|
|
|
|
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 2:05:57 AM | It may very well be my European perspective that makes what I see in the statistics so staggering and unbelievable but I doubt it. I cannot find it in me to accept that the arguments for having guns for either sport or for protection invalidates my belief that guns in a civilised community are wrong.
Having a gun for sport or target practice or hunting your own deer is not a bad thing or something I would advocate taking away from you all. But thats not the reality is it?. 477,000 people killed. Most guns bought by criminals are bought on the street (80%), 16,137 young people under 24 killed and god only knows how many wounded. This is not sport or target practice or hunting for food. It's carnage on a par or worse than with Vietnam. How are you being protected?, your children are certainly not being protected. There seems to me to be a Charles Bronson vigilanty mind set with a smattering od Dirty Harry thrown in for good measure.
The death of such large numbers of children superceedes your right to carry a weapon.
As long as you believe in your mind that these guns protect you, you will see this carnage continue and almost certainly see deterioration as your fears over terrorism and immigration get worse. The solution is to take away the guns not just from the law abiding people in your society but take them away from the criminals too. No guns, no carnage. If you were serious in your desire to do that then getting a gun would be made much more difficult than responding to a newspaper small ad.
I also find the protection argument a little difficult to accept. According to your own crime statistics, most of the people in here are neither victim or perp. Most victims come from black and hispanic young people. Maybe thats why it's not such a big problem so long as they stay within the ghettos they have to live in and that if they even dared to try to move outside the borders of these death camps, you can all be comforted to know that your neighbours Al and Norm will have them in their cross hairs just in case. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 3:21:53 AM | ABKRDyslectic,
It's not my predudice against guns thats the problem it's your refusal to acknowledge that the interests of the community come before self in most societies that work well. I would like my kids to grow up into a less violent society, putting guns into the hands of children is madness even if your intention is to teach them to use it as a 'tool?'.
If you wish to have rational debate then please tell me how you intend to stop the slaughter taking place on your streets. You have no effective control over guns in your community. The few restrictions that are in place are totally ineffective.
If I am wrong and you have access to real data that shows my interpretation of the statistics is wrong, then please enlighten me. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 6:59:59 AM | Well Beachbum I don't mean to be rude, but it's easy to see why Europe allowed fascism to run rampent. I'm not calling you one, in fact I think you have good intentions. The problem is the road to hell is paved with them.
While I don't fully believe that guns are there to "protect" you from our "government". An armed populus does reduce the chances that our government will turn on us. It's no guarantee, but it's far more than the Jews had in WWII. The Soviet Union murdered 100 million people in Russia alone. The funny thing is that People who stalin ordered to death or sent to the Gulags, actually thought it happened behind Stalan's back. They clearly trusted their government way too much.
Imagine if the victims of the holocust had firearms. Do you think they would have gone so quietly? More people would have taken note, and not so many people would have stood ideally by, and watched it happen.
The USA does have the highest murder rate using guns in the modern age, this is true. Yet, if you compare the numbers above, we have far less deaths all in all. It's a trade off that the (much of the) American people are willing accept. You see the 2nd Admendment gives the rest of the bill of rights teeth.
You have to remember too, that in political theory the American people rule our government, not the other way around. To disarm the American People, is to disarm the legitement ruling class. If that happends, it would be proof that there was a political coup against the American people. No other freedom could be called a right again, and it would simply be a privilege granted to us by our new masters. Any privilege could be taken away from anyone on a whim. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 8:09:24 AM | I dont think your being rude powervamp, it would seem that we, or rather I, am talking about totally different things.
I am looking at half a million unnecessary deaths on your streets and thinking OMG whilst most people who respond from America see the issue as a personal erosion of their rights and freedoms.
I speak from a personal view point of what is best for the community as a whole, ie no guns on the street, and Americans see it as how it affects them as individuals. For me the needs of the community come first not the rights of the individuals.
The problem I have with your weak and basesless justification for having them that is that it's based on untruths and irrational fears. Statistically you are not going to be involved in gun crime, it is the poor black and Hispanic youths. Insisting on having guns when you don't need them only makes the use of guns more widespread. White middle class Americans shoot themselves not others.
In all the posts I have read in here, not one sensible justification has been given for having an armed population. Thats because in a civilised society there can be no justification that makes sense.
I have to wonder what is taught in American schools if you think that the holocaust is any justification for having guns. The holocaust happened because of hatred and fear of a minority in a community who were demonised in much the same way as the muslims and mexican migrants are being now in the USA.
There was resistance from the Jewish communities including armed resistance. Having guns will not prevent such things happening again but will in all probability make it more likely. You can see the exact same things that happend there happening in your country now with things being things suggested in threads on immigration the same as happened in 1930's Germany.
The danger comes not from guns but from lack of racial or religious tollerance and looking for someone to blame as you see with the Mexicans or 'illegals' as you like to call them, and with the muslim communities too. I fear for the reation of the American people the next time a terrorist incident occurs in your country with everyone having guns.
That you believe the death toll is acceptable because of your fears is something I cannot comprehend. You live in fear but are unwilling to do anything about it. Does anone really think that having guns is good for your society. I think not. Being afraid of your own government is ridiculous. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 8:12:28 AM |
Imagine if the victims of the holocust had firearms. Do you think they would have gone so quietly? More people would have taken note, and not so many people would have stood ideally by, and watched it happen.
An oft mentioned response in such threads, but one has to look at how that "Final Solution" was implemented. I read a rather horrific, if interesting book called, "The Theory And Practice Of Hell" , about the Shoah.
It's an enlightening look into how the Jews were literally moved from point to point, divided, given hope....and still wound up in the trap. There was a systematic way of doing things that lead people (German and Jew alike) towards the intended destination, always providing them with some sort of small potential "self-denial" that they were going to their deaths.
That self-denial, the refusal to believe what was happening, delayed any fight until it was past the point of being possible.
So tyranny, presumably, would not wear a mask announcing itself.
Any government that wanted to take away your weapons could easily get the access to the NRA database, and instantly have what is ( in a very real sense) a gun registry system in and of itself.
There's about what ? Four million plus of those in the NRA files ?
Membership lists of gun clubs, manufacturers client lists, who bought ammunition, people who wear NRA T-Shirts, people who post pictures of themselves with guns ?
Not hard to track you down, when that day arrives.
Overnight, ammunition sales could be banned, stores guarded by troops, and emptied of their stocks. All you have left then is what you've already go stored - and the government has far better weapons, intelligence systems, information gathering systems, technology, and pretty much unlimited ammo.
All cell phone networks go down at exactly the same moment, the internet stops, postal service suspended, no residential phones ?
Go luck trying to redo Paul Revere's ride, this time around.
At that point ?
Good luck fighting them off. If you've neglected the ballot, a bullet isn't going to help much.
There's this sense that suddenly ALL Americans would oppose it, and that won't be the case either. Some will side with the government, for various reasons. Rebels will be transformed into "domestic terrorists".
You'll be there, huddled behind your locked door, holding your Remington proudly to save America. The guy outside with the sensor that can look through a wall will put a bullet into you before you can even realize he's done it. 
U.S. soldiers and Marines will be issued as early as this spring a new gadget called a RADAR SCOPE that will enable them to see motion through up to 12 inches of concrete, detecting movement as minute as someone breathing in the next room. The DARPA-developed device weighs only a pound and a half, is waterproof, runs on AA batteries and costs taxpayers only about $1,000 each
http://www.therawfeed.com/2006/01/new-military-gadget-sees-through-walls.html
Add heat sensors, night vision goggles that exceed anything you can access, remote flying drones armed with missiles, total body armor, remote controlled armed vehicles......etc, etc, etc.
It will be far less "Red Dawn" time than it will "Terminator".
So that aspect is quite romantic, idealistic, and again fits well with your cultural history.
The only problem is that this world we live in isn't 1776, or 1860 anymore. So this is an argument I can understand you proposing quite easily. I just don't see it as being a realistic means of overthrowing such a government. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 8:28:08 AM |
The death of such large numbers of children superceedes your right to carry a weapon.
Show me in the constitution where it says that the death of a large number of children superceedes my right to carry. Otherwise this is just your opinion, which since you don't even live here is irrelevant. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 8:38:50 AM | kanaduh, I am saying that your constitution is wrong and should be re written. Why you feel the need to adhere to it like it was some ancient religious manuscript is beyond me. The reverence given to it and to your 'founding fathers' is hard for me to grasp. Documents written years ago for a society that existed years ago is not relevent for todays world.
Your rights as an individual should take second place to the needs of the wider community and having so many children die should be enough for most people. It's about us, us, us, not me, me , me. Your country would be a better place to bring up children without so many guns being readily available, that must be acknowledged as true by even the most hardened pro gun person.
Having a constitutional right to carry a gun is of no concern to me, having a society without any form of gun control or the desire to control them is what I have concerns with. There is a massacre taking place daily on your streets and in your communities and no-one seems to care so long as their personal rights are not taken away. The price you are willing to pay to live in fear is too high a price. You should take away the right of anyone to own a gun until you demonstrate that your capable of controlling them in some way which quite clearly you are not.
That I do not live there does not disqualify me from getting involved nor does it make my views any less valid. America has lived almost in isolation for the last few decades taking litle or no interest in events not directly affecting you at home. Whilst you wasn't looking the rest of the world has become actively involved in each others business and my vote here in the UK now affects over 600 million other people. Soon I will have the right to vote in your elections too. That is inevitable and something you should welcome. We out here in the rest of the world have a valuable contribution to make to your country, it's time you started to accept that and allowed us too.
| |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 9:31:10 AM |
I am saying that your constitution is wrong and should be re written.
Glad it’s not up to you …
Documents written years ago for a society that existed years ago is not relevant for today’s world.
Would you like to start by throwing out the Magna Carta ??? , after all ya’ll don’t seem to be using it anymore …..
Your rights as an individual should take second place to the needs of the wider community
That would be called socialism/communism and you can keep it ….
That I do not live there does not disqualify me from getting involved nor does it make my views any less valid.
Actually, it does, oh sure you’re entitled to your opinion, but you know what they say about opinions, everyone has one …..
Soon I will have the right to vote in your elections too. That is inevitable and something you should welcome.
I doubt that, I doubt that, And I won’t welcome it in any way shape or form.
it's time you started to accept that and allowed us too.
Seems we’ve disagreed on this point before .. oh a little over 200 years ago, it seems we got tired of you folks telling us what to do then and no doubt most Americans would just as soon tell you to mind your own business still today.
| |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 10:13:11 AM |
I am saying that your constitution is wrong and should be re written.
Why do you care? Your country has already abolished firearms for the most part, so why don't you just enjoy living in your gun free zone and let us take care of our own laws and personal protection practices. No offence but where do you get the right to tell us what to do? | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 10:13:21 AM | How silly these discussions become. Throw away magna Carta, yes mate why not. We have a new country now with a new constitution. It's called the European Union. A far greater diversity of cultures, national identities and belief systems than you could ever hope to see anywhere else in the world, all living peacefully together and all exchanging ideas and helping to make each others communities better. Whats good for them is good for me.
Having an isolationist approach is yesterdays world. The world is changing despite your attempts to ignore it and it is becoming more 'one world' than ever before. National borders are disappearing and people are free to go unhindered wherever they want too. Thats progress.
America appears to have no plan for the future and will undoubtedly look to us here in Europe to set the standards for you to follow. At the moment you are about twenty to thirty years behind everyone else when it comes to such matters. It is not you who lead the world anymore, it is us, and you will be dragged kicking and screaming into 21st century whether you like it or not and part of that is to disarm yourselves and address the slaughter on your streets.
200 years ago. Give me a break will ya. It's today and tomorrow that matter and we are far far ahead of you in every aspect of life. You could not survive without us, be we could survive without you.
Your constitution is flawed and too many people die because you live in fear and are unwilling to do anything to address those fears. If you do not address your gun problem, we will do it for you eventually.
I'm not telling you what to do. Just telling you that you don't have to live in terror. You don't brng your guns with you when you come to visit us do you?. No, because you don't need to. The same could be true of your country if only you had the courage to face up to your fears.
Land of the free, home of the brave. Land of people who's minds are imprisoned by their fears and too scared to do anything about it more like. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 10:19:37 AM | If you do not address your gun problem, we will do it for you eventually.
Good luck with all that. If this is what you truely believe, you have underestimated Americans.
Try it and see what happens. It would be laughable. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 10:28:01 AM | This is decending into nonsence. We will do it for you because soon you will be a bankrupt nation. You are doing nothing to maintain your position as an economic superpower. You will do what you are told to do either by us or by China and Russia when you come cap in hand begging for us to bail you out. Like the good friends we are, and always have been, we will help you, but there will be a price to pay and that price will include the disarming of your population. You can't expect to continue to behave like your Wyatt Hurp living in Dodge city and stil expect to be regarded as part of the international community.
Try it and see?. OK mate I will. Remember this converstaion in ten years from now and we'll see who's right.
In the meantime, you would do well to focus on stopping half a million children dying unnecessarily just because your terrified. It makes you look bad. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 10:33:12 AM | we will help you, but there will be a price to pay and that price will include the disarming of your population.
So a country that is already disarmed is going to disarm our country? I agree this discussion is decending into nonsence!
In the meantime, you would do well to focus on stopping half a million children dying unnecessarily.
I don't know where your getting these figures from, but they are not even close to being correct. If your going to make an argument based on false information then as far as I am concerned this discussion with you is over. If you listen real close you can hear my Violin playing for all those children. Feel better now? | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 11:19:46 AM | I dont think your being rude powervamp
Well you can look at it that way if you want. I'm not insulting other users education, nor the laws of your land. Although I do disagree with them.
Any government that wanted to take away your weapons could easily get the access to the NRA database, and instantly have what is ( in a very real sense) a gun registry system in and of itself.
All the more reason for the so called gun show loophole.
Montreal_Guy, do you remember the guy who stood in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square? Although that guy wasn't an American, he had the same fire in his heart that first made America strong. Although I'm sure his government killed him later behind closed doors, he will be remembered.
Now think about the guy who will be "huddled behind [his] locked door, holding [his] Remington proudly to save America". Is he making a useless jester, or will he b a Martyr? "Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death" - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
Here is some more food for thought...do you believe Bush stole the election or not? If he stole the vote, then how does my vote really count? Do you trust the judgements of my government? Has it shown to you that it has already gone rouge in some respects? If so, why the hell could you ever expect the American people to trust it too?
One more thing...I trust our troops far beyond that of the politicans. When they see fasism come to America, more than half will fight aganst it. They will be our allies, not our enemies. We won't be fighting tanks with pop guns. We'll have them too. :-) | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 11:27:51 AM |
....If you do not address your gun problem, we will do it for you eventually. Beachbum 1960,
Clearly, you threaten my freedom.
There are few things worth dying for. Freedom is one of them.
Of interest to those, like you, who would attempt to restrict my freedom:
If it's worth dying for, then its worth fighting for.
If tis worth fighting for, then its worth killing for.
The best possible outcome is to retain my life and my freedom, and I will do my utmost to retain both.
I strongly suggest you reconsider your position and abandon your threatening ways. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 11:37:07 AM | Beachbum 1960,
Clearly, you threaten my freedom.
He'd make a great spokesman for the "New World Order". Although I would consider that an insult, I'm sure he wouldn't. Only the Development of a New World Order, would allow him to vote in elections that effect America. He said that is inevitable..
Our Ideas and his cannot coexist forever. One day the two conflicting ideas will lead to a bloody conflict, and is way my outlook on the future is grim. It's also why we need to protect our civil liberties. Keep America the way it was ment to be.
The protecting the rights of the individual protects the rights of the many. By ingnoring the rights of the individual, you erode the rights of the many. The enemies of freedom, don't see it that way. They think what we call freedom is oppression. The idea to ingnore the individual, and placing trust in government is foolish. Freedom will never be obsoltete, don't be fooled into thinking otherwise. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 11:57:12 AM | Kind of losing our way a bit here are we not. I do not threaten you in any way, I'm just a fifty year old bloke from England. The problem I think is that whilst I have been exposed to a world that is changing and have taken these changes and extrapolated them forwards whilst most respondents choose not to do so. Do you have any understanding of the new Europe and how it sits on the world stage?.
At this time the people of America are at a momentous time in your history. Momentum is growing even in your country for 'change we can believe in' The problem is that you have no vision of what those changes are or how they might affect you and the rest of the world.
I have no understanding of what your 'new world order' might be. Would you care to enlighten me?. I do have an understanding of the changes taking place within Europe and elsewhere and can see what a beneficial thing these changes are for all of us including America.
We are supposed to be discussing your constitutional rights to own a gun, or to be more precise, your constitutional right to live in a war zone. Can we stay on subject or can no reasoned argument be made in favour other than some old geezers long since dead said it was a good thing. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 12:04:30 PM | I do not threaten you in any way,
Nor I you, as I'm sure your a nice guy and truly mean well. Non the less, our ideals will collide on the world stage in a grand conflict. With or without our individual help.
The UN or NWO is a direct threat to our constitutional rights, and is why I bring it up. It's almost as if we lost the cold war or perhaps we simply never truly won it. We have the same conflicting Ideas, yet there is a new battlefield. The courts ruling on the 2nd admendment was a battle one, but the war is far from over.
It is a war of ideas, and the 2nd Admentment was not merely about guns, so much as the individual vs the many. Don't fool yourself to thinking otherwise. This is far bigger than simply the right to own a gun. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 12:19:52 PM | What a fascinating concept, our ideals colliding in a grand conflict. Is this a conflict of minds or are you going to bring your gun just in case?
You stand alone in the world now with your isolationist views. Just what is it about getting to know your fellow human beings that you find so threatening. Do we not welcome you when you come to visit?, do we not send our children to fight next to yours in Iraq and Afganistan?, did we not repay every single penny you loaned us to fight the Nazi's?
Nobody hates you, almost everybody likes you. I know the Iranians do, or did, and will do again once you stop threatening them. The rest of the world wants a strong and peaceful America, it's in all our interest but you lack vision. I do not think you have given any thought to what the world might be like in 20 years or even post Iraq conflict. We have the chance to realise the dream of a world without war and without terror but to do this you first have to try and imagine how it might look.
Having the constitutional right to bear arms in your country is of no importance to me. It's your own kids your killing not mine. I joined in this debate because I looked at the statistics produced by your country regarding gun crime and it's victims. Those statistics alone should tell you that your right to bear arms is wrong. If however you are content to continue as you are and believe there is no light at the end of the tunnel only the train coming, then by all means carry on stockpiling your weapons, teaching your children gun crafts, having 16,000 children killed each year just so you can be ready for the uprising or the new civil war mentioned in one thread when it comes. You are a nation obsessed by war and guns and are living in fear. Does anyone have a view of your country in 20 years and how it will be?.
Where is my change I can believe in? | |
|
| |
| |
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 12:29:10 PM | First of all, Beachbum, I do value your opinion and will defend your right to say it. I think your opinion is just as valuable and important as anyone elses on here, and even though my fellow countrymen may deem your opinion worthless, I for one, am thankful for your input.
Just FYI, the New World Order is a belief by the Conspiracy Theorists that there is some underground secret society that controls everything that happens in the world, from the price of gas, to terrorist activity, to government programs, and all the way down to your love life. Take it for what you will, but again, it is very much in the realm of the conspiracy theorists.
Now, Kanaduh, I don't know about you or if you carry a gun on you at all times, and I mean at all times, from the shower to the bedroom, including but not limited to sleeping and having sex. Personally, I think that is a little dangerous, but hey, there are those who are turned on by having sex with a gun held to their head. But I digress. If your gun is not always on you then if the "assailant" has the drop on you, and has the advantage, then there is no way in hell you have a 50/50 shot. Let's think about this. An "assailant" has a gun trained on you. Your gun is in a drawer, or on a night stand, or something like that. You go ahead and make a move toward your gun and see what happens.
Again, if you have the drop on the "assailant", and are able to be where he is when he is unsuspecting, a gun IS NOT necessary. If I have the advantage on the "assailant" then I have the ability to get the gun out of his hands and unarm him, without a weapon of my own. It's simple logic. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/30/2008 12:31:53 PM |
Don't try exporting your criminals to us mate. Only law abiding citizens allowed in the new Europe
Do you really consider what she did a crime? | |
|
| |
| |
|
| Page 10 of 13
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 |
|
Home
login 
