freedom and guns

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by ImNotOliver, Jul 8, 2014.

  1. AlphaOmega

    AlphaOmega Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    28,747
    Likes Received:
    4,821
    Trophy Points:
    113
    History isn't an opinion. Sorry if you refuse to acknowledge the history behind the constitution and the United States then congrats on discrediting your own thread.
     
  2. AlphaOmega

    AlphaOmega Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2013
    Messages:
    28,747
    Likes Received:
    4,821
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the people who defended and founded our Country had had no guns.....please tell us, would there be a Constitution of the United States of America?
     
  3. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Declaration of Independence is the heart of our nation, the Constitution the law.
     
  4. alsos

    alsos New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Messages:
    1,380
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What’s not getting discussed here is why the founders felt a need to put the 2nd amendment in our constitution. Washington said:

    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence…”

    They placed a high importance on THE PEOPLE maintaining their firearms; that not only is this a RIGHT, but it’s also a necessity. They understood how easily tyranny can gain a stronghold over an unarmed people. Guns are necessary for securing a free state. So, firearms were key in the establishment of this nation of liberties, but they are also key in keeping it that way.
     
  5. Recovering Conservative

    Recovering Conservative Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,232
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    So, if I read you correctly, the only way you know of to participate in "government" is to point guns at it?

    Your chosen method begs the question of scope. If the "government" that you seek to control through gun play turns out to have far more people than one guy with a gun--more people, more weapons, better organization etc., then isn't it true that you and your gun actually stand no chance whatsoever of motivating "government" to do what you want? Wouldn't that make you and your gun a rather impotent display of power in comparison?

    Have you ever tried simply talking with "government"?


    Good for you. You should be able to be "more realistic" than a construct of your own imagination!

    However that sentiment doesn't say anything about the alleged efficacy of pointing guns at "government". Can you cite any specific examples of you protecting yourself or your rights from "government" in this manner?

    What about other situations? For example, do you suggest using guns to give yourself an advantage in interpersonal relationships? Or financial matters? I can imagine that brandishing a gun might increase your chances of getting the correct change....
     
  6. Spiritus Libertatis

    Spiritus Libertatis New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    3,583
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    One man against the government cannot win. But since the citizens outnumber the rulers, if the populace decides on defying their authority, they have a huge problem don't they?

    The track record of history does not lead me to the conclusion that simple speech will deter those who crave power from gaining more of it.



    At present you almost never have to use your weapons against the government because the government is not tyrannical. That isn't the point. The point is you can use the 2nd Amendment as an insurance policy in case it ever becomes so.

    Also threatening to shoot people if you don't get your way when you have no legal right to do so is assault and is in fact a crime, so no I don't see why I would approve of settling civil disputes down the barrel of a gun.
     
  7. Mr. Swedish Guy

    Mr. Swedish Guy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    Messages:
    11,688
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Heard of the revolutionary war? Heard of the civil war? Heard of the military?

    Probably not, and I'm not suprised.
     
  8. Rickity Plumber

    Rickity Plumber Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0

    You have a screw loose. Have you saluted Hitler today with a resounding, "Hiel Hitler"? Eradicated any member of a race other than you own?
     
  9. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Some pretty infamous republicans made a pretty penny saluting Hitler's financial escapades. The Bush family comes to mind, for one. I'd say the right was already doing the saluting, long ago.
     
  10. Recovering Conservative

    Recovering Conservative Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2013
    Messages:
    1,232
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Indeed they do! Even more so in a representative system where "the populace" is the authority!

    In common terms, that's known as "shooting yourself in the foot".
     
  11. TheLiberal

    TheLiberal New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    HA! If Romney won the election the middle class would be paying more in taxes than the rich. How is that fair? And if the democrats and liberals weren't in government the right wingers would be letting the companies pay no taxes what so ever? And you may insult Obama but at least he is for progressive programs like high speed rail and better public transportation. And wasn't it the Republicans to almost send the country into disaster with not making up their minds with the budget plan a couple years ago? As far as the wars they can't be helped but with WW2 may I remind you we didn't join until we were attacked. They had more sense back then, then they do now. We spent enough money in Afghanistan to cover the country in rail lines. We had no business being there and getting involved with the other middle eastern countries was a bad choice. George Busch Senior started a war and his son finished his daddy's fiasco. You need to take a look at the real issues. People have easy access to guns. Protection? We have police.

    <<< MODERATOR EDIT: FLAMEBAIT/ OFF TOPIC >>>
     
  12. Rickity Plumber

    Rickity Plumber Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Give me just one example where George Bush "saluted" Hitler or his financial escapades. Just one.
     
  13. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Politics, like all interactions with others, is a game of individual ambitions and their ability to realize those ambitions. Democracy is not immune from this - it's a convenient coalition. War is costly for both sides, even the victor. It's easiest to resolve disputes through mediation where possible, but fundamentally nothing has changed since the time when we used assassinations and battles - cooler heads have merely prevailed and determined a mutually beneficial means to separate ends. Power and self-interest still rule the day.

    As one of these individuals with ambitions of my own, I would quite like to maximize my own power. The democratic coalition is one of opportunity - if enough demerits accumulate like cannabis prohibition, police statism, etc - my participation becomes repugnant. Everyone recognizes this, no matter the majority in support of a fascist state, the individual is justified in rebellion. Complying with democracy for reasons other than convenience or preference is dangerous and sheepish.

    [hr][/hr]

    I more so want guns for sport shooting and self defense anyway. The government is not the only threat to my power, or even the main one - at least if judged by my ability to do something about it.
     
  14. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113

Share This Page