Discussion: The Second Amendment IV

[Kelly]

I love it when we compare to totally different times in history, as if they are the same. Amazing...

 

[Thundercrack85]

The Civil War basically did start because of that. If Lincoln hadn't sent in the troops, the South would have seceded, but there would have been no immediate war. Which was kind of dumb because the best officers in the American military were Southerners. That's why the war took so damn long. America's best officers switched sides when the war started.

Still, Northerners had no problem invading the South. But those were different times. People still identified with their state, region (the South, New England, etc), over the "Union". Modern Americans have a very different concept of nationality. Not sure how well that would translate into "turning on your own".

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Yeah, I don't think they'll be another Civil War anytime soon.

 

[SV Fan]

However it's actually not the Government specifically that you have to worry about in America, it's tyranny of the majority.

I personally think what American's should worry about is the special interest groups that have alot of money to buy elections(and this goes both ways)

 

[DACrowe]

The Civil War basically did start because of that. If Lincoln hadn't sent in the troops, the South would have seceded, but there would have been no immediate war. Which was kind of dumb because the best officers in the American military were Southerners. That's why the war took so damn long. America's best officers switched sides when the war started.

Still, Northerners had no problem invading the South. But those were different times. People still identified with their state, region (the South, New England, etc), over the "Union". Modern Americans have a very different concept of nationality. Not sure how well that would translate into "turning on your own".

It's not an invasion if you're quelling a rebellion.

I like this whole mock Southern revisionist crap of, "It's the war of Northern aggression...started because our states seceded due to losing a presidential election and then fired on a military fort when it was being supplied with food."

Anyway, comparing our time now to 1860 is, as Kel points out, an absurd joke. But if you want to go there, ask yourselves how things turned out for the Confederacy when the weaponry was not as initially lop-sided. Now look at today.

 

[Thundercrack85]

My point is that when a government turns its army on its people, generally speaking, many in said army will refuse to fight, or even defect.

Course, there are ways to work around that. During the Tiananmen Square protests, the Chinese government brought in units from other provinces to massacre the Beijing protestors, because they knew that might happen.

Or you can hire thugs from another country. Though that can really backfire. Just ask Gaddafi.

 

[roach]

Seriously????
Do we truly believe that US troops will be ordered to kill Americans that don't turn over their guns???
The government is not coming for anyone's guns.
I keep saying paranoia and I keep getting laughed at but that is what I see. Paranoia. Some people act as if Obama or some other President is going to pull a Palpatine and declare himself Emperor.
Sure it happened in Germany, China and Iraq...and all these other foreign countries but when was the last time it happened here? Never. But we act as if it happened and we have to remain hyper-vigilant( I am not saying don't keep an eye on the government...please do so...just not with the idea that you are about to see the President turn into Hitler). Our government is set up in a way to prevent it from happening. Hell the government couldn't even decide on the amount of cash to send the areas devastated by Hurricane Sandy...you think they are about to turn into Nazi Germany???
At no time did the President ever say he was coming to take anyone's guns. Sure there are extremists on the gun control side who want all guns taken but that isn't realistic. The most we'll see is an assault weapons ban and we had one in the 80's and we didn't become an evil empire....hell during that time we won the cold war through a combination of Ronald Reagan's cowboy-ism and Rocky 4.
You are being sold a lie and paranoia. Because they know that an angry american will remember that when it comes time to vote.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Seriously????
Do we truly believe that US troops will be ordered to kill Americans that don't turn over their guns???
The government is not coming for anyone's guns.
I keep saying paranoia and I keep getting laughed at but that is what I see. Paranoia. Some people act as if Obama or some other President is going to pull a Palpatine and declare himself Emperor.
Sure it happened in Germany, China and Iraq...and all these other foreign countries but when was the last time it happened here? Never. But we act as if it happened and we have to remain hyper-vigilant( I am not saying don't keep an eye on the government...please do so...just not with the idea that you are about to see the President turn into Hitler). Our government is set up in a way to prevent it from happening. Hell the government couldn't even decide on the amount of cash to send the areas devastated by Hurricane Sandy...you think they are about to turn into Nazi Germany???
At no time did the President ever say he was coming to take anyone's guns. Sure there are extremists on the gun control side who want all guns taken but that isn't realistic. The most we'll see is an assault weapons ban and we had one in the 80's and we didn't become an evil empire....hell during that time we won the cold war through a combination of Ronald Reagan's cowboy-ism and Rocky 4.
You are being sold a lie and paranoia. Because they know that an angry american will remember that when it comes time to vote.

Post of the day!

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I find it funny that people will complain about how sad and ineffective out Government is in one thread then come to another and swear they're Nazi Germany.

 

[SuBe]

I personally think what American's should worry about is the special interest groups that have alot of money to buy elections(and this goes both ways)

Why should be people worry about the special interests that "buy" elections instead of the people that are "being bought"?

 

[Grievous]

I've read comments before that wen't like ''rednecks need to stop thinking just cause a lot of people in their town own a rifle it will stop the military from rolling in if martial law was declared.'' Honestly I don't see the military taking over cities and govts at least not now anyway, and even if they did would there be that many citizens that would go like ''guys are govt has gone too far. They think they are doing the right thing but it isn't. So lets send a message and shoot at our own troops.'' I don't see that happening.

 

[Hotwire]

I've said it before, our current capitalist society prevents the government from turning into a dictatorship. If a president rolled the military out and took over by force, it would crush the industries that pumpall the money into the government. Bottom line, the current set up makes more money for those in power than a tyrannical dictatorship would.

 

[dnno1]

At least three shot at Texas college
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/22/shooting-reported-at-texas-college/?hpt=hp_t1

Yeah, let's arm everybody on campus.

 

[Phallic]

At least three shot at Texas college
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/22/shooting-reported-at-texas-college/?hpt=hp_t1

Yeah, let's arm everybody on campus.

*facepalm*

You do realize the shooter broke their no-gun policy, right? What did your little gun free zone accomplish again?

It's okay, you can go on thinking that your rules will create a force field, disallowing all firearms from entering. Just don't be surprised when more mass killings happen, virtually exclusively in gun free zones.

 

[Kelly]

I've said it before, our current capitalist society prevents the government from turning into a dictatorship. If a president rolled the military out and took over by force, it would crush the industries that pumpall the money into the government. Bottom line, the current set up makes more money for those in power than a tyrannical dictatorship would.

Also, in order for a Dictatorship to work, or any other kind of Totalitarian government....you need a small middle class, and an uneducated (as a large percentage that cannot read) to even get started.

Both of those reasons is why China is moving away from a Communist style economy/government and closer to a Socialist style economy...they will continue in that direction simply because it works. North Korea, Cuba (less and less each day, but still....) has to keep their populace unread and poor in order to keep the Dictatorships in play.

Our middle class and 99% literacy rate (no matter how stupid some people may be....) will keep us from moving that far on the economic and political spectrum. DOESN'T MEAN we can't move towards it....but we will never pass that middle ground.

 

[dnno1]

*facepalm*

You do realize the shooter broke their no-gun policy, right? What did your little gun free zone accomplish again?

It's okay, you can go on thinking that your rules will create a force field, disallowing all firearms from entering.

So? It wasn't supposed to happen and it did. Supposedly over grades. If everybody were armed, it would have been worse.

 

[Phallic]

That's why CCW holders are committing mass shootings en masse...

/sarcasm

Your jaded view on all gun owners is so ridiculous, ignorant and discriminatory that it's bordering on offensive.

 

[dnno1]

That's why CCW holders are committing mass shootings en masse...

/sarcasm

Your jaded view on all gun owners is so ridiculous, ignorant and discriminatory that it's bordering on offensive.

I am not ashamed to say that my view is jaded since I have tired of this nonsense of gun ownership in the United States. The truth of the matter is that we do not have responsible gun owners here and society is not being allowed to make them more responsible. We have an interest group in this country that is a lobby for firearms manufacturers and they have blinded people into thinking that it is their God given right to own something that was man made. Now that is ridiculous.

 

[Phallic]

I am not ashamed to say that my view is jaded since I have tired of this nonsense of gun ownership in the United States. The truth of the matter is that we do not have responsible gun owners here and society is not being allowed to make them more responsible. We have an interest group in this country that is a lobby for firearms manufacturers and they have blinded people into thinking that it is their God given right to own something that was man made. Now that is ridiculous.

1) Misinformation at it's worst. A vast majority of gun owners are very safe and responsible. Judging 80 million people on the irresponsible actions of a few is wrong.

2) It was deemed a God given right to have the means to defend yourself. Before guns were invented, that was the sword. Now that guns exist, it's with a gun.

3) I'm not a member of the NRA and don't support everything they do or say, but to believe that their power is only derived from corporations and black magic is foolish. Their influence comes from the massive amount of people who do support them.

 

[SuBe]

I am not ashamed to say that my view is jaded since I have tired of this nonsense of gun control in the United States. The truth of the matter is that we do have responsible gun owners here and government is not being allowed to let them live free. We have an interest group in this country that is a lobby for more government controls and they have blinded people into thinking that it is their God given right to dictate to others what they are allowed to possess. Now that is ridiculous.

 

[Sun_Down]

I am not ashamed to say that my view is jaded since I have tired of this nonsense of gun control in the United States. The truth of the matter is that we do have responsible gun owners here and government is not being allowed to let them live free. We have an interest group in this country that is a lobby for more government controls and they have blinded people into thinking that it is their God given right to dictate to others what they are allowed to possess. Now that is ridiculous.

A group of people want to "dictate to others what they are allowed to possess"? I don't see anything in the proposed legislative/executive orders that is limiting anyone's right to be a responsible gun owner. All I see is a limit on patently dangerous things like assault weapons and requiring some form of accountability (i.e. background checks) to limit mental unstable individuals' access to deadly weapons.

Bottom line is our homicide rate, particularly our gun homicide rate of minors, is too high. Countries around the world that are comparable in economic and social terms have much lower homicide rates. Why can't we strive for that?

For the life of me, I can't understand how more guns are supposed to lead to a safer existence. Study after study shows that you're more likely to accidentally kill a family member than an intruder. The whole "protecting your family from bad people" narrative is the exception, not the rule.

 

[Phallic]

A group of people want to "dictate to others what they are allowed to possess"? I don't see anything in the proposed legislative/executive orders that is limiting anyone's right to be a responsible gun owner. All I see is a limit on patently dangerous things like assault weapons and requiring some form of accountability (i.e. background checks) to limit mental unstable individuals' access to deadly weapons.

Bottom line is our homicide rate, particularly our gun homicide rate of minors, is too high. Countries around the world that are comparable in economic and social terms have much lower homicide rates. Why can't we strive for that?

Mental health reform and background checks are fine. Restricting access to "assault weapons" (a misnomer once again) is silly given they're not even used in a large % of crimes.

Striving for lower crimes rates is a good way to go, but targeting lawful gun owners is not the solution.

 

[Thundercrack85]

There is actually a decent argument to be made for restricting certain firearms. Military-style rifles, for example.

Unfortunately the people who make that case, are many of them the same people who tried (and in some cases did) ban all firearms when they had their chance.

Look at the president. When he was a state legislator, he tried to ban all semiautomatics, and handguns.

He has since denied that. Despite... the record.

No one in the media has touched that.

 

[SuBe]

A group of people want to "dictate to others what they are allowed to possess"? I don't see anything in the proposed legislative/executive orders that is limiting anyone's right to be a responsible gun owner. All I see is a limit on patently dangerous things like assault weapons and requiring some form of accountability (i.e. background checks) to limit mental unstable individuals' access to deadly weapons.

Bottom line is our homicide rate, particularly our gun homicide rate of minors, is too high. Countries around the world that are comparable in economic and social terms have much lower homicide rates. Why can't we strive for that?

For the life of me, I can't understand how more guns are supposed to lead to a safer existence. Study after study shows that you're more likely to accidentally kill a family member than an intruder. The whole "protecting your family from bad people" narrative is the exception, not the rule.

Reread the statement and try to logically dissect how that wouldn't restrict a persons ability to "possess" what they want.

Also, do you believe in mutually assured destruction in relation to Nuclear arms? Same concept.

 

[roach]

This is why the problem wont be solved. We are too busy fighting over the wrong thing. We're taking potshots at each other over stupid things...the only thing both sides should be discussing is how to prevent more gun tragedies. No one on either side wants to compromise and we'll never fix this issue.
Please do continue to argue about what the forefathers thought or how you are keeping the government in check or taking things from people....The shootings will get worst and worst until we get to a point where we can't ignore them. I thought it was Sandy Hook but I guess I was wrong.