Guns and stuff... [modified]

[soap brain]

Nice one...

Richard of York gave battle in vain.

[Vincent Reynolds]

I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. --Thomas Jefferson

[soap brain]

Stan Shannon wrote:

I would argue that I don't need to. Humanity is a part of nature, the human mind is a part of humanity, and the concept of rights is part of the human mind. The universe is the sum of its parts, which includes the concept of rights.

So it is only humans that define rights? But saying that rights are a law of nature is saying that humans define laws of nature.

Richard of York gave battle in vain.

[soap brain]

Ro0ke wrote:

Nature doesn't give you the right to live, each person has the sole responsibility of surviving.

So you agree with me?

Richard of York gave battle in vain.

[soap brain]

John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:

It's (almost?) impossible to (legally) buy ammo for it though.

Why?

Richard of York gave battle in vain.

[A Wong]

cp9876 wrote:

What came out yesterday was the idea that gun ownership would protect you from a government that went mad. The Government cannot get out of control without the support of the armed forces, and I can't see that you would make a difference with a few guns when the armoured vehicles come down the street firing 25mm depleted uranium rounds at anything that resists.

I beg to differ. The Vietnam war and Iraq war shows that gurilla tatics does work to a certain point. There are other cases where rebel forces toppled well armed governments as well. Ultimately, it is the will of the citizens that matter, but armed resistance does contribute to it.

[Stan Shannon]

Granted. Jefferson was very much an agrarian and opposed to the rise of the industrial state. I can't argue against that. Hartmann[^] has a good overview of all of that. Still, as with so many issues, it is difficult to separate out where "private property" rights should become an essential concern of a centralized federal authority. Boettke[^] has some thoughts. Modern coporations are an extension of private property, which in my view, is an entirely Jeffersonian concept, even if the man himself had issues with it.

Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

[Ro0ke]

Yes, nature doesn't give you rights. But that's not the point, this subsection of the thread started because John mistakenly used the word "natural" when describing the right. I was only stating that many of the paralyzing toxins are the natural defense of plants or animals.

[CataclysmicQuantum]

You realize the federal government can manipulate the States into its will don't you? What if the federal government convince all States to confiscate all guns, would you be OK with that?

The Digital World. It is an amazing place in which we primitive humans interact. Our flesh made this synthetic machine. You see, we are so smart, we know a lot of stuff. We were grown from cells that came from the universe, which the matter and physics I'm typing in it is amazing how the universe is working. Human life is very amazing. How I experience this sh*t its like wow.

[Stan Shannon]

Its a hobby of mine...

Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

[Stan Shannon]

Thats a completely different discussion. As I argue incessantly, I am opposed to the collapse of Jeffersonian federalism which occured during the 20th century and the use of the 14th and 16th amendments to empower the federal government to ignore the original restraints upon its authority. So, no, I would obviously not support the federal government coercing states into violating the 2nd amendment.

Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

[Stan Shannon]

But I never said that humans define them. I merely assert that they exist. That they are a part of nature. Of God's law. That nature intends for me to be the owner of myself, and that, as my own onwer, I possess a valid natural right to defend that which I own. And, yes, to assert that is to assert that the Universe has purpose, has intent, has reason. To suggest otherwise, that the only rights are those that exist as a conseguence of legal definition, is to assert that man has no fundemental claim to any right. That the universe is purposeless, unintentional and irrational, and that legal systems are free to define right however they please.

Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

[73Zeppelin]

ahmed zahmed wrote:

rights exist as a universal, eternal law. Kind of like the Law of Gravity.

No they don't and the fact that you have no evidence in support of that ridiculous claim just reinforces my point.

---

[Stan Shannon]

I think your algebra is flawed. We try to squeeze every thing that occurs into one political model that has been provided for us by the left conveniently for that purpose. The irony of your position, as I understand it, is that if the government were to control corporations to the point that they were no 'threat' to the public good, but rather a benefit to it, would in fact be the very purpose that the fascist were striving to achieve. I'm not defending corporate-government corruption. Bribing politicians or being involved in the political process is a bad thing and can be responsible for great public harm. It might reflect the dark side of Jeffersonianism, free makets and all that, and maybe we need a new word for that. But it is not fascist in any way at all.

Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

[KaRl]

I don't give a fuck about the 2nd amendment - what I care is that guns are controlled here. That said, I think that being armed would change nothing when facing a dictatorship. If the future dictator has troops he can trust, then a civilian militia is no match for a trained army (especially for the so-called 'finest army in the world' :rolleyes: ). If the troops are not mandatory loyal, then the presence of the crowd is enough to stop them, see Russia 1991 for instance. The civilians were not armed, but they succeeded nonetheless to derail the putsch.

There are two things that one must get used to or one will find life unendurable: the damages of time and injustices of men Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[Matthew Faithfull]

I'm not proposing that the governments control the corporations directly at all. I'm simply noting that globalist, if you prefer, corporations have outgrown the nation state based model assumed by Jefferson. They have the excuse that it no longer applies to them. The solution proposed by the socialists, world government, would only benefit the faschists and this is why Rockefeller and friends are happy to pay the socialist academics to organise and promote it. The solution proposed by Mr Bolton, Cheney etc of the USA simply taking over the world is no better, it amounts to the same thing. There is an uneasy but extremely influential truce between the money power of the ultra right wing uegenics supporting faschist elite, typified by for example Rockefeller or the neo-con crazies and the left wing, often exMarxist or neoMarxist academics who control much of the school curriculum, are the guru's of political correctness, (thought police) and staff the beauracracies of organizations like the UN and EU. They are all in the end anti-democratic totalitarians, albeit with opposing views of where the same road will lead and why. The problem for those who believe in democracy and the genuine freedom of the individual is that this in-the-closet alliance has grabbed most of the levers of power, political, social and financial on both sides of the atlantic. It is going to be very difficult to dislodge. So far it is only the inevitable in-fighting between the aggressive neo-cons and passive-aggressive remainder (other-cons if you like) which has stalled the progress of the EU project, killed the FTAA, is causing econimc chaos and has occasionally exposed enough cracks for us to see a little of what's really going on. Ultimately the solution is to return to a human scale system where the corporation cannot grow bigger than the state and the state cannot grow bigger than the nation and become too distant and detached to be subject to democratic control. The only way this will happen is if the people are prepared to use what power remains in their hands to make it so. We all have to be able to say not just, 'I'd rather be poor and free than a rich slave' but also 'I'd rather be poor and free than a rich slave owner'. If we can at least agree on that then we have a good place to start from. 'We hold these truths to be self evident...' :)

Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.

[jchigg2000]

Good Job. I think you used enough big words to shut him up... ;P

[Reagan Conservative]

Ever heard of the NATIONAL GUARD? That's your state militia, fool! I guess you were asleep in your civics classes in school (or do they have those classes any longer?)

John P.

[Stan Shannon]

Obviously a "militia" of citizens armed with off the shelf weaponry would represent little obstacle to the full might of an modern professional military force. However, it is not difficult to imagine scenarios where significant portions of the professional military, especially the Guard, would join the militia. Of course, that would not be the difficult part. The difficult part would be how you would feed everyone after the government closed all the super-markets, quicky-marts and fast food restaurants down. Any plan that included stoping by a McDonalds or a 7-11 on the way to the battlefield would probably need to be reconsidered.

Please excuse my refusal to participate in the suicide of western civilization

[Lost User]

digital man wrote:

A well regulated Militia

Army, Navy, Airforce, Marines....

Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.