Am just wishing to say, not to be rude like, if the 2nd Amndmt. gives the right to bear arms ... trained Militia ... you don't really need it since your Government provides all your protection for you. If you have to have a revolution I fear your Miltia is going to look like those guys in M.Moores film Bowling for Columbine. Ownership of guns is fine as long as you don't look for demons.

I've been munching so much :corn: reading this thread, I need that Pepsi. Diet, if you please.

Icileparadise, this is exceedingly unfortunate thinking. The people who place the whole of their trust for this in their government suffer from elevated crime levels and occasional genocides -- crime built to government specifications, and committed either directly by government or with government as an accessory before, during, and after the fact.

The self-reliant do not place their trust so exclusively, regarding it at best as too passive, and more usually they start throwing around applicable wisecracks about "sheeple."

There is only one known cure or prophylaxis for genocides, and that is to keep an armed populace. Any jerks who think their might makes their right have to weigh their might against that of their targets. Genocide becomes an impracticality at that point -- Einsatzkommandos succeed because nobody can shoot them. Contrariwise, imagine their chances of success if they are wiped out. A happier outcome for the general good, right?

Am I to understand you see some need to explicitly remind us of this? Most of the guns and freedom people are very far beyond having to address this question. I suggest you consider that we gun people know far more about what guns are, and what they are not, than you presently do; was it not you worrying publicly about worrying who might be carrying concealed as you go about your daily occasions? Funny how such views never stretch to imagining oneself, the worrier, carrying concealed. How much "worrying" is called for then, regardless of who else might be carrying?

Icileparadise, this is exceedingly unfortunate thinking. The people who place the whole of their trust for this in their government suffer from elevated crime levels and occasional genocides --

I'm a Brit and we don't do revolutions hav'nt done since Cromwell but that was against a Monarchy oh and a feeble uprising that went away. We prefer to go on strike but only as a last resort. Anyway UG this is a very complex thread which leads to many Hydras. I am amazed that you hold your Government under a wary eye and are ready to act if necesseray - I never imagined that kind of commitment. I own and have owned a liscensed German 7.65mm auto. for years because of this comfort feeling I think you allude to. Americans have a short history but you had it hard for so long, I guess firearms are in you nature & culture similar to the importance of horses/transport to you which in todays terms means grand theft auto is a really serious crime: taking away someones ride (hanging offence!) - in Europe we call it car theft - not so historically important to us in little Europe but to you in the vast USA your horse and your right to defend yourselves/family was the meaning of life.

I'm sorry I did not understand your last paragraph but then I was talking about the European way of life - I often meet hunters in the mountains here with single shot rifles but down in the valley the only people carrying firearms are the Gendarmerie. I mean, from my point of view, I don't need to worry in town if a guy I cut up on the road is carrying coz he's not and the most I'm gonna get is loud klaxons or the finger. In the USA on a hot day I would worry about pissing a guy off. I don't think we can compare each others point of view due to the cultural differences but I an in awe of you UG if you think you could take on the USA Government if necessary though after all you, did a bitching job against the Brits all those years ago. That was awesome.

Bwahahahahahaha! "Thank you" for making me choke on my coffee.... Totally worth it. Awesome!

Why did I make you choke? And if you got any coffee on your T -Shirt bin it, those stains don't come out.

Ok... seriously... I choked on my coffee because I laughed while drinking. I drink a lot of coffee. I laughed because I found your remarks highly amusing--whether or not you intended them to be funny. Either way, they crack me up!

You are most welcome BigV, just spreading my good cheer. Glad you like my mien de la vie. But this is a complex forum. I miss Radars input though.

He won't stay out of this for long; not only is this a tangible application of his favorite subject, but I suspect that only some hectic preholiday running around would keep him from reading on this thread.

Essentially, IciLP, we account the one legitimate source of power to be the electorate, which seems to us an excellent paradigm of a Republic, which is definitely what we are. To retain this political power in full, the electorate must also hold powers of life and death -- just to keep government the people's servant and not its master. (For it will seek mastery.) The electorate does delegate authority and power to its representatives, and this is all up and down through all our governing bodies. That delegated power is limited in scope and in time, and at the end of its term it is to be returned to the people's keeping. I do understand you find that paragraph opaque yet, and I think perhaps we should correspond about it by PM as I'd rather not be tempted up onto a soapbox about it. I'm sure I can make myself clearer and make our motivations as citizens of our Republic clearer too. I'd go to that kind of trouble because I regard those ideas as the quintessence of our Republic's social contract.

A bit of regarding history will show that we had to do that "bitchin' job" twice, in two wars thirty years apart, 1775-83 and 1812-14 -- and with an intervening conflict with France about midway between called the "Quasi-War." 1798-99, IIRC without looking. Not exactly an era of placidity.

The War of 1812 settled permanently a few matters considered at least by England to be loose ends -- impressment of seamen of British birth, and entanglement one way or another with the Napoleonic Wars that had occupied the previous decade. It wasn't all burning Washington, John Paul Jones, and the Battle of New Orleans -- Davy Crockett made his reputation in the frontier regions of this war as did Andrew Jackson, later President and the face on our $20 bill. Jackson was nothing if not colorful, and if the term had been current then, the eastern-seaboard Americans would no doubt have called him a cowboy, as a couple of American Presidents have been termed since. And for the same reasons, too.

V, wrt coffee drinking, have some innocent good fun reading this site sometime when you're not super busy: Girl Genius -- the coffee fun is about halfway down the table of contents. Mad Science rules the world. Badly.

Please don't turn this into a defense of imperialism thread. Radar (presumably) and I prefer to agree with you during the holiday season.


Acknowleges would be the proper word. We've had the fight here the last couple weeks about where rights come from but among the founding fathers there was no such squabble.

Amen Griff. I agree. And UG that is a whole lot of info I did not know. I get your point. thank you both.

By the way, what impact did Benedict Arnold have on the American People at that time? And what was his story? Just fascinated to know? Anyone...

He worked for us, got pissed on, got pissed off, defected to the Brits, retired to London, failed as a businessman and died poor. I would guess karma killed him fittingly.

http://www.ushistory.org/valleyforge/served/arnold.html

[quote=TheMercenary;418960]He worked for us, got pissed on, got pissed off, defected to the Brits, retired to London, failed as a businessman and died poor. I would guess karma killed him fittingly.

Fuck him. Politics ruled then as today. This shit happens every day. And we keep paying. The 2nd Ammndmnt. is fine as it is - untill a new law comes into force. Then we will abide by it.

"We?"

Sustained, Ahem, you're right Clod, I meant the royale "we".