Will the Second Amendment survive?

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by Radar

I'm not trying to "impress" you. I picked the first 2 or three articles that showed up on google.

By all means go to fuckinggoogleit.com so you can learn how to look things up for yourself.

Are you pissed off because your claim was false Radar (and any idiot knows it is without even bothering to look up fuckinggoogle.com), or are you pissed off because you can't find anything substantial to back up your false statement?

You and UG are both on the same slippery slide here. That's patently obvious.

[icileparadise]

It's a very simple question: when all the constitencuy thingeys and the Amendments were written THEN at that time wasn't the militia and the right to bear arms written to birth the Armed Forces as it is it known today. My point is that the civilian element,no matter how much firepower it has, is unregulated and in no way attached to the overall plan of homeland defense as it stands today. I like that Alan Aarkin film "The Russians are coming"

[Radar]

Originally Posted by icileparadise

It's a very simple question: when all the constitencuy thingeys and the Amendments were written THEN at that time wasn't the militia and the right to bear arms written to birth the Armed Forces as it is it known today. My point is that the civilian element,no matter how much firepower it has, is unregulated and in no way attached to the overall plan of homeland defense as it stands today. I like that Alan Aarkin film "The Russians are coming"

An armed citizenry = militia. The founders listed a well-organized militia as one of the MANY reasons that INDIVIDUALS retain the right to keep and bear arms without any governmental oversight or permission. The militia in question is here more to defend Americans from the American government than from other governments.

Also, anyone who thinks a well-armed general citizenry of millions and millions of Americans can't beat a military with a few hundred thousand people (even the best armed military on earth) is smoking crack.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Are you pissed off because your claim was false Radar (and any idiot knows it is without even bothering to look up fuckinggoogle.com), or are you pissed off because you can't find anything substantial to back up your false statement?

You and UG are both on the same slippery slide here. That's patently obvious.

Why would I be angry? Each and every single thing I've said is factual and true. I already know what I've said is a fact. If you are too lazy to look it up on google, don't get upset with me. The UK, Australia, and Canada have more violent crimes (rapes, assaults, etc.) than America on a per-capita basis. Many of those crimes aren't reported in those countries because the Ministry doesn't allow more than a certain number of reports to be made.

The only difference between America and those countries, is over there people use bats, knives, etc. rather than guns.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Radar

Why would I be angry? Each and every single thing I've said is factual and true. I already know what I've said is a fact. If you are too lazy to look it up on google, don't get upset with me. The UK, Australia, and Canada have more violent crimes (rapes, assaults, etc.) than America on a per-capita basis. Many of those crimes aren't reported in those countries because the Ministry doesn't allow more than a certain number of reports to be made.

The reports that don't make it into the statistics go straight to you, I suppose?

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

The reports that don't make it into the statistics go straight to you, I suppose?

Even with the unreported crimes being taken into consideration, the countries with the most restrictive gun laws have more violent crimes than those with the least restrictive.

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by Radar

Why would I be angry? Each and every single thing I've said is factual and true. I already know what I've said is a fact. If you are too lazy to look it up on google, don't get upset with me. The UK, Australia, and Canada have more violent crimes (rapes, assaults, etc.) than America on a per-capita basis. Many of those crimes aren't reported in those countries because the Ministry doesn't allow more than a certain number of reports to be made.

The only difference between America and those countries, is over there people use bats, knives, etc. rather than guns.

OK, for one thing, it's quite clear that what you've presented isn't a fact, but let's just say it was for the sake of you feeling good about yourself.

In that case, it means that being an Australian I'm more likely to get punched or raped than I am of getting shot. Having been a victim of both these crimes, I'd say I'm pretty happy with the outcome...still being alive and all.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Having been a victim of both these crimes, I'd say I'm pretty happy with the outcome...still being alive and all.

Sorry but that is fucking sick. I would have rather killed the bastard.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

You and UG are both on the same slippery slide here. That's patently obvious.

Though Radar and I fight like wombats ("Ow! Quit it!" "Take that!" "Oh shut up and bite!" "But then I can't add insult to injury!"), we are freedom people. We are not necessarily convinced the non-gun or the anti-gun are. There is the matter of the mindset Lookout123 mentioned. Meanwhile, arms and their skill are measurable. Votes, to be sure, are far more pleasant -- but tyranny is far more unpleasant.

Well -- more to follow soon.