or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Massacre in Connecticut
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Massacre in Connecticut - Page 21

post #801 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

But it is a side issue here. The main point was that it is very difficult for civilians to obtain these firearms despite your repeated, incorrect, claims that people are wandering around with fully automatic weapons killing everyone. The dates and acts that led to this difficulty are a side issue and apparently, now, an attempt to score some sort of political shot ("America's favourite gun grabber, the conservative's hero and shining light, Republican Ronald Reagan"). 1rolleyes.gif

 

 

 

I didn't say they weren't increasing. I said "no" to your claim they are rapidly increasing in frequency. There's still not evidence that's true and that these are anything but outliers.

 

However, let's just grant your claim that they "rapidly increasing in frequency." That doesn't justify taking away firearms from innocent, law-abiding people. I just doesn't. People have a right to own firearms.

No MJ it is not "very difficult for civilians to obtain these firearms". Pre 1986 fully auto's are, sure, but semi-auto's are not and like I posted earlier, it's very easy and completely legal to mod your AR-15 to fire like a fully auto by "bumping" it which is easy to do and inexpensive. Here's the video again if you missed it- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm1mBhLNT_s

And here's another- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeDcEadNYX8 and another http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fE8zstf_bg  And here's my favourite- http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=4F8Z5ooMZpY

 

Gun murders have gone down since the eighties by 40%, spree killings on the other hand, one's like Sandy Hook and Aurora, and have increased dramatically . They would not be increasing if semi-auto's were illegal. 

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #802 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

No MJ it is not "very difficult for civilians to obtain these firearms".

 

I was referring to fully automatic weapons. I suspect you know that's what I was referring to. But then...

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

...Pre 1986 fully auto's are, sure, but semi-auto's are not...

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

They would not be increasing if semi-auto's were illegal. 

 

Conjecture. You're assuming they're increasing because of their existence and not because of other factors.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #803 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

I was referring to fully automatic weapons. I suspect you know that's what I was referring to. But then...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conjecture. You're assuming they're increasing because of their existence and not because of other factors.

They wouldn't increase if semi-auto's were illegal, that's the point here, and I suspect you know it. 

 

Yes, you meant fully auto's are hard to get, but like the YouTube videos show, a simple, inexpensive and completely legal mod turns a semi-automatic rifle, or indeed handgun, into a fully automatic weapon. Even without the extra part, these semi-auto's are still incredibly lethal. Lanza didn't even need to bump his semi-automatics to fire off 300 rounds in just a few minutes. 

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #804 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

They wouldn't increase if semi-auto's were illegal, that's the point here

 

Again, this is speculation.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

but like the YouTube videos show, a simple, inexpensive and completely legal mod turns a semi-automatic rifle, or indeed handgun, into a fully automatic weapon.

 

It is not nearly as easy as is claimed.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #805 of 1058

Again, it's obvious that this is not really about saving lives because the focus is on guns and guns only. If they were truly concerned about saving lives, the discussion would also focus on the underlying reasons people are using guns to harm others. Mental illness, medications, and other factors should be receiving just as much, if not more attention, because guns, in and of themselves, do not harm or kill anyone. They are inanimate objects.

 

This is about destroying the Second Amendment, which is really one of the few remaining things preventing the complete destruction of the First Amendment and the entire Bill of Rights.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #806 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Again, it's obvious that this is not really about saving lives because the focus is on guns and guns only. If they were truly concerned about saving lives, the discussion would also focus on the underlying reasons people are using guns to harm others. Mental illness, medications, and other factors should be receiving just as much, if not more attention, because guns, in and of themselves, do not harm or kill anyone. They are inanimate objects.

 

This is about destroying the Second Amendment, which is really one of the few remaining things preventing the complete destruction of the First Amendment and the entire Bill of Rights.

 

Duly noted. I won't tu quoque you here, but I'll make sure to bring this up when we discuss birth control and abortions.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #807 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Not quite.

 

The AR-15 is a civilian semi-automatic version of the M-16 which has fully automatic, burst and semi-automatic modes. And the AR-15 cannot fire up to 60 rounds a minute. It tops out at about 12-15 per minute before it starts to cook the barrel. It does not perform like an assault rifle. You are misinformed.

 

I've never owned an AR but I have plinked with one.  It's damn fun and I'm 99% sure I was shooting faster than 1 round every 5 seconds and the owner was not yelling at me for "cooking" his barrel*.  All I really remember is an empty magazine and big shit eating grin on my face after emptying said magazine despite the craptastic shooting.  

 

I dunno, maybe it took more than a minute but I doubt it.  I wasn't exactly going for accuracy and I doubt that giggling counts as breath control...

 

* Probably what they are warning about is a cook off when the temp gets high enough.  That's gonna take a while and kinda hard on the wallet to dump mags like that.

post #808 of 1058

Is this all the crap you talk about these dam guns all the time.Who gives a dam what you experience they are all killing machines!
 

post #809 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

Is this all the crap you talk about these dam guns all the time.Who gives a dam what you experience they are all killing machines!

Funny, I've never killed anything even hunting (I'm bored easy...ain't no way I'm sitting in a tree or a blind and I stomp around the woods like a city boy). The only deer I've bagged is accidentally with my car. This is a sub-optimal method.

Shooting is fun. 99.99% of my experience is at the range. There are a lot of folks like that.

And if you looked at my posts you'd see that I'm pro gun control...just not stupid gun control.
post #810 of 1058

At least you are sensible about this gun control issue.
 

post #811 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

The AR-15 was originally designed for and used by the US military. A civilian version was later introduced that wasn't fully automatic, but is still capable of firing up to 60 rounds a minute. So while technically you're right, it still performs much like an assault rifle, which by the way have semi-automatic mode too. They can also be modified to be fully automatic. Lanza taped two thirty bullet magazines together so he could quickly reload. 

 

Firearms Training Unit Detective Barbara J. Mattson of the Connecticut State Police holds up a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, the same make and model of gun used by Adam Lanza in the Sandy Hook School shooting, for a demonstration during a hearing of a legislative subcommittee reviewing gun laws, at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford, Conn., Monday, Jan. 28, 2013. The parents of children killed in the Newtown school shooting called for better enforcement of gun laws Monday at the legislative hearing. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)

 

http://news.yahoo.com/newtown-parents-urge-enforcement-gun-laws-171101155.html

 

So stop calling it an assault rifle.

Well it's certainly not for Deer hunting and it's pretty much over kill for personal protection. As a matter of fact there's pretty much only one thing they're designed for.1wink.gif

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #812 of 1058

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #813 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

And today- http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/Facts/Gun_Death_and_Injury_Stat_Sheet_2008__2009_FINAL.pdf

 

And for women...

 

DID YOU KNOW? Because of high household gun ownership, women in the United States are at higher risk of homicide victimization than are women in any other high-income country.

 

  • In 2008, 7,451 women were treated in emergency rooms for a gunshot wound. Sixty-six percent of the injuries (4,892) were assault-related (NCIPC).
  • Among high-income countries, the U. S. accounts for 32 percent of the female population but 70 percent of all female homicides (Hemenway, 2002, p. 100).
  • U.S. women's firearm death rate is 12 times higher than the combined rate of 22 other populous, high-income countries (Richardson)
  • Gun owners are 7.8 times more likely than non-gun owners to have threatened their partners with guns (Rothman, p. 62).
  • Murder is the leading cause of injury-related death for women in the workplace (Hoskins, 2005).

~  http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunviolence/factswomen

 

And...

 

DID YOU KNOW?  Keeping a gun in the home raises the risk of homicide.

 

  • States with the highest levels of gun ownership have 114 percent higher firearm homicide rates and 60 percent higher homicide rates than states with the lowest gun ownership (Miller, Hemenway, and Azrael, 2007, pp. 659, 660).
  • The risk of homicide is three times higher in homes with firearms (Kellermann, 1993, p. 1084).

 

DID YOU KNOW?  Keeping a gun in the home raises the risk of suicide.

 

  • Keeping a firearm in the home increases the risk of suicide by a factor of 3 to 5 and increases the risk of suicide with a firearm by a factor of 17 (Kellermann, p. 467, p. Wiebe, p. 771).

http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunviolence/gunsinthehome


Edited by Hands Sandon - 2/17/13 at 5:47pm
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #814 of 1058

I see your cut-and-pasted gun control "facts" and raise you the Constitution.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #815 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I see your cut-and-pasted gun control "facts" and raise you the Constitution.

 

You mean that document that is used to violently impose other people's will upon you by legitimizing our horrific government? 

 

How odd that you would refer to something that codifies our government rather than something against the state by Herbert Spencer.

post #816 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

You mean that document that is used to violently impose other people's will upon you by legitimizing our horrific government? 

How odd that you would refer to something that codifies our government rather than something against the state by Herbert Spencer.

It is true the Constitution has no real authority. It is not a binding document.

Yet the government does pretend to operate within its limitations, and one of those is that the citizens be properly armed to defend themselves and their property against government aggression.

Ignore the 2nd Amendment and it will be all the easier to ignore the rest.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #817 of 1058
Better yet, sensibly interpret the second amendment, using a further amendment to do so if necessary, and save thousands of lives, without touching the test of the constitution.
post #818 of 1058

If you do not   favor  our horrible government go to another country like China or Vietnam you will be most admired there. Gimme a break!
 

post #819 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Better yet, sensibly interpret the second amendment, using a further amendment to do so if necessary, and save thousands of lives, without touching the test of the constitution.

There is a reason the amendment approach hasn't been tried. It would never pass.

No, it's much easier these days to write executive orders, pass legislation in the dead of night, or get the courts to legislate from the bench.

My point is, the Second Amenment makes the First Amendment possible. Take away the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and the First Amenment can and will be infringed. It's already happening.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #820 of 1058
Taking away the right for people to keep and bear high capacity magazines and high speed high powered assault rifles does not take away the right for people to keep and bear arms.
post #821 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Taking away the right for people to keep and bear high capacity magazines and high speed high powered assault rifles does not take away the right for people to keep and bear arms.

 

It infringes upon that right.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #822 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I see your cut-and-pasted gun control "facts" and raise you the Constitution.

I did. There were quite a few more facts included in my post than yours, you'll notice. 

 

In 1776 life expectancy in the US was a paltry 35 years. Now it's well over double that. Like the rest of the developed world, the American government spends vasts amounts of money helping it's citizens live longer. Far more in fact than any other country. What would the founding fathers have thought about spending so much money on peoples health back then? They would have been appalled of course. But they could never have predicted the massive costs spent today in their time, so they didn't strictly forbid it specifically. Today the money spent is considered to be allowable under the US constitution. With all the medical developments since their day, it's hard to imagine them not seeing the massive gains in peoples health and life expectancy, as a worthwhile government, and certainly not one that they would have felt was oppressing them, and so, calling for a revolution. 

 

Now lets take a look at guns. I've posted above the incredible rates of harm in the US caused by guns. What would the founders think today, especially knowing the development of nukes, drones, lasers, jet fighters, aircraft carriers etc? They'd see that a good and friendly government, which spends trillions of dollars to help keep it's population healthy, may also limit the population who don't fight in wars, from buying guns. They would understandably adjust with the times. 1776 was at the very early stages of the industrial revolution. We've moved on a long way since then. Now the US is left behind, with 270 citizens each day gunned down. Life is very different now, and so are the weapons. A constitutional amendment banning citizens owning automatic weapons is now an absolute must, before countless more people needlessly die. 


Edited by Hands Sandon - 2/18/13 at 1:01pm
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #823 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

I did. There were quite a few more facts included in my post than yours, you'll notice. 

 

In 1776 life expectancy in the US was a poultry 35 years. Now it's well over double that. Like the rest of the developed world, the American government spends vasts amounts of money helping it's citizens live longer. Far more in fact than any other country. What would the founding fathers have thought about spending so much money on peoples health back then? They would have been appalled of course. But they could never have predicted the massive costs spent today in their time, so they didn't strictly forbid it specifically. Today the money spent is considered to be allowable under the US constitution. With all the medical developments since their day, it's hard to imagine them not seeing the massive gains in peoples health and life expectancy, as a worthwhile government, and certainly not one that they would have felt was oppressing them, and so, calling for a revolution. 

 

Now lets take a look at guns. I've posted above the incredible rates of harm in the US caused by guns. What would the founders think today, especially knowing the development of nukes, drones, lasers, jet fighters, aircraft carriers etc? They'd see that a good and friendly government, which spends trillions of dollars to help keep it's population healthy, may also limit the population who don't fight in wars, from buying guns. They would understandably adjust with the times. 1776 was at the very early stages of the industrial revolution. We've moved on a long way since then. Now the US is left behind, with 270 citizens each day gunned down. Life is very different now, and so are the weapons. A constitutional amendment banning citizens owning automatic weapons is now an absolute must, before countless more people needlessly die. 

 

You can, of course, make wild claims as to the intent of the founders and what they would do were they alive today. I prefer to read and study their own thoughts and words on government and the 2nd Amendment:

 

"It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect his country from its government."
-- Thomas Paine
 
"The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite."
-- Thomas Jefferson
 
"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
-- Samuel Adams (1722–1803)
 
"I am a mortal enemy to arbitrary government and unlimited power. I am naturally very jealous for the rights and liberties of my country, and the least encroachment of those invaluable privileges is apt to make my blood boil."
-- Ben Franklin
 
"The greatest [calamity] which could befall [us would be] submission to a government of unlimited powers."
-- Thomas Jefferson
 
"[G]overnment, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer."
-- Thomas Paine
 
"It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expense.... They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in society. Let them look well after their own expense, and they may safely trust private people with theirs."
-- Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations [1776]
 
"There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
-- James Madison, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention [June 16, 1788]
 
"The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States."
-- Noah Webster
 
"Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government."
--James Madison
 
"We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretenses for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."
-- Thomas Paine
 
"You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; right derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe."
-- John Adams
 
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
 
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ... " 
-- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
 
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
--Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
 
"They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

 

These men lamented the growth of government and its usurpation of power in their own time. And you presume to say they would see government any differently today?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #824 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

 

You can, of course, make wild claims as to the intent of the founders and what they would do were they alive today. I prefer to read and study their own thoughts and words on government and the 2nd Amendment:

 

 
 

 

These men lamented the growth of government and its usurpation of power in their own time. And you presume to say they would see government any differently today?

 

Of course they would see things differently today. Think about it, wouldn't you?

 

Angola has the worlds lowest life expectancy rate. It's 37 years for men and 40 years for women. They also collect just 5.7% of tax revenue to their GDP. Other very poor countries are the same like Afghanistan- 6.4% and Nigeria 6.1%. There are some oil rich countries with lower government spending, but they are ran by very wealthy royal families who's people live in dire poverty. It's the modern wealthy OECD countries who have the highest levels. See the full list here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

 

Do you really think that bright founding fathers, of European descent, would do what no other white people have done in modern times; limit the scope of government to the levels seen in the poorest countries on earth? 

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #825 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

 

Of course they would see things differently today. Think about it, wouldn't you?

 

Angola has the worlds lowest life expectancy rate. It's 37 years for men and 40 years for women. They also collect just 5.7% of tax revenue to their GDP. Other very poor countries are the same like Afghanistan- 6.4% and Nigeria 6.1%. There are some oil rich countries with lower government spending, but they are ran by very wealthy royal families who's people live in dire poverty. It's the modern wealthy OECD countries who have the highest levels. See the full list here- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

 

Do you really think that bright founding fathers, of European descent, would do what no other white people have done in modern times; limit the scope of government to the levels seen in the poorest countries on earth? 

 

I do not speak for the founders. I don't believe you can claim to, either.

 

Are you really implying that those countries are poor and have low life expectancy ONLY and BECAUSE they have "less government"? Surely there are many other factors to consider in each situation, such as culture, location, external influences, etc.?

 

Correlation vs. causation and all that.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #826 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Taking away the right for people to keep and bear high capacity magazines and high speed high powered assault rifles does not take away the right for people to keep and bear arms.

 

It infringes upon that right.


In exactly the same way that telling you that you can only drive on the right side of the street and cannot drive 150MPH infringes on your right to drive a car. But still... it doesn't take away that right.

post #827 of 1058

One of these things is totally incapable of protecting the people from an oppressive government, in 2013:

 

Rule of law.

The vote.

The Constitution.

The Triumvirate system.

Freedom of migration.

Guns.

 

Can you guess which one?

 

Protection from government is in no way a legitimate excuse for firearms ownership in 2013.

post #828 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post


In exactly the same way that telling you that you can only drive on the right side of the street and cannot drive 150MPH infringes on your right to drive a car. But still... it doesn't take away that right.

 

And what part of "shall not be infringed" is difficult to understand, here?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #829 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

One of these things is totally incapable of protecting the people from an oppressive government, in 2013:

 

Rule of law.

The vote.

The Constitution.

The Triumvirate system.

Freedom of migration.

Guns.

 

Can you guess which one?

 

Protection from government is in no way a legitimate excuse for firearms ownership in 2013.

 

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #830 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post


In exactly the same way that telling you that you can only drive on the right side of the street and cannot drive 150MPH infringes on your right to drive a car. But still... it doesn't take away that right.

 

And what part of "shall not be infringed" is difficult to understand, here?

 

The part where we're not allowed to arm ourselves with a nuclear missile.

post #831 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

One of these things is totally incapable of protecting the people from an oppressive government, in 2013:

 

Rule of law.

The vote.

The Constitution.

The Triumvirate system.

Freedom of migration.

Guns.

 

Can you guess which one?

 

Protection from government is in no way a legitimate excuse for firearms ownership in 2013.

 

Thank you for sharing your opinion.


Shame on you for not admitting the facts I shared.

post #832 of 1058

Keep and bear arms the right way not using these weapons which belong in the military and other enforcement departments.You are correct.
 

post #833 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

 

The part where we're not allowed to arm ourselves with a nuclear missile.

 

You want to entrust the use of such weapons with the only group of individuals that has ever actually used them against other human beings?

 

I find your blind faith in government disturbing.

 

 

“If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free [or bear arms], how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind?” 
― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #834 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post


Shame on you for not admitting the facts I shared.

 

Facts?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #835 of 1058
"You want to entrust the use of such weapons with the only group of individuals that has ever actually used them against other human beings?"

Far far far far better to do that than to entrust their non-use to every member of the (soon to be extinct if you have your way) human race! All it takes is ONE insane person to kill us all.
post #836 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

"You want to entrust the use of such weapons with the only group of individuals that has ever actually used them against other human beings?"

Far far far far better to do that than to entrust their non-use to every member of the (soon to be extinct if you have your way) human race! All it takes is ONE insane person to kill us all.

 

And you believe there are no insane people in government?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #837 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

 

And you believe there are no insane people in government?

 

Checks and balances.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #838 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

 

I do not speak for the founders. I don't believe you can claim to, either.

 

Are you really implying that those countries are poor and have low life expectancy ONLY and BECAUSE they have "less government"? Surely there are many other factors to consider in each situation, such as culture, location, external influences, etc.?

 

Correlation vs. causation and all that.

Well, we probably can. The founding fathers wore the clothes of their time. They built the houses of their time. They had the philosophies about government of their time (which mostly came from the English). They had the horses and carts of their time. They used the medical practices of their time. Do you really think that if they were alive today they wouldn't be of this time? If you do, then you must think that they were all a bunch of nutty Ludites.

 

If a country is going to grow it must take money from the people to invest in education, health and technology. If it doesn't it can't compete. 


Edited by Hands Sandon - 2/19/13 at 4:55pm
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.
Reply
post #839 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

If a country is going to grow it must take money from the people to invest in education, health and technology. If it doesn't it can't compete. 

 

Please read the following statement carefully:

 

If I am going to grow, I must take money from you to invest in my education, health, and technology. If I don't, I can't compete.

 

Do you believe this statement is right and moral?

 

If not, please tell us how and why this statement is wrong and immoral, yet the statement you made is right and moral.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #840 of 1058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post

If a country is going to grow it must take money from the people to invest in education, health and technology. If it doesn't it can't compete. 

 

Please read the following statement carefully:

 

If I am going to grow, I must take money from you to invest in my education, health, and technology. If I don't, I can't compete.

 

Do you believe this statement is right and moral?

 

If not, please tell us how and why this statement is wrong and immoral, yet the statement you made is right and moral.

 

Would you say that you understand the difference between cooperative and competitive societal models?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Massacre in Connecticut