By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Obama's Continued War on Human Rights

mornelithe on 07 March 2015
thismeintiel said:
mornelithe said:

From what?  Is your avg citizen running into allot of situations with criminals wearing body armor?

What a shock, you didn't even read the OP.  They can't pierce body armor.  Nice try, though.

@ OP

Getting people to buy more dangerous ammo is EXACTLY the goal here.  You ban the less harmful ammo, first.  Of course, you have to do it with lies so those who don't do any research just hear the words "armor piercing" from the always right government, and they are on board.  Then, when the more harmful ammo is more prevalent, you can con the scaredy cats who are against civilians having guns into banning it all.  Then, it's just so much easier to control a country when they can't defend themselves.

Wow my bad, the armor piercing bullets don't actually pierce armor, so shouldn't we be suing the gun industry for faulty advertising?  And what nice try?  He said self defense, against what? People with tougher than normal skin?



Around the Network
NobleTeam360 on 07 March 2015
thismeintiel said:
NobleTeam360 said:
mornelithe said:

See, this is where the argument falls apart.  I can see the argument from self-defense from criminal aspects, and I most certainly agree that targeting a weapon (assault rifles) that aren't the main culprit (hand guns) makes zero sense to me.  But, a tyrranical Government?  Really?  That's your fallback?  In what world do you live in where a supposed 'tyrranical US Government' intent on killing you, would be stopped by armor piercing bullets fired from a gun of that caliber and range?  Nevermind helicopters, nevermind jets, nevermind a 50 caliber that could punch a hole through your house and still tear you to pieces, a single drone, or hell if they're 'tyrranical' a cruise missile taking out your entire block is a mere pittance to them.  Hell, they could just send in a few of the SWORD prototypes in, and lay waste.  Why would they care?  They're tyrranical.

Again, I do like guns...but that whole self defense thing against the Government mattered when black powder was cutting edge tech.  A group of citizens stands no chance against a US Gov't willing to forgo rules of engagement and constitutional law (no armed forces in US cities).  That's just how it is, unless we relax things even further and allow private citizens to purchase heavy weaponry en-masse.

Well the military and all of it's high tech weapons couldn't stop terrorists in Afghanistan, so I don't see a scenario where our beloved military could take on Americans. 

@ bolded, well they may be tyrannical, I don't think their goal would be to destroy the country. 

There's also the fact that many of that same military would defect, and most likely join in the rebellion, if the cause was just.

I agree!



Lafiel on 07 March 2015
thismeintiel said:

There's also the fact that many of that same military would defect, and most likely join in the rebellion, if the cause was just.

and if the cause is unjust the well regulated militia has enough fire power to control and terrorize a few cities ISIS style, awesome :)



Nirvana_Nut85 on 07 March 2015
sundin13 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:

The American military can barely win wars in the middle east. I highly doubt they could take on Texas, let alone the entire country!

Iraq War Death Counts:

Insurgents: 26K
US Armed Forces: 4.4K

While the unrest was difficult to deal with (its the Middle East...), its hard to argue that the US had vast amounts of trouble with the enemy.

Vietnamese body count was much higher than the U.S as well :p



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

thismeintiel on 07 March 2015
Lafiel said:
thismeintiel said:

There's also the fact that many of that same military would defect, and most likely join in the rebellion, if the cause was just.

and if the cause is unjust the well regulated militia has enough fire power to control and terrorize a few cities ISIS style, awesome :)

Except most of the people who legally own guns are actually good people.  Otherwise, we would have mini-wars all over the country.  Kinda like they do in those Muslim countries with decent sized extremist population.  Maybe we should be more concerned about their gun laws?



 

Around the Network
thismeintiel on 07 March 2015
Goatseye said:
I would be more for the guns right, if the US wasn't a country with the most psychologically unstable individuals I have ever seen.
Going postal is a normal thing in the US. It takes so little to tip the psychological balance of people in this country.

Yep, cause no other countries have people who go postal for really no reason.  Oh, wait...



 

NobleTeam360 on 07 March 2015
mornelithe said:
thismeintiel said:

What a shock, you didn't even read the OP.  They can't pierce body armor.  Nice try, though.

@ OP

Getting people to buy more dangerous ammo is EXACTLY the goal here.  You ban the less harmful ammo, first.  Of course, you have to do it with lies so those who don't do any research just hear the words "armor piercing" from the always right government, and they are on board.  Then, when the more harmful ammo is more prevalent, you can con the scaredy cats who are against civilians having guns into banning it all.  Then, it's just so much easier to control a country when they can't defend themselves.

Wow my bad, the armor piercing bullets don't actually pierce armor, so shouldn't we be suing the gun industry for faulty advertising?  And what nice try?  He said self defense, against what? People with tougher than normal skin?

From people trying to break into my house or steal my property. 



o_O.Q on 07 March 2015
binary solo said:
o_O.Q said:
binary solo said:

It is the democratic provisions of the constitution that protects against a tyrannical govt, not the gun rights rubbish. You will overthrow a tyrannical government at the ballot box faster than a guerilla war. And if you are absolutely confident that the military, and police, won't turn on the people, then why do the people need guns to protect themselves from something that will never come to pass? It's not like any hypothetical tyrant will be capable of withstanding a simple unarmed take over of the Whitehouse and congress if the branches of govt with all the guns refuse to take up arms against the people.

The main reason the US military couldn't defeat terrorists in Afghanistan is because of needing to appear to have concern for human rights, and public image among allies and the US public. A tyrannical govt has none of those concerns, if the military is fully on board with protecting those in power.

nazi germany was brought about through democracy

oh and america was founded as a constitutional republic and not a democracy for that very reason

because the masses can be lead to destroy themselves with deception

A country that just 15 years prior had been ruled by a monarch as an Empire, and a country who's boundaries had been fixed for only about 50 years. Democracy was hardly well developed and the country had never formed a politically and economically stable republic. Nazi Germany isn't remotely relevant as an example of a well established democracy bringing about tyrannical rule that can only be overthrown by armed struggle by the people. 

hardly well developed? all that is required for democracy is that the masses  influence what path a country proceeds along which is what happened in germany

the problem with democracy is that what the masses believe the best path for a country is may not in reality be the best path

the masses may even go as far as voting to have their rights taken away in the name of safety which as a result makes them more and more dependent on a government that becomes more and more tyranical with every lost right



Lafiel on 07 March 2015
thismeintiel said:

Except most of the people who legally own guns are actually good people.  Otherwise, we would have mini-wars all over the country.  Kinda like they do in those Muslim countries with decent sized extremist population.  Maybe we should be more concerned about their gun laws?

Hey, I won't tell americans or arabs how they have to live, keep buying our guns it's good for our economy :). I just couldn't live comfortably myself if people around me had the power to kill, they are all lunatics. Or maybe I'm the lunatic and they are the normal people, which would be even worse.



sundin13 on 07 March 2015
NobleTeam360 said:
mornelithe said:

Wow my bad, the armor piercing bullets don't actually pierce armor, so shouldn't we be suing the gun industry for faulty advertising?  And what nice try?  He said self defense, against what? People with tougher than normal skin?

From people trying to break into my house or steal my property. 


Assault rifles seems a tad extreme, don't you think?