The 2nd Amendment

I'd like to state that gun advocates are not talking about attacking the gov't over issues they disagree with. I can speak for most of us when I say that we do believe in peaceful political change and don't want chaos or violence. What we are talking about when we say tyranny, is violent force under the guise of something like martial law. When the gov't deploys troops on the streets and starts killing Americans, detaining citizens, complete abolition of the rights we were born under.. then you might see a far reaching revolution.

And balbus, please get off the fear thing. It makes you seem extremely simple minded. Your fear/no fear dichotomy has been addressed multiple times yet you keep beating a dead horse.

 

You are comparing apples to oranges. A hippie/anti-establishment/socialist/drug induced uprising in select liberal cities is not the same as what is going on now. Middle America is who is pissed off now, the backbone of this country. And it is based on a different set of values that parallel the founding values of the US.

 

And here we go again. Back to square one.

 

:2thumbsup: True and sad.

 

The pinko arse taken away happened in Argentina's Dirty War: 30,000 desaparecidos. When they disappeared, the first thought of the neighbors, the 'fellow gun owners' was "They must have done something wrong." Note that Feinstein seems in need to invoke the amount of time at work, and since capitalism is already profoundly illiterate and writing's not its thing, one can understand Cruz's question to the fascist ****. Feinstein's heresay about Sandy Hook dismemberments means that this whore is extravagantly confident that Jaba's hostages have adapted to the absurdity of unbelievably funky Sandy Hook evidence. Arm yourselves. Suggested reading: Deleuze and Law.

 

1. Um. Nothing like Kent State. Another bad example.

2. I wasn't born in 1983 but that is not relevant. Don't act self righteous because you were alive during this, when two posts ago you were discussing 1791. The counterculture of the 60s is probably the most documented era in post modern history. Furthermore, were you there? I have a lady friend who was (yes, she's as old as my mom) and she still has her head in the clouds like most of you on HF to this day. I am talking about grounded beliefs here, not idealistic utopian "I want it all but don't want to work for it" beliefs.

Most of America today can't be bothered to off their smartphones, gun advocates and gun grabbers alike. So once again that is not relevant to this conversation.

Additionally, once again, I am not talking about selected and spontaneous uprisings of entitled spoiled youth. I am talking about national policy that is violent and oppressive and changes our lives as we know it. At that point, it will time for the patriots to take up arms regardless of outcome.

And all of those cities you listed are liberal in my opinion.

 

Well, not sure about Selma. And Watts is an area but whatever.

 

Actually, there are disturbing similarities to Kent State. The discourse at the time included rumors of bombs that take out the people yet leave the buildings intact. Scalia seems to think that at a certain point, technology is accessible to only a select few and under certain conditions as they relate to both the first and second amendment. That is why the reader should get more serious about the history of book burnings inside the American rhizome, especially when a knowledge-envious smuggled punk, fronting as a Rhodes scholar, gets a library named after him. In philsophy, one may call Scalia's thinking kuklos exothen, an exclusionary principle which, as hard as god may try, always leaves a remainder. This kuklos recalls the white-clad cone-heads of venture capital, coked-out and drooling, in intimate parallel to the fact that capitalism keeps two-thirds of humanity in poverty. Capitalo Kuklos. So, go ahead and do it, as capitalism (and capital) both exclaim simultaneously, "Shoot Me!"

 

I think you're missing my point. I'm talking about the gov't going into people's neighborhoods and homes and either extracting them or detaining them. People that were in their own homes, minding their own business and not breaking any laws or bothering anyone.

Whether Kent State was right or not, whether the guard should have been deployed or not, whether unarmed students should have been shot at/shot or not.. they were responding to a situation (uprising) at a state owned university that was basically out of control.

The rest of your post is pretty much incoherent. Though you do sound smart and interesting.

 

Had the students been armed with automatic weapons, I can assure you the government would not have sent the National Guard in, but active duty military with the appropriate weapons. It would have been an even bigger bloodbath.

 

Well seeing as there were still a shit ton of guns in the US in 1970 and the students weren't opening fire on the guard.. I don't understand where we are going with this.

 

1. No, I wasn't there when it was written. However, I'm not the one that brought out the ageism card and insinuated that a person doesn't have a clue because they weren't alive during the kent state shooting..

And I know what this site is about, I've been coming here since 2004. The fact remains that most of you who profess to be so hip and liberal and free thinking, are just as closed minded as anyone else when it comes to things you don't agree with or differing viewpoints.

2. The work ethic comment was a general comment, although I do maintain that was a self righteous post. Anyone can be self righteous, I was today at work. But hey a spade is a spade.

3. Point taken there, even though I'm not sure you really consider the weathermen nasty, that seemed a little less than convincing.

Once again, I'm an advocate of peace and democratic change.. except protections that were enshrined in our Constitution. I've been shooting guns my entire life and have never killed anything except fish and bugs. I own guns but I can tell you they are not assault weapons they are defensive weapons. I can't wrap my head around the idea that even hippies.. who struggled in the civil rights movement, now have the degree of trust in the gov't that are perfectly ok with SWAT teams and these myriad state and federal law enforcement agencies being armed to the teeth with sophisticated weaponry.. then turn around and advocate denying civilian access to semi automatic versions of their automatic rifles. And they just assume ban all guns. It's very very short sighted.

As phyrefly touched upon, this debate and passionate calls for gun bans are coming about after a tragedy we heard about through media outlets and with no material evidence. We don't even know what happened up there and you people just eat it up hook, line, and sinker.

 

I don't agree with what happened at kent state, at all. I don't agree that our right to peaceful assembly is outright ignored most of the time. Especially regarding any effective movement.

Maybe if they had been armed and peaceful, there would have not been a shooting. Ever consider that?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1OTg8Bx3Yw"]2nd Amendment Rally at the State Capital Indianapolis, Indiana - Feb 8th - YouTube