Welcome to Gaia! ::

God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton


Annual inspections, must be licensed, must be registered annually, people must have a license, people must be mentally and physically competent to use one, they must take a course and training and any infractions would be fined with a confiscation of the firearm if the infraction is major.

And you may be right about the constitution, but it was at a different time. The US was poor during the writing of the constitution and as a result, the arming of the nation was necessary to have a standing military against the imperial powerhouses of Europe if they were to survive as a nation. Now 232 years later, the US is really no different from Imperial Great Britain. And in all honesty, cars are more important than guns. With automobiles, we are able to transport food from farms to a city with very little agriculture, allowing for cities to do other things like industry and commerce. It also allows for regions to have a higher population than the farms locally permit. As time changes, so does priorities and this is why the founding fathers allowed for amendments to be added and to even allow amendments to cancel others out. I do believe in the right to bear arms. The question is where is your limit? Do you believe felons, sex offenders, illegal aliens and enemies of the state should have the right to own guns? How about nuclear weapons?


I am arguing against increasing restrictions, not arguing for loosening them.

You will get no further reply from me along this vein, I'm not arguing that people should be allowed to have nuclear weapons, that's blatantly ******** ridiculous.

I am for the complete and unrestricted ownership of small arms by non-felons, or other persons who's rights have not been restricted. nuclear weapons are not small arms.

Then how do you propose a rebellion if you do not have military equipment?


Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.

And, in most states, there is nothing preventing somebody with the money from buying and owning a fully operational battle tank.

any civil war in the united states would be fought primarily with small arms and explosives.

armed civilians outnumber the military by orders of magnitude, to say nothing of members of the military who would refuse to fight civilians.

but largely, your force multipliers are useless in that kind of combat.

And why do you think they would have a problem with collateral?


What makes you think they wouldn't? you don't win a war by killing your own women and children, you'd lose public support, you'd lose military support. you'd look like assholes in the eyes of the world and you'd justify every nasty thing ever said about you.

the government might give the orders, but the military carries them out, and they will refuse to kill their own families just to get at them nasty gun owners.
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton


Annual inspections, must be licensed, must be registered annually, people must have a license, people must be mentally and physically competent to use one, they must take a course and training and any infractions would be fined with a confiscation of the firearm if the infraction is major.

And you may be right about the constitution, but it was at a different time. The US was poor during the writing of the constitution and as a result, the arming of the nation was necessary to have a standing military against the imperial powerhouses of Europe if they were to survive as a nation. Now 232 years later, the US is really no different from Imperial Great Britain. And in all honesty, cars are more important than guns. With automobiles, we are able to transport food from farms to a city with very little agriculture, allowing for cities to do other things like industry and commerce. It also allows for regions to have a higher population than the farms locally permit. As time changes, so does priorities and this is why the founding fathers allowed for amendments to be added and to even allow amendments to cancel others out. I do believe in the right to bear arms. The question is where is your limit? Do you believe felons, sex offenders, illegal aliens and enemies of the state should have the right to own guns? How about nuclear weapons?


I am arguing against increasing restrictions, not arguing for loosening them.

You will get no further reply from me along this vein, I'm not arguing that people should be allowed to have nuclear weapons, that's blatantly ******** ridiculous.

I am for the complete and unrestricted ownership of small arms by non-felons, or other persons who's rights have not been restricted. nuclear weapons are not small arms.

Then how do you propose a rebellion if you do not have military equipment?


Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.

And, in most states, there is nothing preventing somebody with the money from buying and owning a fully operational battle tank.

any civil war in the united states would be fought primarily with small arms and explosives.

armed civilians outnumber the military by orders of magnitude, to say nothing of members of the military who would refuse to fight civilians.

but largely, your force multipliers are useless in that kind of combat.

And why do you think they would have a problem with collateral?


What makes you think they wouldn't? you don't win a war by killing your own women and children, you'd lose public support, you'd lose military support. you'd look like assholes in the eyes of the world and you'd justify every nasty thing ever said about you.

the government might give the orders, but the military carries them out, and they will refuse to kill their own families just to get at them nasty gun owners.

Violence is human nature and it is in our blood to kill. And in all honesty, the only difference between a soldier, a rebel or someone who shoots up an elementary school is their excuse. People kill because peace implies that the person you hate lives to see another day and you can't stand that. That is why most people who are assassinated are proponents of peace.
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton

Then how do you propose a rebellion if you do not have military equipment?


Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.

And, in most states, there is nothing preventing somebody with the money from buying and owning a fully operational battle tank.

any civil war in the united states would be fought primarily with small arms and explosives.

armed civilians outnumber the military by orders of magnitude, to say nothing of members of the military who would refuse to fight civilians.

but largely, your force multipliers are useless in that kind of combat.

And why do you think they would have a problem with collateral?


What makes you think they wouldn't? you don't win a war by killing your own women and children, you'd lose public support, you'd lose military support. you'd look like assholes in the eyes of the world and you'd justify every nasty thing ever said about you.

the government might give the orders, but the military carries them out, and they will refuse to kill their own families just to get at them nasty gun owners.

Violence is human nature and it is in our blood to kill. And in all honesty, the only difference between a soldier, a rebel or someone who shoots up an elementary school is their excuse. People kill because peace implies that the person you hate lives to see another day and you can't stand that. That is why most people who are assassinated are proponents of peace.


s**t, you're so deep and edgy.
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton
Tadpole Jackson
God Emperor Akhenaton

Then how do you propose a rebellion if you do not have military equipment?


Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.

And, in most states, there is nothing preventing somebody with the money from buying and owning a fully operational battle tank.

any civil war in the united states would be fought primarily with small arms and explosives.

armed civilians outnumber the military by orders of magnitude, to say nothing of members of the military who would refuse to fight civilians.

but largely, your force multipliers are useless in that kind of combat.

And why do you think they would have a problem with collateral?


What makes you think they wouldn't? you don't win a war by killing your own women and children, you'd lose public support, you'd lose military support. you'd look like assholes in the eyes of the world and you'd justify every nasty thing ever said about you.

the government might give the orders, but the military carries them out, and they will refuse to kill their own families just to get at them nasty gun owners.

Violence is human nature and it is in our blood to kill. And in all honesty, the only difference between a soldier, a rebel or someone who shoots up an elementary school is their excuse. People kill because peace implies that the person you hate lives to see another day and you can't stand that. That is why most people who are assassinated are proponents of peace.


s**t, you're so deep and edgy.

And you are incorrect. If violence wasn't human nature, then we wouldn't have war.
I think people take free speech in the wrong direction a lot. If you can't use it responsibly then you don't understand what it means. It needs to be used at the right time and place to be effective. Especially if you have a cause you are trying to help. What ever happened to tact? My grandmother always told me that you need to know when to keep your mouth shut. Everyone wants instant respect without earning it.

I sound old. sweatdrop

My opinion is very unpopular and I bet people will call it un-american. To be honest I no longer care.

The US is so gun crazy I don't even know what to say about it any more. It's just an endless circle of "Why do we need guns? To protect ourselves from people who want to shoot us with guns."

It almost seems as if having a gun is somehow part of the American dream. Like owning a house or a car. We glorify guns like they are toys. We glorify violence like it's a joke. And I'm not against violent video games or movies. I just think that they should be kept away from children. And that's failure to parent your kids properly and a whole other issue.

If anyone asked me if I supported the second amendment I honestly could not give them an answer. Because I'm at a loss for words about it. I just wish that our gun crazy culture had never developed at all. We'd be much better off without it. But it's already gone so far now that it's probably hopeless to change it. Maybe in a few centuries we'll culturally evolve for the better. But I don't see things improving any time soon. For all I know we're already past the event horizon with this one.

That's all I really have to say on this matter.
Wendigo's avatar

Enduring Phantom

8,700 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Tadpole Jackson
alright, so what's your plan? banning all guns?
In Russia? Maybe. Gives the Vory one less rock to hide under. Of course, confiscation is always the trick, since ownership of an illegal firearm doesn't normally announce itself so that such weapons can be disposed of safely.

Quote:
most crimes are not committed with AR-15 rifles, in fact, most 'gun crime' could have been committed with a flinklock pistol.
You could commit a gun crime with all sorts of things, including an airsoft gun or a BB gun - as long as somebody's really afraid of being harmed and your conduct suggests that you are capable of harming them with what you've got. Nevertheless, there's a reason most firearms crimes aren't committed with flintlocks. Modern cartridge firearms, particularly those possessed of higher rates of fire and more powerful calibers, are of much greater value as weapons than antiques. Fumbling with percussion caps or powder horns or ram rods is a bit of a hassle, if you, say, miss your first shot.
Quote:

So, are you going to ban and confiscate all guns?
No, now stop arguing against that straw man, you stupid jackass.

Quote:

Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.
Tell that'n to Basshar al-Assad.
Wendigo
Tadpole Jackson

Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.
Tell that'n to Basshar al-Assad.

He has no issue with killing his own people
Mimetic Hybrid
Wendigo
Tadpole Jackson

Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.
Tell that'n to Basshar al-Assad.

He has no issue with killing his own people

About as much of an issue as any Dictator using military force on his own populace.
Wendigo's avatar

Enduring Phantom

8,700 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Mimetic Hybrid
Wendigo
Tadpole Jackson

Aircraft and bombs and missiles are not useful against an "enemy" that is deeply integrated with the civilians you don't want to kill.
Tell that'n to Basshar al-Assad.

He has no issue with killing his own people
That is, th' people bombing his people from planes had no problem killing his people, on his behalf. Because that's basically how dictators roll.
nobounce the 2nd's avatar

Dapper Dabbler

15,200 Points
  • Pie For All! 300
  • Pie Trafficker 100
  • Pie Hoarder by Proxy 150
Tadpole Jackson
The First Amendment is an obsolete document from hundreds of years ago, it was intended to protect books and political pamphlets like those of Thomas Paine, not sick video games like StarCraft that legitimize mass murder, or websites full of gore, and Nazism.

The First Amendment was never developed with computers and the internet in mind. You should be free to write whatever you want with quill and parchment, but that's it.


Same goes for the 2nd Amendment then as well
Wendigo's avatar

Enduring Phantom

8,700 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
nobounce the 2nd
Tadpole Jackson
The First Amendment is an obsolete document from hundreds of years ago, it was intended to protect books and political pamphlets like those of Thomas Paine, not sick video games like StarCraft that legitimize mass murder, or websites full of gore, and Nazism.

The First Amendment was never developed with computers and the internet in mind. You should be free to write whatever you want with quill and parchment, but that's it.


Same goes for the 2nd Amendment then as well
That's what he was getting at. That is, he considers absolute support for firearms ownership and support for freedom of speech as necessarily happening together.
Young King under Heaven's avatar

Golden Millionaire

8,800 Points
  • Millionaire 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Popular Thread 100
The rose in spring
We never really had the first amendment. Say something that could threaten to change the political direction of the country and you get killed. Don't believe me? Ask the students at Kent State.

And yet, the country has chanfged and continues to change. Guess your theory is shot
Young King under Heaven's avatar

Golden Millionaire

8,800 Points
  • Millionaire 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Popular Thread 100
The First Amendment is one of our most important freedoms. Leave it be
Queen Shining Heaven
The rose in spring
We never really had the first amendment. Say something that could threaten to change the political direction of the country and you get killed. Don't believe me? Ask the students at Kent State.

And yet, the country has chanfged and continues to change. Guess your theory is shot

Nothing changes. You still are a slave to the owners of this country.
Young King under Heaven's avatar

Golden Millionaire

8,800 Points
  • Millionaire 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Popular Thread 100
The rose in spring
Queen Shining Heaven
The rose in spring
We never really had the first amendment. Say something that could threaten to change the political direction of the country and you get killed. Don't believe me? Ask the students at Kent State.

And yet, the country has chanfged and continues to change. Guess your theory is shot

Nothing changes. You still are a slave to the owners of this country.

Not that slave thing again. Will you lighten up? The world isn't perfect but it's not nearly as bad as you seem to see it as

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games