The 2nd amendment

[Quad]

Geez, I thought the second amendment was a codified protection of our right to armed revolt.

I guess they were just thinking about being able to walk the street with a 38 on your hip to defend yourself from muggers though?

The second amendment protects our right to form militias and represents a "last line" in the defense of self-governance of, by, and for the people. A line of defense beyond checks and balances, beyond ballots, beyond the electoral college, that goes beyond protection of dissent through word and through pen. The argument from "libs" is that we no longer need it, I personally don't think it's a good argument.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Quad
right wing avenger...

Have you even read adam smith or thomas jefferson or alexander hamilton?

Maybe.

Whats with these stupid emotional pronouncements about "libs" anyways? Is the world that black and white to you?

Well, obviously it's to indicate my distaste for libs and their ideas.

Growth in markets is driven by competition, unrestricted capitalism has a 100% failure rate at encouraging competition.

Yes. In the limited case where a company achieves monopoly status. I actually agree with trustbusting anyway. Jubilee!

The nature of business and beaurocracy in our system is that the most predatory and unethical business practices yield massive short term rewards - short term rewards for producers limit the power of labor and the consumer at the figurative bargaining table.

How do short term costcutting practices limit the power of labor and consumer at the bargaining table? I've been wondering that for a while now.

The balancing force that protects the competitive ability of individuals in the marketplace is and always has been democracy.

Theoretically you could have a dictatorship with free markets inside it. The free market is the key. Not the election processs, or lack therof.

You have a very very extreme way of looking at capitalism that has nothing to do with liberalism or conservativism. If you want to put yourself in a box you are an objectivist - in other words an ethical egoist. Objectivism is a utopian ideal about the ability of people and the goal of humanity. The reality is we do not have the right safeguards in place to de-regulate the marketplace, attempts at deregulation have been massive failures. Until we can protect long term competitive ability of all classes and tiers of labor then a free market system will collapse inward on itself.

Don't worry about defining me, hombre. Get yourself together first.

Yeah it will fail, if you have anything to say about it, right? This is more of a threat than anything reasonable. You fucking libs would ruin the economy out of spite.

You're very deluded. I hope you get some help.

 

[Bullypulpit]

...Quad is correct about unregulated free markets. Such markets presuppose a rational society, which simply does not exist...anywhere.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
...Quad is correct about unregulated free markets. Such markets presuppose a rational society, which simply does not exist...anywhere.

Yeah. Trust busting. been over it. I'd down with. We've discussed this.

And Quad, though many ARE thinking of a time when an armed revolution could be necessary and are therefore fighting assiduously to defend their god given right to bear arems, it's TOO much to expect the right to be codified explictiy as such. Be real.

 

[MtnBiker]

Quad, do you have a relative teaching enlish somewhere in Madrid?

 

[Eagle need both]

I think I'm noticing the "slight" bias of the posters in this forum.

Rt Wing avenger -- we need guys like you in the U.S. At least as long as there are left wing avengers that hold just as extreme a viewpoint as you. However, I must side with Quad... the 3rd grade name calling was definitely started by you, as soon as you tagged Quad as a "communist".

Quad -- I think you're not going to win over any hearts and minds in this forum, but I'm sure you know it's not because you didn't make good points.

I love the United States, and I would NEVER think of living anywhere else. I only brought up the initial posting because I just want to see America become even greater. And I've changed my mind about the amendment. Changing such a pivotal part of our history is a bad idea.... but control of firearms is something we could learn from other countries. Period.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Eagle need both
I think I'm noticing the "slight" bias of the posters in this forum.

Rt Wing avenger -- we need guys like you in the U.S. At least as long as there are left wing avengers that hold just as extreme a viewpoint as you. However, I must side with Quad... the 3rd grade name calling was definitely started by you, as soon as you tagged Quad as a "communist".

It's not an 3rd grade name. It MAYBE just an overstated description of his general political outlook.

Quad -- I think you're not going to win over any hearts and minds in this forum, but I'm sure you know it's not because you didn't make good points.

No. His points were bad. Very bad. Not everyone adheres to socialism dogma. Some of us are real americans.

I love the United States, and I would NEVER think of living anywhere else. I only brought up the initial posting because I just want to see America become even greater. And I've changed my mind about the amendment. Changing such a pivotal part of our history is a bad idea.... but control of firearms is something we could learn from other countries. Period.

Why would we want to learn things are that are stupid? From our cold, dead hands, Moth**fu*k*r!

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by Eagle need both
but control of firearms is something we could learn from other countries. Period.

I am in complete agreement.

There is no faster way to get the populace to submit to corrupt government than to take away guns.

 

[Hobbit]

Take a look at Switzerland. Everybody in Switzerland is in the military and has an assault rifle. Their crime rate is so low, it's not even funny. That's because a Swiss criminal knows that pulling anything in public will only get him shot down in the street.

Now, let's take a look at Australia, which has been cracking down on guns. Many people with ranches in the Outback turned their guns in to the federal government like the good, law-abiding citizens they were. Then many of these families were mercilessly slaughtered by bandits who did not turn in their guns and knew the family ranches now had no defense.

We need to allow citizens to have guns...period.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Hobbit
Take a look at Switzerland. Everybody in Switzerland is in the military and has an assault rifle. Their crime rate is so low, it's not even funny. That's because a Swiss criminal knows that pulling anything in public will only get him shot down in the street.

Now, let's take a look at Australia, which has been cracking down on guns. Many people with ranches in the Outback turned their guns in to the federal government like the good, law-abiding citizens they were. Then many of these families were mercilessly slaughtered by bandits who did not turn in their guns and knew the family ranches now had no defense.

We need to allow citizens to have guns...period.

:clap1:

 

[opieie]

Hello all, this is my first post here after reading for a couple of days and is mostly for quad, while I think your ideas for a utopian society are commendable you must understand they will never actually work in reality, also you keep referring to our government as a democracy which it is not or was never intended to be, our system of gov. is a constitutional republic which protects the rights of the minority as well as the majority unfortunately the left wing politicians have twisted this around and used it to their benefit and to be fair right wing politicians have had their hand in this also, here is a quote from Professor Alexander Tyler circa 1787

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money (generous gifts) from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilization has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence.

From bondage to spiritual faith;
from spiritual faith to great courage;
from courage to liberty;
from liberty to abundance,
from abundance to selfishness;
from selfishness to complacency,
from complacency to apathy,
from apathy to dependency,
from dependence back into bondage."

As you can see democracy is a bad idea and this is why our founding fathers decided not to subject this great nation to the pitfalls of such a system.

Now on to some of the comments you made about gun control being a success in England, this is just simply not the case in England or any other country with strict gun control laws and I will provide facts to support this statement, I prefer to deal in facts it makes things much easier when trying to prove a point.
Here is a quote from Joyce Lee Malcolm from an article about Englands gun control laws.

"Gun crime in England is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England’s inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England’s rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America’s, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world’s crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people".

Here is another quote from Ed Chenel a police officer in Australia where it is now illegal to own a handgun,

"It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars.

The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent!) In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)

These are facts that can not be disputed period, but most liberals (I'm not saying you are a liberal because I have no way of knowing that) for some reason think that they will be able to succeed at something others have failed at by throwing more of my money at it.

Thats about all I have to say right now please let me know what you think.

"

 

[DKSuddeth]

welcome to the boards opieie

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Opieie kicks ASS!


Welcome, partner in righteousness and truth!

 

[eric]

Welcome !!

 

[5stringJeff]

Rock on opieie!!! Welcome!

 

[Bern80]

Welcome opie,

If you have not already, you may want to check out the book "More Guns, Less Crime" interestin read.

Nice info too

 

[Merlin1047]

Living in England for two years gave me the feeling that it's REALLY nice to walk around in cities without worrying about guns, let alone assault weapons.

Certainly glad you enjoyed your stay in England. Last year they prosecuted a 60 year old man for shooting intruders in his home. Seems two punks with tire irons broke in. The man had an old shotgun in his closet. He shot and killed one of the scum who would probably have beaten him to death with their weapons. British "justice" seeks to send this man to jail for defending himself, his wife and his home. British idiots were on the tele villifying the homeowner for killing the scum who tried to rob him.

You do not need to look to England for stupidity. How many times have you heard a victim prosecuted for self defense by overzealous idiot district attorneys in this country? The trend is becoming alarming.

And what will you do if your home is invaded? Cringe in the closet while they ransack your house? I suppose that since you liberals are in love with income redistribution, you might view burglary and robbery as simply another means of achieving that end.

If you need any more proof of the liberal slant of the network "news" media, simply ask yourself this question: When was the last time you heard the major networks carry a story on how a potential victim successfully defended himself / herself from a would-be attacker?

Bottom line - there can NEVER be enough police to keep you safe. You have to be prepared to do it yourself, or you have to be prepared to be at the mercy of any vermin who decides that your property should be his.

I do not worry about losing my rights to a corrupt government. But I damn sure worry about losing my rights to watery-eyed left wingers who see more government and fewer personal freedoms as the panacea for every social ill.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Merlin1047
Living in England for two years gave me the feeling that it's REALLY nice to walk around in cities without worrying about guns, let alone assault weapons.

Certainly glad you enjoyed your stay in England. Last year they prosecuted a 60 year old man for shooting intruders in his home. Seems two punks with tire irons broke in. The man had an old shotgun in his closet. He shot and killed one of the scum who would probably have beaten him to death with their weapons. British "justice" seeks to send this man to jail for defending himself, his wife and his home. British idiots were on the tele villifying the homeowner for killing the scum who tried to rob him.

You do not need to look to England for stupidity. How many times have you heard a victim prosecuted for self defense by overzealous idiot district attorneys in this country? The trend is becoming alarming.

And what will you do if your home is invaded? Cringe in the closet while they ransack your house? I suppose that since you liberals are in love with income redistribution, you might view burglary and robbery as simply another means of achieving that end.

If you need any more proof of the liberal slant of the network "news" media, simply ask yourself this question: When was the last time you heard the major networks carry a story on how a potential victim successfully defended himself / herself from a would-be attacker?

Bottom line - there can NEVER be enough police to keep you safe. You have to be prepared to do it yourself, or you have to be prepared to be at the mercy of any vermin who decides that your property should be his.

I do not worry about losing my rights to a corrupt government. But I damn sure worry about losing my rights to watery-eyed left wingers who see more government and fewer personal freedoms as the panacea for every social ill.

Cool avatar, cool under avatar tag line, cool post!!!!

 

[opieie]

Thanks to everyone who posted welcoming me to the board, I can't help wondering why quad has not posted a reply considering all of his/her posts in this thread, I am looking foward to debating with him/her

 

[David]

My concern is protecting victims. I think we should all carry arms. And in any case, poverty, your extenuating social factor, does not justify violence in any case. Anyone attempting some kind of violent crime against anyone should be shot on site, regardless of any extenuating circumstance.


It's the wrong direction. Law abiding members of society should be armed to enforce peace and tranquility and to shoot criminals dead in their tracks if they start "wilding".

No. It's the founding principle of our country. You know what doesn't square with reality, all liberal notions of governance, justice, fairness, history, economics.... on and on.

You don't want the economy to expand unless you can be assured the cash will go to your socialis agenda. You're killing humanity.

Completely ridding society of guns would require near martial law. THat's just a truism. Don't blame me that it sounds bad for your case.

I'd like you to quit being a fool. But we don't always get what we want.

You just think people protecting themselves is an "escalation of aggression" or some such liberal shit. The criminals are the problem you twit. Not the guns. Oh yes but crimes is just a result of social inequality. ----BULLSHIT.

But before you said arguments about individual rights are not realistic or something. Why the flip flop john kerry?

That all sounds nice. Your claim that therefore a criminals right to his life, supercedes the property owners right to his property in the context of a burglary is a perversion.

You give criminals a free pass. And blame regular citizens for defending themselves. Well poverty doesn't justify crime.


We've been debating. And I kicked your ass.

Sir, please be quiet about gun control. Your stance is obvious. Your mind cannot be changed. shh.