Will the Second Amendment survive? - Page 20

TheMercenary · 12-16-2007, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Which they rarely use, because more than 3 rounds is inaccurate and wasteful.

Correct.

xoxoxoBruce · 12-16-2007, 04:29 PM

Hey, I'm not just a pretty face ya know.

piercehawkeye45 · 12-16-2007, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Are you wondering, if civil unrest broke out it could be defeated by cutting off imports? No.

I don't think so. If civil rest breaks out in America, there would be no way to stop the import of heavy guns and bombs.

What I am wondering is if civil rest does break out, are there enough to heavy guns in the US right now so the importation of more heavy guns is not needed? If there are 300 million machine guns in civilian hands in the US right now, the importation of more machine guns will not be needed. Anyone who does fight the revolution will have three or four. But if there are only 300,000 machine guns, importation will be needed.

Radar · 12-16-2007, 02:16 PM

By civilians I mean those who are not cops or are not in the military.

deadbeater · 12-16-2007, 07:21 PM

I'm not talking about just rifles. I'm talking about the miltary with tanks and airplanes as well. Can't shoot them all down. After all, this is American production we are talking about. And corporations will side with the government. The government and the corporation combined will successfully suppress even a gun-toting nation.

piercehawkeye45 · 12-16-2007, 07:27 PM

But corporations are worked by the people.

Well, they will just move somewhere else then wouldn't they?

deadbeater · 12-16-2007, 07:42 PM

Not if they are part of the military industrial complex. And who knows if foreign military industries won't help the government from these home grown 'terrorists'?

ZenGum · 12-16-2007, 08:07 PM

I'm surprised that none of the gun-totin' types around these parts have yet pointed out the difference between "automatic rifles" and "machine guns".

AKs, M-16s, Uzis, etc are automatic rifles (or pistols as the case may be) although it is common for folks to refer to them as "machine guns" in the sense of "hold the trigger in and bangbangbangbangbangbangbang".

Machine guns, strictly speaking, are things like M-60s or larger; usually belt fed, much larger caliber, heavier weapons.

I wonder if the disagreement above was due to mixing these two senses of "machine gun".
That US civilians hold more automatic rifles than the military is quite plausible. More (strictly) machine guns ... seems less plausible to this outsider.

And so, imagine 10,000 civilians with automatic rifles*, against 500 trained military with tanks, artillery, air support, full command and control networks .... if it came to a pitched battle, I'd rather be inside one of the tanks.

EDIT: * and a few heavier weapons...

deadbeater · 12-16-2007, 08:38 PM

Also, more importantly, America is not like Israel, where each citizen undergo mandatory military training and service. Israeli citizens can in this case take on the Israeli government.

regular.joe · 12-17-2007, 08:21 AM

Yea, well, the Govt. has been trouncing all over my right to hit the pipe when ever I want. The tyranny!

BigV · 12-20-2007, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icicleparadise

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!

icileparadise · 12-20-2007, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigV

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.

BigV · 12-20-2007, 04:55 PM

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!

icileparadise · 12-20-2007, 04:59 PM

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.

Urbane Guerrilla · 12-22-2007, 04:23 AM

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.

12-16-2007, 04:29 PM	#2
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Hey, I'm not just a pretty face ya know. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

12-16-2007, 02:16 PM	#4
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	By civilians I mean those who are not cops or are not in the military. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

12-16-2007, 07:21 PM	#5
deadbeater Sir Post-A-Lot Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 439	I'm not talking about just rifles. I'm talking about the miltary with tanks and airplanes as well. Can't shoot them all down. After all, this is American production we are talking about. And corporations will side with the government. The government and the corporation combined will successfully suppress even a gun-toting nation. Last edited by deadbeater; 12-16-2007 at 07:39 PM.

12-16-2007, 07:42 PM	#7
deadbeater Sir Post-A-Lot Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 439	Not if they are part of the military industrial complex. And who knows if foreign military industries won't help the government from these home grown 'terrorists'? Last edited by deadbeater; 12-16-2007 at 07:52 PM.

12-16-2007, 08:07 PM	#8
ZenGum Doctor Wtf Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Badelaide, Baustralia Posts: 12,861	I'm surprised that none of the gun-totin' types around these parts have yet pointed out the difference between "automatic rifles" and "machine guns". AKs, M-16s, Uzis, etc are automatic rifles (or pistols as the case may be) although it is common for folks to refer to them as "machine guns" in the sense of "hold the trigger in and bangbangbangbangbangbangbang". Machine guns, strictly speaking, are things like M-60s or larger; usually belt fed, much larger caliber, heavier weapons. I wonder if the disagreement above was due to mixing these two senses of "machine gun". That US civilians hold more automatic rifles than the military is quite plausible. More (strictly) machine guns ... seems less plausible to this outsider. And so, imagine 10,000 civilians with automatic rifles, against 500 trained military with tanks, artillery, air support, full command and control networks .... if it came to a pitched battle, I'd rather be inside one of the tanks. EDIT: and a few heavier weapons... __________________ Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008. Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl. Last edited by ZenGum; 12-16-2007 at 09:03 PM.

12-16-2007, 07:27 PM	#6
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	But corporations are worked by the people. Well, they will just move somewhere else then wouldn't they?

12-16-2007, 08:38 PM	#9
deadbeater Sir Post-A-Lot Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 439	Also, more importantly, America is not like Israel, where each citizen undergo mandatory military training and service. Israeli citizens can in this case take on the Israeli government.

12-17-2007, 08:21 AM	#10
regular.joe Старый сержант Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: NC, dreaming of large Russian women. Posts: 1,464	Yea, well, the Govt. has been trouncing all over my right to hit the pipe when ever I want. The tyranny! __________________ Birth, wealth, and position are valueless during wartime. Man is only judged by his character --Soldier's Testament. Death, like birth, is a secret of Nature. - Marcus Aurelius.

12-20-2007, 04:55 PM	#13
BigV Goon Squad Leader Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,063	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! __________________ Be Just and Fear Not.

12-20-2007, 04:59 PM	#14
icileparadise Coronation Incarnate Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Swiss Mountains Posts: 96	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.

12-22-2007, 04:23 AM	#15
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	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. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course. Last edited by Urbane Guerrilla; 12-22-2007 at 04:30 AM.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)