Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,178 Year: 5,435/9,624 Month: 460/323 Week: 100/204 Day: 0/16 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Gun Control

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gun Control
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 82 of 310 (669044)
07-26-2012 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by NoNukes
07-26-2012 2:45 PM


Re: Inclusive
NoNukes writes:
We've already had an armed rebellion against the US that began chiefly because one side did not like the outcome of the election in 1860.
As I understand it, political dissatisfaction became a CIvil War because of state-controlled militias seizing arms from Federal arsenals; it had little to do with privately owned weapons.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by NoNukes, posted 07-26-2012 2:45 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2012 9:33 AM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 120 of 310 (669143)
07-27-2012 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by NoNukes
07-27-2012 9:33 AM


Re: Inclusive
NoNukes writes:
My point was that people might have reason for concern about the "armed overthrow of the government" justification for a right to bear arms.
As far as I'm concerned, people do have an inherent right to overthrow their government, if necessary, as per Declaration of Independence. As I understand it, the Constitution simply codifies that inherent right into law.
If it was intended to guarantee a hunter's right to own the tools of his trade, that would be too Marxist for most Americans.
If it was intended to help Americans protect themselves from each other, it's a sign of a sick society - but then a healthy society might be too socialist too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2012 9:33 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2012 12:19 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 144 of 310 (669257)
07-28-2012 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by foreveryoung
07-28-2012 12:19 PM


Re: Breivik used legally obtained firearms
Voltaire30 writes:
There is no way for the people of China to overthrow their government now because they are unarmed. I realize that the police and the military are more armed than the populace could ever be, but at least it is possible to start guerilla war with the state if the populace is armed.
You contradict yourself. The current regime in China came to power by guerrilla warfare. It is always possible to become armed, should the need arise.
As an aside, are you under the impression that the people of China want to overthrow their government?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by foreveryoung, posted 07-28-2012 12:19 PM foreveryoung has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by foreveryoung, posted 07-28-2012 9:23 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 203 of 310 (669481)
07-30-2012 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by foreveryoung
07-28-2012 9:23 PM


Voltaire30 writes:
It came to power by guerilla warfare and that was made possible because the citizenry was allowed to have weapons.
Guerrilla warfare may start with a few individually-owned weapons - today that would probably be called "terrorism". But to defeat a modern army, you need heavier weapons than a peasant is likely to own. That usually means importing arms in quantity from sympathetic and/or greedy neighbouring countries. Note the Viet Cong who were supplied with AK-47s from North Vietnam.
What you need to overthrow your government isn't civilian-owned weapons; it's international sympathy for your cause.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by foreveryoung, posted 07-28-2012 9:23 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 217 of 310 (669511)
07-30-2012 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by 1.61803
07-30-2012 3:58 PM


3.14159 writes:
If some asshole pulls his pistol I much rather have a firearm than a list of all the things wrong with gun violence and proliferation to counter.
Isn't he more likely to fire his weapon if you draw yours?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by 1.61803, posted 07-30-2012 3:58 PM 1.61803 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by 1.61803, posted 07-30-2012 4:17 PM ringo has replied
 Message 223 by crashfrog, posted 07-30-2012 4:35 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 222 of 310 (669517)
07-30-2012 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by 1.61803
07-30-2012 4:17 PM


90210 writes:
If I hit what I aim at he wont be doing nothing but running, bleeding or dying.
You're pretty sure of yourself there, Quickdraw. If his weapon was already drawn, like you said, I wouldn't be too eager to provoke him into using it.
If I have a weapon, I'm not likely to get a chance to use it. If I don't have one, he gets to feel like a big man with his and he might not feel the need to use it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by 1.61803, posted 07-30-2012 4:17 PM 1.61803 has seen this message but not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 226 of 310 (669521)
07-30-2012 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by crashfrog
07-30-2012 4:35 PM


crashfrog writes:
Does it make any sense at all to trust your safety to the care of someone who has already endangered it by pointing a loaded weapon at you?
It makes more sense to hope he won't use it than to encourage him to use it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by crashfrog, posted 07-30-2012 4:35 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 284 of 310 (669681)
08-01-2012 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by Jon
08-01-2012 1:19 PM


Re: Wha??
Jon writes:
Why didn't that big voting majority stand up against those rag-tag racists, then?
So which group is it that has the right to bear arms? The voting majority or the rag-tag dissidents? Or is it both? Are you advocating the use of arms to solve all political disputes?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by Jon, posted 08-01-2012 1:19 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Jon, posted 08-01-2012 1:37 PM ringo has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 287 of 310 (669684)
08-01-2012 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 285 by Jon
08-01-2012 1:37 PM


Re: Wha??
Jon writes:
As I already said:
"All people should be equally empowered."
And it has already been pointed out that that's impossible. Are you advocating futile terrorist acts against an overwhelmingly superior tyranny?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by Jon, posted 08-01-2012 1:37 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by Jon, posted 08-01-2012 3:32 PM ringo has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 523 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(3)
Message 305 of 310 (669758)
08-02-2012 12:08 PM


There are no easy answers
You reap what you sow. If there are guns around, there's likely to be gun-related violence. But does that mean "more" violence in general? Do guns produce violence or do they just make it easier?
Prohibition doesn't work. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns (but that will make it easier to spot the outlaws).
If you want to live in a gun-obsessed society, that's your choice. If you want to uphold an antiquated Constitution, that's your choice. If you want to take up arms against tyranny, that's your choice too - but civilian-owned weapons have little chance against a modern army.
If some maniac decides to shoot me, whether or not I have a gun is unlikely to make any difference. As for me and my house, we will go unarmed into the great unknown.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024