Ohio Rifleman
Member
Anti says:
is that a gun?
Me says:
Yes it is. Shooting's a hobby of mine
Anti says:
I hate guns
Me says:
*shrugs* That's your perogitive...but I think they're fun
Anti says:
I think they're dangerous and they kill people
Me says:
I won't deny guns are dangerous, but, and I'm sure you've heard this, but guns do not kill people, people kill people
Anti says:
people with guns kill people
Me says:
So what? Before guns, people with axes, swords and clubs killed people
Anti says:
it's a lot easier to kill somebody with a gun than with a knife
Anti says:
far less personal
Me says:
I won't deny that, however, before guns, the strong ruled over the weak, men ruled over women, and the oppressed had no way to fight back
Anti says:
you don't even have to look in the person's eyes
Me says:
Again, I can't deny that
Me says:
But, I should point out, that you can kill someone with a blowgun or a bow and arrow without looking into their eyes
Anti says:
have you ever tried that
Me says:
Of course not
Me says:
While I am an avid archer, I'd never consider turning either my guns or my bow on another living thing unless absolutely necessary
Anti says:
it's a lot easier to miss
Me says:
True, but in the right hands, a bow and arrow can be just as deadly as a firearms
Anti says:
that's why the Indians won right?
Anti says:
oh wait they didn't
Me says:
The Indians put up a Hell of a fight
Anti says:
the reality is they didn't have a chance
Me says:
I'm not saying a bow and arrow is just as good as a gun, but they're both ranged weapons...you don't have to "look into the person's eyes" to kill them
Anti says:
not against the Gunds
Anti says:
guns
Me says:
Even so, they held their own for quite a while
Anti says:
they never held their own
Me says:
What about Little Big Horn?
Anti says:
they just postponed the inevitable
Anti says:
little bighorn was to do the stupidity of Custer
Me says:
But, I suppose, that shouldn't have mattered...because the Americans had guns and the Indians didn't
Anti says:
that's right and they weren't Americans at that time they were English and French
Me says:
The United States was still fighting the Indians long after the Revolutionary War
Anti says:
I guess the point is I still don't like guns
Me says:
And I still do *shrugs*
Anti says:
I wonder why
Me says:
Because they are fun to me
Anti says:
what's fun about a gun
Me says:
It's fun just to shoot at paper targets and the like. It's relaxing for me
Me says:
Also, should the worst happen, I can use them to defend myself, my home and my family from aggression
Anti says:
aggression from somebody else with a gun
Me says:
Quite possibly, yes
Anti says:
if nobody had guns there wouldn't be any problem
Me says:
I don't think so.
Me says:
Long before there were guns, people still slaughtered each other mercilessly
Anti says:
will certainly somebody wouldn't come into your house and try and shoot you with a bow and arrow
Me says:
No, but they could use a knife, a machete, a lead pipe..
Anti says:
I know they did slaughter each other guns just made it a lot easier
Me says:
And so what? It is human nature to fight and to kill each other. The tools we use are irrelevant
Me says:
Guns just level the playing field.
Anti says:
it's too bad that it's human nature to fight and kill each other
Me says:
I agree, but that's the truth
Anti says:
I don't think that we should play into that
Me says:
Maybe some day, we won't....but as long as there are people who don't, good people must defend themselves
Anti says:
I think we should evolve
Me says:
I won't argue with you there, but I don't know when, or if, that will happen
Anti says:
I think of good people don't have guns it's a step in the right direction
Me says:
If good people give up their guns, the bad people won't, and good people will be left defenseless
Anti says:
we do have the police
Me says:
The police can't be everywhere at once
Anti says:
we are a relative civilization
Anti says:
more people are killed BECAUSE they have guns in their house
Me says:
And why do you think that?
Anti says:
it's a fact
Me says:
According to whom?
Anti says:
according to whoever studied the statistics
Me says:
Who studied the statistics?
Anti says:
I don't know his name
Anti says:
but you should read something about it
Me says:
I've done a lot of research, I'm a card-carrying member of the National Rifle Association, and I believe that people have a fundamental right to defend themselves
Anti says:
and I'm supposed to be impressed by that
Anti says:
that you are a card-carrying member of the National Rifle Association
Me says:
No, but it should tell you about my beliefs
Anti says:
I think it's despicable
Anti says:
I'm very clear about your beliefs
Me says:
I'm not so clear about yours. What's wrong with people who use guns in a safe, responsible way?
Anti says:
I just think it's unnecessary, if you like to play cowboys and Indians use plastic guns
Anti says:
or use rubber tip darts
Me says:
A lot of things are unnecessary...to be brutally honest, all you NEED is food, water and shelter
Me says:
Besides, there is the Second Amendment to contend with
Anti says:
and that's what we should focus on
Anti says:
the Second Amendment was written when people had to have guns to shoot food
Anti says:
not other people
Me says:
I believe that it was written as a hedge against potential tyranny by the government. Governemtns tend to be much more leery about oppressing an armed population
Anti says:
well there isn't any such government now
Me says:
The Second Amendment gives us the means to resist oppression by our own government, and foreign invaders
Anti says:
I'm not worried about being killed by the Republicans or the Democratic
Anti says:
in the Army will take care of foreign invaders
Me says:
Why not have an armed population as an additional deterrent? And what if the army is used to oppress the people?
Anti says:
I think the Second Amendment is just an excuse
Me says:
For what?
Anti says:
to have a gun
Anti says:
the Army is not going to attack the population
Anti says:
and even if they did you are in no position to fight them with your silly rifle
Anti says:
they havefar more sophisticated weapons than you'll ever own
Me says:
And that's why, in Iraq right now, a ragtag group of guys with AK-47s and RPGs are holding off the most powerful military the world has ever known with all our sophisticated weapons?
Anti says:
I think if you're worried about armed oppression here in United States I suggest to move to some other country
Me says:
I believe that the Second Amendment is an insurance policy of sorts...you hope you never need it, but if you do, you're glad it's there
Me says:
I just know it COULD happen some day
Anti says:
I'm not
Anti says:
the world could explode some day but I'm not going to build a bomb shelter
Anti says:
there is a better chance that you'll get hit by lightning but you still in the rain
Me says:
So, you don't believe in preparing for bad things that may or may not actually happen?
Anti says:
nope
Anti says:
I don't worry about them
Me says:
So, I assume, you don't wear a seatbelt when you're in a car?
Anti says:
I do, it's the law
Me says:
As is the Second Amendment
Anti says:
but I don't worry about having an accident
Me says:
Maybe you should
Anti says:
the Second Amendment isn't a law
Me says:
It is in the Bill of Rights, part of the Constitution, supreme law of the land
Anti says:
neither is Constitution of the bill of rights
Anti says:
you should read your history
Me says:
I have
Anti says:
it is not supreme law of the land
Me says:
Um, I'm sorry, but it is
Me says:
The Constitution is
Anti says:
there isn't one law in the Constitution
Me says:
Then why is our entire government based on it?
Anti says:
tell me one law that's in the Constitution
Me says:
First Amendment, the gov't is not allowed to suppress freedom of speech or freedom of religion, if that's not a law, what is?
Anti says:
that's not a law it's a right
Me says:
The Bill of Rights are a group of laws that says what the government is allowed and what it is now allowed to do
Me says:
not*
Anti says:
they are RIGHTS that's why they call it The Bill of Rights not the Bill of Laws
Me says:
And if you're right...then it is our RIGHT to keep and bear arms....if we deny that one right...what's to keep the government from denying other ones too?
Anti says:
you have the right to keep and bear on arms and form a militia which we already have it's called THE ARMY
Anti says:
you can't read just part of the Bill of Rights or of the you've got to take them as a whole statement
Me says:
You're right...I'll go find the whole thing
Anti says:
have a nice evening reading
Me says:
In the early days of the Republic..."militia" meant all able bodied males 17 and over
Me says:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"
Unfortunately, the Anti left before I could send the actual text of the Second Amendment. This is the very first time I've had a serious debate with an anti, online or in person. How did I do? Thoughts?
is that a gun?
Me says:
Yes it is. Shooting's a hobby of mine
Anti says:
I hate guns
Me says:
*shrugs* That's your perogitive...but I think they're fun
Anti says:
I think they're dangerous and they kill people
Me says:
I won't deny guns are dangerous, but, and I'm sure you've heard this, but guns do not kill people, people kill people
Anti says:
people with guns kill people
Me says:
So what? Before guns, people with axes, swords and clubs killed people
Anti says:
it's a lot easier to kill somebody with a gun than with a knife
Anti says:
far less personal
Me says:
I won't deny that, however, before guns, the strong ruled over the weak, men ruled over women, and the oppressed had no way to fight back
Anti says:
you don't even have to look in the person's eyes
Me says:
Again, I can't deny that
Me says:
But, I should point out, that you can kill someone with a blowgun or a bow and arrow without looking into their eyes
Anti says:
have you ever tried that
Me says:
Of course not
Me says:
While I am an avid archer, I'd never consider turning either my guns or my bow on another living thing unless absolutely necessary
Anti says:
it's a lot easier to miss
Me says:
True, but in the right hands, a bow and arrow can be just as deadly as a firearms
Anti says:
that's why the Indians won right?
Anti says:
oh wait they didn't
Me says:
The Indians put up a Hell of a fight
Anti says:
the reality is they didn't have a chance
Me says:
I'm not saying a bow and arrow is just as good as a gun, but they're both ranged weapons...you don't have to "look into the person's eyes" to kill them
Anti says:
not against the Gunds
Anti says:
guns
Me says:
Even so, they held their own for quite a while
Anti says:
they never held their own
Me says:
What about Little Big Horn?
Anti says:
they just postponed the inevitable
Anti says:
little bighorn was to do the stupidity of Custer
Me says:
But, I suppose, that shouldn't have mattered...because the Americans had guns and the Indians didn't
Anti says:
that's right and they weren't Americans at that time they were English and French
Me says:
The United States was still fighting the Indians long after the Revolutionary War
Anti says:
I guess the point is I still don't like guns
Me says:
And I still do *shrugs*
Anti says:
I wonder why
Me says:
Because they are fun to me
Anti says:
what's fun about a gun
Me says:
It's fun just to shoot at paper targets and the like. It's relaxing for me
Me says:
Also, should the worst happen, I can use them to defend myself, my home and my family from aggression
Anti says:
aggression from somebody else with a gun
Me says:
Quite possibly, yes
Anti says:
if nobody had guns there wouldn't be any problem
Me says:
I don't think so.
Me says:
Long before there were guns, people still slaughtered each other mercilessly
Anti says:
will certainly somebody wouldn't come into your house and try and shoot you with a bow and arrow
Me says:
No, but they could use a knife, a machete, a lead pipe..
Anti says:
I know they did slaughter each other guns just made it a lot easier
Me says:
And so what? It is human nature to fight and to kill each other. The tools we use are irrelevant
Me says:
Guns just level the playing field.
Anti says:
it's too bad that it's human nature to fight and kill each other
Me says:
I agree, but that's the truth
Anti says:
I don't think that we should play into that
Me says:
Maybe some day, we won't....but as long as there are people who don't, good people must defend themselves
Anti says:
I think we should evolve
Me says:
I won't argue with you there, but I don't know when, or if, that will happen
Anti says:
I think of good people don't have guns it's a step in the right direction
Me says:
If good people give up their guns, the bad people won't, and good people will be left defenseless
Anti says:
we do have the police
Me says:
The police can't be everywhere at once
Anti says:
we are a relative civilization
Anti says:
more people are killed BECAUSE they have guns in their house
Me says:
And why do you think that?
Anti says:
it's a fact
Me says:
According to whom?
Anti says:
according to whoever studied the statistics
Me says:
Who studied the statistics?
Anti says:
I don't know his name
Anti says:
but you should read something about it
Me says:
I've done a lot of research, I'm a card-carrying member of the National Rifle Association, and I believe that people have a fundamental right to defend themselves
Anti says:
and I'm supposed to be impressed by that
Anti says:
that you are a card-carrying member of the National Rifle Association
Me says:
No, but it should tell you about my beliefs
Anti says:
I think it's despicable
Anti says:
I'm very clear about your beliefs
Me says:
I'm not so clear about yours. What's wrong with people who use guns in a safe, responsible way?
Anti says:
I just think it's unnecessary, if you like to play cowboys and Indians use plastic guns
Anti says:
or use rubber tip darts
Me says:
A lot of things are unnecessary...to be brutally honest, all you NEED is food, water and shelter
Me says:
Besides, there is the Second Amendment to contend with
Anti says:
and that's what we should focus on
Anti says:
the Second Amendment was written when people had to have guns to shoot food
Anti says:
not other people
Me says:
I believe that it was written as a hedge against potential tyranny by the government. Governemtns tend to be much more leery about oppressing an armed population
Anti says:
well there isn't any such government now
Me says:
The Second Amendment gives us the means to resist oppression by our own government, and foreign invaders
Anti says:
I'm not worried about being killed by the Republicans or the Democratic
Anti says:
in the Army will take care of foreign invaders
Me says:
Why not have an armed population as an additional deterrent? And what if the army is used to oppress the people?
Anti says:
I think the Second Amendment is just an excuse
Me says:
For what?
Anti says:
to have a gun
Anti says:
the Army is not going to attack the population
Anti says:
and even if they did you are in no position to fight them with your silly rifle
Anti says:
they havefar more sophisticated weapons than you'll ever own
Me says:
And that's why, in Iraq right now, a ragtag group of guys with AK-47s and RPGs are holding off the most powerful military the world has ever known with all our sophisticated weapons?
Anti says:
I think if you're worried about armed oppression here in United States I suggest to move to some other country
Me says:
I believe that the Second Amendment is an insurance policy of sorts...you hope you never need it, but if you do, you're glad it's there
Me says:
I just know it COULD happen some day
Anti says:
I'm not
Anti says:
the world could explode some day but I'm not going to build a bomb shelter
Anti says:
there is a better chance that you'll get hit by lightning but you still in the rain
Me says:
So, you don't believe in preparing for bad things that may or may not actually happen?
Anti says:
nope
Anti says:
I don't worry about them
Me says:
So, I assume, you don't wear a seatbelt when you're in a car?
Anti says:
I do, it's the law
Me says:
As is the Second Amendment
Anti says:
but I don't worry about having an accident
Me says:
Maybe you should
Anti says:
the Second Amendment isn't a law
Me says:
It is in the Bill of Rights, part of the Constitution, supreme law of the land
Anti says:
neither is Constitution of the bill of rights
Anti says:
you should read your history
Me says:
I have
Anti says:
it is not supreme law of the land
Me says:
Um, I'm sorry, but it is
Me says:
The Constitution is
Anti says:
there isn't one law in the Constitution
Me says:
Then why is our entire government based on it?
Anti says:
tell me one law that's in the Constitution
Me says:
First Amendment, the gov't is not allowed to suppress freedom of speech or freedom of religion, if that's not a law, what is?
Anti says:
that's not a law it's a right
Me says:
The Bill of Rights are a group of laws that says what the government is allowed and what it is now allowed to do
Me says:
not*
Anti says:
they are RIGHTS that's why they call it The Bill of Rights not the Bill of Laws
Me says:
And if you're right...then it is our RIGHT to keep and bear arms....if we deny that one right...what's to keep the government from denying other ones too?
Anti says:
you have the right to keep and bear on arms and form a militia which we already have it's called THE ARMY
Anti says:
you can't read just part of the Bill of Rights or of the you've got to take them as a whole statement
Me says:
You're right...I'll go find the whole thing
Anti says:
have a nice evening reading
Me says:
In the early days of the Republic..."militia" meant all able bodied males 17 and over
Me says:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"
Unfortunately, the Anti left before I could send the actual text of the Second Amendment. This is the very first time I've had a serious debate with an anti, online or in person. How did I do? Thoughts?