|
I've Never Heard A Better 2nd Amendment Argument
And here it is.
This is all I will say on the subject, you good folks can argue amongst yourselves all you like. I ain't changing your mind, and you ain't about to change mine. :cool: |
That's right. Defend yourself from a theoretically possible future assault by your government at the cost of an actual and current slowly unfolding massacre on your streets and in your schools.
|
The protestors weren't armed, and they won.
And now, a bunch of armed men took over the Crimean parliament and put up a Russian flag. Which group is the 2nd amendment argument? |
Except it's not an actual massacre, we just say it's one for the emotional plea.
Here's my counter-argument: Iraq is lousy with AK-47s. For some reason this did not make them free. |
But then no one is saying that guns will make everyone free, just that they can give people a fighting chance to protect their freedom should they wish to keep it. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Websites can make people rich. Mark Zuckerberg's website made a lot of money. Undertoad is lousy with website. For some reason this did not make him rich. There is an actual and current slowly unfolding crime wave on the internet comprised of websites for terrorists, drug traffickers, child pornographers and more extracting a cost on our streets and in our schools. Undertoad should not be entitled to have a website. Only Mark Zuckerberg should have a website. |
Quote:
|
The idea that citizens, armed with the type of weapons that citizens can afford and buy, could in any way defend themselves against the military and its very special weapons is fantastic.
The 2nd amendment was written in another time and world. Now that I've posted my opinion on Grav's article I'll go read it. hahhahahha |
Crap. It's blocked at my school. Weapons sites, etc. I'm sure there's a FIRST amendment issue here since the school is public and blocking certain sites is essentially censorship AND there is no evidence that the site promotes violence, etc etc
|
Quote:
|
How do we curb all the wrongful gun deaths, without limiting guns?
|
who will cut and paste or attache a pdf so I can read it?
|
|
ok that's a better solution
|
And I just deleted it when I saw yours!
|
Quote:
And the author's point about a similarly trained and armed populace is my point. The gov has much better toys than joe average and far better and more comprehensive training. I see a slippery slope of blood. I still think the whole gun violence thing that many object to is better addressed by eliminating poverty, and ignorance. Maybe all the gun violence we are seeing is in fact a revolution only happening in slow motion. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Jesus said "The poor are always with us"
Apparently, and translated and paraphrased. Same with the ignorant I guess. And the aggressive and the violent. The above isn't about anyone here or their views, I'm writing abut the fringe. |
I kinda thought we were the fringe?
|
Well, we are stuck in the cellar.
|
Beyond the fringe...
|
Quote:
Well, the Afghanis must have some fantastic ideas since their culture has transcended invasions by the world's two major superpowers. You see, those who know unconventional warfare [UW], how it works and how it can be successful for those with patience also know that there is a minimum threshold of initial capability needed to give an insurgency a chance against all but the weakest of governments. That threshold is the private ownership of individual firearms and hasn't changed since the 2nd amendment was written. Those who have "been there, done that" recognize it while the been nowhere, done nothings can't. The majority of people fall into the latter category. That's why it takes a 2/3 vote in Congress rather than a simple majority to change it. Conventional militaries do not fare well over the long haul against those using UW tactics ... not the Russians' ... not ours. That's why there are specialists in this area. For the US, it's Special Forces. They know how to develop an insurgency to overthrow a government even if you don't. That ability also makes them best qualified to conduct counterinsurgencies as seen in the heavy reliance on them in Afghanistan. The nature of the UW beast is; however, that even our best solution, human or technological, is still not the definitive solution to an insurgency ... not foreign ... not domestic. None of the above matters to those with defeatist attitudes and those who would rather just go with the flow as long as they themselves remain minimally comfortable. There are; however, still those of us who don't want to live in France. Quote:
|
^
And in the spirit of the above, Colorado is contemplating issuing licenses to shoot down drones. Not only is it our patriotic duty to fight against the coming surveillance society, it is a quick way to earn a few extra bucks for more ammo with a proposed bounty of $100/drone. From the Huffington Post: ~snip~ Quote:
I'm getting my drone license framed and hanging it on the wall in my living room right next to the gun rack with my 12 guage. ;) |
Quote:
I can't imagine very many Americans who'd be willing to live like an Afghani for some moral code. I bet we'd see a fair number of Rosetta Stone learn French CDs fly off the shelves first. |
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:22 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.