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

binary solo on 07 March 2015
NobleTeam360 said:
sundin13 said:
NobleTeam360 said:
mornelithe said:

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

What does it matter if the gun in question can pierce body armor? Rifles are used in a very slim margin of crimes, so why is the government so desperate to ban them? The whole point of the 2nd amendment was to protect ourselves from a potentailly tryanical governement.

There is no chance in hell that civilians could compete against the American military...that purpose is extremely outdated and fairly ridiculous in the modern context.

Do you believe that the American military would turn on it's own citizens? better yet our military couldn't even defeat a small nubmer of terrorists in Afghanistan, I like our chances in a scenario involving a tyrannical governement happened

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.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Around the Network
OfficerRaichu15 on 07 March 2015
SandyVGina said:
spurgeonryan said:
I am tired of the children of America dying, also if it were not for guns Robin Williams may still be with us. I hate guns, hope he bans all gun ownership before he is out of office.


Banning abortion would be a better way to keep american children from dying.... not guns....

This is actually sort of true

more kids would be alive through this

like I heard like 60 million more would have been alive if there wasn't abortion



Bets:

(Won)Bet with TechoHobbit: He(Techno) says 10 million by January 1,2014 I say 9 million by then. Winner gets 2 weeks of sig control.

(Lost)Bet with kinisking: I say Ps4 will win April NPD while he says Xbox One will win it; winner gets 1 week of avatar control.

Raichu's First Series:

First RPG?

First Fighter?

First Racer?

First Shooter?

First MMO?

First Horror?

Official Ni No Kuni Fanboy:

Familiars Captured:37

Game Beaten: 2 times almost

Times I got teary during some scenes: 3

sc94597 on 07 March 2015
binary solo said:
NobleTeam360 said:

Do you believe that the American military would turn on it's own citizens? better yet our military couldn't even defeat a small nubmer of terrorists in Afghanistan, I like our chances in a scenario involving a tyrannical governement happened

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. 

Assuming the democratic process represents the people voting iwithin said tyrannical government. That is a BIG assumption. Even in our less than tyrannical governments today, there isn't a 1:1 correlation between voter beliefs and government action. 



Moren on 07 March 2015

A sarcastic comment I saw sums my thoughts pretty well:
"Jesus would be so proud of gun advocates."



sundin13 on 07 March 2015
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.



Around the Network
binary solo on 07 March 2015
sc94597 said:
binary solo said:
Well I don't think there should be a constitutional right to own guns. So I applaud any effort to circumvent such a ridiculous and outdated part of the constitution. However if there is lying involved that isn't cool.

What is your stance on the fourth amendment? 

My stance is, why the hell was this the 4th amendment and not actually part of the original constitution? But what does that have to do with guns? Guns are not the only or even the principle means of defending and asserting that right. 



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Lafiel on 07 March 2015

I think it's amazing how much trust americans have in each other :), personally I would be terrified knowing anybody could be a lunatic with a gun.



sc94597 on 07 March 2015
morenoingrato said:
A sarcastic comment I saw sums my thoughts pretty well:
"Jesus would be so proud of gun advocates."

Athiest and gun supporter here. Appeal to religion is a logical fallacy. ;) 



o_O.Q on 07 March 2015
binary solo said:
NobleTeam360 said:

Do you believe that the American military would turn on it's own citizens? better yet our military couldn't even defeat a small nubmer of terrorists in Afghanistan, I like our chances in a scenario involving a tyrannical governement happened

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



sc94597 on 07 March 2015
binary solo said:
sc94597 said:

What is your stance on the fourth amendment? 

My stance is, why the hell was this the 4th amendment and not actually part of the original constitution? But what does that have to do with guns? Guns are not the only or even the principle means of defending and asserting that right. 

Because then the anti-federalists wouldn't have voted for the original constitution. Remember, the Bill of Rights was a compromise to have a federal government.