The 2nd Amendment

I don't fear being killed. I'm aware of realilty, though, and unfortunately at some point that could happen. I'd rather not be killed so I have the means to stop it.

 

Hell yeah. A small percentage of pushovers would turn theirs in, but the vast majority would flat out refuse. If police were sent to collect it yes I'm sure some people would open fire. In my state there is no registration.. even my handguns aren't registered. So they really have no idea what I have. I don't even know how a gun confiscation would happen logistically in this country.

 

Since gun registration would be the first step in making gun confiscation an easier task, how many persons who would put a gun to use criminally would purchase a gun and register it? At the same time it would give government a way to criminalize law abiding citizens who fail or refuse to register their guns.

Wasn't it Obama, in 2008, who said "If they bring a knife to the fight, we will bring a gun?" Or has it been scrubbed from the Internet?

 

So, yes, Obama said it and now you have the context. We'll leave it to you to decide whether Obama's remarks were appropriate or not.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/01/obama-guns-and-the-untouchables/


O

 

Had Bush, McCain, Romney or any Republican used those words, how do you think the media would have responded? If one side can get away with speaking figuratively why should should it be presented literally when done by the other side?

I only brought that up because it seems the 2nd amendment is no longer the topic of the thread, and at least the word 'gun' was included.

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." (included for the subtopic)

 

Or something like: '...don't retreat, reload'?
I imagine, as usual, media bias would have swung both ways - to varying degrees.

I'm not sure how it was spun by either side. I'm sure there was a quote from Bush, McCain, Romney or any Republican (probably Palin) that was butchered.

 

Yeah, it's a blind effort. The people who would register their guns aren't going to commit crimes with them so it has to be more about general disarmament. And it would criminalize the wrong people as you said. I'm not going to commit any crimes with my weapons, but I wouldn't register them in some national database. Which would arbitrarily make me a criminal.

 

Wasn't a list of registered gun owners made public recently in one State? And if all gun owners were to register their guns and criminals were able to avail themselves of that list or a portion of it, and then acquire any of those weapons, would the registered owner then be held liable in any way for a crime involving the stolen weapon?

It might be even more effective in reducing crime to have a law mandating that every law abiding adult citizen or household own a weapon for defensive purposes, but without enforcing it. I once lived in a town where gun ownership was required, but not enforced.

 

It was in NY somewhere that happened. I think what the newspaper did was publish everyone who has a permit, which apparently you need up there to even own a gun. The anti gun crowd was cheering it on in the name of safety. But in a twist of irony they realized it gave criminals a list of houses not to invade, therefore the rest of the houses on any given street had no weapons (unless illegal), and made those houses a target. So what happened? The newspaper pulled it offline. Fucking idiots. And I would imagine if your gun is registered then stolen there is a law to report it stolen also.

My state has no registration, no duty to report stolen, and no duty to inform cops you are armed. So I'm not fully aware of how it works there.

 

[FONT=&quot]Deviate[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So let’s get this right the reality to you is that you could at any time be attacked and murdered, but you claim that this is not about fear? This pressing reality of possible attack and murder is so intense for you that you feel you need a lethal weapon to be prepared for it, but again you claim that this is not about fear?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Sorry it just doesn’t add up.

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s probably a duck even if someone else tells you it is a lion.

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So are you saying you would be one of those that would shoot, even possibly murder, innocent police officers that came to take you gun away? [/FONT]

 

[FONT=&quot]Indie[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Franklin D. Roosevelt

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]In another speech he outlined what he thought was ‘freedom from fear’ - "The fourth is freedom from fear, which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor -- anywhere in the world.

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]The fear of being attacked the same fear that seems to be behind many pro-gunners feeling that they need guns to protect them.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The point being that if people live in a society in which they didn’t feel so frightened they wouldn’t feel they needed lethal weapons for their protection. [/FONT]

 

Considering the shape of the economy, unemployment, growing national debt and growing budget imbalance it seems totally irrational to be talking about gun control and/or the 2nd amendment. Not to mention that the dollar devaluing will soon begin to exert its' impact on the tax paying as well as the tax consuming citizens.

Until a right is misused, 1st amendment "yelling fire in a crowded theater", or 2nd amendment "threatening, robbing or killing an individual(s) with a gun" they are and always should remain undeniable by government.

 

If people were as frightened as you seem to imply, they would likely not ever leave their house. Although the probability one may need a gun is infinitely small, not having one in the rare instance it is needed would be a more likely point in time which fear would arise.

There is no large society I know of which is crime, including murder, free, and considering how you seem to define a society, I'm even willing to state that there never will be. I would probably feel less safe in Great Britain than many other places in the world where guns are readily available. And since you don't live in the U.S. I don't think any gun is capable of firing across the Atlantic and doing you harm, so WHY do you fear U.S. citizens being free to own them? Are you afraid they might at some point mount an attack on Great Britain?

 

[FONT=&quot]Indie[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If I was implying that they were so frightened to leave the house I say it and I’m not because people are not saying that - however they are saying that they want guns as protection because they fear being killed, raped, beaten up etc, they fear being harmed at that’s why they seem to want a lethal weapon.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If it was, [/FONT][FONT=&quot]infinitely[/FONT][FONT=&quot] small, why are you even thinking about it let alone actually wanting a gun to protect yourself from it? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]How do you think I define society? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Why? There are a number of war zones in the world where guns are more available the thing is that there isn’t supposed to a war going on in the US. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I thought you lived in Laos? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]And the most fatuous part of a fatuous post – OK I’ve pointed out this very silly tactic before it’s used by many pro-gunners who don’t have any rational argument.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]It is about trying to claim that anyone who doesn’t support a pro-gun stance is doing so out of fear of firearms. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Look I don’t care if you want to own guns, and as I keep pointing out in principle I’ve got nothing against the law abiding and responsible owning a gun. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I’m asking why anyone would want one for protection? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Wouldn’t it be better to live in a society where the fear of harm was so [/FONT][FONT=&quot]infinitely[/FONT][FONT=&quot] small, that they didn’t even think about it, let alone actually wanting a gun to protect yourself from it? [/FONT]

 

1. So are you saying you would prefer to be harmed rather than possess any means of protecting yourself or your family if the necessity were to arise, which of course could not in your society because guns are illegal?

2. Infinitely small, but not impossible, as I have previously stated that I have encountered situations where a gun was put to use.

3. Much more broadly than I do, although I do view us, humans, as a single species.

4. I've not said there was a war going on in the U.S. but crime occurs throughout the world, each and every day. I'd be willing to bet even in your country/society. Am I wrong?

5. Are you a U.S. citizen? I don't expect to ever visit GB, but could again visit the U.S. as that IS my home country, place of my citizenship, and where I pay taxes and vote.

6. Like I said before, I own many guns, and only on rare occasions do I carry one for protection. If necessity requires one to travel in an area where it is known to have a high rate of crime, mugging, rapes, car jackings, etc., you might call it fear, but I would just call it reason to take necessary precaution to be prepared to defend ones self should the need arise.

7. Do you recognize the difference between infinitely small and impossible? Would you disagree that knowledge and forethought are better than ignorance and afterthought?

And I always have lived in a society where fear of harm is infinitely small, but then one sometimes has to travel among other social groups. I rarely carry a gun now, except where I think I may encounter snakes. I usually just carry a machete, and I don't fear thick brush, but only find it difficult to travel through.

As an afterthought, it would be great to live in a society absent of crime and any causes of fear, but I still wouldn't be willing to give up my guns, nor would it make any rational sense to need to do so if such a society were to exist.

 

[FONT=&quot]

Let's get something clear Balbus. I've looked death in the eye more than once as a result of pieces of shit on the streets who have no regard for another persons property, well being, or life. I've been beaten to a bloody pulp for walking down the wrong street. I've had my wallet stolen, my bike stolen, my car stolen, my pride stolen. This was all (except for the car) before the age of 15. I learned at a young age to not fear anyone, that only makes you less effective in a situation and it makes them happen more ffrequently because people pick up on fear. So what did I do the next time someone tried to rob me after that realization? Beat the shit out of 2 guys who were bigger than me and older than me, with my skateboard. What did I do after I had a growth spurt and went from 5'6 to 6'1? Walked through the hood with my head held high just hoping someone fucks with me. I was angry at that point in my life, never afraid.

Fast forward to now. I own a home. I work hard every day, have friends, volunteer at events for the local children's hospital. I live a peaceful life and help everyone I can (who deserves it). [/FONT]I have a classic mustang sitting on the driveway under a cover that thieves would just love to get their hands on. I have a big screen tv you can see from the road. Do I have curtains? No. I don't want curtains I don't like them. I have valuables in my home and in the past year alone 3 of my friends have had their homes invaded and goods stolen. Am I afraid? No. But come into my home will ill intent and I'll make sure you won't be doing that again.

I get the feeling you haven't been in any situations in your life where you had violence brought up you or have been violated in any way by the force of another person.

[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT]

I don't like theoretical questions like that. But let's not paint some picture of an 'innocent' police officer coming by and knocking on the door. If they do that here it will be paramilitary style raids, so the cops take the home owners by surprise and don't get shot. And if my house was ever raided that way, the first thing they are going to do is open fire on my dogs who would be attacking them.

Come into my house forcefully, open fire and start killing my family members.. and we are going to have some problems.

 

deviate,

From the accumulation of posts made by Balbus that I've read, it would appear that what he continually attempts to promote, regardless of the topic being discussed, is a form of government produced utopia where those who can, must and those who cannot or will not simply partake, or "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs and wants." Sort of a Collectivist Socialist Democracy on steroids form of government.

What's that got to do with the 2nd amendment you might ask? Nothing at all.

And, "Occasionally threads are deliberately taken off topic to advance an opposing agenda or disrupt the discussion. These posts will be moved or deleted at the discretion of the moderator...", but when it IS the moderator?

 

Yeah, I don't know why I keep getting sucked into his debate. It just annoys me that anyone can continually assert that people only own defense weapons out of fear. The fact is armed citizens aren't congruent with his idea a perfect society, which is an authoritarian and socialist/communist type of system. I honestly thought those kind of hippies died out in the 70s? None of my hippie friends advocate that kind of shit. They work in restaurants enough to sustain their travels and music festivals, and they don't bitch about not having health insurance or other things.

I don't even think people like balbus are fully aware of the evils in the type of system they wish for.

 

Just sayin'...

 

What policies are you talking about, and what kinds of changes could be made to those policies which would guarantee them to be capable of preventing crime? I can think of none at all. About the best we will ever be able to hope for is reducing the amount of crime, but I doubt there will ever be a way to eliminate it entirely, so...