Alex Jones speaks against Amendment 2: The Right to keep and bear arms
-
True, maybe they weren't "the ones" to create the constitution, etc... yet, they had a lot of say in it. But yeah, CSS is just concerned about the direction that we're going in.
josda1000 wrote:
But yeah, CSS is just concerned about the direction that we're going in.
I think we're all concerned about the direction we're going in. We just can't agree on how to properly change that direction. Personally, I'm starting to think we're past the point of no return, and that we're screwed no matter what we do.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)
-
josda1000 wrote:
But yeah, CSS is just concerned about the direction that we're going in.
I think we're all concerned about the direction we're going in. We just can't agree on how to properly change that direction. Personally, I'm starting to think we're past the point of no return, and that we're screwed no matter what we do.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)
See, that's probably another way you and I differ. I'm not such a cynical guy, I'm pretty optimistic. I just believe it takes a re-education of what our founders believed, and then you'll see progress to liberty, and self-sufficiency/self-protection/self-government. I think the biggest problem is believing that government can solve everything. But the thing about government is that it is coercion and force. All government power comes from the consent of the governed, and then the barrel of a gun. More regulations and more wars just destroys all freedom. Once we realize that, and start repealing laws instead of creating new laws, I think we'll be a little bit more prosperous. Obviously, this doesn't quite convey all of the ideas that go along with these premises, but this is the very foundation that my philosophy is based on. It's based on property and the idea of the "self". I'm sure you've heard these ideas before though.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_X-CVR5L14[^] Here's a great reason why Alex Jones shouldn't be listened to, he's just hindering the cause.
josda1000 wrote: he's just hindering the cause. What cause is that ? Keeping the crime rate high ? Making sure that school shootings continue to occur ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
True, maybe they weren't "the ones" to create the constitution, etc... yet, they had a lot of say in it. But yeah, CSS is just concerned about the direction that we're going in.
josda1000 wrote: But yeah, CSS is just concerned about the direction that we're going in. CSS is looking for explanations for his own catastrophic failure in life. He's spent many years attacking this site, and as many years jumping from one conspiracy to another. At one stage he was posting the details of his personal life ( remember when he worked as a fry cook, and some girl showed her the swastika tattoo on her genitals, and he was in love ? ). His life appears to me to be a train wreck, I can see why he needs excuses for it.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote: he's just hindering the cause. What cause is that ? Keeping the crime rate high ? Making sure that school shootings continue to occur ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
What cause is that ?
Liberty. In a truly free society (which is, I think we can all agree, NOT what we have today), we'd all be able to protect ourselves. Gun banning suspends the second amendment, which is the right to self-defense, and now we see encroachment into a police state. Crime rates are only seen in progressive cities, especially detroit. crime is through the roof, residential closings are at all time highs. and school shootings? those are few and far between, at least from what i've heard. If you keep living in fear, the government will continue to wipe away liberty. That's all I have to say about this one.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_X-CVR5L14[^] Here's a great reason why Alex Jones shouldn't be listened to, he's just hindering the cause.
That was bad. What the hell he was thinking?
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
That was bad. What the hell he was thinking?
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
you tell me. you love the guy lol i can't stand him because he sensationalizes bad situations, making them look worse than they already are. now he's just making himself look more ridiculous, and completely fraudulent.
I don't love him. I just like his aggressiveness, but not when it gets in the way of patriots.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
Christian Graus wrote:
What cause is that ?
Liberty. In a truly free society (which is, I think we can all agree, NOT what we have today), we'd all be able to protect ourselves. Gun banning suspends the second amendment, which is the right to self-defense, and now we see encroachment into a police state. Crime rates are only seen in progressive cities, especially detroit. crime is through the roof, residential closings are at all time highs. and school shootings? those are few and far between, at least from what i've heard. If you keep living in fear, the government will continue to wipe away liberty. That's all I have to say about this one.
josda1000 wrote: and school shootings? those are few and far between, at least from what i've heard. 18 mass shootings a year in America. 13 in Australia, not a year, but EVER. None, not one, since the gun buyback over a decade ago. josda1000 wrote: we'd all be able to protect ourselves. Well, you know, I feel that knowing that the stranger on my property almost certainly hasn't got a gun means I am happy to grab an axe and walk down and ask what the hell he's doing. In the US, I'd hide in the house and wait for them to leave. I know if I had a gun, that having both parties armed makes my odds of dying far greater than if neither of us were. josda1000 wrote: Gun banning suspends the second amendment, which is the right to self-defense, and now we see encroachment into a police state. how do you see a police state ? The second ammendment is not a right to carry arms day to day, it's a right to own them for the purpose of forming a militia. Which made sense when your gun at home, and the guns the army had, were the same. Today, it is a nonsense. josda1000 wrote: If you keep living in fear, the government will continue to wipe away liberty. What amuses me about this, is that my observation of life in the US is that your media seeks to keep people in fear, if people by and large buy into it or not, is another question. There's certainly a lot more fear in the USA than there is here at home. Guns don't seem to me to be a factor in this equation.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I don't love him. I just like his aggressiveness, but not when it gets in the way of patriots.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
When you use the word 'patriot', I thnk of people with no teeth, who are married to farm animals.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote: and school shootings? those are few and far between, at least from what i've heard. 18 mass shootings a year in America. 13 in Australia, not a year, but EVER. None, not one, since the gun buyback over a decade ago. josda1000 wrote: we'd all be able to protect ourselves. Well, you know, I feel that knowing that the stranger on my property almost certainly hasn't got a gun means I am happy to grab an axe and walk down and ask what the hell he's doing. In the US, I'd hide in the house and wait for them to leave. I know if I had a gun, that having both parties armed makes my odds of dying far greater than if neither of us were. josda1000 wrote: Gun banning suspends the second amendment, which is the right to self-defense, and now we see encroachment into a police state. how do you see a police state ? The second ammendment is not a right to carry arms day to day, it's a right to own them for the purpose of forming a militia. Which made sense when your gun at home, and the guns the army had, were the same. Today, it is a nonsense. josda1000 wrote: If you keep living in fear, the government will continue to wipe away liberty. What amuses me about this, is that my observation of life in the US is that your media seeks to keep people in fear, if people by and large buy into it or not, is another question. There's certainly a lot more fear in the USA than there is here at home. Guns don't seem to me to be a factor in this equation.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
18 mass shootings a year in America. 13 in Australia, not a year, but EVER.
where can I find these stats?
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, you know, I feel that knowing that the stranger on my property almost certainly hasn't got a gun means I am happy to grab an axe and walk down and ask what the hell he's doing.
This is illogical, and kind of proving my point as well at the same time. Knowing that he doesn't have a gun doesn't mean he doesn't have an axe, just like you. This is just like saying, if axes are outlawed, I know I can go downstairs with my fists ready because he doesn't have fists. The point is, you need to defend yourself. Besides, if a guy really wanted to rob you, he'll find a gun anyway. Just because guns are outlawed doesn't mean he won't get one anyway, because he's already breaking the law by going into your house.
Christian Graus wrote:
In the US, I'd hide in the house and wait for them to leave.
See, that's the thing. People that own guns have a way to defend their houses. That's what we do here, cuz we actually have backbones. No offense, but seriously think about this.
Christian Graus wrote:
how do you see a police state ?
How do you NOT?! Random searches inside cars, self-written search warrants, wiretapping, airport security for no reason, traffic cameras on the street... the list goes on. This kind of thing would never happen in a free society, I'm sorry.
Christian Graus wrote:
The second ammendment is not a right to carry arms day to day
Yes. It is. "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Keep = Own. Bear = Carry. Arms = Guns (specifically rifles)
Christian Graus wrote:
Today, it is a nonsense.
It won't be if martial law is ever declared. Not saying that it will, but if it is ever declared, you're going to think twice about what you just said. Personally, I do believe that the dollar will collapse soon. And this will mean that martial law will be declared. So... yeah.
Christian Graus wrote:
What amuses me about this, is that my observation of life in the US is that your media seeks to keep people in
-
When you use the word 'patriot', I thnk of people with no teeth, who are married to farm animals.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Christian Graus wrote:
18 mass shootings a year in America. 13 in Australia, not a year, but EVER.
where can I find these stats?
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, you know, I feel that knowing that the stranger on my property almost certainly hasn't got a gun means I am happy to grab an axe and walk down and ask what the hell he's doing.
This is illogical, and kind of proving my point as well at the same time. Knowing that he doesn't have a gun doesn't mean he doesn't have an axe, just like you. This is just like saying, if axes are outlawed, I know I can go downstairs with my fists ready because he doesn't have fists. The point is, you need to defend yourself. Besides, if a guy really wanted to rob you, he'll find a gun anyway. Just because guns are outlawed doesn't mean he won't get one anyway, because he's already breaking the law by going into your house.
Christian Graus wrote:
In the US, I'd hide in the house and wait for them to leave.
See, that's the thing. People that own guns have a way to defend their houses. That's what we do here, cuz we actually have backbones. No offense, but seriously think about this.
Christian Graus wrote:
how do you see a police state ?
How do you NOT?! Random searches inside cars, self-written search warrants, wiretapping, airport security for no reason, traffic cameras on the street... the list goes on. This kind of thing would never happen in a free society, I'm sorry.
Christian Graus wrote:
The second ammendment is not a right to carry arms day to day
Yes. It is. "The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Keep = Own. Bear = Carry. Arms = Guns (specifically rifles)
Christian Graus wrote:
Today, it is a nonsense.
It won't be if martial law is ever declared. Not saying that it will, but if it is ever declared, you're going to think twice about what you just said. Personally, I do believe that the dollar will collapse soon. And this will mean that martial law will be declared. So... yeah.
Christian Graus wrote:
What amuses me about this, is that my observation of life in the US is that your media seeks to keep people in
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>where can I find these stats?</blockquote> <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aEsJF8HMg5yM&refer=australia">Australia</a>[<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aEsJF8HMg5yM&refer=australia" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>] I honestly can't find the figure for the US, I did read it recently, but it looks to me like the real figure is probably lower. It is, however, certainly a lot higher than Australia. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div> Knowing that he doesn't have a gun doesn't mean he doesn't have an axe, just like you. This is just like saying, if axes are outlawed, I know I can go downstairs with my fists ready because he doesn't have fists. The point is, you need to defend yourself.</blockquote> But, two guys with axes is not as dangerous as two guys with guns. Guns change the whole picture, and greatly increase the possibility of someone dying. They don't make you any safer, far from it. They create an illusion of safety that is likely to get you killed. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>Besides, if a guy really wanted to rob you, he'll find a gun anyway. Just because guns are outlawed doesn't mean he won't get one anyway, because he's already breaking the law by going into your house.</blockquote> But it's far harder to get one in a society that doesn't have gun shops on the outskirts of every town, where there's no gun shows, where it's almost impossible that a prior robbery would have got them a gun. Yes, I've been to America. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>How do you NOT?! Random searches inside cars, self-written search warrants, wiretapping, airport security for no reason, traffic cameras on the street... the list goes on. This kind of thing would never happen in a free society, I'm sorry.</blockquote> Well, I was not disputing, more asking for your reasoning. your list is flawed. Airport security is not for no reason, it's an expression of capitalism. People would not fly after 9/11, so security went ballistic, to prove to people it was safe. It's all a smoke screen, and smart people know that, but it's done that way, because it makes d
-
This implies you actually do live in a dreamworld, Christian. Take it easy buddy, and try to act with a little logic sometimes. You don't always have to be a bully. I'll take hillbillies for five hundred, Alex.
In all honesty, it means that my perception of the 'freedom movement' has been formed by talking to CSS and assuming they are all like him. I know that's probably not true, but it's the sample I've had to work with, so far.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>where can I find these stats?</blockquote> <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aEsJF8HMg5yM&refer=australia">Australia</a>[<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aEsJF8HMg5yM&refer=australia" target="_blank" title="New Window">^</a>] I honestly can't find the figure for the US, I did read it recently, but it looks to me like the real figure is probably lower. It is, however, certainly a lot higher than Australia. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div> Knowing that he doesn't have a gun doesn't mean he doesn't have an axe, just like you. This is just like saying, if axes are outlawed, I know I can go downstairs with my fists ready because he doesn't have fists. The point is, you need to defend yourself.</blockquote> But, two guys with axes is not as dangerous as two guys with guns. Guns change the whole picture, and greatly increase the possibility of someone dying. They don't make you any safer, far from it. They create an illusion of safety that is likely to get you killed. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>Besides, if a guy really wanted to rob you, he'll find a gun anyway. Just because guns are outlawed doesn't mean he won't get one anyway, because he's already breaking the law by going into your house.</blockquote> But it's far harder to get one in a society that doesn't have gun shops on the outskirts of every town, where there's no gun shows, where it's almost impossible that a prior robbery would have got them a gun. Yes, I've been to America. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>How do you NOT?! Random searches inside cars, self-written search warrants, wiretapping, airport security for no reason, traffic cameras on the street... the list goes on. This kind of thing would never happen in a free society, I'm sorry.</blockquote> Well, I was not disputing, more asking for your reasoning. your list is flawed. Airport security is not for no reason, it's an expression of capitalism. People would not fly after 9/11, so security went ballistic, to prove to people it was safe. It's all a smoke screen, and smart people know that, but it's done that way, because it makes d
Christian Graus wrote:
But, two guys with axes is not as dangerous as two guys with guns.
In the end, both are tools. They are both dangerous, and both can be taken from the hands of the offender. So really, this is open to speculation. Basically it comes down to the fact that you're afraid of a gun, perpetrated probably by media and the government. But that's open to speculation as well.
Christian Graus wrote:
Guns change the whole picture, and greatly increase the possibility of someone dying. They don't make you any safer, far from it. They create an illusion of safety that is likely to get you killed.
This is also speculation. When was the last time you heard about any axe muderers? No stats probably on this at all, anywhere.
Christian Graus wrote:
But it's far harder to get one in a society that doesn't have gun shops on the outskirts of every town, where there's no gun shows, where it's almost impossible that a prior robbery would have got them a gun. Yes, I've been to America.
That's cool. I live in the USA myself. Massachusetts. One of the most liberal states of the confederation. Guess what: I haven't been to a gun show. And guess what: I don't own a gun. I'm just defending the position because I believe in liberty. I literally choose not to own a gun, but I'll support the right to keep and bear it.
Christian Graus wrote:
Airport security is not for no reason, it's an expression of capitalism. People would not fly after 9/11, so security went ballistic, to prove to people it was safe.
Nope, it's not capitalism. The government demanded it. Government = force.
Christian Graus wrote:
Traffic cameras on the streets are also capitalism, both the state making money on victimless crime, and the fact that there are people who WANT speed cameras because ( again ) they think it makes them safer.
Nope, it's not capitalism. The government demanded it. Government = force. Capitalism is the free market at work, meaning the government doesn't interfere one iota. But since the government created TSA and local/state police demanded these cameras in whatever areas, that's not capitalism. Especially for the fact that these cameras are monitored by the police, and that the TSA is a gov
-
Christian Graus wrote:
But, two guys with axes is not as dangerous as two guys with guns.
In the end, both are tools. They are both dangerous, and both can be taken from the hands of the offender. So really, this is open to speculation. Basically it comes down to the fact that you're afraid of a gun, perpetrated probably by media and the government. But that's open to speculation as well.
Christian Graus wrote:
Guns change the whole picture, and greatly increase the possibility of someone dying. They don't make you any safer, far from it. They create an illusion of safety that is likely to get you killed.
This is also speculation. When was the last time you heard about any axe muderers? No stats probably on this at all, anywhere.
Christian Graus wrote:
But it's far harder to get one in a society that doesn't have gun shops on the outskirts of every town, where there's no gun shows, where it's almost impossible that a prior robbery would have got them a gun. Yes, I've been to America.
That's cool. I live in the USA myself. Massachusetts. One of the most liberal states of the confederation. Guess what: I haven't been to a gun show. And guess what: I don't own a gun. I'm just defending the position because I believe in liberty. I literally choose not to own a gun, but I'll support the right to keep and bear it.
Christian Graus wrote:
Airport security is not for no reason, it's an expression of capitalism. People would not fly after 9/11, so security went ballistic, to prove to people it was safe.
Nope, it's not capitalism. The government demanded it. Government = force.
Christian Graus wrote:
Traffic cameras on the streets are also capitalism, both the state making money on victimless crime, and the fact that there are people who WANT speed cameras because ( again ) they think it makes them safer.
Nope, it's not capitalism. The government demanded it. Government = force. Capitalism is the free market at work, meaning the government doesn't interfere one iota. But since the government created TSA and local/state police demanded these cameras in whatever areas, that's not capitalism. Especially for the fact that these cameras are monitored by the police, and that the TSA is a gov
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div> Basically it comes down to the fact that you're afraid of a gun, perpetrated probably by media and the government</blockquote> No, that is BS. I'm not afraid of a gun, I've been thinking of getting one, actually, as we live in the country. The point is, when you have scared people walking around with guns, you have an explosive situation. When a guy comes onto my property with a gun, and I get out my gun, the threat is more immediate and more lethal than if I am holding a piece of wood. That escalates the situation and greatly increases the odds of someone dying. That's just common sense. It has nothing to do with fear. A gun is a tool. It is made to visit sudden death on people. As Lynyrd Skynyrd said, it ain't good for nothin' else. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>This is also speculation. When was the last time you heard about any axe muderers? No stats probably on this at all, anywhere.</blockquote> Well, why would anyone bother ? A gun is the obvious tool for killing people and the ONLY way to get away with mass murder. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>. Massachusetts. One of the most liberal states of the confederation. Guess what: I haven't been to a gun show.</blockquote> Well, that does not surprise me, do they happen up there ? I've been, nice place, but the thing I most recall was a gun show poster that was really a protest poster. When I travelled the south, I saw a lot of ads for gun shows, and gun shops. josda1000 wrote: And guess what: I don't own a gun. I'm just defending the position because I believe in liberty. I literally choose not to own a gun, but I'll support the right to keep and bear it. OK, that's fine. I still think you're wrong. I don't think owning a gun gives you any freedom, except freedom to create a society where mass shootings happen far too often, and crime is almost always violent, because everyone can get a gun. josda1000 wrote: Again, this is speculation. How did us dumbass americans win against the English Empire, the greatest force in the world at the time? Well, this leads to my point. BECAUSE your guns were the same as their guns, or close enough to it. That' why
-
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div> Basically it comes down to the fact that you're afraid of a gun, perpetrated probably by media and the government</blockquote> No, that is BS. I'm not afraid of a gun, I've been thinking of getting one, actually, as we live in the country. The point is, when you have scared people walking around with guns, you have an explosive situation. When a guy comes onto my property with a gun, and I get out my gun, the threat is more immediate and more lethal than if I am holding a piece of wood. That escalates the situation and greatly increases the odds of someone dying. That's just common sense. It has nothing to do with fear. A gun is a tool. It is made to visit sudden death on people. As Lynyrd Skynyrd said, it ain't good for nothin' else. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>This is also speculation. When was the last time you heard about any axe muderers? No stats probably on this at all, anywhere.</blockquote> Well, why would anyone bother ? A gun is the obvious tool for killing people and the ONLY way to get away with mass murder. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>. Massachusetts. One of the most liberal states of the confederation. Guess what: I haven't been to a gun show.</blockquote> Well, that does not surprise me, do they happen up there ? I've been, nice place, but the thing I most recall was a gun show poster that was really a protest poster. When I travelled the south, I saw a lot of ads for gun shows, and gun shops. josda1000 wrote: And guess what: I don't own a gun. I'm just defending the position because I believe in liberty. I literally choose not to own a gun, but I'll support the right to keep and bear it. OK, that's fine. I still think you're wrong. I don't think owning a gun gives you any freedom, except freedom to create a society where mass shootings happen far too often, and crime is almost always violent, because everyone can get a gun. josda1000 wrote: Again, this is speculation. How did us dumbass americans win against the English Empire, the greatest force in the world at the time? Well, this leads to my point. BECAUSE your guns were the same as their guns, or close enough to it. That' why
Christian Graus wrote:
I've been thinking of getting one, actually
Now, this is just hypocritical, plain and simple.
Christian Graus wrote:
The point is, when you have scared people walking around with guns, you have an explosive situation. When a guy comes onto my property with a gun, and I get out my gun, the threat is more immediate and more lethal than if I am holding a piece of wood. That escalates the situation and greatly increases the odds of someone dying. That's just common sense.
I'm not denying that, this is completely valid.
Christian Graus wrote:
A gun is a tool. It is made to visit sudden death on people. As Lynyrd Skynyrd said, it ain't good for nothin' else.
I agree it's a tool, but it's not made to kill people (originally, that is.) It was made for hunting. But then once governments (and men in general) used it on each other, it has been demonized along with every other weapon.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, why would anyone bother ? A gun is the obvious tool for killing people and the ONLY way to get away with mass murder.
I completely and heartily disagree with this. You referenced my question of "Have you heard of any axe murderers lately?" Now you're saying that a gun is the obvious tool for killing people. Agreed. But the only way to get away with mass murder? Hardly. Bombs. Grenades. Arson. etc.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, that does not surprise me, do they happen up there ?
Yes. Though, more in New Hampshire.
Christian Graus wrote:
OK, that's fine. I still think you're wrong. I don't think owning a gun gives you any freedom, except freedom to create a society where mass shootings happen far too often, and crime is almost always violent, because everyone can get a gun.
Actually, people are jailed more often here for nonviolent crimes, such as possessing marijauna and the like. But that's besides the point... There was less crime in the States in the first hundred years of its existence than today, and it has more to do with poverty (welfare state). When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, this leads to my poi
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I've been thinking of getting one, actually
Now, this is just hypocritical, plain and simple.
Christian Graus wrote:
The point is, when you have scared people walking around with guns, you have an explosive situation. When a guy comes onto my property with a gun, and I get out my gun, the threat is more immediate and more lethal than if I am holding a piece of wood. That escalates the situation and greatly increases the odds of someone dying. That's just common sense.
I'm not denying that, this is completely valid.
Christian Graus wrote:
A gun is a tool. It is made to visit sudden death on people. As Lynyrd Skynyrd said, it ain't good for nothin' else.
I agree it's a tool, but it's not made to kill people (originally, that is.) It was made for hunting. But then once governments (and men in general) used it on each other, it has been demonized along with every other weapon.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, why would anyone bother ? A gun is the obvious tool for killing people and the ONLY way to get away with mass murder.
I completely and heartily disagree with this. You referenced my question of "Have you heard of any axe murderers lately?" Now you're saying that a gun is the obvious tool for killing people. Agreed. But the only way to get away with mass murder? Hardly. Bombs. Grenades. Arson. etc.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, that does not surprise me, do they happen up there ?
Yes. Though, more in New Hampshire.
Christian Graus wrote:
OK, that's fine. I still think you're wrong. I don't think owning a gun gives you any freedom, except freedom to create a society where mass shootings happen far too often, and crime is almost always violent, because everyone can get a gun.
Actually, people are jailed more often here for nonviolent crimes, such as possessing marijauna and the like. But that's besides the point... There was less crime in the States in the first hundred years of its existence than today, and it has more to do with poverty (welfare state). When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it.
Christian Graus wrote:
Well, this leads to my poi
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>Now, this is just hypocritical, plain and simple.</blockquote> Why is it ? I have no problems with people having a gun if they have a use for one. That means farmers ( which I am ). It doesn't mean people in the suburbs. I sure as hell would not carry one off my property. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>It was made for hunting. But then once governments (and men in general) used it on each other, it has been demonized along with every other weapon.</blockquote> So your claim is that someone who lives in LA would own a gun so they can hunt their own food ? <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>But the only way to get away with mass murder? Hardly. Bombs. Grenades. Arson. etc.</blockquote> Sure. Those things happen from time to time. But, in terms of someone wanting to go ballistic in a school, or place of work, a gun beats an axe. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>Actually, people are jailed more often here for nonviolent crimes, such as possessing marijauna and the like.</blockquote> Hordes of peole being jailed for victimless crime, does not prove that you have a much higher per capita murder rate than countries who do not allow citizens to carry guns. josda1000 wrote: There was less crime in the States in the first hundred years of its existence than today, and it has more to do with poverty (welfare state). When people have nothing left to lose, they lose it. Well, that much is probably true. Another reason not to add guns to that mix. josda1000 wrote: I have to say, this is a good point. But, we could still use massive weapons against theirs (bombs, grenades, etc). But, theirs are massiver. And they have weapons that they can use remotely. It would not be a fair fight, that's for sure. josda1000 wrote: how many militia were there compared to the number of citizens, during the Revolution? The difference was that the guns were the *same*. You need bigger numbers now, to fight against their bigger guns. josda1000 wrote: If that's the case, why do you insist on writing legislation against it? Because while they don't cause fear to those in power, they do arm criminals and increase crime. Note: after the gun
-
<blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div> Basically it comes down to the fact that you're afraid of a gun, perpetrated probably by media and the government</blockquote> No, that is BS. I'm not afraid of a gun, I've been thinking of getting one, actually, as we live in the country. The point is, when you have scared people walking around with guns, you have an explosive situation. When a guy comes onto my property with a gun, and I get out my gun, the threat is more immediate and more lethal than if I am holding a piece of wood. That escalates the situation and greatly increases the odds of someone dying. That's just common sense. It has nothing to do with fear. A gun is a tool. It is made to visit sudden death on people. As Lynyrd Skynyrd said, it ain't good for nothin' else. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>This is also speculation. When was the last time you heard about any axe muderers? No stats probably on this at all, anywhere.</blockquote> Well, why would anyone bother ? A gun is the obvious tool for killing people and the ONLY way to get away with mass murder. <blockquote class="FQ"><div class="FQA">josda1000 wrote:</div>. Massachusetts. One of the most liberal states of the confederation. Guess what: I haven't been to a gun show.</blockquote> Well, that does not surprise me, do they happen up there ? I've been, nice place, but the thing I most recall was a gun show poster that was really a protest poster. When I travelled the south, I saw a lot of ads for gun shows, and gun shops. josda1000 wrote: And guess what: I don't own a gun. I'm just defending the position because I believe in liberty. I literally choose not to own a gun, but I'll support the right to keep and bear it. OK, that's fine. I still think you're wrong. I don't think owning a gun gives you any freedom, except freedom to create a society where mass shootings happen far too often, and crime is almost always violent, because everyone can get a gun. josda1000 wrote: Again, this is speculation. How did us dumbass americans win against the English Empire, the greatest force in the world at the time? Well, this leads to my point. BECAUSE your guns were the same as their guns, or close enough to it. That' why
The major flaw that adversely influences your logic (or illogic) is the fact that you think so low of the human species, that they are cattle to be controlled, manipulated, and exploited. You think of patriots as toothless barefooted animals that run around after chickens in the dirt. That corrupt belief destroys your credibility. If a real revolution were to take place the country would be divided as seen in the civil war. A new government, a new currency, a new flag, a new military with a very large percentage if not the majority of current military signing up. The new countries economy would begin pumping out ammunition and weapons as the surplus of the general armed public (over 100 million gun owners) is used to fight tyranny. As we see in the middle east, wars like that are impossible to win. Also it is important to point out that the general public does own military assault rifles of all calibers, and body armor. We have seen for over a year, gun and ammunition sales are off the charts, so is the demand for gold and silver, storable food, and medical supplies. Oh, and I forgot to add that the current government is bankrupt. How will they fight in the middle east and America?
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
modified on Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:31 PM
-
The major flaw that adversely influences your logic (or illogic) is the fact that you think so low of the human species, that they are cattle to be controlled, manipulated, and exploited. You think of patriots as toothless barefooted animals that run around after chickens in the dirt. That corrupt belief destroys your credibility. If a real revolution were to take place the country would be divided as seen in the civil war. A new government, a new currency, a new flag, a new military with a very large percentage if not the majority of current military signing up. The new countries economy would begin pumping out ammunition and weapons as the surplus of the general armed public (over 100 million gun owners) is used to fight tyranny. As we see in the middle east, wars like that are impossible to win. Also it is important to point out that the general public does own military assault rifles of all calibers, and body armor. We have seen for over a year, gun and ammunition sales are off the charts, so is the demand for gold and silver, storable food, and medical supplies. Oh, and I forgot to add that the current government is bankrupt. How will they fight in the middle east and America?
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
modified on Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:31 PM
CaptainSeeSharp wrote: The major flaw that adversely influences your logic (or illogic) is the fact that you think so low of the human species, that they are cattle to be controlled, manipulated, and exploited. No, that is your fantasy version of me, not anything I've ever said. CaptainSeeSharp wrote: . You think of patriots as toothless barefooted animals that run around after chickens in the dirt. No, I think of YOU that way, based on your actions. CaptainSeeSharp wrote: If a real revolution were to take place the country would be divided as seen in the civil war. A new government, a new currency, a new flag, a new military with a very large percentage if not the majority of current military signing up. The new countries economy would begin pumping out ammunition and weapons as the surplus of the general armed public (over 100 million gun owners) is used to fight tyranny. As we see in the middle east, wars like that are impossible to win. This is a retarded fantasy. Put away the vaseline and try coming up with your own opinions, and explaining them. CaptainSeeSharp wrote: Also it is important to point out that the general public does own military assault rifles of all calibers, and body armor. I'm sure they do. Woo hoo. CaptainSeeSharp wrote: We have seen for over a year, gun and ammunition sales are off the charts, so is the demand for gold and silver, storable food, and medical supplies. So what ? none of that will turn your fantasies into reality.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.