Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-01-2015, 10:05 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(12-01-2015 09:35 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 09:07 PM)Chas Wrote:  Sorry - I was asking what you would do in the context of the U.S. society - in contrast to what I am doing/would do. I didn't make that clear.
Oh, OK, well as you know I can't answer that from the context of US society, I've never been to the U.S. I've only just seen it on T.V.
I understand that the horse has already bolted out the door with regards to the guns in society issue over there.

I'm not advocating the same approach or solution for every society. The U.S. has a more violent society than other Western democracies and there are more guns in civilian hands than in other Western democracies.

While it may not make as much sense to have a firearm in other countries, it is not as crazy as many allege to do so in the U.S. I would say, however, that the spread of terror as seen in recent events may be changing that. That may be a discussion worth having.

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
12-01-2015, 10:30 PM (This post was last modified: 12-01-2015 10:35 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(12-01-2015 11:49 AM)Patriot10mm Wrote:  The Bill of Rights lays down limits on the government. We have the right to keep and bear arms, without infringement.

This from a Constitutional Law expert who earns a living catching shoplifters? ... The fuck you thinking fool.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-01-2015, 11:10 PM (This post was last modified: 13-01-2015 05:24 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(12-01-2015 09:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 09:15 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  The people are anything but 'well regulated'.

The meaning of the amendment is that the people both have the right to arms and should have arms so that a militia may be formed in time of need.
This is clear from the writings of those who composed and approved it.

Okay, let's assume that was truly their intent, In light of their complete ignorance of the reality of modern warfare.

So what?

What is Average Joe and his AR-15 going to do against an M1 Abrams tank? Or an Apache attack helicopter? Or a Predator drone strike?

If the point was to have a citizens militia that could challenge the standing army if needed (assuming they intended for us to keep a standing army), that ship appears to have sailed long ago. So how would you return that parity? Universal conscription? Forcing nearly everyone to undergo training and serve in the military for a time, like Israel? Have the government supply their now trained citizens with their own weapons and ammo to be stored at home, like Switzerland? Downsize our own military to something that could be challenged by a citizens militia armed with hunting rifles (I support cutting back our bloated military spending)? Start handing out tanks and Javelin launchers so that citizens could challenge the military?

We no longer live in the age of muzzle loading muskets, a time when hunters held equipment parity with professional soldiers. New technology like the television and the internet has forced us to scrutinizes and reassess the First Amendment. Why should the Second Amendment be immune to similar challenges?

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 04:49 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(12-01-2015 11:10 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 09:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  The meaning of the amendment is that the people both have the right to arms and should have arms so that a militia may be formed in time of need.
This is clear from the writings of those who composed and approved it.

Okay, let's assume that was truly their intent, In light of their complete ignorance of the reality of modern warfare.

So what?

The 'what' is accuracy, truth, basic understanding. You are wasting your time arguing about this point.
If you are opposed to private firearms ownership, fight the correct battle - amend the Constitution.

Quote:What is Average Joe and his AR-15 going to do against an M1 Abrams tank? Or an Apache attack helicopter? Or a Predator drone strike?

That's not really an entirely sensible question. If the shit hit the fan such that there was the level of civil unrest that required martial law, not every military unit would be ok with that. (It would require martial law because it is illegal to use the military against the citizenry.) If it were just the National Guard, then it is also unlikely that they will unanimously agree to fire on their neighbors.

Small arms would allow the possibility of capturing heavier weapons.

Quote:If the point was to have a citizens militia that could challenge the standing army if needed (assuming they intended for us to keep a standing army), that ship appears to have sailed long ago. So how would you return that parity? Universal conscription? Forcing nearly everyone to undergo training and serve in the military for a time, like Israel? Have the government supply their now trained citizens with their own weapons and ammo to be stored at home, like Switzerland? Downsize our own military to something that could be challenged by a citizens militia armed with hunting rifles (I support cutting back our bloated military spending)? Start handing out tanks and Javelin launchers so that citizens could challenge the military?

It is not about challenging a standing, professional military. That could only happen with a complete breakdown of civilian government and law.

Quote:We no longer live in the age of muzzle loading muskets, a time when hunters held equipment parity with professional soldiers.

Muskets and fowling pieces did not provide parity with professional soldiers. The professionals had artillery and cavalry, training and supply.

Quote:New technology like the television and the internet has forced us to scrutinizes and reassess the First Amendment. Why should the Second Amendment be immune to similar challenges?

Who said it was immune? I'm only arguing about understanding it. You want to change it? Go for it.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-01-2015, 04:53 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(12-01-2015 10:30 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 11:49 AM)Patriot10mm Wrote:  The Bill of Rights lays down limits on the government. We have the right to keep and bear arms, without infringement.

This from a Constitutional Law expert who earns a living catching shoplifters? ... The fuck you thinking fool.

Mocking the poor because they are poor. Democrats ought to stop complaining about how they don't get the poor white vote and start hearing what they say.

Paleoliberal • English Nationalist • Zionist • Rightist • Anti-Islam • Neoconservative • Republican • Linguistic Revivalist and Purist

Happily Divorced from the Left!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 04:57 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(12-01-2015 10:30 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 11:49 AM)Patriot10mm Wrote:  The Bill of Rights lays down limits on the government. We have the right to keep and bear arms, without infringement.

This from a Constitutional Law expert who earns a living catching shoplifters? ... The fuck you thinking fool.

Well, I suspect he simply accepts what SCOTUS said in District of Columbia v. Heller followed by McDonald v. City of Chicago.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
13-01-2015, 05:28 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
Quote:If we don't include suicide, it may well be a net positive. Try this source. Or this.

That's like saying "If we overlook that one time, Bush had a great record on terrorism."

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 05:34 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(13-01-2015 05:28 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
Quote:If we don't include suicide, it may well be a net positive. Try this source. Or this.

That's like saying "If we overlook that one time, Bush had a great record on terrorism."

No, it's not like that at all.
Half of suicides are by firearm. That means the other half aren't. If there were no firearms, how many of those suicides would have happened by other means? Most?
Clearly, firearms don't cause suicides.

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
13-01-2015, 05:35 PM (This post was last modified: 13-01-2015 05:46 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(13-01-2015 04:53 PM)Res Publica Wrote:  Mocking the poor because they are poor.

I prefer to think of it as mocking the arrogance of the ignorant. Kinda like a punk 17 yo canuck lecturing Girly on politics and society when he ain't even old enough to vote. Pffft. ...

(13-01-2015 04:57 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-01-2015 10:30 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  This from a Constitutional Law expert who earns a living catching shoplifters? ... The fuck you thinking fool.

Well, I suspect he simply accepts what SCOTUS said in District of Columbia v. Heller followed by McDonald v. City of Chicago.

Yeah, yeah I'm sure that's the ticket. NotQuiteHalfAnInchPatriot is no doubt up to date on all the Supreme Court rulings.

(13-01-2015 05:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  Half of suicides are by firearm. That means the other half aren't. If there were no firearms, how many of those suicides would have happened by other means? Most?
Clearly, firearms don't cause suicides.

Half is a pretty high correlation. I'm guessing jumpers or pills are the next highest. All way too messy. Nitrogen exit bag, unconscious in 10-12 seconds, dead in a couple minutes with no pain or anxiety or even notice. No muss, no fuss. Undetectable by autopsy.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2015, 05:46 PM
RE: Racist Conservative Gun Nuts Getting A Taste Of Their Own Medicine
(13-01-2015 05:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(13-01-2015 05:28 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  That's like saying "If we overlook that one time, Bush had a great record on terrorism."

No, it's not like that at all.
Half of suicides are by firearm. That means the other half aren't. If there were no firearms, how many of those suicides would have happened by other means? Most?
Clearly, firearms don't cause suicides.

Actually it is a little more that half. Keep in mind most people who commit suicide, by lets say hanging, are in prision, where guns are scarce. You are right to say they don't cause suicide, but it makes it a hella a lot easier to kill yourself. Drop guns, the suicide rate will drop by a lot.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: