The 2nd Amendment and the 13th

[Aporeia]

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

What's your line in the sand then. When are YOU willing to fight with violence in self-defense.

To save my life?

Quote:

Will you be walked into a camp for let's say being atheist?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

Quote:

Notice how us pro-gunners have yet to start a revolt.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

Quote:

Tomorrow might be different though. I pray we stay strong but there are going to be rallies at state capitals. And if shots are fired that might be a tipping point.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

Quote:

Now what is your line in the sand when you're going to wish you had a gun. Do you even support gun control? Or are you just playing devils advocate for sport and debate.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Right, so when they have guns pointed at you you will magically slit their throats with your magic kung fu powers?

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

Right.

So magic kunk fu ninja powers against guys with guns, wearing body armor, that can easily stop knives; I guess you got them. rolleyes

Let me explain this to you. Men bust in chasing me. Either they die or I do. I will act.

As for body armor, excuse me, but I've never heard of any fancy shmancy body armor that stops a knife. Joints are joints, if you armor it, you can't move it.

[Aporeia]

Kaltros

False Dichotomy

Kaltros

False Dichotomy

The New Wineskin

False Dichotomy

It's called a red herring, and it's generally not wise to chase it. You're better off with palming your face, and quietly walking away while shaking your head.

How is it a red herring? He is saying that, if we can blatantly ignore the second amendment, what is to stop us from blatantly ignoring other amendments (i.e., the 13th)? I'm not seeing a red herring here. It's a stupid argument, sure, but it's not a red herring.

It's a red herring because he's talking about something completely irrelevant to the original idea.

Gun control being equated to ignoring the 2nd amendment being a stretch, then going off on a tangent and saying we might as well fall off the slippery slope, and ignore the 13th amendment...

The argument kind of detaches at that point.

If gun control doesn't infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, what does it do?

Do you still have the right to bear arms, even with gun control? Yea. So now your rights haven't been infringed upon, they're been modified.

How are they modified?

Now instead of the right to bear [ambiguous] arms, you have the right to bear [specified] arms.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

To save my life?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Right, so when they have guns pointed at you you will magically slit their throats with your magic kung fu powers?

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

Right.

So magic kunk fu ninja powers against guys with guns, wearing body armor, that can easily stop knives; I guess you got them. rolleyes

Let me explain this to you. Men bust in chasing me. Either they die or I do. I will act.

As for body armor, excuse me, but I've never heard of any fancy shmancy body armor that stops a knife. Joints are joints, if you armor it, you can't move it.

You've... never heard of body armor that can stop a knife?

Uh-huh.


Well, in the 80's, police were running across problems with soft body armor only stopping knives some half of the time; it's the reason why carrying a knife over 6 inches, butter fly knives, switchblades etc. are illegal without a weapons license.

Thing is, since this problem was addressed, now a days most soft body armor is knife proof. Since soft body armor is knife proof, it can cover your hands, feet, joints etc.


The military carries around a 75 pound combat pack, which includes food, water, etc.

If say oh, a SWAT team were to, they don't need several days worth of water, food, sleeping materials, sleeping bags, tents, etc., so they have a lighter pack; if that was replaced with armor, up to 75 pounds, there would be no real issue protecting against pistol rounds or knives.


With rifle rounds, you have a better chance if they aren't using ceramic armor. You have a better chance even if they are.

The idea that you're going to protect yourself with magic kung foo with a knife and magically slit everyone's throats who have guns and wear body armor?


Let's just pretend you can breathe fire and are like wolverine so, you have healing abilities and an adamantium skeleton.

What does 99% of the population do? You can see the problem with outlawing guns saying knives are good enough right; against 10 people, hell 3 people? Maybe, and I mean maybe, you can take down one, maybe two guys, but the third can just shoot you since they have range; and then where do you run to? They have APC's with guns waiting around in case you jump out the window, they have tear gas and flash bangs, you're going to fight back, with a knife, against guys with guns in the middle of the street, against tear gas and flashbangs and who knows what else?


Since even soldier armor doesn't stop rifle rounds, neither do helmets, it actually is a decent way to defend yourself. That is, a rifle.

I don't think a bunch of armed backwoods redneck/hippies will beat the military. I don't think it will ever come to that; at best mercenaries would do it but since most are ex-military and pro second amendment it would likely never come to this. But against an armed attacker, any armed attacker? Say cougars or giant pigs or bears? Yeah, guns are great.

[Azkeel]

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

I like living. And you don't know what my principles are. I already live in a world who's principles I disagree with. Think I should start killing people?

What's your line in the sand then. When are YOU willing to fight with violence in self-defense.

To save my life?

Quote:

Will you be walked into a camp for let's say being atheist?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

Quote:

Notice how us pro-gunners have yet to start a revolt.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

Quote:

Tomorrow might be different though. I pray we stay strong but there are going to be rallies at state capitals. And if shots are fired that might be a tipping point.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

Quote:

Now what is your line in the sand when you're going to wish you had a gun. Do you even support gun control? Or are you just playing devils advocate for sport and debate.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Let's talk about first shot. Kent state massacre.

Now what if said first shot comes from the crowd but is an agent working to get gun control.

You're going to have to remove your tin hat, sir.

Quote:

Now let's take you out of the equation and focus on only guns and not slitting throats with a knife. When would you be willing to pick up a gun and defend others. Let's say worse case scenario where you'd want something to get the job done. My point is you do have that line that once crossed you will want a weapon powerful enough to defeat your foes, or at least level the playing field just a little to your advantage.

There is no civilian weapon that can contend with our military if they're coming to kill you (for some irrational reason?)

Excuse me, if that kind of thing were to happen, and I'm using the word IF very strongly, fighting is not the answer. Not being there is the answer.

You're not familiar with cointelpro are you? Black ops? You can't deny these operations designed to get a job done. You claim a government is incapable of attacking it's own populace and blaming it on others to get an agenda done is "Inconceivable!!!" (Quote from the Princess Bride. I hope you read it in Wallace Shawn's voice!)

I didn't say "Our" military now did I. So before you pick up a gun and fight for anyone or yourself, you'd rather die? "Fighting is not the answer" Then why did you suggest slitting throats. You have to have a case in your mind in which you'd want to have firepower. Right?

[Aporeia]

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

To save my life?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Right, so when they have guns pointed at you you will magically slit their throats with your magic kung fu powers?

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

Right.

So magic kunk fu ninja powers against guys with guns, wearing body armor, that can easily stop knives; I guess you got them. rolleyes

Let me explain this to you. Men bust in chasing me. Either they die or I do. I will act.

As for body armor, excuse me, but I've never heard of any fancy shmancy body armor that stops a knife. Joints are joints, if you armor it, you can't move it.

You've... never heard of body armor that can stop a knife?

Uh-huh.


Well, in the 80's, police were running across problems with soft body armor only stopping knives some half of the time; it's the reason why carrying a knife over 6 inches, butter fly knives, switchblades etc. are illegal without a weapons license.

Thing is, since this problem was addressed, now a days most soft body armor is knife proof. Since soft body armor is knife proof, it can cover your hands, feet, joints etc.


The military carries around a 75 pound combat pack, which includes food, water, etc.

If say oh, a SWAT team were to, they don't need several days worth of water, food, sleeping materials, sleeping bags, tents, etc., so they have a lighter pack; if that was replaced with armor, up to 75 pounds, there would be no real issue protecting against pistol rounds or knives.


With rifle rounds, you have a better chance if they aren't using ceramic armor. You have a better chance even if they are.

The idea that you're going to protect yourself with magic kung foo with a knife and magically slit everyone's throats who have guns and wear body armor?


Let's just pretend you can breathe fire and are like wolverine so, you have healing abilities and an adamantium skeleton.

What does 99% of the population do? You can see the problem with outlawing guns saying knives are good enough right; against 10 people, hell 3 people? Maybe, and I mean maybe, you can take down one, maybe two guys, but the third can just shoot you since they have range; and then where do you run to? They have APC's with guns waiting around in case you jump out the window, they have tear gas and flash bangs, you're going to fight back, with a knife, against guys with guns in the middle of the street, against tear gas and flashbangs and who knows what else?


Since even soldier armor doesn't stop rifle rounds, neither do helmets, it actually is a decent way to defend yourself. That is, a rifle.

I don't think a bunch of armed backwoods redneck/hippies will beat the military. I don't think it will ever come to that; at best mercenaries would do it but since most are ex-military and pro second amendment it would likely never come to this. But against an armed attacker, any armed attacker? Say cougars or giant pigs or bears? Yeah, guns are great.

Now that you've rambled on aimlessly... So if the first stab doesn't work, stab where I see skin. Or eyes, that works too.

If you actually think any kind of armor stops a knife, you're silly. It's pretty obvious you don't stab a bulge.

And i don't think you're getting the point, if men bust in with guns, I assume 4 things.

1. If I comply, I die.
2. If I lose, I die.
3. If I kill, I might live
4. If I run, I might live

So obviously, go with what gives you a chance to live. Maybe I'll get shot if I attack. I'll definitely get shot if I don't.

[Azkeel]

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

To save my life?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Right, so when they have guns pointed at you you will magically slit their throats with your magic kung fu powers?

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

What if you're preparing to liquidate the nation and give it over to another force? You'd want the national civilians to be disarmed as this change happens. What if your goal is to depopulate the people because too many are eaters and produce nothing. America seems to be producing nothing at all, so what's to farm here when you can introduce far more productive individuals willing to work a slaves wage.

Military enforcement costs way more than letting the church of Coca Cola and the synagogue of McDonalds enthrall their worshippers. Why spend trillions to keep citizens in line militarily, when you can just let the free market enslave them, and profit from their greed and ignorance?

What if it costs more to keep a nation alive that's in debt? Let's say 15 trillion in debt that won't be paid back. China has Coca Cola Factories, so does Mexico. There are Mc Donalds all over the world. Why do they need to keep their base of operations in America when they are already global and making a nice profit from workers they pay less. Does America produce anything anymore or are we just consumers ready for the slaughter...

[Suicidesoldier#1]

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

Right.

So magic kunk fu ninja powers against guys with guns, wearing body armor, that can easily stop knives; I guess you got them. rolleyes

Let me explain this to you. Men bust in chasing me. Either they die or I do. I will act.

As for body armor, excuse me, but I've never heard of any fancy shmancy body armor that stops a knife. Joints are joints, if you armor it, you can't move it.

You've... never heard of body armor that can stop a knife?

Uh-huh.


Well, in the 80's, police were running across problems with soft body armor only stopping knives some half of the time; it's the reason why carrying a knife over 6 inches, butter fly knives, switchblades etc. are illegal without a weapons license.

Thing is, since this problem was addressed, now a days most soft body armor is knife proof. Since soft body armor is knife proof, it can cover your hands, feet, joints etc.


The military carries around a 75 pound combat pack, which includes food, water, etc.

If say oh, a SWAT team were to, they don't need several days worth of water, food, sleeping materials, sleeping bags, tents, etc., so they have a lighter pack; if that was replaced with armor, up to 75 pounds, there would be no real issue protecting against pistol rounds or knives.


With rifle rounds, you have a better chance if they aren't using ceramic armor. You have a better chance even if they are.

The idea that you're going to protect yourself with magic kung foo with a knife and magically slit everyone's throats who have guns and wear body armor?


Let's just pretend you can breathe fire and are like wolverine so, you have healing abilities and an adamantium skeleton.

What does 99% of the population do? You can see the problem with outlawing guns saying knives are good enough right; against 10 people, hell 3 people? Maybe, and I mean maybe, you can take down one, maybe two guys, but the third can just shoot you since they have range; and then where do you run to? They have APC's with guns waiting around in case you jump out the window, they have tear gas and flash bangs, you're going to fight back, with a knife, against guys with guns in the middle of the street, against tear gas and flashbangs and who knows what else?


Since even soldier armor doesn't stop rifle rounds, neither do helmets, it actually is a decent way to defend yourself. That is, a rifle.

I don't think a bunch of armed backwoods redneck/hippies will beat the military. I don't think it will ever come to that; at best mercenaries would do it but since most are ex-military and pro second amendment it would likely never come to this. But against an armed attacker, any armed attacker? Say cougars or giant pigs or bears? Yeah, guns are great.

Now that you've rambled on aimlessly... So if the first stab doesn't work, stab where I see skin. Or eyes, that works too.

If you actually think any kind of armor stops a knife, you're silly. It's pretty obvious you don't stab a bulge.

And i don't think you're getting the point, if men bust in with guns, I assume 4 things.

1. If I comply, I die.
2. If I lose, I die.
3. If I kill, I might live
4. If I run, I might live

So obviously, go with what gives you a chance to live. Maybe I'll get shot if I attack. I'll definitely get shot if I don't.

Let's say for the sake of the argument you attack them somewhere they aren't protected; say their hand. You are magically going to avoid being shot by somebody else in the room? They travel around in teams. It takes them fractions of a second to fire 10 bullets, just a flick of their trigger, you actually have to have a range of motion to use a knife, be in close, have all kinds of things.

They wear helmets, face masks, and bullet proof vests. They cover their heart, their spine, their neck, and their head. A knife will not get through their armor. If it can stop a bullet, it can stop a knife. If you can't stab a guy in the head, or other vital organ to immediately incapacitate them, you don't have take down power.


Head to head, heart to heart, diaphragm etc. you move target to take as efficiently as you can, stabbing them in the jugular, twisting on your way out to the next target. You have to take them down in one hit or else you're dead.

I mean you can't do that when they just have a crappy flak vest and helmet on, let alone modern body armor that can stop rifle rounds. Assuming you stab them in the leg they'll just shoot you, you're dead. So, no, it won't defend you.


But with a gun, if you have a gun, if you don't outlaw guns, your chance of self defense is substantially higher.

No, it's not random or aimless, I'm actually explaining the situation, talking it out, so you can see how stupid your premise is. Have you ever heard don't bring a knife to a gunfight? I mean this is just, idk, common sense, basic human intuition.

[Aporeia]

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

What's your line in the sand then. When are YOU willing to fight with violence in self-defense.

To save my life?

Quote:

Will you be walked into a camp for let's say being atheist?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

Quote:

Notice how us pro-gunners have yet to start a revolt.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

Quote:

Tomorrow might be different though. I pray we stay strong but there are going to be rallies at state capitals. And if shots are fired that might be a tipping point.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

Quote:

Now what is your line in the sand when you're going to wish you had a gun. Do you even support gun control? Or are you just playing devils advocate for sport and debate.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Let's talk about first shot. Kent state massacre.

Now what if said first shot comes from the crowd but is an agent working to get gun control.

You're going to have to remove your tin hat, sir.

Quote:

Now let's take you out of the equation and focus on only guns and not slitting throats with a knife. When would you be willing to pick up a gun and defend others. Let's say worse case scenario where you'd want something to get the job done. My point is you do have that line that once crossed you will want a weapon powerful enough to defeat your foes, or at least level the playing field just a little to your advantage.

There is no civilian weapon that can contend with our military if they're coming to kill you (for some irrational reason?)

Excuse me, if that kind of thing were to happen, and I'm using the word IF very strongly, fighting is not the answer. Not being there is the answer.

You're not familiar with cointelpro are you? Black ops? You can't deny these operations designed to get a job done. You claim a government is incapable of attacking it's own populace and blaming it on others to get an agenda done is "Inconceivable!!!" (Quote from the Princess Bride. I hope you read it in Wallace Shawn's voice!).

I don't have anything to fear from cointelpro.

Quote:

I didn't say "Our" military now did I. So before you pick up a gun and fight for anyone or yourself, you'd rather die? "Fighting is not the answer" Then why did you suggest slitting throats.

Because they're already there? Obviously the best answer isn't the answer where I attempt to kill them all to get free. The best answer is that If I feel threatened, I leave before a confrontation ever happens. If this country were ever to do the kinds of irrational bullcrap you people fear, I'd leave.

Quote:

You have to have a case in your mind in which you'd want to have firepower. Right?

Not a military takeover. Dudes have body armor, what's my civilian firearm going to do against a trained group of people who'd shoot me before I could land a lucky shot somewhere they aren't protected?

Guns are great until you're talking about a group of well trained, armored men who are all probably a better shot than you.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

To save my life?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Let's talk about first shot. Kent state massacre.

Now what if said first shot comes from the crowd but is an agent working to get gun control.

You're going to have to remove your tin hat, sir.

Quote:

Now let's take you out of the equation and focus on only guns and not slitting throats with a knife. When would you be willing to pick up a gun and defend others. Let's say worse case scenario where you'd want something to get the job done. My point is you do have that line that once crossed you will want a weapon powerful enough to defeat your foes, or at least level the playing field just a little to your advantage.

There is no civilian weapon that can contend with our military if they're coming to kill you (for some irrational reason?)

Excuse me, if that kind of thing were to happen, and I'm using the word IF very strongly, fighting is not the answer. Not being there is the answer.

You're not familiar with cointelpro are you? Black ops? You can't deny these operations designed to get a job done. You claim a government is incapable of attacking it's own populace and blaming it on others to get an agenda done is "Inconceivable!!!" (Quote from the Princess Bride. I hope you read it in Wallace Shawn's voice!).

I don't have anything to fear from cointelpro.

Quote:

I didn't say "Our" military now did I. So before you pick up a gun and fight for anyone or yourself, you'd rather die? "Fighting is not the answer" Then why did you suggest slitting throats.

Because they're already there? Obviously the best answer isn't the answer where I attempt to kill them all to get free. The best answer is that If I feel threatened, I leave before a confrontation ever happens. If this country were ever to do the kinds of irrational bullcrap you people fear, I'd leave.

Quote:

You have to have a case in your mind in which you'd want to have firepower. Right?

Not a military takeover. Dudes have body armor, what's my civilian firearm going to do against a trained group of people who'd shoot me before I could land a lucky shot somewhere they aren't protected?

Guns are great until you're talking about a group of well trained, armored men who are all probably a better shot than you.

Modern body armor doesn't stop rifle rounds.

Until recently our soldier's helmets couldn't even stop 9mm rounds.


Kevlar is a piece of crap.

A rifle round will go clean through.

[Azkeel]

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

To save my life?

Well, that would be morbidly inaccurate, but allow me to humor you. If I'm assaulted by a group of men trying to take me anywhere, I'll slit their throats without hesitation. If I can run, then I'll run instead. If I can do neither, I'll comply.

You say pro-gun as if we're all anti-gun. This is false.

If said first shot is fired, I can guarantee it will be by some skinhead redfaced asswagon getting too emotional about how he can't defend his home from da guvrnmint that only wants his guns because he's a convicted felon.

I don't support the exact style of gun control that is being proposed by democrats, no. I would, however choose it over what republicans are frothing at the mouth over trying to keep.

I'm for much stricter regulations than the democrats would ever jump on.

Let's talk about first shot. Kent state massacre.

Now what if said first shot comes from the crowd but is an agent working to get gun control.

You're going to have to remove your tin hat, sir.

Quote:

Now let's take you out of the equation and focus on only guns and not slitting throats with a knife. When would you be willing to pick up a gun and defend others. Let's say worse case scenario where you'd want something to get the job done. My point is you do have that line that once crossed you will want a weapon powerful enough to defeat your foes, or at least level the playing field just a little to your advantage.

There is no civilian weapon that can contend with our military if they're coming to kill you (for some irrational reason?)

Excuse me, if that kind of thing were to happen, and I'm using the word IF very strongly, fighting is not the answer. Not being there is the answer.

You're not familiar with cointelpro are you? Black ops? You can't deny these operations designed to get a job done. You claim a government is incapable of attacking it's own populace and blaming it on others to get an agenda done is "Inconceivable!!!" (Quote from the Princess Bride. I hope you read it in Wallace Shawn's voice!).

I don't have anything to fear from cointelpro.

Quote:

I didn't say "Our" military now did I. So before you pick up a gun and fight for anyone or yourself, you'd rather die? "Fighting is not the answer" Then why did you suggest slitting throats.

Because they're already there? Obviously the best answer isn't the answer where I attempt to kill them all to get free. The best answer is that If I feel threatened, I leave before a confrontation ever happens. If this country were ever to do the kinds of irrational bullcrap you people fear, I'd leave.

Quote:

You have to have a case in your mind in which you'd want to have firepower. Right?

Not a military takeover. Dudes have body armor, what's my civilian firearm going to do against a trained group of people who'd shoot me before I could land a lucky shot somewhere they aren't protected?

Guns are great until you're talking about a group of well trained, armored men who are all probably a better shot than you.

What do you mean you people? lol And you're rich enough to just bail out on the country if said "Bullcrap" people fear starts happening? Do you think you'd be welcome as a refugee in these places or are you going to bug out to the wild? What if your immigration is stopped and you're forced to stay in the states as said bullcrap starts happening. What if our neighbors to the north and south lock down on our borders faster then a lock down in a prison that riots.

You need to stop avoiding the question. What is the case in your mind you'd want firepower. You know you have one.

[Aporeia]

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

Right.

So magic kunk fu ninja powers against guys with guns, wearing body armor, that can easily stop knives; I guess you got them. rolleyes

Let me explain this to you. Men bust in chasing me. Either they die or I do. I will act.

As for body armor, excuse me, but I've never heard of any fancy shmancy body armor that stops a knife. Joints are joints, if you armor it, you can't move it.

You've... never heard of body armor that can stop a knife?

Uh-huh.


Well, in the 80's, police were running across problems with soft body armor only stopping knives some half of the time; it's the reason why carrying a knife over 6 inches, butter fly knives, switchblades etc. are illegal without a weapons license.

Thing is, since this problem was addressed, now a days most soft body armor is knife proof. Since soft body armor is knife proof, it can cover your hands, feet, joints etc.


The military carries around a 75 pound combat pack, which includes food, water, etc.

If say oh, a SWAT team were to, they don't need several days worth of water, food, sleeping materials, sleeping bags, tents, etc., so they have a lighter pack; if that was replaced with armor, up to 75 pounds, there would be no real issue protecting against pistol rounds or knives.


With rifle rounds, you have a better chance if they aren't using ceramic armor. You have a better chance even if they are.

The idea that you're going to protect yourself with magic kung foo with a knife and magically slit everyone's throats who have guns and wear body armor?


Let's just pretend you can breathe fire and are like wolverine so, you have healing abilities and an adamantium skeleton.

What does 99% of the population do? You can see the problem with outlawing guns saying knives are good enough right; against 10 people, hell 3 people? Maybe, and I mean maybe, you can take down one, maybe two guys, but the third can just shoot you since they have range; and then where do you run to? They have APC's with guns waiting around in case you jump out the window, they have tear gas and flash bangs, you're going to fight back, with a knife, against guys with guns in the middle of the street, against tear gas and flashbangs and who knows what else?


Since even soldier armor doesn't stop rifle rounds, neither do helmets, it actually is a decent way to defend yourself. That is, a rifle.

I don't think a bunch of armed backwoods redneck/hippies will beat the military. I don't think it will ever come to that; at best mercenaries would do it but since most are ex-military and pro second amendment it would likely never come to this. But against an armed attacker, any armed attacker? Say cougars or giant pigs or bears? Yeah, guns are great.

Now that you've rambled on aimlessly... So if the first stab doesn't work, stab where I see skin. Or eyes, that works too.

If you actually think any kind of armor stops a knife, you're silly. It's pretty obvious you don't stab a bulge.

And i don't think you're getting the point, if men bust in with guns, I assume 4 things.

1. If I comply, I die.
2. If I lose, I die.
3. If I kill, I might live
4. If I run, I might live

So obviously, go with what gives you a chance to live. Maybe I'll get shot if I attack. I'll definitely get shot if I don't.

Quote:

Let's say for the sake of the argument you attack them somewhere they aren't protected; say their hand.

Your lack of thought is making me want to stop replying to you. Ever. Show me military armor that protects the throat from a knife attack. Then the face. It doesn't exist, buddy. A fraction of an inch of soft fabric isn't going to stop a knife, or a bullet.

Quote:

You are magically going to avoid being shot by somebody else in the room?

Line the piggies up. If they'd shoot their comrade, they'd shoot me regardless of what I do. Reasonable gambit.

Quote:

Head to head, heart to heart, diaphragm etc. you move target to take as efficiently as you can, stabbing them in the jugular, twisting on your way out to the next target. You have to take them down in one hit or else you're dead.

Twist the neck then, geez. It takes like no force. If you're that ignorant, then howabout that?

Quote:

I mean you can't do that when they just have a crappy flak vest and helmet on, let alone modern body armor that can stop rifle rounds. Assuming you stab them in the leg they'll just shoot you, you're dead. So, no, it won't defend you.

Meatshields work better when they're armored.

Quote:

But with a gun, if you have a gun, if you don't outlaw guns, your chance of self defense is substantially higher.

What about all that magical armor of invincibility you keep yammering about?

Quote:

No, it's not random or aimless, I'm actually explaining the situation, talking it out, so you can see how stupid your premise is.

Yes, because your infinite knowledge is both accurate and non contradictory. I hope you realize that was sarcasm.

Quote:

Have you ever heard don't bring a knife to a gunfight?

Yea, in a movie. A bad one. I also heard 9/11 was an inside job.

Quote:

I mean this is just, idk, common sense, basic human intuition.

I like how you use the words common sense in every thread, despite you lacking it.

[Azkeel]

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

Let's talk about first shot. Kent state massacre.

Now what if said first shot comes from the crowd but is an agent working to get gun control.

You're going to have to remove your tin hat, sir.

Quote:

Now let's take you out of the equation and focus on only guns and not slitting throats with a knife. When would you be willing to pick up a gun and defend others. Let's say worse case scenario where you'd want something to get the job done. My point is you do have that line that once crossed you will want a weapon powerful enough to defeat your foes, or at least level the playing field just a little to your advantage.

There is no civilian weapon that can contend with our military if they're coming to kill you (for some irrational reason?)

Excuse me, if that kind of thing were to happen, and I'm using the word IF very strongly, fighting is not the answer. Not being there is the answer.

You're not familiar with cointelpro are you? Black ops? You can't deny these operations designed to get a job done. You claim a government is incapable of attacking it's own populace and blaming it on others to get an agenda done is "Inconceivable!!!" (Quote from the Princess Bride. I hope you read it in Wallace Shawn's voice!).

I don't have anything to fear from cointelpro.

Quote:

I didn't say "Our" military now did I. So before you pick up a gun and fight for anyone or yourself, you'd rather die? "Fighting is not the answer" Then why did you suggest slitting throats.

Because they're already there? Obviously the best answer isn't the answer where I attempt to kill them all to get free. The best answer is that If I feel threatened, I leave before a confrontation ever happens. If this country were ever to do the kinds of irrational bullcrap you people fear, I'd leave.

Quote:

You have to have a case in your mind in which you'd want to have firepower. Right?

Not a military takeover. Dudes have body armor, what's my civilian firearm going to do against a trained group of people who'd shoot me before I could land a lucky shot somewhere they aren't protected?

Guns are great until you're talking about a group of well trained, armored men who are all probably a better shot than you.

Modern body armor doesn't stop rifle rounds.

Until recently our soldier's helmets couldn't even stop 9mm rounds.


Kevlar is a piece of crap.

A rifle round will go clean through.

And we learned kevlar is horrid in hot desert terrain. They'd have to wear class three body armor to stop rifle rounds and then they'd be slow moving targets. I think the armor is more for show of power psychologically. Just like a tank is now.

[Suicidesoldier#1]

YahuShalum

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

YahuShalum

False Dichotomy

You're going to have to remove your tin hat, sir.

There is no civilian weapon that can contend with our military if they're coming to kill you (for some irrational reason?)

Excuse me, if that kind of thing were to happen, and I'm using the word IF very strongly, fighting is not the answer. Not being there is the answer.

You're not familiar with cointelpro are you? Black ops? You can't deny these operations designed to get a job done. You claim a government is incapable of attacking it's own populace and blaming it on others to get an agenda done is "Inconceivable!!!" (Quote from the Princess Bride. I hope you read it in Wallace Shawn's voice!).

I don't have anything to fear from cointelpro.

Quote:

I didn't say "Our" military now did I. So before you pick up a gun and fight for anyone or yourself, you'd rather die? "Fighting is not the answer" Then why did you suggest slitting throats.

Because they're already there? Obviously the best answer isn't the answer where I attempt to kill them all to get free. The best answer is that If I feel threatened, I leave before a confrontation ever happens. If this country were ever to do the kinds of irrational bullcrap you people fear, I'd leave.

Quote:

You have to have a case in your mind in which you'd want to have firepower. Right?

Not a military takeover. Dudes have body armor, what's my civilian firearm going to do against a trained group of people who'd shoot me before I could land a lucky shot somewhere they aren't protected?

Guns are great until you're talking about a group of well trained, armored men who are all probably a better shot than you.

Modern body armor doesn't stop rifle rounds.

Until recently our soldier's helmets couldn't even stop 9mm rounds.


Kevlar is a piece of crap.

A rifle round will go clean through.

And we learned kevlar is horrid in hot desert terrain. They'd have to wear class three body armor to stop rifle rounds and then they'd be slow moving targets. I think the armor is more for show of power psychologically. Just like a tank is now.

It's really used to stop shrapnel. Since 1/3 terrorists have an RPG, 5 dollar grenades and I.E.D.'s, land mines, and explosives tend to be the number one killer, our soldiers wear body armor more or less to stop shrapnel.

Since a direct high with an explosive, even an RPG, and especially I.E.D's since they're detonated some distance away, with some guy watching it, with a detonator, shrapnel and energy are our biggest concern.


Shrapnel proof glasses and groin covers have become the norm, as well as neck covers.

This is mostly all to stop shrapnel; your arm, your face, may get torn up, you may get peppered and have half an inch of penetration all over you, but you won't die or suffer a debilitating injury, unlike say the eye, the head, the sternum etc.


It's meant to stop death from shrapnel which is the biggest cause in major wars (artillery, planes etc., grenades) and even in these events.

If you're in a one on one fight with guns though, you're on your own. You have to hide behind buildings, practice superior marksmanship, hide, quickly go into hide and attack tactics. Bullet proof vests suck. xp

[Suicidesoldier#1]

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

Suicidesoldier#1

False Dichotomy

No, with a knife. If these imaginary men can even get to me without me knowing, at least. If I had reason to suspect I'd be taken away, I'd be gone long before I was ever a target. If anyone confronted me in that situation it'd be on my terms.

I'm an extremely paranoid person, but even I don't see what our government would have to gain from military takeover. It's so much cheaper to farm humans when they all think they're free.

Right.

So magic kunk fu ninja powers against guys with guns, wearing body armor, that can easily stop knives; I guess you got them. rolleyes

Let me explain this to you. Men bust in chasing me. Either they die or I do. I will act.

As for body armor, excuse me, but I've never heard of any fancy shmancy body armor that stops a knife. Joints are joints, if you armor it, you can't move it.

You've... never heard of body armor that can stop a knife?

Uh-huh.


Well, in the 80's, police were running across problems with soft body armor only stopping knives some half of the time; it's the reason why carrying a knife over 6 inches, butter fly knives, switchblades etc. are illegal without a weapons license.

Thing is, since this problem was addressed, now a days most soft body armor is knife proof. Since soft body armor is knife proof, it can cover your hands, feet, joints etc.


The military carries around a 75 pound combat pack, which includes food, water, etc.

If say oh, a SWAT team were to, they don't need several days worth of water, food, sleeping materials, sleeping bags, tents, etc., so they have a lighter pack; if that was replaced with armor, up to 75 pounds, there would be no real issue protecting against pistol rounds or knives.


With rifle rounds, you have a better chance if they aren't using ceramic armor. You have a better chance even if they are.

The idea that you're going to protect yourself with magic kung foo with a knife and magically slit everyone's throats who have guns and wear body armor?


Let's just pretend you can breathe fire and are like wolverine so, you have healing abilities and an adamantium skeleton.

What does 99% of the population do? You can see the problem with outlawing guns saying knives are good enough right; against 10 people, hell 3 people? Maybe, and I mean maybe, you can take down one, maybe two guys, but the third can just shoot you since they have range; and then where do you run to? They have APC's with guns waiting around in case you jump out the window, they have tear gas and flash bangs, you're going to fight back, with a knife, against guys with guns in the middle of the street, against tear gas and flashbangs and who knows what else?


Since even soldier armor doesn't stop rifle rounds, neither do helmets, it actually is a decent way to defend yourself. That is, a rifle.

I don't think a bunch of armed backwoods redneck/hippies will beat the military. I don't think it will ever come to that; at best mercenaries would do it but since most are ex-military and pro second amendment it would likely never come to this. But against an armed attacker, any armed attacker? Say cougars or giant pigs or bears? Yeah, guns are great.

Now that you've rambled on aimlessly... So if the first stab doesn't work, stab where I see skin. Or eyes, that works too.

If you actually think any kind of armor stops a knife, you're silly. It's pretty obvious you don't stab a bulge.

And i don't think you're getting the point, if men bust in with guns, I assume 4 things.

1. If I comply, I die.
2. If I lose, I die.
3. If I kill, I might live
4. If I run, I might live

So obviously, go with what gives you a chance to live. Maybe I'll get shot if I attack. I'll definitely get shot if I don't.

Quote:

Let's say for the sake of the argument you attack them somewhere they aren't protected; say their hand.

Your lack of thought is making me want to stop replying to you. Ever. Show me military armor that protects the throat from a knife attack. Then the face. It doesn't exist, buddy. A fraction of an inch of soft fabric isn't going to stop a knife, or a bullet.

Quote:

You are magically going to avoid being shot by somebody else in the room?

Line the piggies up. If they'd shoot their comrade, they'd shoot me regardless of what I do. Reasonable gambit.

Quote:

Head to head, heart to heart, diaphragm etc. you move target to take as efficiently as you can, stabbing them in the jugular, twisting on your way out to the next target. You have to take them down in one hit or else you're dead.

Twist the neck then, geez. It takes like no force. If you're that ignorant, then howabout that?

Quote:

I mean you can't do that when they just have a crappy flak vest and helmet on, let alone modern body armor that can stop rifle rounds. Assuming you stab them in the leg they'll just shoot you, you're dead. So, no, it won't defend you.

Meatshields work better when they're armored.

Quote:

But with a gun, if you have a gun, if you don't outlaw guns, your chance of self defense is substantially higher.

What about all that magical armor of invincibility you keep yammering about?

Quote:

No, it's not random or aimless, I'm actually explaining the situation, talking it out, so you can see how stupid your premise is.

Yes, because your infinite knowledge is both accurate and non contradictory. I hope you realize that was sarcasm.

Quote:

Have you ever heard don't bring a knife to a gunfight?

Yea, in a movie. A bad one. I also heard 9/11 was an inside job.

Quote:

I mean this is just, idk, common sense, basic human intuition.

I like how you use the words common sense in every thread, despite you lacking it.

Stopping a knife isn't invincible armor.

You have to realize that knives aren't super powerful. O_o


Paper armor can stop knives.

Hell just a few sheets of paper; people usually measure the sharpness of knives by how many pieces of paper you can cut. A few dozen could stop a knife pretty easily. I mean go ahead and try it.


Also, yes, I apparently have common sense while you don't.

Since you think a knife will be a good thing in a gun fight. xp


The U.S. uses interceptor class IIIA body armor for defense.

Since the IBA armor is stab proof, and covers the shoulders, neck, groin, and a helmet covers the head, usually now a days an MICH helmet (with it's replacement the ACH), yes, I know it will stop knives.

[The20]

I think the 13th is superfluous.
The Declaration of Independence says:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
If all men are equal and if liberty is a unalienable right why was slavery tolerated after 1776?