|
Author
|
Topic: Gun Control Again
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
Message 3796 of 5179 (765749)
08-05-2015 3:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3794 by Diomedes
08-05-2015 2:40 PM
|
|
Re: From my cold dead stupid fingers....
One other thing (and I have said this before), the one argument that drives me beyond nuts when I speak to other gun owners is this fixation they have on needing to be armed because they might need to overthrow a tyrannical government. I am sorry, but that is the most moronic statement I have ever heard. The most staunch Ayn Rand acolyte could go into Gander Mountain and buy ever gun they sell and it wouldn't mean a hill of beans the moment the government showed up with ten M1A1 tanks. The soldiers inside would be playing cards laughing their asses off as you emptied every clip you had only to watch it bounce off the tank's armor. Ah, so you've completely misunderstood the mentality. Its not that The People are going to get into a toe-to-toe fight with the Army. Its that having The People armed means that it would be too big of a pain in the ass for the Army to even begin to think about starting the battle. From Message 626:
quote:
The Second Amendment did provide protection against government tyranny in the 18th century. Today, it does not. Not even a little. An armed populace still has no defense against tanks. If our government and military institute martial law, there is nothing in terms of violent resistance that you could do with your guns to effectively win. Nothing at all. The age of the armed revolution died when the age of the tank began. If you want to perform or resist tyranny, today we do so through words and political action, not with bullets. The Second Amendment is worthless today for its original stated purpose. It might make you feel better...but your handgun doesn't do any good when an unmanned drone fires a Hellfire missile into your house, effectively ending your resistance. I don't agree with this. The government has a vested interest in its people being alive. Without the people there's nothing to govern. There's no situation where the government would go to war with its own people, which is what it would take if the people are armed. If the people are not armed, then there's no need for any military-like 'invasion' in the first place. The people are already defenseless and could be pushed around in much more subtle ways. So in the sense that the 2nd amendment provides arms to the people and the people being armed would require government tyranny to be a military-like invasion like you describe, since the government would not do something like that, then the 2nd amendment does provide protection against government tyranny. ABE: Maybe a more consice way to say it: An armed populous ups the ante to the point where the government doesn't want to play the game of tyranny.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3794 by Diomedes, posted 08-05-2015 2:40 PM | | Diomedes has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 3797 of 5179 (765750)
08-05-2015 3:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3795 by saab93f
08-05-2015 2:53 PM
|
|
Still, guns have a useful purpose.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3795 by saab93f, posted 08-05-2015 2:53 PM | | saab93f has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 3798 by saab93f, posted 08-05-2015 3:21 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
saab93f
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 265 From: Finland Joined: 12-17-2009
|
Still, guns have a useful purpose. I don't agree. Their purpose is not useful per se. They are for killing others and at best act as a deterrent. However they were never designed to be deterrents.
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
(2)
| |
| |
| |
Catholic Scientist writes: Thanks for admitting that you'd prefer to just deny me one of my rights.
I would gladly deny you the "right" to own a handgun. I would also deny that you have a right to own a handgun. What you have is the flagrant misinterpretation of the Second Amendment.
|
Diomedes
Member Posts: 996 From: Central Florida, USA Joined: 09-13-2013
|
Re: From my cold dead stupid fingers....
Ah, so you've completely misunderstood the mentality. Its not that The People are going to get into a toe-to-toe fight with the Army. Its that having The People armed means that it would be too big of a pain in the ass for the Army to even begin to think about starting the battle. I would disagree. The matter and type of armament that 'The People' have at their disposal is, at best, a minor nuisance to a well armed military and I don't believe it in any way deters the government. The bigger 'deterrent' in my mind is our voting system. Politicians are placating to those with the loudest voices and the biggest wallets. I don't think for one second they consider armed citizens as being any type of threat. Perhaps in the past, it might have carried more weight. But to be honest, even when individuals and groups have had access to weapons that placed them on near-equal footing with a tyrannical state, it at best only delayed the inevitable.
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 3801 of 5179 (765759)
08-05-2015 3:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3798 by saab93f
08-05-2015 3:21 PM
|
|
Well I don't know what you are trying to say, but it seems to be that you just don't like the useful purposes that handguns do have.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3798 by saab93f, posted 08-05-2015 3:21 PM | | saab93f has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 3804 by saab93f, posted 08-05-2015 3:45 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 3802 of 5179 (765760)
08-05-2015 3:36 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3800 by Diomedes
08-05-2015 3:29 PM
|
|
Re: From my cold dead stupid fingers....
The matter and type of armament that 'The People' have at their disposal is, at best, a minor nuisance to a well armed military and I don't believe it in any way deters the government. It deters the government because they have a vested interest in The People being alive. When their tyranny would result in all-out warfare, because The People are armed, then that bullying becomes inconsiderable. If The People weren't armed, then the tyranny becomes a realistic option. The point is that We wouldn't have to be able to win the war to dissuade them from starting the first battle.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3800 by Diomedes, posted 08-05-2015 3:29 PM | | Diomedes has not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 3803 of 5179 (765761)
08-05-2015 3:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3799 by ringo
08-05-2015 3:25 PM
|
|
I know, Ringo. I don't respect your opinion on this matter in the slightest.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3799 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 3:25 PM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 3805 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 3:54 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
saab93f
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 265 From: Finland Joined: 12-17-2009
|
Well I don't know what you are trying to say, but it seems to be that you just don't like the useful purposes that handguns do have. Could be that I cannot communicate my thoughts clearly enough. Anyway, I do not see any useful purpose for a handgun like for example a wheelbarrow or an axe have. Handguns are not useful in hunting either so if their sole reason of existence is to kill others handily then that is not a useful purpose in my book. In my "business" handguns are an unfortunate, necessary evil. I just about loath the glorifying of guns and accept them as tools since they are what we got.
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Cat Sci writes: I don't respect your opinion on this matter in the slightest.
I don't think anybody respects your failure to reply substantively.
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 3806 of 5179 (765764)
08-05-2015 3:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3804 by saab93f
08-05-2015 3:45 PM
|
|
Could be that I cannot communicate my thoughts clearly enough. I don't think "useful purpose" is helping.
Anyway, I do not see any useful purpose for a handgun like for example a wheelbarrow or an axe have. Handguns are not useful in hunting either so if their sole reason of existence is to kill others handily then that is not a useful purpose in my book. They're weapons. And, like, the best weapon. Weapons have a useful purpose. And they don't require killing, so that can't be the sole reason of existence.
In my "business" handguns are an unfortunate, necessary evil. Look at it this way, if they didn't have a useful purpose then how could they be necessary?
I just about loath the glorifying of guns and accept them as tools since they are what we got. They're great tools, for their purpose. That means they're useful. You simply cannot deny that handguns have useful purpose.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3804 by saab93f, posted 08-05-2015 3:45 PM | | saab93f has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 3808 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 4:00 PM | | New Cat's Eye has not replied | | | Message 3825 by saab93f, posted 08-06-2015 3:23 AM | | New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 3911 by Percy, posted 08-08-2015 8:09 AM | | New Cat's Eye has not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 3807 of 5179 (765766)
08-05-2015 3:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3805 by ringo
08-05-2015 3:54 PM
|
|
 Now you're just being a dishonest prick. I'm probably the most substantial poster in this thread.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3805 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 3:54 PM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 3809 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 4:03 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied | | | Message 3819 by Theodoric, posted 08-05-2015 6:47 PM | | New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied | | | Message 3912 by Percy, posted 08-08-2015 8:12 AM | | New Cat's Eye has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Cat Sci writes: You simply cannot deny that handguns have useful purpose.
It isn't that handguns have no useful purpose for anybody. They just don't have a useful purpose for most of the people who have them. A handgun is like a giraffe. I can easily go through life without "needing" one.
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 443 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
Cat Sci writes: I'm probably the most substantial poster in this thread.
And yet you didn't reply substantively to me. Here, I'll give you another chance:
quote:
I would gladly deny you the "right" to own a handgun.
I would also deny that you have a right to own a handgun. What you have is the flagrant misinterpretation of the Second Amendment.
Message 3799
Any substance at all?
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 3810 of 5179 (765769)
08-05-2015 4:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3809 by ringo
08-05-2015 4:03 PM
|
|
And yet you didn't reply substantively to me. You reap what you sow.
Here, I'll give you another chance:
quote:
I would gladly deny you the "right" to own a handgun.
I would also deny that you have a right to own a handgun. What you have is the flagrant misinterpretation of the Second Amendment.
Message 3799
Any substance at all? No, I do not see any substance there worth replying to.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3809 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 4:03 PM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 3811 by ringo, posted 08-05-2015 4:17 PM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2