Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Second Amendment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Second Amendment

    If it came down to it, would you resist the US government and the UN should they try to "peacefully" disarm our citizenry?

    Non-US citizens feel free to answer also.

  • #2
    since when did the US gubbernment care about the law?
    DNI Admits FISA Surveillance Violated the 4th Amendment - Slashdot
    Some Game Thing

    Comment


    • #3
      good question...

      Comment


      • #4
        Most civilized countries in the world manage to get on just fine without being able to pretend that they're rootin' tootin' hootin' shootin' cowboys. The right of US citizens to bear arms is just an artefact of it's time, when you couldn't walk into the local saloon without some lowdown dirty yellow bellied varmint out to make a name for himself trying to make you another notch on his revolver's handle. That time doesn't exist any more, but many of y'all in Murrkah seem to think it still does.

        Serious question, and it would be nice to see an answer that doesn't involve any political rhetoric or other similar chest-beating. Why?
        IT LIVES! http://directq.blogspot.com/

        Comment


        • #5
          an armed populace is good for:
          1: defending against foreign invasion.
          2: violent rebellion against the government.
          3: social reasons.
          4: culture

          1) this is the US we're talking about. they'd probably just nuke the invaders. they might get nuked back, sure, but any such invasion where an armed populace is actually useful would be rather quite minor.
          2) nice idea, but civil wars are horrible in regards to death tolls, and really only work if you have one or more states officially declaring war on the others. Anything else is too de-centralized to be useful, and basically mere terrorism. If a state hated the federal gubbernment that much then they really ought to 'just' leave the union instead (maybe join canada a few years later or something).
          3) carrying a gun to defend yourself should someone point a gun at you generally results in everyone being trigger happy in case the mugee has a concealed firearm. And if you don't carry a gun around with you at all times, all the law has done is enabled the criminals to more easily carry one. And if you do carry one, the police will probably shoot you if you try using it to shoot the criminal, or at least you'd be in prison for a long time if the police officer doesn't like you. Remember, people tend to act very irrationally when there's a gun pointing at them. Guns can just turn theft into homicide as a result. Allowing people to carry knives instead would still allow people to defend themselves, while being more useful for cooking at the same time, plus accidents would be less fatal and the police would be a little less likely to shoot you before asking your name.
          4) really? how the hell is a vibrant gun culture actually a good thing? people running around shooting electricity pylons/transformers because they explode in a shower of sparks? people threatening to shoot each other because they think it makes them sound cool/hard/criminals? you think that's a good thing? there really is no reasoning with you!
          5) wait, I didn't say there was a fifth thing... I might have missed something though.

          If the US were to rescind their second amendment (that's the gun one, right?) then that would not be a bad thing in principal. But they would have to officially do it rather than merely adding extra laws. And a hell of a lot of states would disagree, so really they'd have to leave it up to the states to decide instead of doing it at a federal level.
          Some Game Thing

          Comment


          • #6
            Guns don't kill people, people kill people with guns. I can kill you with a pen, rock, bleach, gas, a wire....

            I can make a better gun that is not even considered a gun and fry you to death. Taking our guns away is to remove our ability to resist tyranny. If the plan is to truly disarm us, how much more will have to be banned that is not even considered a weapon in it's intended use?

            What about zip-guns? You don't need anything but some bullets, 2 pieces of pipe a cork and a nail. With a little rifling and the proper diameter, I could fire any damn bullet ever invented. The point is, they will absolutely never succeed in disarming Americans cause you can just make a damn gun (bullets too) and if all else fails you can improvise nasty bombs with household cleaners, engine fluids, pool chemicals, pesticides, fertilizer, etc..

            Their worried about taking some guns away from law abiding citizens while your real nut jobs do not obey the law and probably have devices that are way more devastating than a gun.

            If more Americans were exercising their 2nd amendment rights, the nut job at the theater would have been leaving in a body bag long before he killed as many as he did. If Americans had no 2nd amendment rights, there would still be the nut job at the theater.
            Last edited by MadGypsy; 07-23-2012, 09:08 PM.
            http://www.nextgenquake.com

            Comment


            • #7
              The question is though - exactly what tyranny are you resisting? This seems very much rooted in a mentality that became invalid a long time ago. Where is the tyranny? And in the 21st century if any such hypothetical tyranny does arise it will have tanks, choppers, smart bombs - what good are your guns?

              Your argument largely defeats itself as you've listed lots of other ways to kill people too. Take your guns away and what happens? You just use one of those other ways.
              IT LIVES! http://directq.blogspot.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                Removing our rights and passing laws that violate the constitution and it's amendments is Tyranny...

                Had this discussion also with a lot of Europeans, and it's not just to protect yourself from other people in the USA, there is huge non-populated area's around population with TONS of not so nice wild animals (Bears, moose, big cats, wolves, coyotes, etc), and reptiles (Alligators, Crocodiles, Lizards, Snakes). The guns are also to protect ourselves from them. We also have a history and culture in hunting (as do many other countries) and it is allowed to have hunting arms in those countries too.

                Crime is also rampant in the USA in some places still, if you take away law abiding citizens guns, the only people who will have them is the Police and the Criminals. Removing those guns in large part will NOT stop criminals from obtaining or making them. If people REALLY want guns, they WILL get them, it's like DRM imo. Punishing people for something that the criminals/pirates do.

                I also did a little search of cause of death numbers in the world, including the USA, and several countries in Europe. I found that CARS kill more people a year than guns do, in almost every country, including USA. So should we take those away too because some idiots do not know how to drive? Hrm...
                Regular One Man Slaughterhouse

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MH View Post
                  The question is though - exactly what tyranny are you resisting? This seems very much rooted in a mentality that became invalid a long time ago. Where is the tyranny? And in the 21st century if any such hypothetical tyranny does arise it will have tanks, choppers, smart bombs - what good are your guns?

                  Your argument largely defeats itself as you've listed lots of other ways to kill people too. Take your guns away and what happens? You just use one of those other ways.
                  Seriously ?
                  Spoken like someone who has lived a sheltered life.Never having to go out at night in a bad neighborhood or have to worry about anyone's safety.
                  Not only do I think it should be my right I see it as every mans DUTY.
                  How many kids would have been killed in these schools if all the teachers were armed?If it were up to me all retirees would be issued a weapon and taught to use it with their first ss checks.Anyone who thinks the police will protect them when some low life piece of shit breaks into your home,your car, or worse goes after one of your family is a FOOL.
                  WARNING
                  May be too intense for some viewers.
                  Stress Relief Device
                  ....BANG HEAD HERE....
                  ---------------------------
                  .
                  .
                  .
                  .
                  .--------------------------

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bluntz View Post
                    Seriously ?
                    Spoken like someone who has lived a sheltered life.Never having to go out at night in a bad neighborhood or have to worry about anyone's safety.
                    Not only do I think it should be my right I see it as every mans DUTY.
                    How many kids would have been killed in these schools if all the teachers were armed?If it were up to me all retirees would be issued a weapon and taught to use it with their first ss checks.Anyone who thinks the police will protect them when some low life piece of shit breaks into your home,your car, or worse goes after one of your family is a FOOL.
                    I live in a bad neighbourhood. But I'm European so I seriously don't get the obsession with guns that (many) Americans have. It works elsewhere, why can't it work in the US? What's so special about the US that it has this gun thing?
                    IT LIVES! http://directq.blogspot.com/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Spoken like someone who has lived a sheltered life
                      No doubt, MH is looking pretty naive. The real problem is, if they can get your guns they can take whatever they want from you. If they can take your last form of protection and resistance from you, your freedom, family and very life are a hairsbreadth away.

                      This isnt a maybe..the entire theme is control, do you really think they will stop with guns? I read somewhere that the government is about to try to regulate how much sugar you are allowed to eat. Oh, I assure you guns is the START of how they truly control you.

                      But I'm European so I seriously don't get the obsession with guns
                      - your a good European too. You have bought and accepted the "Corporations" propaganda. If you had a gun you would live in a much better Europe. Maybe one that isn't surveiling you 24/7.

                      You and millions of other armed Europeans could toss out your garbage government and elect a new one that doesn't bring you failing currencies like the euro. Actually, in that, you are correct, why do Americans need guns? I don't see a large number of gun owners overthrowing our garbage government and electing a new one, like is provided as a right to us in our constitution.

                      People do not have the stones they had 200 years ago. George Washington told all of Britain to F themself, starting with King George. One rag tag guy "invented" the beginnings of an entire nation against an entire nation. This was made possible by the fact that the TV was not invented yet. There was no mindless distractions to stop George Washington from being a massive beast.

                      CNN could broadcast matter-of-factly that America is now a communist dictatorship and it would be followed by a commercial for some non-sensical new reality show that piques just enough interest to make the majority of America forget that they were just told they have no rights anymore.

                      -"Did you hear, we are now a communist dictatorship?"
                      ~"Yes, but I don't actually know what that is."
                      -"Me either but it doesn't sound good."
                      ~"I'm sure everything will be fine, as long as I get to maintain my freedom"
                      -"Yeah, I think they are taking that away."
                      ~"You're crazy, this is America - it's magically free forever without having to lift a finger."
                      Last edited by MadGypsy; 07-23-2012, 10:37 PM.
                      http://www.nextgenquake.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Eh, sorry. I've seen bad. I go to work and back home through crowds of junkies every day. I've been to some scary places - Jerusalem, the West Bank, Cairo, Camorra territory in Italy. I've seen the night lit up by gunfights across the river Jordan, I've been in the seedier parts of Amsterdam, I've fought off muggers. Believe me, I know what "bad" looks like.

                        What I haven't seen yet is any justification for guns beyond the political chest-beating I predicted in my first reply.
                        IT LIVES! http://directq.blogspot.com/

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          OK, lets approach this differently. They take away my gun and then what? Who benefits from my disarmament? I have no record, never shot anyone, I am trained in firearm safety and I have never had a single accident. What threat does my gun pose and who does it pose it to?

                          Only law abiding citizens are going to lawfully turn in their firearm(s), so all the people that have guns but would only use them for protection will be disarmed. Hmmm, protection. Why would any "body" want me to give up my protection? Why is the "body" that's crying about it happen to be the control-freak government? Does the control-freak government recognize a threat to their controlling agenda if I am "allowed" to keep my gun? What will the government be able to accomplish by disarming it's citizens? Why is this of import to them? Why does our Constitution (The LAW) say I can have and should have a gun but the government (those elected to uphold the constitution) is attempting to say otherwise?

                          This is deeper than gun ownership. This is about government turning its back on the law and the people. The law states clearly that I have a RIGHT to own a gun. the government is attempting to remove one of my rights. They have already removed many and I'm about fuckin sick of it. This isn't about guns, this about leaving my rights alone!

                          Where does it stop?! I'll tell you where it stops. It stops when you have no rights left at all. It stops when the state is your full master and controller and you no longer have choices. It stops when everyone has been assimilated into the borg.
                          Last edited by MadGypsy; 07-23-2012, 11:01 PM.
                          http://www.nextgenquake.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            madgypsy... lol.
                            If the police can take your guns from you, at least they're not going to shoot you 'because you might have a gun'. They don't need to take your guns as they can legally take your freedom and life from you already.
                            Hell, even the UK can legally take your life from you if they think you're armed and mean harm to the police.
                            Sure, they can't legally take away your family, but hey, there's always aiding and abetting. Gotta love that part of law.

                            Regarding your remark about europe...
                            The difference between the EU and the US is that in the EU, the government does the surveilence while in the US the corporations willingly do it free of charge as a service to the government and to each other.
                            Have you seen the US national debt recently? Yeah, majority gun ownership in the EU would really help things, yup. I really see that working.
                            Oh, sure, the euro is going to collapse fairly soon, but on the plus side, the euro has retained more of its value since 2000 than the us dollar. I guess that makes the euro a more stable currency. Shucks.

                            Roy, some very good arguments there. I'd have to point out that deaths are not the only problem with guns, but rather the problem is the fact that criminals are feel empowered by gun ownership even if they never kill someone with it.

                            Either way, it should be for each state to decide, then more rural areas don't have problems with big animals. I've no problem with rifles (though electricity companies might..), imho the real civil issues come from pistol ownership.
                            Owning machine guns/chainguns is a bit weird though. Cool certainly, but a bit weird.
                            Some Game Thing

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              My argument stands and ends that they are just taking away another one of my rights. A right that can only be important to them if they intend to enact something that can be spoiled by me owning a gun. Whatever that agenda may be, I assure you it is not to spread freedom.

                              the euro has retained more of its value since 2000 than the us dollar. I guess that makes the euro a more stable currency. Shucks.
                              Apples and oranges. The dollar is the world reserve currency. The euro failed so miserably that it wasn't even considered as an alternative. You can't get anymore stable than the world reserve currency. The dollar could be worth a negative amount and it's world reserve status will keep it in circulation.

                              I think it's funny that a bunch of Europeans can't understand the right to bare arms. Just because you gave your guns away, doesn't mean it was a good idea. If your country was fabulous I might consider your argument.

                              Wait til a Marshall Law situation where you have to defend your property and loved ones from opportunists that do have guns. Let's see how that plow share works out for ya'. It's not like there are no guns in Europe, you just don't have one. Your "enemies" do though and they are real confident (empowered) by the fact you dont.
                              Last edited by MadGypsy; 07-23-2012, 11:50 PM.
                              http://www.nextgenquake.com

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X