Discussion: The Second Amendment

[MessiahDecoy123]

Jefferson would defend till his death the right for this militia group to exist - no matter how much value he may have placed on them.

Militias are an outdated concept. They were needed to stop invading forces but not anymore.

They're simply a source for domestic terrorism these days.

 

[StorminNorman]

Militias are an outdated concept. They were needed to stop invading forces but not anymore.

They're simply a source for domestic terrorism these days.

Jefferson liked that idea.

"I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people, which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is medicine necessary for the sound health of government."

 

[Paradoxium]

Big government is not controlled by a big democracy, it's a class of politicians and civil servants who try to control the opinions of the masses. Whether it be NGO, college universities and the media. All in competition to their own benefit.

And if corporations are motivated by greed, who is to say this isn't the case of government, it's politicos and in how they manipulate the public? At least if a corporation gets corrupt and financially stupid, they can get to go bankrupt (something the government is not allowing lately).. With the government they bring everyone down with them, even if you don't want to have anything to do with them.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

When my vote counts as much as Paris Hilton's vote, I have to question the benefits of Democracy.

Corporations are motivated by self-interest. That I can understand, predict and prepare for. I will take that every day over the illogical BS the government seems to be guided by.

Not a big fan of democracy, eh?

The fact that every one gets the same amount of votes is re-assuring. It's called power sharing and it ensures that everyone or at least most people benefit from our society and system. The alternative is power consolidated among the few rather than the many. That allows far more abuse and evil than a healthy democracy because only a few interest are truly protected.

Corporations have been known to do whatever they have to in order to make a bigger and bigger profit. If that meant child labor or dangerous conditions then so be it. When you put corporations in control you get far less than when a democracy has a say. Another reason I don't understand why libertarians rally against big government knowing the alternative is corporate control.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Big government is not controlled by a big democracy, it's a class of politicians and civil servants who try to control the opinions of the masses. Whether it be NGO, college universities and the media. All in competition to their own benefit.

And if corporations are motivated by greed, who is to say this isn't the case of government, it's politicos and in how they manipulate the public? At least if a corporation gets corrupt and financially stupid, they can get to go bankrupt (something the government is not allowing lately).. With the government they bring everyone down with them, even if you don't want to have anything to do with them.

At least the opinions of the masses are competed for rather than a corporate rule that doesn't care about the opinion of the masses, only about the bottom line.

The motivations of government officials varies from person to person. Not all are primarily motivated by greed as it is in the business world. A corrupt business doesn't necessarily go bankrupt. Many would go on and on without a government to keep them in check. Just look at history. Businesses in the past are notorious for human right violations and tyrannical practices.

When a single person accumulates too much corporate power it takes generations to divide that power. With the government it takes a single election cycle.

I'd much rather be ruled by a democratic government, no matter the size, than ruled by oligarchs and corporations.

 

[souloffire]

Corporations are motivated by greed.

So is the Government.

 

[StorminNorman]

Not a big fan of democracy, eh?

The fact that every one gets the same amount of votes is re-assuring. It's called power sharing and it ensures that everyone or at least most people benefit from our society and system. The alternative is power consolidated among the few rather than the many. That allows far more abuse and evil than a healthy democracy because only a few interest are truly protected.

It doesn't give people the same amount of votes. It gives those that have complex proposals requiring intelligence to understand (you know...the type generally needed to run a government) a huge disadvantage to the politician who excells on style points and catch phrases.

I think the quote that best sums ups my views on Democracy: It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.

Thank you Churchill.

Corporations have been known to do whatever they have to in order to make a bigger and bigger profit. If that meant child labor or dangerous conditions then so be it. When you put corporations in control you get far less than when a democracy has a say. Another reason I don't understand why libertarians rally against big government knowing the alternative is corporate control.

I have no problem with child labor, but that's another story. You act as if corporations don't have to worry about reputation and integrity. (Especially if we deregulated the market) the importance of reputation is huge. It's why corporations can't just do whatever they want to make profits. When we are free to buy from whoever we want, then it is up to consumers to decide what sins a corporation commits should be punished.

If you don't believe in child labor, then you boycott a corporation's goods.

We have reached the point where we are completely gone from the original topic.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Jefferson liked that idea.

"I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people, which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is medicine necessary for the sound health of government."

I think he intended for people to protest every once and a while not arm themselves for a treasonous insurgency.

 

[StorminNorman]

I think he intended for people to protest every once and a while not arm themselves for a treasonous insurgency.

You need to re-evaluate your perception of Jefferson.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

So is the Government.

So everyone involved in public service is primarily motivated by greed.

How do you figure?

Remember the government isn't some giant, monolithic organism. It's actually controlled by publicly elected officials. You don't like those in power, run for office yourself.

 

[Paradoxium]

Do you even understand how corrupt business continue perpetuate to begin with? Do you know what the original definition of monopoly was? It was when the government grants them a privilege. The railroads industry is a good example of this. Their cartels kept getting busted by competitors, until government introduced "regulations" to allow their monopolies to exist. There is no way to go around the fact, when a government falls, it brings more people down than a business. You can't have two different set of rules, and say, all capitalists are motivated by greed, and government politicos are usually not.

And corporations that rule in conjunction with government is not capitalism, that is corporatism. Those are two very different things.

-----

Voting is a political power. A small one. It doesn't make a man any less free without it. The fact you have people manipulating or indoctrinating others just so they can have power in government, makes these voters less free.

And greed for profit is a unit of measure to have a functional society; that is how strangers take care of other strangers through a market. In real life a large group of strangers don't treat each other like family members. This is where all those tribalist rooted commies fail to understand, they think society is an extension of the tribe. While profit as a unit measure is far from perfect it at least works in a practical sense. You simply can't democratize the economy to a few, because it is a technical impossibility. There simply is too much fact and information from a variety of contexts to properly manage everything.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

You need to re-evaluate your perception of Jefferson.

Jefferson was a product of his times.

Those quotes were direct results of having to revolt against a King's rule.

It doesn't mean he would support these fools preparing to shoot fellow Americans because of a differing opinion on constitutional rights.

If Jefferson studied the times we live in he would understand these people were paranoid nut cases living on the fringe while shrouding themselves in the American flag.

 

[Kelly]

Jefferson was a product of his times.

Those quotes were direct results of having to revolt against a King's rule.

It doesn't mean he would support these fools preparing to shoot fellow Americans because of a differing opinion on constitutional rights.

If Jefferson studied the times we live in he would understand these people were paranoid nut cases living on the fringe while shrouding themselves in the American flag.

I think that Jefferson would most definitely see the government's infringement into the privacy of our lives as "Kinglike". He would have with Bush, and would with Obama as well, IMO.

 

[Paradoxium]

Oh man is Stormy really banned banned, or fake text banned like me

 

[Kelly]

Not fake text, in the middle of the discussion at the moment.

 

[souloffire]

So everyone involved in public service is primarily motivated by greed.

How do you figure?

Remember the government isn't some giant, monolithic organism. It's actually controlled by publicly elected officials. You don't like those in power, run for office yourself.

Sure why not. You feel everyone in a corporation is motivated by greed.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Do you even understand how corrupt business continue perpetuate to begin with? Do you know what the original definition of monopoly was? It was when the government grants them a privilege. The railroads industry is a good example of this. Their cartels kept getting busted by competitors, until government introduced "regulations" to allow their monopolies to exist. There is no way to go around the fact, when a government falls, it brings more people down than a business. You can't have two different set of rules, and say, all capitalists are motivated by greed, and government politicos are usually not.

And corporations that rule in conjunction with government is not capitalism, that is corporatism. Those are two very different things.

If government allowed monopolies to exist they were also the only entity powerful enough to break up monopolies when needed.

Voting is a political power. A small one. It doesn't make a man any less free without it. The fact you have people manipulating or indoctrinating others just so they can have power in government, makes these voters less free.

With careful organization voting is no small power. Collectively voters are a powerful force, able to decide whose in power and what laws are passed. Without the power to vote an individual has no say on who rules or what new laws will take effect. You say people are less free because they are always manipulated in voting for someone. At least the voter has a say in the matter, unlike when an oligarch is in control and doesn't need the voters for anything other than compliance.

And greed for profit is a unit of measure to have a functional society; that is how strangers take care of other strangers through a market. In real life a large group of strangers don't treat each other like family members. This is where all those tribalist rooted commies fail to understand, they think society is an extension of the tribe. While profit as a unit measure is far from perfect it at least works in a practical sense. You simply can't democratize the economy to a few, because it is a technical impossibility. There simply is too much fact and information from a variety of contexts to properly manage everything.

Government has many functions. You can demonize it if you want but it's the most practical method to serve the peoples' needs in ways that businesses won't.

Money is a good motivator but it doesn't always account for the public good.

That's the reason we have a mixed economy.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Sure why not. You feel everyone in a corporation is motivated by greed.

A business' primary function is to make more and more money, so yes the primary motivation is greed.

 

[Kelly]

Government is much like the Church as far as I'm concerned. Much is expected from both, but both are run by "man" (waits for crying of sexism, so I'll leave it...lol) and therefore destined for corruption, we can only hope for low levels of said corruption.

 

[Kelly]

A business' primary function is to make more and more money, so yes the primary motivation is greed.

IMO, "how" you make the money, as in "within the laws" etc.....calls for the description of greed or not. I have many friends who own their own businesses, YES they are in it to make money, and they do quite well.....but I would not describe them as greedy simply because they desire to make money.

In the actual definition of "greed", the word selfish is used, IMO that is what differentiates one business from another in the area of greed. And IMO, actions show this selfishness and excessive nature that describes greed.

 

[souloffire]

A business' primary function is to make more and more money, so yes the primary motivation is greed.

So anybody who ever started a business was motivated by greed?

 

[Paradoxium]

Collective force is a idealist pipe dream that ignores de facto reality. The special interest and lobbies have more power than the voters. Voters probably have more power if they elect a lobbyiest at this point. South Africa while intended as a liberal democracy, devolved into a democracy and a kleptocracy. It manage to outfail the Apartheid, and the Apartheid ain't exactly sun shine and rainbows.

AND there is a reason why our economy is screwed up. And no one said no government; the criticism is the type. Face it, Democracy gave us Hitler, the Holocaust, millions of deaths, and Stalin. There is a reason why the founders didn't want a Democracy, and made it a Constitutional Republic. Unfortunately it has devolved into a Democracy.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

IMO, "how" you make the money, as in "within the laws" etc.....calls for the description of greed or not. I have many friends who own their own businesses, YES they are in it to make money, and they do quite well.....but I would not describe them as greedy simply because they desire to make money.

In the actual definition of "greed", the word selfish is used, IMO that is what differentiates one business from another in the area of greed. And IMO, actions show this selfishness and excessive nature that describes greed.

So anybody who ever started a business was motivated by greed?

Every business aims to grow in order to make more money.

Is it content with simply paying the bills and people's salary? No, it must earn more money in order to grow and earn yet more money for the owner.

The very nature of business is greedy.

 

[Kelly]

Every business aims to grow in order to make more money.

Is it content with simply paying the bills and people's salary? No, it must earn more money in order to grow and earn yet more money for the owner.

The very nature of business is greedy.

I disagree, if the business owner, as his business grows and does well, passes that on to his/her customers and employees, I see nothing selfish about that at all. Is his/her desire to grow, yes......what they do with that growth IMO shows the greed, not just the desire to do so.

 

[souloffire]

Every business aims to grow in order to make more money.

Is it content with simply paying the bills and people's salary? No, it must earn more money in order to grow and earn yet more money for the owner.

The very nature of business is greedy.

Does this logic apply to the individual as well? If I leave my job for a higher paying one because I'm not "content with simply paying the bills' does that mke me "greedy"?