Gun Control and the Inner City

[bigrebnc1775]

I think you are confusing your Amendments.

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

How many times have you had to use a gun to protect your rights?

Would you like to find out? If so take a trip to some middle eastern country, or Cuba, China

 

[Cecilie1200]

I think you are confusing your Amendments.

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

How many times have you had to use a gun to protect your rights?

It's not an issue of me personally, Einstein. It's an issue of the populace of the United States retaining its freedom from oppression by being armed. Would you like to ask me how many times the people of the United States have had to defend themselves against oppression? Or would you like to discuss the OTHER nations of the world whose people have given up their arms and subsequently lost their freedoms?

Deliberately misunderstanding me is not going to make you look clever. It's just going to give me the opportunity to demonstrate how incredibly obtuse you are.

 

[idb]

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

How many times have you had to use a gun to protect your rights?

It's not an issue of me personally, Einstein. It's an issue of the populace of the United States retaining its freedom from oppression by being armed. Would you like to ask me how many times the people of the United States have had to defend themselves against oppression? Or would you like to discuss the OTHER nations of the world whose people have given up their arms and subsequently lost their freedoms?

Deliberately misunderstanding me is not going to make you look clever. It's just going to give me the opportunity to demonstrate how incredibly obtuse you are.

How many times have the people of the United States had to defend themselves against oppression?

 

[BrianH]

How many times have you had to use a gun to protect your rights?

It's not an issue of me personally, Einstein. It's an issue of the populace of the United States retaining its freedom from oppression by being armed. Would you like to ask me how many times the people of the United States have had to defend themselves against oppression? Or would you like to discuss the OTHER nations of the world whose people have given up their arms and subsequently lost their freedoms?

Deliberately misunderstanding me is not going to make you look clever. It's just going to give me the opportunity to demonstrate how incredibly obtuse you are.

How many times have the people of the United States had to defend themselves against oppression?

3 times for sure. Revolutionary War, war of 1812, and the Civil War. Both sides thought they were defending themselves against oppression. IMO, the main problem is when people somehow come to the conclusion that civilized nations are immune to oppression, invasion, and/or tryannical governments. There have been invasions, wars, the loss and and creation of countries since countries were first organized. What makes people think that it will all stop just because of the times we live in? The Roman empire was the most civilized and powerful nation of its time, but it still fell. Now that I think of it, many Americans, especially along the southern border are being forced to defend themselves against oppression from the Mexican drug cartels...this is especially so considering our government is not doing its job in protecting our borders.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How many times have you had to use a gun to protect your rights?

It's not an issue of me personally, Einstein. It's an issue of the populace of the United States retaining its freedom from oppression by being armed. Would you like to ask me how many times the people of the United States have had to defend themselves against oppression? Or would you like to discuss the OTHER nations of the world whose people have given up their arms and subsequently lost their freedoms?

Deliberately misunderstanding me is not going to make you look clever. It's just going to give me the opportunity to demonstrate how incredibly obtuse you are.

How many times have the people of the United States had to defend themselves against oppression?

It's a safe guard so we do not have to.

 

[idb]

Without the second you wouldn't have the right to talk so stupidly.

I think you are confusing your Amendments.

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

 

[BrianH]

I think you are confusing your Amendments.

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

You are right, however, the election of the president in four year cycles is between TWO major parties that are both bent on power. That's it. They're supposed to be represented of the population, but you'd be amazed how little this is practiced. For example, we have presidents who are elected to the position without having the majority of popular votes from the people, you have bills passed in the same manner. The problem is that our laws are primarily passed based on our congress "wheeling and dealing." They have the "we'll do this for you if you do this for us" mentality. You'd be really surprised how much say the "people" actually have in this nation. The government is controlled by the elite, just as it is in other countries, this in itself does not make us immune to oppression.

Here's an example: In the last two decades, we've had two members of the bush family as president, almost had two from the clinton family, and we typically have the same candidates running over and over again. Our election system forces voters to choose from only a few candidates....candidates who were not chosen by the people, but chosen by party members...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I think you are confusing your Amendments.

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

How much time does it take to restrict someone freedoms? How fast can a legislative branch create new laws that restrict freedoms? We have our guns the subject of any gun control is not up for debate.

Just look through out recent history Nazi Germany was a democracy how did their rights do the jewish germans when they did not have the means of a way to defend themself.

 

[BrianH]

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

How much time does it take to restrict someone freedoms? How fast can a legislative branch create new laws that restrict freedoms? We have our guns the subject of any gun control is not up for debate.

Just look through out recent history Nazi Germany was a democracy how did their rights do the jewish germans when they did not have the means of a way to defend themself.

Couldn't have put it better myself...only 70 years ago.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

How much time does it take to restrict someone freedoms? How fast can a legislative branch create new laws that restrict freedoms? We have our guns the subject of any gun control is not up for debate.

Just look through out recent history Nazi Germany was a democracy how did their rights do the jewish germans when they did not have the means of a way to defend themself.

Couldn't have put it better myself...only 70 years ago.

What you said earlier was much more in depth, I was more blunt and too the point.

 

[idb]

It's not an issue of me personally, Einstein. It's an issue of the populace of the United States retaining its freedom from oppression by being armed. Would you like to ask me how many times the people of the United States have had to defend themselves against oppression? Or would you like to discuss the OTHER nations of the world whose people have given up their arms and subsequently lost their freedoms?

Deliberately misunderstanding me is not going to make you look clever. It's just going to give me the opportunity to demonstrate how incredibly obtuse you are.

How many times have the people of the United States had to defend themselves against oppression?

3 times for sure. Revolutionary War, war of 1812, and the Civil War. Both sides thought they were defending themselves against oppression. IMO, the main problem is when people somehow come to the conclusion that civilized nations are immune to oppression, invasion, and/or tryannical governments. There have been invasions, wars, the loss and and creation of countries since countries were first organized. What makes people think that it will all stop just because of the times we live in? The Roman empire was the most civilized and powerful nation of its time, but it still fell. Now that I think of it, many Americans, especially along the southern border are being forced to defend themselves against oppression from the Mexican drug cartels...this is especially so considering our government is not doing its job in protecting our borders.

The Revolutionary War was pre-United States, 1812 was a war declared by the USA on Britain followed by an invasion of Canadian territory and the Civil War...well, that is an interpretation I suppose...

The 1812 war is an interesting read actually, I had heard of it but never knew anything about it...in fact I assumed it was to do with Mexico...that was clearly a different one.

I would humbly submit that the fall of the Roman Empire is a bit more complicated than outside oppressive forces.
Remember it was an empire, consisting of an amalgam of territories acquired largely by force - it could be argued that they, in fact, were the oppressors.

 

[idb]

I think he's saying that without the 2nd Amendment, we would not be able to protect and ensure any of our other rights.

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

How much time does it take to restrict someone freedoms? How fast can a legislative branch create new laws that restrict freedoms? We have our guns the subject of any gun control is not up for debate.

Just look through out recent history Nazi Germany was a democracy how did their rights do the jewish germans when they did not have the means of a way to defend themself.

You've already told us that the USA is not a democracy, which is a shit system, but is a republic.
So you should be safe.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You have a government elected by the people on a four-year cycle.
Your president can serve no more than two terms.
You have four levels of administration (from state to national, pardon me if I don't know the proper terms).
You have an independent judiciary.
You have personal rights and governmental fetters enshrined in a written constitution that have been tested and re-tested over 210-odd years.
And yet, bigrednec is saying that you would not be able to protect and ensure your rights without the citizenry being armed?!
How much more protection could you need?

How much time does it take to restrict someone freedoms? How fast can a legislative branch create new laws that restrict freedoms? We have our guns the subject of any gun control is not up for debate.

Just look through out recent history Nazi Germany was a democracy how did their rights do the jewish germans when they did not have the means of a way to defend themself.

You've already told us that the USA is not a democracy, which is a shit system, but is a republic.
So you should be safe.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms.

You've already told us that the USA is not a democracy, which is a shit system, but is a republic.
So you should be safe.

We are safe and shall remain that way.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms

No we'll stick with the use of nazi germany as an example. I do not want you gun grabbing progressive to forget them ever.

 

[idb]

How much time does it take to restrict someone freedoms? How fast can a legislative branch create new laws that restrict freedoms? We have our guns the subject of any gun control is not up for debate.

Just look through out recent history Nazi Germany was a democracy how did their rights do the jewish germans when they did not have the means of a way to defend themself.

You've already told us that the USA is not a democracy, which is a shit system, but is a republic.
So you should be safe.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms.

You've already told us that the USA is not a democracy, which is a shit system, but is a republic.
So you should be safe.

We are safe and shall remain that way.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms

No we'll stick with the use of nazi germany as an example. I do not want you gun grabbing progressive to forget them ever.

Armed citizens didn't do much good for Mexico in the face of American aggression and expansionism - oppression if you will.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You've already told us that the USA is not a democracy, which is a shit system, but is a republic.
So you should be safe.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms.

We are safe and shall remain that way.

The corollary of your German example might be what is happening in Egypt at the moment. It appears that the oppressive regime is being cast out by popular revolution, not force of arms

No we'll stick with the use of nazi germany as an example. I do not want you gun grabbing progressive to forget them ever.

Armed citizens didn't do much good for Mexico in the face of American aggression and expansionism - oppression if you will.

what period of time are you referencing to?

 

[idb]

we are safe and shall remain that way.



No we'll stick with the use of nazi germany as an example. I do not want you gun grabbing progressive to forget them ever.

armed citizens didn't do much good for mexico in the face of american aggression and expansionism - oppression if you will.

what period of time are you referencing to?

1845

 

[bigrebnc1775]

armed citizens didn't do much good for mexico in the face of american aggression and expansionism - oppression if you will.

what period of time are you referencing to?

1845

The American Mexican war, was a war fought against the citizens of mexico? Yep that new progressive history got to love it.

 

[idb]

what period of time are you referencing to?

1845

The American Mexican war, was a war fought against the citizens of mexico? Yep that new progressive history got to love it.

Who was it fought against then?
Sorry, my googling skills aren't as good as yours.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

1845

The American Mexican war, was a war fought against the citizens of mexico? Yep that new progressive history got to love it.

Who was it fought against then?
Sorry, my googling skills aren't as good as yours.

You really do not seem to have a problem with googling if you can type a post you can google.

 

[idb]

The American Mexican war, was a war fought against the citizens of mexico? Yep that new progressive history got to love it.

Who was it fought against then?
Sorry, my googling skills aren't as good as yours.

You really do not seem to have a problem with googling if you can type a post you can google.

It would be a foolish duplication of effort for us both to Google the same subject.
Think of all the other important things I could be doing.