeur like yours, we end up with political decisions that are what I like to call "Kobayashi Marus." Look at the upcoming presidential election. NO ONE is strongly against the AWB, or strongly for the RKBA. This is the fruition of thinking like yours. At this point, we get the distinct pleasure of choosing the lesser of two evils with a blindfold on.
WE'RE NOT.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution, in its entirety: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free state, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed."
Once again, you assume that the RIGHT to keep and bear arms hinges on their "worthiness." The government, even with as much as they tax us, is still not precognitive. They cannot see -- nor can you or I -- whether or not someone is going to commit a crime. To treat me like a criminal BEFOREHAND is wrong, and is an infringement of MANY of my rights. To take my rights is theft. Therefore, if someone is accusing me of a future crime, but committing a crime themselves, they are instantly discredited.
You are really missing the point. Goblins can get their guns down the street with no background check. They don't have a waiting period. They also don't have to find someone with an FFL, or to help them with their 4473.
On top of that, guns DO come with operator's manuals, which are CHOCK FULL of safety rules, and the proper way to use your firearm. Most also suggest the the owner seek out an experience instructor.
Yes, they are ridiculous. Every human has a right to keep and bear arms. If they are violent or psychotic, they need to be incarcerated or dead.
How about this -- let everyone who wants a gun buy one without the headaches. Make it legal for everyone to carry everywhere. Now normal people have the same advantages that BGs do. Make it legal to shoot and kill all those in the act of commiting a crime (not talking about parking violations here). Make crime a hazardous career.
More dead BGs means they can't commit crimes again, and we don't have to pay for their cable TV in jail.
I don't mean to sound condescending, but maybe you should study this constitutional stuff a little more.
Sources, please?
----------------------------------
What this entire conversation boils down to is that you've taken it upon yourself to require people to "prove their worthiness" before M'lord before they can use their rights (making them priveleges). This is NOT YOUR PLACE, nor is it any other human's. If you can't live with your fellow man having the same rights as you, I will suggest that you look into investing in your own private island.
I don't know if you're a "RKBA for me, screw the rest of you," kind of guy, but that's what you're making yourself sound like. Maybe you'd better decide whether or not you believe in RKBA, because it sounds like you're internally conflicted.
Wes
There are a couple of problems with that. First, You want to sacrifice your rights for the imaginery "good" of humanity? Fine. But forcing me to is wrong -- it is a form of tyranny. Aren't you also forgetting that giving up YOUR rights won't do anything? In order for the "good of humanity" illusion to take place, you've got to burn the rights of ALL of us at the stake.
Second, Who's to say that infringing your rights actually makes us safer? That's an assumption on your part, and an asinine one.
Doublethink is when a person holds two opposing ideas in their head without recognizing the conflict between them. In other words, you're contradicting yourself, but don't realize it.
If YOUR state is obstructive about it you need to work on changing all that, mostly by electing those who support your views and ousting those who don't
e.g. what theis ted kennedy still doing in office?
Whoa there, buddy... I think you better hit the brakes and pull over to think this one out. Positions like yours are what got people like Ted Kennedy elected, and got the country into this mess.
Gun control is a fallacy. We know this. But to assume that "you don't want complete gun control, just a little," Is another contradiction.
After sliding so far with delusions of grandeur like yours, we end up with political decisions that are what I like to call "Kobayashi Marus." Look at the upcoming presidential election. NO ONE is strongly against the AWB, or strongly for the RKBA. This is the fruition of thinking like yours. At this point, we get the distinct pleasure of choosing the lesser of two evils with a blindfold on.
WE'RE NOT.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution, in its entirety: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free state, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed."
Once again, you assume that the RIGHT to keep and bear arms hinges on their "worthiness." The government, even with as much as they tax us, is still not precognitive. They cannot see -- nor can you or I -- whether or not someone is going to commit a crime. To treat me like a criminal BEFOREHAND is wrong, and is an infringement of MANY of my rights. To take my rights is theft. Therefore, if someone is accusing me of a future crime, but committing a crime themselves, they are instantly discredited.
You are really missing the point. Goblins can get their guns down the street with no background check. They don't have a waiting period. They also don't have to find someone with an FFL, or to help them with their 4473.
On top of that, guns DO come with operator's manuals, which are CHOCK FULL of safety rules, and the proper way to use your firearm. Most also suggest the the owner seek out an experience instructor.
Yes, they are ridiculous. Every human has a right to keep and bear arms. If they are violent or psychotic, they need to be incarcerated or dead.
How about this -- let everyone who wants a gun buy one without the headaches. Make it legal for everyone to carry everywhere. Now normal people have the same advantages that BGs do. Make it legal to shoot and kill all those in the act of commiting a crime (not talking about parking violations here). Make crime a hazardous career.
More dead BGs means they can't commit crimes again, and we don't have to pay for their cable TV in jail.
I don't mean to sound condescending, but maybe you should study this constitutional stuff a little more.
Sources, please?
----------------------------------
What this entire conversation boils down to is that you've taken it upon yourself to require people to "prove their worthiness" before M'lord before they can use their rights (making them priveleges). This is NOT YOUR PLACE, nor is it any other human's. If you can't live with your fellow man having the same rights as you, I will suggest that you look into investing in your own private island.
I don't know if you're a "RKBA for me, screw the rest of you," kind of guy, but that's what you're making yourself sound like. Maybe you'd better decide whether or not you believe in RKBA, because it sounds like you're internally conflicted.
Wes
byedan1
Member
well i agree and i dont we have to controll our own selfs like if you go to a gun show and you are trying to sell a gun and some one offers you twice the amount that it is worth that should right there tell you something is wrong but does the goverment have a right to tells us we cant sell that gun at a gun show well no. I am also some one who believe if i can afford it i should be able to buy it, if i want a small tactical nuke and have the money then i should be able to buy it but we the people have to govern oursleves and not let the goverment do this for us. and i also believe we should be abble to carry our legal (note legal i mean i have nothing that would stop me from buying like being a wife beater) gun when and where ever we want. Also we are the last defense this country and our familiys have against threats from abroad and domestic SORRY this is so long winded
280PLUS
Member
ah well,,,
i'm entitled to my opinion and you yours,,,
i'd like to see people get a little training before they own and operate firearms
i want to make it as difficult as i can to prevent goblins im general from getting their hands on firearms
in your world any goblin can go into any store and by the gun he needs to commit crime right away.
i say at least make it a little more difficult than that.
if we stop even just one from committing a crime because he/she couldn't get their hands on a firearm in a timely manner, again it is worth it to ME
maybe it's not worth it to you? youre entitled to think that way.
while all of you seem to oppose this idea because it requires some form of documentation noone has yet given me a viable alternative
i've agreed it's not constitutionally correct but what ELSE can we do, other than letting un- guneducated people just walk in and buy that desert eagle they saw on TV last night cause they think its "cool"
ive been asking but have received no answers, just arguements why i'm wrong and youre right
you guys are so much more well informed that i am, lets hear your ideas of how to achieve these goals
here's one to chew on,,,
the constitution gives me the right of pursuit of happiness?
the constitution gives me the right of free choice of religion?
ok,,,
let's say i'm from a foreign land and the one thing that makes me the happiest is participating in the rituals that my religion involves
the thing is that in MY religion the most sacred thing i could do is to kill a man and consume portions of his anatomy at a ritualistic ceremony
if i come to america and become a citizen does the constitution guarantee me the right to continue this religious practice?
theoretically yes,,,
will i actually BE allowed to pursue this religion?
you know,,,say a little raid across the river into mudville to capture victims and bring them back to my sacrificial altar
not likely,,,
why? because it is better for the WHOLE of society that i not practice this religion
you all would be hoping i'd end up in prison and with any luck beaten to death by some guy who thinks he's Christ because his first name is chris and his last name starts with a "T"
even though that would be unconstitutional
could i take my case to the supreme court arguing that my right to choice of religion has been infringed upon
theoretically,,,yes BUT
the supreme court can refuse to hear the case, and probably will
hence local law will supersede the constitution and i'm in the slammer, constitutional or not
maybe this is why gun control (as you call it) has been placed at the state level or defederalized, now theres a bunch more steps to get to the supreme court which can simply revert it back to the state level and refuse to hear our arguments
as far as my shifting focus,,,youre right,,,this is a many faceted arguement and we have covered a lot of the bases,,,
let's go back to the SO discussion i said that if it prevented one JUST ONE guy from killing his SO it was worth it to me"
incidentally, in my mind, a guy who kills his SO IS A GOBLIN
thats my opinion, end of story, noone here has changed it
so we moved on to other facets
my "sources"? something i picked up in my reading, can't tell you where but i believe if you researched it yourself you could find similar statements
or better yet, try to find something to refute it
what i'm hearing is to blazes with everybody else, me and my rights come first.
youre entitled to that opinion, as much as i am to mine
gun accidents have declined? why? is it possible that since 911 more people are purchasing and owning firearms and being required to take a safety course to do so has MADE A DIFFERENCE?
lastly,,,as far as a .44 through the wall into your TV, correct, it doesnt happen that often BUT IT DOES HAPPEN and sometimes due to lack of gun knowledge
e.g. "GEE, i didnt know it would go through the wall and through my neighbors wall and into his TV" "glad it wasnt his kids room"
and don't throw orwellianspeak at me, i read 1984 way before 1984
how my desire to see ted kennedy out of office has caused this country to be a mess is beyond me.
ted kennedy and his ilk in office are what got us in this mess in the first place
if, eg. you live in mass and teddy is a hinderance to your feelings on gun control, you need to work your @$$ off to get him out and someone else in
it's called democracy, and by God, if you don't vote, you have no say in any of this conversation we've been having because people that don't vote are the real reason this country is "in such a mess"
i can't spend anymore time on this, ive spent a lot already
so we are just going to have to agree to disagree
i'm entitled to my opinion and you yours,,,
i'd like to see people get a little training before they own and operate firearms
i want to make it as difficult as i can to prevent goblins im general from getting their hands on firearms
in your world any goblin can go into any store and by the gun he needs to commit crime right away.
i say at least make it a little more difficult than that.
if we stop even just one from committing a crime because he/she couldn't get their hands on a firearm in a timely manner, again it is worth it to ME
maybe it's not worth it to you? youre entitled to think that way.
while all of you seem to oppose this idea because it requires some form of documentation noone has yet given me a viable alternative
i've agreed it's not constitutionally correct but what ELSE can we do, other than letting un- guneducated people just walk in and buy that desert eagle they saw on TV last night cause they think its "cool"
ive been asking but have received no answers, just arguements why i'm wrong and youre right
you guys are so much more well informed that i am, lets hear your ideas of how to achieve these goals
here's one to chew on,,,
the constitution gives me the right of pursuit of happiness?
the constitution gives me the right of free choice of religion?
ok,,,
let's say i'm from a foreign land and the one thing that makes me the happiest is participating in the rituals that my religion involves
the thing is that in MY religion the most sacred thing i could do is to kill a man and consume portions of his anatomy at a ritualistic ceremony
if i come to america and become a citizen does the constitution guarantee me the right to continue this religious practice?
theoretically yes,,,
will i actually BE allowed to pursue this religion?
you know,,,say a little raid across the river into mudville to capture victims and bring them back to my sacrificial altar
not likely,,,
why? because it is better for the WHOLE of society that i not practice this religion
you all would be hoping i'd end up in prison and with any luck beaten to death by some guy who thinks he's Christ because his first name is chris and his last name starts with a "T"
even though that would be unconstitutional
could i take my case to the supreme court arguing that my right to choice of religion has been infringed upon
theoretically,,,yes BUT
the supreme court can refuse to hear the case, and probably will
hence local law will supersede the constitution and i'm in the slammer, constitutional or not
maybe this is why gun control (as you call it) has been placed at the state level or defederalized, now theres a bunch more steps to get to the supreme court which can simply revert it back to the state level and refuse to hear our arguments
as far as my shifting focus,,,youre right,,,this is a many faceted arguement and we have covered a lot of the bases,,,
let's go back to the SO discussion i said that if it prevented one JUST ONE guy from killing his SO it was worth it to me"
incidentally, in my mind, a guy who kills his SO IS A GOBLIN
thats my opinion, end of story, noone here has changed it
so we moved on to other facets
my "sources"? something i picked up in my reading, can't tell you where but i believe if you researched it yourself you could find similar statements
or better yet, try to find something to refute it
what i'm hearing is to blazes with everybody else, me and my rights come first.
youre entitled to that opinion, as much as i am to mine
gun accidents have declined? why? is it possible that since 911 more people are purchasing and owning firearms and being required to take a safety course to do so has MADE A DIFFERENCE?
lastly,,,as far as a .44 through the wall into your TV, correct, it doesnt happen that often BUT IT DOES HAPPEN and sometimes due to lack of gun knowledge
e.g. "GEE, i didnt know it would go through the wall and through my neighbors wall and into his TV" "glad it wasnt his kids room"
and don't throw orwellianspeak at me, i read 1984 way before 1984
how my desire to see ted kennedy out of office has caused this country to be a mess is beyond me.
ted kennedy and his ilk in office are what got us in this mess in the first place
if, eg. you live in mass and teddy is a hinderance to your feelings on gun control, you need to work your @$$ off to get him out and someone else in
it's called democracy, and by God, if you don't vote, you have no say in any of this conversation we've been having because people that don't vote are the real reason this country is "in such a mess"
i can't spend anymore time on this, ive spent a lot already
so we are just going to have to agree to disagree
fix
Member
We are so screwed.
"Well, I really want to take away what is left of your freedoms. If it saves just one child, destroying YOUR freedom is worth it to ME. I'm going to fight for legislation that will make it tougher for you to own a gun, and more likely that your children will never want to own a gun, and more likely that your grandchildren will be born into an absolute tyranny. That okay with you? No? Okay, well, we can just agree to disagree then."
I think I'm going to be ill.
pax
Necessity is the plea of every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. -- William Pitt, Earl of Chatham
ksnecktieman
Member
Hey guys. We ALL know the answer. All we have to do is be willing to state it.
#1 All children should be taught firearms safety. One hour per day, for five days at the start of every school year, maybe? beginning in kindergarten.
#2 All criminals should be punished. Lock them up for a suitable time for their crime (execute them if it is appropriate). Then release them back to society with all of their rights restored, including gun ownership. If they are a threat to society they should not be free. Three times convicted and they should NEVER be free again.
#3 Repeal all gun control laws, except one prohibiting minors under eighteen from purchasing their own guns. Their parents are responsible for their actions. If parents wish to they can give their own children guns. If the child commits a crime with a gun parents provided, mom and dad should be punished for lack of supervision.
No nics check, no AWB no infringement, as it says in the second amendment. No license, no permit, no taxes.
The power to tax or to license, is the power to ban. I am sure that very few of us would reject a tax on ammunition of 25 cents per box, if it were used to build and maintain gun ranges. BUT If we allowed it to happen it would soon be 25 dollars a box, and it would be used for what ever a politician needed to fund to get votes.
#1 All children should be taught firearms safety. One hour per day, for five days at the start of every school year, maybe? beginning in kindergarten.
#2 All criminals should be punished. Lock them up for a suitable time for their crime (execute them if it is appropriate). Then release them back to society with all of their rights restored, including gun ownership. If they are a threat to society they should not be free. Three times convicted and they should NEVER be free again.
#3 Repeal all gun control laws, except one prohibiting minors under eighteen from purchasing their own guns. Their parents are responsible for their actions. If parents wish to they can give their own children guns. If the child commits a crime with a gun parents provided, mom and dad should be punished for lack of supervision.
No nics check, no AWB no infringement, as it says in the second amendment. No license, no permit, no taxes.
The power to tax or to license, is the power to ban. I am sure that very few of us would reject a tax on ammunition of 25 cents per box, if it were used to build and maintain gun ranges. BUT If we allowed it to happen it would soon be 25 dollars a box, and it would be used for what ever a politician needed to fund to get votes.
TallPine
Member
Doesn't the Pittman-Roberts Act already tax ammo ....?
Or is it only guns and fishing gear?
Or is it only guns and fishing gear?
ojibweindian
Member
280Plus, you want some sort of guarantee that you will be safe from "inexperienced" gun owners. I really don't know what to say, other than you're wrong and you should know better concerning the whole "safety" thing.
BHPshooter
Member
280plus, did you even read my post?
Obviously you didn't.
Because AS I POSTED EARLIER, BGs don't buy their guns from "legitimate sources." They go down the street to JimmyDawg and get it without the legal hassles that you and I go through.
ONCE AGAIN: THEY ALREADY GET THEIR GUNS "RIGHT AWAY." Making LESS hassles for us just evens the playing field.
Freedom is not about what is best for society, it is about what is best for you. Therefore, if everyone protects their rights as vigilantly as they should, then "society" balances itself out.
If you are only interested in the good of society, I suggest a move to China.
You assume the only way to kill a significant other is with a gun. I can go to any store in my town and get a hammer, no waiting period or 4473, and it will kill people just as dead.
There are no background checks and waiting periods for knives, yet they can kill you just as dead, just as quick, and silently.
I could go on all day, but I'll just say it bluntly -- your argument holds no water.
Did you skip over my post entirely? You want to see Ted Kennedy and his lackeys out of office, yet you espouse the same ideas and arguments that he is putting forth in office. This is simply another display of doublethink.
Wrong. It is not a democracy, thank God. We live in (what is supposed to be) a Constitutionally limited Democratic Republic. If we were a democracy, then we -- average joes like you and I -- would go out and vote weekly on all the policies in the nation, state, and community. There would also be no Senate or House.
And in all but the tiniest of villages or exclusive upper classes, democracy doesn't work. And even when it does, it usually has no regard for the rights of the citizenry. Can you imagine what would happen if you had to count EVERY PERSON'S vote on EVERY issue before you could implement a plan? We'd go nowhere.
Did you vote whether or not we'd raise Medicare spending? Did you vote whether or not we'd go to war with Afghanistan or Iraq? Didn't think so.
Democracy is one man, one vote. Period.
A Republic would be if there was one vote per household, and the father of the household voted whatever HE wanted to, regardless of the rest of the household.
A Democratic Republic would be if every household voted amongst themselves, then their representative -- the father -- would vote what his family has voted, more or less. The neighborhood would be like the Senate. This way, everyone is represented in the same vein as a democracy, but with the fail-safes of a republic. Additionally, it is workable. A Constitution -- a rulebook that the government has to follow -- helps ensure that the Senate won't step out of line.
We are not a democracy. Thank God.
The problem isn't on our end, friend. Open your mind to opposing opinions, consider them thoughtfully and truthfully, and then make up your mind. The problem is that you've made up your mind already, and there's nothing we can do to sway you.
Wes
Obviously you didn't.
Because AS I POSTED EARLIER, BGs don't buy their guns from "legitimate sources." They go down the street to JimmyDawg and get it without the legal hassles that you and I go through.
ONCE AGAIN: THEY ALREADY GET THEIR GUNS "RIGHT AWAY." Making LESS hassles for us just evens the playing field.
Freedom is not about what is best for society, it is about what is best for you. Therefore, if everyone protects their rights as vigilantly as they should, then "society" balances itself out.
If you are only interested in the good of society, I suggest a move to China.
You assume the only way to kill a significant other is with a gun. I can go to any store in my town and get a hammer, no waiting period or 4473, and it will kill people just as dead.
There are no background checks and waiting periods for knives, yet they can kill you just as dead, just as quick, and silently.
I could go on all day, but I'll just say it bluntly -- your argument holds no water.
Did you skip over my post entirely? You want to see Ted Kennedy and his lackeys out of office, yet you espouse the same ideas and arguments that he is putting forth in office. This is simply another display of doublethink.
Wrong. It is not a democracy, thank God. We live in (what is supposed to be) a Constitutionally limited Democratic Republic. If we were a democracy, then we -- average joes like you and I -- would go out and vote weekly on all the policies in the nation, state, and community. There would also be no Senate or House.
And in all but the tiniest of villages or exclusive upper classes, democracy doesn't work. And even when it does, it usually has no regard for the rights of the citizenry. Can you imagine what would happen if you had to count EVERY PERSON'S vote on EVERY issue before you could implement a plan? We'd go nowhere.
Did you vote whether or not we'd raise Medicare spending? Did you vote whether or not we'd go to war with Afghanistan or Iraq? Didn't think so.
Democracy is one man, one vote. Period.
A Republic would be if there was one vote per household, and the father of the household voted whatever HE wanted to, regardless of the rest of the household.
A Democratic Republic would be if every household voted amongst themselves, then their representative -- the father -- would vote what his family has voted, more or less. The neighborhood would be like the Senate. This way, everyone is represented in the same vein as a democracy, but with the fail-safes of a republic. Additionally, it is workable. A Constitution -- a rulebook that the government has to follow -- helps ensure that the Senate won't step out of line.
We are not a democracy. Thank God.
The problem isn't on our end, friend. Open your mind to opposing opinions, consider them thoughtfully and truthfully, and then make up your mind. The problem is that you've made up your mind already, and there's nothing we can do to sway you.
Wes
Gordon Fink
Member
A “goblin†can already get a gun more easily than I can. The criminal needs no license or training, no background check, no waiting period, no safe-handling demonstration, and no mandatory lock. All he needs is cash.
Now, whom are gun-control “laws†punishing?
Passive gun-control “laws†simply cannot stop criminals from getting firearms. The U.K. is on an honest-to-goodness island, and yet British authorities still can’t stop the flow of “illegal†guns into their country. Even though the U.S. spends tens of billions of dollars annually on active interdiction of the illegal drug trade, we still can’t even dent the flow of “illegal†drugs.
Why do we waste so much time, effort, and money on things that don’t work but do erode our rights and liberties?
~G. Fink
Now, whom are gun-control “laws†punishing?
Passive gun-control “laws†simply cannot stop criminals from getting firearms. The U.K. is on an honest-to-goodness island, and yet British authorities still can’t stop the flow of “illegal†guns into their country. Even though the U.S. spends tens of billions of dollars annually on active interdiction of the illegal drug trade, we still can’t even dent the flow of “illegal†drugs.
Why do we waste so much time, effort, and money on things that don’t work but do erode our rights and liberties?
~G. Fink
- Status
