If our government comes after you it ain’t gonna be with machetes. What will your not-an-assault-rifle do for you if you got rockets and tanks coming down on you. The 2nd amendment as a “guard against tyranny,” is a Chuck Norris fantasy.
So you claim. You make the fallacious assumption that the military is homogenous. The military can’t even pacify Afghanistan.
No, gun rights are absolute. Nothing else is equal. :rolleyes: All other considerations must give way, even the right to life itself.
He’s saying that cutting down on the number of guns washing around the country, and the world, thereby reducing the murder rate, is implausible and unthinkable (the rest of the world’s experience notwithstanding), while hoping for people’s basic character to change is realistic. Only people with serious mental defects, on the level necessary to dismiss the importance of human life itself, could say that. Yet there are several people in this very thread claiming it.
That isn’t what makes certain people evil. Their depraved indifference to human life does.
And you can see it in the number of people who actually mock these latest deaths, and the very idea that it would be a good idea to help prevent more of them. How *do *you reach someone who can’t even agree that Murder Is Bad? People who don’t even *have *thoughts and prayers to offer?
**Lumpy **has been told that numerous times. It hasn’t sunk in.
The Stopping The Bad Guys fantasy is also not well supported by mere reality. If you feel the need to go around with a weapon, then you’re the one looking for trouble. You’re the bad guy.
The Wizard of Oz wants his strawman back.
Yet another example of you having nothing but derision to offer, lacking as you do any capability of understanding this “life” stuff. Not that any more proof was needed, of course.
Now go get help.
I’ve grown up with guns my whole life, military and police in my family. Been shooting firearms since I was a kid. I own a dozen guns, myself. I think I would like to own an assault gun and learn to shoot it well. It would be fun, and another skill, and useful in the coming zombie apocalypse, race war, alien invasion, liberal take over, home defense, global socioeconomic collapse, or whatever.
Considering how often these guns get misused in these types of events I have to think that it would make sense that if I really want one of these guns, I should have to jump through an awful lot of hoops to prove to the world that I am responsible and sane enough to have one. Once I have one I should have to continue on an ongoing basis to prove that I remain sane and responsible. It shouldn’t be easy. It should be a hassle, and it should be a big deal.
If we can’t figure out how to do that, than nobody outside of the military should have them. Yes, that means I can’t use it for all the legitimate purposes that I might want to. Yes, it’s unfair, since I would be a responsible owner. However, I’d have to concede that giving up the ability to have and use such a weapon is worth the loss of whatever small pleasure it might give me if it means that just one of these types of incidents is averted.
Just what have you done about it? Did you steal any guns today? Donate blood? Write a letter to elected officials? Or did you just rant on a message board?
Irony.
In other words, the best you can offer in response to Jack Batty’s sensible point that privately-owned arms aren’t adequate for a successful insurrectionist stand against the military is to hope that:
(a) a significant portion of the military would desert to the insurrectionists’ side and bring their non-privately-owned superior arms with them, and/or
(b) the military would be too incompetent to prevail against a vastly inferior force, even though the military would be backed up by civilian authority and the good will of the overwhelming majority of the populace.
Yeah. How’d that little fantasy work out for you guys at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon?
How’d it work in Afghanistan and Iraq? And you never know how a conflict against a tyrannical government will turn out. You could marched into the ovens heads bowed with no struggle or you might depose the tyrants. Life is messy like that.
If you aren’t part of the movement to arm free people everywhere you are evil and part of the problem.
Was Chuck Norris in Mad Max?
When are you moving to the paradise of Somalia?
So all those millions upon millions of Europeans, Canadians, Australians, etc. looking at events like this and not comprehending how we can let them happen are… What? Evil? Brainwashed, every single one? All those millions are wrong, and you couple million are right, the only people on the planet capable of rational thought?
The Duggars have weighed in. :rolleyes:
Cliché and a strawman.
But on that note, why don’t you move to one of the socialist paradises like North Korea or Venezuela?
European governments such as WWII Germany say “hi.” What ended that nightmare? Lofty rhetoric or superior firepower?
Someone infamous and admired at one time by Western leftists said “one death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic.” Here’s a cite. I hope the source is liberal approved. http://www.haciendapub.com/articles/stalin-communists-and-fatal-statistics
*Everyone *thinks they’re the good guys.
Many, however, are wrong. We do have universal standards, starting with a basic respect for human life.
Here is a current gun thread in GD where a couple gun rights advocates actually offer something more than derision. Be careful though, the quality of conversation there is a little too sophisticated for your typical posting style.
Uh, that was a war situation, with trained militaries, unless there were guerilla firefights that I’m not aware of. Further, what are gun laws like in Germany these days? By your logic, they should’ve acknowledged the need for their citizens to be fully armed, right?
Pssst: Afghanistan and Iraq aren’t part of the US military’s home turf.
Malheur, Waco, and Ruby Ridge all are.
Every time self-imagined domestic “tyranny fighters” have tried to enact their fantasy of “deposing the tyrants” by challenging the modern US military and paramilitary law enforcement, they’ve been ignominiously crushed.
[QUOTE=octopus]
And you never know how a conflict against a tyrannical government will turn out.
[/QUOTE]
Oh right, I forgot that alternative “tyranny-fighting” strategy. Let me just add that to my previous list:
The best you can offer in response to Jack Batty’s sensible point that privately-owned arms aren’t adequate for a successful insurrectionist stand against the military is to hope that:
(a) a significant portion of the military would desert to the insurrectionists’ side and bring their non-privately-owned superior arms with them, and/or
(b) the military would be too incompetent to prevail against a vastly inferior force, even though the military would be backed up by civilian authority and the good will of the overwhelming majority of the populace, and/or
(c) the vastly inferior force of the insurrectionists might somehow get superhumanly and miraculously lucky against indisputably overwhelming odds merely on the theoretical premise that “you never know”.
Yeah, no. Your fantasy of domestic “tyranny fighting” is still a pathetically unrealistic daydream that no responsible grownup need take seriously when discussing the genuine issues involved in gun ownership regulation.
Massive national resources and opposing armies, dude. On a scale that you self-imagined “tyranny fighters” could never realistically hope to equal a millionth part of.
There is absolutely no valid reason that serious, everyday gun policy aimed at balancing the realistic needs and concerns of the populace as a whole should be based in any way on the kind of large-scale apocalyptic fantasies that the self-imagined “tyranny fighters” love to indulge in.
If we ever do end up in a situation where millions of civilians are pitted in a struggle for life against their tyrannical government, it won’t make a blind bit of difference what the laws say. Our laws need to apply realistically to our society as it exists with the rule of law in force, rather than catering to apocalyptic fantasies of what we’d like to be able to do in the massively improbable event of total anarchy and chaos.