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

Forums - Politics Discussion - Obama Admin Caves: ATF Halts Assault on Inalienable Rights

Normchacho on 10 March 2015
o_O.Q said:
jigokutamago said:
It it my personal belief that the term "human rights" should be reserved for more pressing issues like freedom from slavery or freedom of religion.


you can't free yourself from slavery if you don't have the means to defend yourself

the only other way is if people at the same level of power as your masters choose to help you which is what happened with the transatlantic slave trade

 

alternatively had the enslaved people had guns and the will to fight for their freedom they could have secured their freedom themselves

 

ironically all that happened is that they were "freed" right into another a more subtle form of control

Uuuuhhh...I don't think slaves had trouble getting guns because of those strict, confederate gun laws...



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Around the Network
o_O.Q on 10 March 2015
Normchacho said:
o_O.Q said:


you can't free yourself from slavery if you don't have the means to defend yourself

the only other way is if people at the same level of power as your masters choose to help you which is what happened with the transatlantic slave trade

 

alternatively had the enslaved people had guns and the will to fight for their freedom they could have secured their freedom themselves

 

ironically all that happened is that they were "freed" right into another a more subtle form of control

Uuuuhhh...I don't think slaves had trouble getting guns because of those strict, confederate gun laws...

i honestly don't fully understand what you're saying here

my first impression is that you're saying that the enslaved people were allowed to have guns

is that what you're saying?



o_O.Q on 10 March 2015
the_dengle said:
I don't get it. Unless one thinks civilians should be allowed to possess armed nuclear warheads, we already agree that a line must be drawn somewhere. What's wrong with having a discussion about where that line should be? Why is even bringing the line up considered an assault against freedom?

first off i don't believe nuclear weapons should exist nor should tanks 

 

anyway where do you draw the line? that is the problem

the boston bombers apparently used pressure cookers along with metal fragments to instill terror 

does that mean therefore that we ban pressure cookers?

 

wny is it ok for your governemnt to use rifles but not its citizens?



Normchacho on 10 March 2015
o_O.Q said:
Normchacho said:

Uuuuhhh...I don't think slaves had trouble getting guns because of those strict, confederate gun laws...

i honestly don't fully understand what you're saying here

my first impression is that you're saying that the enslaved people were allowed to have guns

is that what you're saying?


Nope, I'm saying slaves weren't allowed to have guns because they were slaves, not due to gun regulation.

I stand by the notion that claiming the right to purchase 5.56 ammo is worthy of the title "human right" is a little insulting to those who are fighting for actual human rights all over the world.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Normchacho on 10 March 2015
o_O.Q said:
the_dengle said:

first off i don't believe nuclear weapons should exist nor should tanks 

 

anyway where do you draw the line? that is the problem

the boston bombers apparently used pressure cookers along with metal fragments to instill terror 

does that mean therefore that we ban pressure cookers?

I've hear arguments like this a lot and they don't really make sense..."you could kill someone with a fork, does that mean we should ban forks?".

How many people were killed by pressure cookers in the U.S. last year? Is a pressure cooker designed to kill people?



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Around the Network
o_O.Q on 10 March 2015
Normchacho said:
o_O.Q said:

i honestly don't fully understand what you're saying here

my first impression is that you're saying that the enslaved people were allowed to have guns

is that what you're saying?


Nope, I'm saying slaves weren't allowed to have guns because they were slaves, not due to gun regulation.

I stand by the notion that claiming the right to purchase 5.56 ammo is worthy of the title "human right" is a little insulting to those who are fighting for actual human rights all over the world.

how does that invalidate what i was saying?

do you disagree that enslaved people only have two ways out?

that they either fight back or their masters are forced to stop?



o_O.Q on 10 March 2015
Normchacho said:
o_O.Q said:
the_dengle said:

first off i don't believe nuclear weapons should exist nor should tanks 

 

anyway where do you draw the line? that is the problem

the boston bombers apparently used pressure cookers along with metal fragments to instill terror 

does that mean therefore that we ban pressure cookers?

I've hear arguments like this a lot and they don't really make sense..."you could kill someone with a fork, does that mean we should ban forks?".

How many people were killed by pressure cookers in the U.S. last year? Is a pressure cooker designed to kill people?


if we go into statistics hand guns kill substantially more people than rifles per year

traffic accidents caused by alcohol cause even more so what is your point?

if we are to ban things out of concern for the amount of civilians they kill rifles wouldn't be near the top of the list



Normchacho on 10 March 2015
o_O.Q said:
Normchacho said:


Nope, I'm saying slaves weren't allowed to have guns because they were slaves, not due to gun regulation.

I stand by the notion that claiming the right to purchase 5.56 ammo is worthy of the title "human right" is a little insulting to those who are fighting for actual human rights all over the world.

how does that invalidate what i was saying?

do you disagree that enslaved people only have two ways out?

that they either fight back or their masters are forced to stop?


It doesn't invalidate that slaves really only have those two choices, but saying slaves could have fought for themselves if they had guns doesn't do anything to support the argument that 5.56 ammo is a human right.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Azerth on 10 March 2015

Why do sportsmen need armor pricing ammo?



o_O.Q on 10 March 2015
Normchacho said:
o_O.Q said:

how does that invalidate what i was saying?

do you disagree that enslaved people only have two ways out?

that they either fight back or their masters are forced to stop?


It doesn't invalidate that slaves really only have those two choices, but saying slaves could have fought for themselves if they had guns doesn't do anything to support the argument that 5.56 ammo is a human right.

 

i think that had they had rifles and 5.56 ammo they would disagree with you