Subject:
|
Re: Sticking my gun where it doesn't belong...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:43:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1063 times
|
| |
|
|
David Koudys wrote:
> Constant avoidance of the truth does not make the truth go away. A citizen
> cannot purchase an F22. A citizen cannot have at his or her disposal an ICBM.
> A citizen can only have, at best, a gun. This makes the differntial rather
> large. It's the truth of the matter, and, again, parenthetical, but still a
> valid point. Giving everyone access to fighter jets and nuclear missles won't
> be the answer, either. A weapon in the hands of a citizen is a placebo (in
> America), and won't solve the problems facing your country. Guns are a large
> contributing factor of the problems in your country. Larger weapons will just
> equate to larger problems--i.e. more people dead or maimed.
However, fighter jets and ICBMs don't "hold" territory. Just look at
what's going on in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine for examples of what
an "armed" citizenry might be able to do to resist oppressors.
> True in 1776, not so much today. Do you carry your sidearm to the voting booth?
> Do you need to force someone to let you vote with the business end of a gun? I
> reiterate, Nixon left, without one gun being shot, without one gun being
> displayed, without *any* threatening action other than the power of the people.
> It's what happened and all your talk of guns had *nothing* to do with it.
Right now the situation is not such that we have to cary our sidearm to
the voting booth. That doesn't mean that the existence of said weapons
is not guaranteeing that freedom.
I don't see the cops in my apartment complex on a daily basis, however,
I'm confident their existence has something to do with the fact that my
apartment has not been broken into.
> Yes, the armed forces will combat such oppressors. 'Cause that's what they're
> suppose to do. That's what they're trained for. That's why you have taxes--to
> pay for the educaiton and enhancement of your combat forces. Again, the truth
> is your gun in your house does not contribute *in any fashion* to the protection
> of your country. Guns in homes either do nothing, or are used against family
> members, or are stolen to be used in crimes against your fellow citizen. These
> are what your guns in your homes end up doing. Stop pseudo-rationalizing your
> desire to retain a gun in your home. If you want to keep your gun, just say
> that. I don't care if oyu have a gun in your house--just be honest about it and
> realize that, truthfully, it's not there for all your 'high falutin' ideals'
> 'cause you're just deceiving yourself. You sound like a smoker rationalizing
> his cancer stick. All the slick talking in the world isn't going to change the
> truth.
I'm not sure what the armed forces will do. Personally, I actually
suspect that many of them would turn against the government if things
got out of hand. On the other hand, history has shown many occaisions of
the armed forces blindly following leaders orders and shooting when not
remotely necessary.
It's actually more of a problem with the cops. They shoot when not
necessary, and then get all fired up when the citizens want a review of
their actions.
> So long as you are a citizen in a democracy your vote can never be denied. And
> that, again, has nothing to do with a gun. "Hey Mike, we won't let you vote in
> this election!" "Yeah, I'll just go get my gun and we'll see about that!" Both
> sides of that scenario are ludicrous, don't you think?
How can you say that? Actually your right. As long as your a citizen of
a democracy you will have a vote. The problem is when the leaders decide
it's not a democracy anymore. What magical mystical force is preventing
the leaders from declaring the experiment in democracy over?
> No, as stated, it comes from, well, the people. "We the people..." It didn't
> say "We the people who happen to own guns..." or "We the people who like
> shooting at folks when things don't go our way..." I don't know every second of
> every moment of MLK's life, but from what I know, he never carried a gun and he
> did more for your country than most anyone else in your history. Why? Because
> he knew the power of the people--a fact that you seem to blatantly ignore so you
> can hold on to your little security blanket. Security blankets are for 5 year
> olds. Grow up and face the truth.
Well, the "we the people" who wrote our constitution were pretty well
armed, and were in the process of kicking the pants of the oppressors.
MLK did nothing in comparison to the founding fathers. MLK was a very
good man, but what he did only worked because of the foundation laid 200
years ago.
Frank
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Sticking my gun where it doesn't belong...
|
| (...) And I mentioned that in other countries, an armed citizenry is needed in order for them to make it to the end of a day. Are you saying that America is on par with Afghanistan? That you face the same problems? (...) Cites please. Show me at (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sticking my gun where it doesn't belong...
|
| (...) Constant avoidance of the truth does not make the truth go away. A citizen cannot purchase an F22. A citizen cannot have at his or her disposal an ICBM. A citizen can only have, at best, a gun. This makes the differntial rather large. It's the (...) (21 years ago, 17-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
111 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
