Bad news for liberals.

[The One and Only...]

Nice how everyone avoids my points.

Does this mean I win?

BTW: I want to keep my guns to shoot the criminal that messes with me, not start a revolution. To start a revolution, one needs to get support within the military and government to be sucessful in this country...

[El Blanco]

So why does the average citizen need a gun when the army is made up of the average citizen, and therefore they already have access to all the guns they need?

Provide stiff resistence at first until enough troops realize what they are doing and refuse to fight against them. Especially the National Guard.


And why are you so offended by my right to defend myself?

[AChimp]

Yeah... except that the troops ARE the citizens...

And stiff resistance? Last time I heard, the army pulls out tanks and helicopters when faced with stiff resistance. Perhaps average citizens should be allowed to own heavy artillery, as well, just in case, because how could assault rifles defend against mortars and missiles?

And why are you so offended by my right to defend myself?

I'm not saying you shouldn't own a gun, I'm saying there's no need to have one, especially if your reason is defending against the marauding drug dealers who want to rape your children and the evil plotting government.

If you're that paranoid, why are you using the Internet? They can track your every move!

[El Blanco]

Tanks and artillery don't work to well in urban settings. Not if you want the city still standing, anyway.

[kellychaos]

Consider this point and comment, if you will:

Guns are against the natural order, specifically the "flight of fight" trait. Gunless, the little guy in a mismatched fight would run away to safety as a defense whilst the strong would stand and deliver. Strapped, this same little guy would stay to deliver his lethal blow while, this time, the bigger guy who is paralyzed in fear (assuming he has no weapon) would run away. Isn't there something inherently wrong with that? OK, so you say, give the bigger guy a gun and things are on the same footing (as the original scenario), right? Wouldn't they be on the same footing if guns weren't involved at all?

[The One and Only...]

No, because the big guy corners the little guy. Or he runs faster. Either way, it's checkmate.

[El Blanco]

So, only the strong should survive? I mean, how far can the weak run?

Wouldn't they be on the same footing if guns weren't involved at all?

You just said it was inequal. Remember, the little guy had no choice but to run.

[kellychaos]

Assuming that they both had the drop at the exact same time, I say that the bigger guy would take the smaller guy's weapon and shove it up his cowardly ass ... as it should be ... thus restoring the natural order.

[El Blanco]

Again, only the strong survive.

I bet you will love that until you realize you ain't the biggest dog in the yard.

[Sethomas]

Guns are just too much fun to be illegal. I loves muh guns 'n booze.

[El Blanco]

Jack Daniels and Samuel Colt. th two greatest Americans in history.

[Vibecrewangel]

Comparing them to nukes is idiocy.

From a strictly psycholgical standpoint I find it interesting that people completely overlook the actual point and always turn to the "but it's a right" or the "nukes are more dangerous" argument.

A lunatic with a weapon is a lunatic with a weapon.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

Again, only the strong survive.

I bet you will love that until you realize you ain't the biggest dog in the yard.

I don't disagree with you, EB. I was just raising it as a point of interest and playing the devil's advocate to check out reactions. I think the right to bear arms has merit ... to a point. I OWN hunting rifles and a handgun myself. It's just that some of the ideas that the NRA members attach to the sentiment are ridiculous.

[El Blanco]

Kind of like all those silly sentiments ACLU members have?

[AChimp]

Tanks and artillery don't work to well in urban settings. Not if you want the city still standing, anyway.

You would be very surprised. All they have to do is blow up one house to instill pants-shitting fear in the citizens with rifles.

Besides, there's plenty of smaller light armor that can be used where tanks won't fit. Those 6-wheeled things that UN soldiers drive, for instance.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

Kind of like all those silly sentiments ACLU members have?

More akin to those in PETA, methinks. Yes, conservation and sparing defenseless animals from cruelty and abuse is important to a point but ... :/

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

From a strictly psycholgical standpoint I find it interesting that people completely overlook the actual point and always turn to the "but it's a right" or the "nukes are more dangerous" argument.

A lunatic with a weapon is a lunatic with a weapon.

They both use the "deterrence" argument, n'est-ce pas?

[Sethomas]

I believe in the right to bear arms, I just think that it's only sane to require registration and licensing for all guns. I don't see why the NRA lot gets its panties bunched up over this, except out of excessive paranoia or laziness. I think gun safety should be taught in schools, instead of just in scouting and 4-H.

Edit: I spell gud.

[El Blanco]

All they have to do is blow up one house to instill pants-shitting fear in the citizens with rifles.

Or rage.

Those 6-wheeled things that UN soldiers drive, for instance.

Those are troop carriers. They have a .50 cal gun on top and not much else. It didn't help the pakastani troops who were slaughtered in Somalia.

[kellychaos]

Exactly. If they are such sticklers for discipline and responsibility, why would there ever be a rush to own a handgun or a fear of a backgroung check at any given time?

I also have issues with those that feel a need for assault rifles. Why God, why?! ... and don't gimme that "collectibles" crap.

[Vibecrewangel]

Totally there Seth and Kelly

If you can't wait 15 days for a gun you may be exactly the kind of person that shouldn't have one.

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by Vibecrewangel

From a strictly psycholgical standpoint I find it interesting that people completely overlook the actual point and always turn to the "but it's a right" or the "nukes are more dangerous" argument.

A lunatic with a weapon is a lunatic with a weapon.

Next time, you should consider reading my entire argument. A lunatic with a gun IS NOT a lunatic with a nuke, and I stated my reasons why.

[Vibecrewangel]

Actually, I did read you whole argument. You believe that that a gun and a nuke are different. And they are in many ways.
I believe that a lunatic is a lunatic.

Your qualifier is the weapon. Mine is the lunatic. I find that the lunatic is the more important part of that equation.

[ranxer]

i must admit the references to cia and others knowing about the pearl harbor attack 12 days before are very hard to find as is the info regarding japan being ready to surrender before the bomb, it all depends on what you read.. ive come across the info in books by zinn and the war on freedom, so i can't prove much here.. many folks with the personal experience are now dead.

my point is not that there's some shadow government (as blanco says) working as a team to pull the wool over our eyes.. its that there are corrupt people in the government using thier power to sway opinion with only a little concern about collateral damage(concern based on selfpreservation). the wmd issue is 90% manufactured and those using the issue should be held accountable.. i just see this situation as similar to many other situations that were surrounded by lies, demonization, fear, and cloak and dagger tactics.

have you heard of the declasified northwoods document?
we've had plans to bait an enemy into first strike or fabricate a first strike(hard to prove) over and over if you look into it.. if you don't believe it or don't care, i'm saying that you have been duped into waving that flag as if gw really cares about you. If the plans were known about, do you think they would use them? control of information is thier first line of defence. plus everybody knows how slippery politicians are, you think that's for no reason? give me a break.

gw rewards the financial contributors and throws the rest to the wolves.. even our GI's are suffering many cutbacks. gw needed collateral damage to back a move into oil country to stabalize the dollar and provide new contracts for the corp heads that got him into power. at least thats what i and many others see as the main reason we had 9-11, attack on afghanistan, wmd's and iraq occupation.

[O71394658]

Ranx, I never know if you're joking, so I'm not even going to bother with that post. :/

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to posses arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so." -Adolph Hitler 1938

""This year, will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"

(although there is some propaganda circling as to doubt Hitler said this- he [i]did[\i] in fact say the first one)