"If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-12-2015, 01:39 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 01:38 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 01:35 AM)JDog554 Wrote:  Could not imagine calling cookies "biscuits". It's a thought that keeps me awake at night.

Or call a cigarette a fag. Weeping

Oh god, that would be horrible. Probably use a more universal term like "Cancer Stick".

"If you keep trying to better yourself that's enough for me. We don't decide which hand we are dealt in life, but we make the decision to play it or fold it" - Nishi Karano Kaze
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 02:50 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 12:16 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(21-12-2015 10:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  Militias are not standing armies - they are ad hoc.
When a militia is needed, it is formed comprising people who have their own arms.

Name two times that's ever really worked that way.

I'll name three right off the top of my head.
The first second and third Punic wars.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 03:22 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
But if it weren't for guns they wouldn't have guns either.. It would be equal back on sword and bow technology.

Well if it weren't for guns really, maybe the Native Americans would of pushed out settlers a lot more as well so I guess we really wouldn't be British or American.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 06:58 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(21-12-2015 10:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(21-12-2015 03:39 PM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  But it wasn't the militia that kicked the British out, it was regular army troops trained by European professionals.

The majority of the troops were not professional soldiers nor trained by European professionals. So there's that.

Quote:Ask your friend if he's part of a well-regulated militia.

Militias are not standing armies - they are ad hoc.
When a militia is needed, it is formed comprising people who have their own arms.

"The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained
so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper
working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly,
functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was
not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to
render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it."

I know militias aren't standing armies. That was my point. And the point of the 2A was public defense, not private toy collection.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gawdzilla's post
22-12-2015, 07:12 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 01:38 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 01:35 AM)JDog554 Wrote:  Could not imagine calling cookies "biscuits". It's a thought that keeps me awake at night.

Or call a cigarette a fag. Weeping

On the other hand you can call people a twat and then explain that in Britain the word is not considered offensive. When they look unconvinced you can then admonish them for being a stuck-up cunt and then explain that it's part of our culture to be really offensive in Britain.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
22-12-2015, 08:13 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 06:58 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  
(21-12-2015 10:44 PM)Chas Wrote:  The majority of the troops were not professional soldiers nor trained by European professionals. So there's that.


Militias are not standing armies - they are ad hoc.
When a militia is needed, it is formed comprising people who have their own arms.

"The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained
so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper
working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly,
functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was
not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to
render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it."

I know militias aren't standing armies. That was my point. And the point of the 2A was public defense, not private toy collection.

What was your point? Your 'facts' were incorrect and your apparent conclusion erroneous.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 08:50 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
Oh goody. Another gun thread.

I was having symptoms of withdrawal.

Rolleyes

A thought occurred recently when thinking about the Trolley Problem...

The reason why people are more likely to take responsibility for the death of the one guy in the first scenario but not the second is supposed to be the proximity of the victim ... pulling a lever is a more remote action than physically and personally pushing the dude off the bridge.

I was wondering if this might (at least partially) account for the popularity of guns over e.g. knives.

Consider

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:25 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 08:50 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Oh goody. Another gun thread.

I was having symptoms of withdrawal.

Rolleyes

A thought occurred recently when thinking about the Trolley Problem...

The reason why people are more likely to take responsibility for the death of the one guy in the first scenario but not the second is supposed to be the proximity of the victim ... pulling a lever is a more remote action than physically and personally pushing the dude off the bridge.

I was wondering if this might (at least partially) account for the popularity of guns over e.g. knives.

Consider
Sounds right to me.

A further observation: The Allies defeated the Axis in WWII and the millions of individual soldiers needed one gun apiece, a rifle.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 09:35 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 09:25 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  A further observation: The Allies defeated the Axis in WWII and the millions of individual soldiers needed one gun apiece, a rifle.

Hmm... the Axis included Japan, and it took a couple of really big bombs to beat them...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2015, 10:02 AM
RE: "If it weren't for guns we'd still be British"
(22-12-2015 09:35 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(22-12-2015 09:25 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  A further observation: The Allies defeated the Axis in WWII and the millions of individual soldiers needed one gun apiece, a rifle.

Hmm... the Axis included Japan, and it took a couple of really big bombs to beat them...

Not sure what that adds.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: