"if" is the key word here, friend. You obviously don't know if I did or if I didn't yet that didn't stop you from using your straw man, eh? Tell you what, if I did indeed argue what you claimed; that my "stance that the american revolution or any other struggle against an oppressive state could be won without taking up arms", as you charged then please show it. If not, then apologize for misrepresenting my position. Simple. I'm not responsible for your ability to comprehend simple logic, friend. Sorry. I have shown you with your own quoted words, your use of a logical fallacy called a "straw man". Your inability to substantiate your charge only confirms this fact while your repeated avoidance of acknowledging your error only speaks to your character. There's still time to change this...... Once again, my use of this phrase went way over your head. It was simply a method to show you the idiocy of using mindless slogans such as you did. I'm sorry you missed that. I somehow doubt others did. I must have hit a nerve. I suppose the truth hurts a bit, but this should not deter you from facing up to your errors and cleaning the slate with humility and honor. Any and all of my observations have been accompanied by quoted examples, no? Then what would be "effective" "brainwashing" in your opinion? 100% effectiveness? Really? After that you could show where I said anything about "brainwashing". I'll look forward to seeing your reply.
stick to gun control because banning guns in America is a joke. There are over a 100million gun owners and I would like to know how the government is going to enforce any law that removes the right to bear arms. Hell even the police support the 2nd.... The 2010 postal opinion survey is the 22nd such annual survey conducted by the National Association of Chiefs of Police (NACOP). Snyder serves on the NACOP board. When the officers were asked if general recognition throughout the states of ccw permits issued by a state, in the way drivers licenses are recognized throughout the country, would facilitate the violent crime-fighting potential of the professional law enforcement community, 77 percent said yes. The survey upends the propaganda of anti-gun organizations and individuals that gun rights and police interests are not compatible, says Snyder, also a board member of the American Federation of Police and Concerned Citizens. In fact, he believes, the very opposite is the case. The survey shows that over 70 percent of the chiefs and sheriffs think that qualified, law-abiding armed citizens can be of assistance to the professional law enforcement community in promoting justice and reducing the incidence of violent criminal activity.-[source] http://www.geekswithguns.com/2010/0...te-issued-ccw-permits-reports-gun-law-expert/
Being in favor of gun confiscation is a great way to end your political career in the US. Ask Al Gore.
FYI if you are in the USA and are a slave to pay tax for the public education system, and the homeland security, and the war on drugs, and fall for the maipulation of the broadcast media and politicians. You all are slaves and don't even know it.
This would be sort of fitting. The roots of gun control in the USA go back to slavery. Slaveholders were afraid of slave rebellions, forget the fact that they would happen because Black people didn't want to be slaves. Such laws were made to keep Blacks in a subservient position.
There were alot of laws in the USA prohibiting Black slaves from even carrying anything that looked like a club.
As I said, the roots of gun control can be traced back to English law (such as the 14th century Statute of Northampton)
Another example of reacting to coercion. You'd have to condemn supply and demand, the market and individualism to argue otherwise. Perhaps you will do that? I look forward to it
does anyone know for sure exactly what this cat is talking about?..the only thing I'm condemning is early 'arms control' was mostly an effort to keep the rabble disarmed
You're coming out with cliché inconsistent with reality. It mentions "to come before the Kings Justices, or other of the Kings Ministers . . . with Force and Arms, or to ride armed by Night nor by Day, in Fairs, Markets.
Didn't you understand the post? Perhaps the oldy-worldy language confused you? I'd be surprised as those regulations are clearly inconsistent with your cliché
